Accident Near Mangalore Airport - Possibly 2 Aircraft down
traffic, in your way of thinking, you only work out the costs AFTER THE ACCIDENT. Then you say to yourself “jeez, if we had spent $100,000 per year to prevent the accident it would have been money well spent.”.
Risk management calculations allow allow you to make the costs decision without waiting for the accident.
To put that another way. You can calculate what it’s worth to stop the accident and I assure you, you will think it’s a good deal.
Risk management calculations allow allow you to make the costs decision without waiting for the accident.
To put that another way. You can calculate what it’s worth to stop the accident and I assure you, you will think it’s a good deal.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Occasional flights into Ballina (and Lismore); I find the Unicom is more of a hindrance than a help, too much repetition of previously made (and already heard) calls tying up the radio.
Unicom operators definitely need training in how to value add if Unicoms are to work.
Doesn't help that Lismore is on the same frequency.
Unicom operators definitely need training in how to value add if Unicoms are to work.
Doesn't help that Lismore is on the same frequency.
To my knowledge there has never been a mid air collision in controlled airspace in this country.
But I mean controlled airspace, not a GAAP/Class D Metro, where you aren't subject to a separation service (unless IFR in IMC)
Of the 37 mid-airs between 1968 and 2003:
Fifteen of the collisions in or near the circuit area occurred at one of the five major general aviation airports; that is, Archerfield, Bankstown, Jandakot, Parafield or Moorabbin. Thirteen of these collisions occurred during tower operating hours.
And of course, Coolangatta 1998
Seriously a UNICOM service could make all the difference, for a number of reasons. Don't wait for the Government - we should do it ourselves.
Jandakot and Hoxton part has had some collisions. At least one of those was just after the tower closed from memory. Moorabbin has the shocker fireball at night after tower closed.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: A pothole on the information superhighway
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jandakot and Hoxton part has had some collisions. At least one of those was just after the tower closed from memory. Moorabbin has the shocker fireball at night after tower closed.
Hoxton, Non-Towered Aerodrome.
Hoosten - in every comment you make you expose the ridiculousness of our current system.
When I watch the videos of the US system, I recommended, I do not see pilots doing "rapid frequency transfers from Terminal to Centre, to receive traffic, then to CTAF to arrange segregation with aircraft then to Unicom".
First there is no mandatory traffic information in Class G airspace in the US, if IFR you would be separated from other IFR down to 1200 or 700 feet AGL; that is the Centre (I am not sure what Terminal is in your email) The CTAF is the other frequency you guard and if there is a UNICOM the operator would be on the same frequency, as per our legislation.
So two frequencies, on one you are being vectored to an instrument approach, and if you say you are visual you will be assigned a visual approach. (If you do not want a visual approach do not report visual). The CTAF is where you will hear the VFR traffic, but if the Centre controller can see any VFR traffic he/she thinks might affect your flight, it will be passed. (In Australia this is also a duty of care issue for the ATC)
If it is not hard in the US why is it so hard in Australia? My answer is because of the Class G, IFR pilots are having to separate themselves with other IFR pilots, conducting practice instrument approaches. Centre is passing traffic, but pilot has to self-separate while also keeping eyes and ears open for VFR traffic. It's no wonder that "Arriving into MNG from the South is extremely high workload when MNG is busy"
Last comment "Jandakot is a Class D Metro, i.e no separation service to traffic unless you're IFR in IMC" Strictly correct however Class D airspace was identified and codified by ICAO by observing what control towers do with traffic in the air traffic zone (ATZ), a term not used in Australia. Class D should be circuit area size (5NM if surrounded by Class E but once again Australia is different) Basically pilots either enter as approved by ATC (Non-Metro Class D) or in accordance with a published procedure (Metro Class D). Both are designed to allow pilots to self-separate while positioning for circuit entry watched over by Tower ATC, who also regulates runway movements in accordance with ICAO or National regulations. In the US these are commonly referred to as VFR Towers because IFR aircraft are separated from other IFR aircraft by Centre onto instrument approaches, sequence information is given to the VFR tower, and the Tower then segregates the VFR traffic using circuit area instructions,from the aircraft on the instrument approach who call the Tower around ten miles. In other parts of the world this is ATC 101, but for some reason Australia went a different way.
