182 crashed into trees at Porepunkah
'Fly Neighbourly Normal aircraft operations are 8am (Sunday 9am) until 8pm. Departures prior to 8am (Sunday 9am) are allowed but aircraft must immediately fly away from the airfield and valley to reduce noise and should not return before normal operating hours'
But, as it's a "PPR" aerodrome, then operating against this instruction means that you are using the aerodrome without said permission. As I'm sure any insurance company will be happy to point out...
The following users liked this post:
So someone took off in the dark and had the misfortune of having an engine failure soon after departure.
It’s hardly newsworthy, but 9 pages later…?
It’s hardly newsworthy, but 9 pages later…?
Thread Starter
Thread Starter
Based on available imagery of the crash, I estimate that it ended up here. I could be wrong, but keep in mind that it did collide with trees within view of the on-site cameras and as you can see, there aren't many in close proximity and that trajectory heads directly towards a mountain, or for the conservative types, call it rising terrain.
The runway length is 820 metres.
Maybe you can join the dots for yourself as to what you think happened. What would be good is to know where the witnesses were camped that heard the engine "splutter" followed by the noise of the crash.
All very interesting.
Those vehicles are emergency services vehicles.
We'll have to agree to disagree on that. You seem to me to be construing a practise recommended to avoid an illusion during rotation and initial climb as meaning you don't have to be able to see the ground or water if, for whatever reason, you look outside at any point during that process.
Just to show just how black it is, here's a pic of a really well-lit airport from a recent nav: YMML from 6000'. Sure, you can see the runway, but aside from the approach lights and the odd car headlight, what about anything north of it?
YMML at night
Sorry I didn't get any photos of others - my phone camera simply couldn't see anything to photograph:. So, having been there and knowing what it's like, I'm happy to agree to disagree on this.
I can't think of anything more frightening than a single-engine failure at night.
There's a reason most regional airports (eg. YMBU, YLEG, YMNG and even YLTV and Ballarat!) are considered 'black holes' at night. Full moon or not, other than the edge lights of the runway you just departed from, from rotation until your crosswind turn (at least) there is quite literally nothing to see outside other than pure blackness: no horizon, no ground, no trees, no grass, no hills, sheds, nothing at all.. and even if it's artificially lit, it's more of a distraction than helpful and totally useless to you for reference anyway.
And were you at or below 1,000' AGL when you took that photo? You were evidently above 3,000' AMSL.
If you are indeed at or below 1,000' AGL while operating NVFR and there is - quite literally - nothing to see, then maybe - just maybe - you are not in the VMC which you are supposed to be in. That's why I sent the question to CASA's 'Guidance Delivery Centre'.
How's about we stand by and wait for their answer?
That's why so many 'old and not so bold' pilots won't fly NVFR over 'lumpy gaffa' in and out of 'black holes' except on cloudless, moonlit nights.
Last edited by Clinton McKenzie; 19th Jan 2023 at 04:27.
That's why so many 'old and not so bold' pilots won't fly NVFR over 'lumpy gaffa' in and out of 'black holes' except on cloudless, moonlit nights
How? In the whatever way that they do. And bloody well done and thank heavens for their work.
I hope they all get old.
And I'll make a wild guess and say they get a little more practise at it than us 'weekend warriors'.
I hope they all get old.
And I'll make a wild guess and say they get a little more practise at it than us 'weekend warriors'.
If you start to ask too many questions that may have obvious answers but the regulator turns a blind eye to, then on realising somebody in authority might be responsible, you start to lose the ability to conduct such operations.
LAHSO is a good example, after years of non events, one ridiculous event that should never had even been close to happening has now relegated the procedure to 'in perfect conditions only, with separation that negates its only benefits'. With stupid requirements now that the tower has some form of responsibility to visually separate airborne aircraft in a missed-approach with no RADAR.
Aeromeds have special procedures and training for these events. Even so it's considered very high risk and in less forgiving terrain environments overseas the EMT drivers are regularly victims themselves.
LAHSO is a good example, after years of non events, one ridiculous event that should never had even been close to happening has now relegated the procedure to 'in perfect conditions only, with separation that negates its only benefits'. With stupid requirements now that the tower has some form of responsibility to visually separate airborne aircraft in a missed-approach with no RADAR.
How do the RFDS chaps/chapesses get from cloud 8/8ths 500' above LSALT to landing at an outback station strip on a pitch black, no moon, no approach aids..
it’s been a couple of decades - perhaps the current crew might post something more contemporary.
There are many times in the circuit when there is absolutely zero to see outside the aircraft except the point of light (runway threshold) in your 7 o’clock.
Can any of the old timers confirm (older than me), The NVFR rating, before it was called that, was a class/grade of Instrument Rating?
When I first did the NVFR Rating it was treated as a pseudo instrument rating, without doing any IMC work of course. There was a fair whack of tracking on navaids, and a lot of training on getting to LSALT in the circling area before setting course. Now? Not so much.
When I first did the NVFR Rating it was treated as a pseudo instrument rating, without doing any IMC work of course. There was a fair whack of tracking on navaids, and a lot of training on getting to LSALT in the circling area before setting course. Now? Not so much.
Thread Starter
Can any of the old timers confirm (older than me), The NVFR rating, before it was called that, was a class/grade of Instrument Rating?
When I first did the NVFR Rating it was treated as a pseudo instrument rating, without doing any IMC work of course. There was a fair whack of tracking on navaids, and a lot of training on getting to LSALT in the circling area before setting course. Now? Not so much.
When I first did the NVFR Rating it was treated as a pseudo instrument rating, without doing any IMC work of course. There was a fair whack of tracking on navaids, and a lot of training on getting to LSALT in the circling area before setting course. Now? Not so much.
As I understand it, NVFR is part-way to a PIFR.. but without the IMC, approach procedures and holds.