3 lost west of Brisbane Monday 29-8-22
I often hear references like this, however gps coordinates are still gps coordinates… they don’t corrupt. The data packets either arrive, or they don’t.
They are safe to use after the fact for historical purposes, however there are real-time delays induced when trying to use them live, like sharing traffic between EFB’s for example - you can’t rely on it.
They are safe to use after the fact for historical purposes, however there are real-time delays induced when trying to use them live, like sharing traffic between EFB’s for example - you can’t rely on it.
My comment were that I have read of concerns with the web trackers.
The matter is outside of my own knowledge.
Thread Starter
Read the report and was shocked. Only one thought….. Why?
With 40+ years and 13000+ hours, I would have thought the return to refuel in Dalby would have prompted an overwhelming urge to check out the Chicken Parmi that night at the Dalby RSL instead of trying again to push through in weather he had already experienced.
If a guy like that can’t say no to the boss, imagine how difficult it must be for a 20 year old with 300 hours.
With 40+ years and 13000+ hours, I would have thought the return to refuel in Dalby would have prompted an overwhelming urge to check out the Chicken Parmi that night at the Dalby RSL instead of trying again to push through in weather he had already experienced.
If a guy like that can’t say no to the boss, imagine how difficult it must be for a 20 year old with 300 hours.
The following users liked this post:
And why would the pilot not have kept his instrument ratings current?
I am also wondering how easy it is to transit Amberley CTR? The track around it seems to indicate that the PIC, for whatever reason, thought it would be more expedient to skirt it.
The Amberley military control zone extends from ground level up to an altitude of 8,500 ft (Figure 5). The airspace was active from 0800 to 2300 on 29 August and required a clearance to transit. Preliminary information indicated no record of a transit clearance request by the pilot, however, additional information is being collected by the ATSB to verify this.
Just because he were not “ratings current” do not mean he were not current flying the dials. NGT VFR is defacto IF. He would have been current on the dials.
Plus he seems to have gotten significantly behind the aircraft.. Having got himself to Dalby - just - he should have had plenty of breathing space to work out a plan for the short hop to Archerfield, yet it all seemed to go pear-shaped just as soon as he was back in the air??
Last edited by PiperCameron; 20th Dec 2022 at 03:12.
If he had a valid IFR rating then he could have lodged an IFR flight plan from Dalby to Archerfield and arrived safely. Instead he appears to have chosen to a tortuous VFR route that has killed him and two others. How expensive was it to not maintain the rating?
Depending on the panel layout, an avionics failure under the IFR may have given the same result.
At the time of the prang I doubt that any form of avionics, working or otherwise, was going to be of much use to him. He would have been eyes outside looking for a flightpath through the hills. Fully IFR, Night VFR or limited panel IFR are irrelevant if you have put yourself below the hill tops with the tops of the hills covered in cloud.
The following 3 users liked this post by Lookleft:
At the time of the prang I doubt that any form of avionics, working or otherwise, was going to be of much use to him. He would have been eyes outside looking for a flightpath through the hills. Fully IFR, Night VFR or limited panel IFR are irrelevant if you have put yourself below the hill tops with the tops of the hills covered in cloud.
To add. The ATSB report shows the aircraft were above the local terrain for a time.
I'm not at all familiar with the airspace around Archerfield, but for other reasons would like to be.
What I don't get is: Having found what looks to be the Lake Clarendon VFR route towards Archerfield around the top end of the control zone and starting to follow it in, why he suddenly left it, did a 180 and subsequently lost all SA. After skirting around a thunderhead or two maybe? Or is that only an outbound route from Archerfield??
What I don't get is: Having found what looks to be the Lake Clarendon VFR route towards Archerfield around the top end of the control zone and starting to follow it in, why he suddenly left it, did a 180 and subsequently lost all SA. After skirting around a thunderhead or two maybe? Or is that only an outbound route from Archerfield??
Thread Starter
I’m impressed that they managed to take on 263 litres of fuel and be airborne 11 minutes after landing.
That speaks of someone in a huge rush. Would barely allow for a restroom stop.
That speaks of someone in a huge rush. Would barely allow for a restroom stop.
The following 2 users liked this post by Squawk7700:
So, yep, even with a high-flow (80l/min) pump that's one heck of a rush! And certainly no time at all for runups!!
The aircraft appears to be a 1978 R182. The flight manual for this model states long range tanks hold 285 litres of useable fuel. Adding 263 litres means they sure were light on fuel earlier. Unless of course they had modified fuel capacity.
Last edited by Cloudee; 20th Dec 2022 at 08:58.
"Or is that only an outbound route from Archerfield??"
No, it is two way, but there is high terrain at the eastern end near Fernvale to Lake Manchester and as you turn to the southwest for Archerfield. Flying that route requires a healthy respect for terrain clearance. If the weather was as poor as reported it would have been a difficult route to negotiate.
Getting a clearance is only an issue when the military have hardware airborne. Generally, they are quite accommodating.
No, it is two way, but there is high terrain at the eastern end near Fernvale to Lake Manchester and as you turn to the southwest for Archerfield. Flying that route requires a healthy respect for terrain clearance. If the weather was as poor as reported it would have been a difficult route to negotiate.
Getting a clearance is only an issue when the military have hardware airborne. Generally, they are quite accommodating.