We are far too heavily biased towards "revenue generating" airspace such as above FL180, the Oceanic areas and major terminal maneuvering areas (TMAs). Low level airspace around our smaller airports where statistically the accidents happen get no interest unless there is something that might embarrass the MInister, such as Jetstar complaining about Ballina.
When I watch the videos of the US system, I recommended, I do not see pilots doing "rapid frequency transfers from Terminal to Centre, to receive traffic, then to CTAF to arrange segregation with aircraft then to Unicom".
First there is no mandatory traffic information in Class G airspace in the US, if IFR you would be separated from other IFR down to 1200 or 700 feet AGL; that is the Centre (I am not sure what Terminal is in your email) The CTAF is the other frequency you guard and if there is a UNICOM the operator would be on the same frequency, as per our legislation.
So two frequencies, on one you are being vectored to an instrument approach, and if you say you are visual you will be assigned a visual approach. (If you do not want a visual approach do not report visual). The CTAF is where you will hear the VFR traffic, but if the Centre controller can see any VFR traffic he/she thinks might affect your flight, it will be passed. (In Australia this is also a duty of care issue for the ATC)
If it is not hard in the US why is it so hard in Australia? My answer is because of the Class G, IFR pilots are having to separate themselves with other IFR pilots, conducting practice instrument approaches. Centre is passing traffic, but pilot has to self-separate while also keeping eyes and ears open for VFR traffic. It's no wonder that "Arriving into MNG from the South is extremely high workload when MNG is busy"
Last comment "Jandakot is a Class D Metro, i.e no separation service to traffic unless you're IFR in IMC" Strictly correct however Class D airspace was identified and codified by ICAO by observing what control towers do with traffic in the air traffic zone (ATZ), a term not used in Australia. Class D should be circuit area size (5NM if surrounded by Class E but once again Australia is different) Basically pilots either enter as approved by ATC (Non-Metro Class D) or in accordance with a published procedure (Metro Class D). Both are designed to allow pilots to self-separate while positioning for circuit entry watched over by Tower ATC, who also regulates runway movements in accordance with ICAO or National regulations. In the US these are commonly referred to as VFR Towers because IFR aircraft are separated from other IFR aircraft by Centre onto instrument approaches, sequence information is given to the VFR tower, and the Tower then segregates the VFR traffic using circuit area instructions,from the aircraft on the instrument approach who call the Tower around ten miles. In other parts of the world this is ATC 101, but for some reason Australia went a different way.
We are far too heavily biased towards "revenue generating" airspace such as above FL180, the Oceanic areas and major terminal maneuvering areas (TMAs). Low level airspace around our smaller airports where statistically the accidents happen get no interest unless there is something that might embarrass the MInister, such as Jetstar complaining about Ballina.
Hoosten - in every comment you make you expose the ridiculousness of our current system.
When I watch the videos of the US system, I recommended, I do not see pilots doing "rapid frequency transfers from Terminal to Centre, to receive traffic, then to CTAF to arrange segregation with aircraft then to Unicom".
First there is no mandatory traffic information in Class G airspace in the US, if IFR you would be separated from other IFR down to 1200 or 700 feet AGL; that is the Centre (I am not sure what Terminal is in your email) The CTAF is the other frequency you guard and if there is a UNICOM the operator would be on the same frequency, as per our legislation.
So two frequencies, on one you are being vectored to an instrument approach, and if you say you are visual you will be assigned a visual approach. (If you do not want a visual approach do not report visual). The CTAF is where you will hear the VFR traffic, but if the Centre controller can see any VFR traffic he/she thinks might affect your flight, it will be passed. (In Australia this is also a duty of care issue for the ATC)
If it is not hard in the US why is it so hard in Australia? My answer is because of the Class G, IFR pilots are having to separate themselves with other IFR pilots, conducting practice instrument approaches. Centre is passing traffic, but pilot has to self-separate while also keeping eyes and ears open for VFR traffic. It's no wonder that "Arriving into MNG from the South is extremely high workload when MNG is busy"
Last comment "Jandakot is a Class D Metro, i.e no separation service to traffic unless you're IFR in IMC" Strictly correct however Class D airspace was identified and codified by ICAO by observing what control towers do with traffic in the air traffic zone (ATZ), a term not used in Australia. Class D should be circuit area size (5NM if surrounded by Class E but once again Australia is different) Basically pilots either enter as approved by ATC (Non-Metro Class D) or in accordance with a published procedure (Metro Class D). Both are designed to allow pilots to self-separate while positioning for circuit entry watched over by Tower ATC, who also regulates runway movements in accordance with ICAO or National regulations. In the US these are commonly referred to as VFR Towers because IFR aircraft are separated from other IFR aircraft by Centre onto instrument approaches, sequence information is given to the VFR tower, and the Tower then segregates the VFR traffic using circuit area instructions from the aircraft on the instrument approach who call the Tower around ten miles. In other parts of the world this is ATC 101, but for some reason Australia went a different way.
We are far too heavily biased towards "revenue generating" airspace such as above FL180, the Oceanic areas and major terminal maneuvering areas (TMAs). Low level airspace around our smaller airports where statistically the accidents happen get no interest unless there is something that might embarrass the MInister, such as Jetstar complaining about Ballina.
8 National Party ministers for transport would be worth what? A 3rd year apprentice plasterer?
I thought others may be interested in this article I wrote for The Australian on 1 April, 2016.
Particularly note my last words:
It looks as if what I said was so true when it comes to Mangalore.
Particularly note my last words:
“Calling in the blind do it yourself airspace” will remain until a major accident with fatalities brings in the change. I despair!
I have just been told that with 19 fatalities over 3 months, if this keeps up we will end up with 76 fatalities per year. Let’s hope this is not going to happen. The normal fatality rate is about 21 per year.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any fatality is a worry Dick.
Unfortunately if people persist in committing aviation despite CAsA's best endeavours to stamp it out, there will be more.
Our safety record is way behind the USA statistically, that should tell us something, they have a GA industry, we have the ragged dregs
of what's left of one, but we still persist with the myth that ever increasing regulation will make us safer.
There is a rumour around that McBank affiliates have been telephoning airport leaseholders to ask if they are solvent with the current crisis.
Could it be that the major airports are a tad worried about their cash flow? or is McBank worried about their "Management Fees" and directors bonuses?
Passing strange.
At this time with the whole aviation industry rapidly arriving with their backs to the wall, is it time to suspend all Curfews and other restrictions that impinge on the whole industry? The rule book got thrown out with the 89 dispute to keep the country moving, are we at that time again?
Desperate times call for desperate measures, I tried to buy some black underwear at Target today, my white ones have printers ink stains all over them, out of stock dam it, this really is getting serious.
Unfortunately if people persist in committing aviation despite CAsA's best endeavours to stamp it out, there will be more.
Our safety record is way behind the USA statistically, that should tell us something, they have a GA industry, we have the ragged dregs
of what's left of one, but we still persist with the myth that ever increasing regulation will make us safer.
There is a rumour around that McBank affiliates have been telephoning airport leaseholders to ask if they are solvent with the current crisis.
Could it be that the major airports are a tad worried about their cash flow? or is McBank worried about their "Management Fees" and directors bonuses?
Passing strange.
At this time with the whole aviation industry rapidly arriving with their backs to the wall, is it time to suspend all Curfews and other restrictions that impinge on the whole industry? The rule book got thrown out with the 89 dispute to keep the country moving, are we at that time again?
Desperate times call for desperate measures, I tried to buy some black underwear at Target today, my white ones have printers ink stains all over them, out of stock dam it, this really is getting serious.
That’s being unfair to apprentice plasterers.
Dont worry Dick. This fatality rate is an anomaly.
Meanwhile refer to Dr (Smart) Aleck gobsmaking comment "that CASA is being prospective and etc" and you can see clearly what the regulator thinks about all this.
Using the Angel Flight "fix"... Charter operators , Flying Schools etc will have to have their aircraft 'annualed' every 50 hours. That should stop it
Meanwhile refer to Dr (Smart) Aleck gobsmaking comment "that CASA is being prospective and etc" and you can see clearly what the regulator thinks about all this.
Using the Angel Flight "fix"... Charter operators , Flying Schools etc will have to have their aircraft 'annualed' every 50 hours. That should stop it
traffic, in your way of thinking, you only work out the costs AFTER THE ACCIDENT. Then you say to yourself “jeez, if we had spent $100,000 per year to prevent the accident it would have been money well spent.”.
Risk management calculations allow allow you to make the costs decision without waiting for the accident.
To put that another way. You can calculate what it’s worth to stop the accident and I assure you, you will think it’s a good deal.
Risk management calculations allow allow you to make the costs decision without waiting for the accident.
To put that another way. You can calculate what it’s worth to stop the accident and I assure you, you will think it’s a good deal.