S211 Down Port Phillip Bay
Not sure why so many on the forum seem to have issues with keeping all options open.
The following 6 users liked this post by FullOppositeRudder:
Perhaps they don't have these issues of which you speak. We've had just over a week now to 'consider all options'. We don't know that the highly competent crew on board the surviving aircraft didn't consider all options available to them, but given their vast experience, one can be confident that that did. They settled for the best option at the time in their judgement, and it turned out to be the right one. Subsequent and frequent protests by someone who wasn't there, and didn't have the information that they did (and still doesn't), that it wasn't the right one, are rather tiring and frankly pointless, and reminiscent of the ordeal which 'Sully' had to endure after his decision making process was under scrutiny by people who likewise weren't there, but knew he should have done something different - until it was proven that the alternatives would have been catastrophic. Please cut the guys a bit of slack on this one, and hope earnestly that none of us reading this are ever put in that situation ourselves.
It's not the pilot of the Viper I'm questioning, so there's no "slack to be cut". It's that people on the forum who refuse to consider the Avalon option. If you had some doubt about the integrity of the airframe you were flying, would you choose to fly over built up areas? Or would you maybe ditch in the river (like Sully)--or land at an aerodrome that didn't require flying over a built up area?
The following users liked this post:
So Thursday night we can listen to that recording and wonder why he didn't declare a Mayday.
why give a **** about who you fly over. Make your decision to fly over as many houses as possible if you ever have an airframe problem.
So what was the Mayday for? It's the ambivalence in his behavior
Which is fine I guess in the long run but perhaps some posters prefer to gather more information about the events before judging. Perhaps the ATSB investigation will reveal more.
The following users liked this post:
He did what he did and he got away with it, the wing didn't drop off over a built up area. Do we really have to wait a whole 2 years for the ATSB to perhaps have some thoughts about what we might do differently if we were involved in a midair?
Am I criticizing the pilot? Or ATC for that matter? No. As you quoted me I said "here we are Thursday night", so we can look at scenarios like that and have a think about what we might do.
He did what he did and he got away with it, the wing didn't drop off over a built up area. Do we really have to wait a whole 2 years for the ATSB to perhaps have some thoughts about what we might do differently if we were involved in a midair?
He did what he did and he got away with it, the wing didn't drop off over a built up area. Do we really have to wait a whole 2 years for the ATSB to perhaps have some thoughts about what we might do differently if we were involved in a midair?
The following users liked this post:
Wetcompass,
His primary responsibility is the safety of the aircraft and passenger. Difficult imo to fault an immediate turn toward MB being closest at that point and track close to the coast. From then on AV would have been further away. You don’t know that he didn’t consider AV and decided EN was safest. You don’t have to agree with it but that doesn’t make it the wrong decision.
interesting channel 9 I think reported he was inverted when they came into contact or just before.
His primary responsibility is the safety of the aircraft and passenger. Difficult imo to fault an immediate turn toward MB being closest at that point and track close to the coast. From then on AV would have been further away. You don’t know that he didn’t consider AV and decided EN was safest. You don’t have to agree with it but that doesn’t make it the wrong decision.
interesting channel 9 I think reported he was inverted when they came into contact or just before.
It's not the pilot of the Viper I'm questioning
Your contributions here are an embarrassment and I would urge you to stop.
The following 4 users liked this post by itsnotthatbloodyhard:
Of course you are, you’ve spent thousands of words here doing exactly that. Apart from questioning the choice of landing field, you repeatedly claimed he hadn’t declared a Mayday, and then when it was pointed out that he had, pivoted to taking issue with the ‘vibe’ of the Mayday. If you’re claiming that this is all about ‘learning’, well God forbid we rely on learning from the uninformed opinions of random anonymous people on the internet. BTW the aircraft is not a Viper, it’s an S.211. ‘Viper’ was the formation callsign.
Your contributions here are an embarrassment and I would urge you to stop.
Your contributions here are an embarrassment and I would urge you to stop.
So rather than addressing the point about the availability of another aerodrome and how the Mayday was acted upon by Melbourne Control, you stick to interpreting me out of context and lowering my status to a "random anonymous" person.
Well done, many on Twitter would be proud of you.
Genuine question WetCompass, as you seem incredibly invested in this particular incident, so invested that over a 5 year account period it now makes up over 80% of your total post contributions - what is it about this specific tragedy that is making you so motivated to ensure a better outcome next time? Or it just something you have developed an interest in?
Genuine question WetCompass, as you seem incredibly invested in this particular incident, so invested that over a 5 year account period it now makes up over 80% of your total post contributions - what is it about this specific tragedy that is making you so motivated to ensure a better outcome next time?
This forum has gone down hill.
Tell me, if you were involved in a midair collision in the middle of Port Phillip Bay and you had Moorabbin, Essendon, Melbourne and Avalon all available, no fuel, Notam or weather concerns, all within range, which one would you choose?
Simple really, just stick to the point.
Yeah, the first time in 5 years I've had a reaction where "professionals" don't want to address an issue. Instead, I've been inundated with ad-hominem and strawman attacks.
This forum has gone down hill.
Tell me, if you were involved in a midair collision in the middle of Port Phillip Bay and you had Moorabbin, Essendon, Melbourne and Avalon all available, no fuel, Notam or weather concerns, all within range, which one would you choose?
Simple really, just stick to the point.
This forum has gone down hill.
Tell me, if you were involved in a midair collision in the middle of Port Phillip Bay and you had Moorabbin, Essendon, Melbourne and Avalon all available, no fuel, Notam or weather concerns, all within range, which one would you choose?
Simple really, just stick to the point.
Yep, and there's the strawman and the ad-hominem attack.
So rather than addressing the point about the availability of another aerodrome and how the Mayday was acted upon by Melbourne Control, you stick to interpreting me out of context and lowering my status to a "random anonymous" person.
Well done, many on Twitter would be proud of you.
So rather than addressing the point about the availability of another aerodrome and how the Mayday was acted upon by Melbourne Control, you stick to interpreting me out of context and lowering my status to a "random anonymous" person.
Well done, many on Twitter would be proud of you.
The PIC in this incident had a fairly traumatic incident, recovered quickly, and then aviated, navigated and effectively communicated.
Given the time frame, this would seem to be a very good example of natural decision making. He took the information available and came up with a plan. He had sufficient spare capacity to think ahead, and plan his arrival nominating his preferred runway and approach preference (and at 2000 feet to give more options). His request for a runway inspection after landing was a consideration taught at my past airline after any non normal landing. And this wasn't because we thought bits would fall off, it was a "just in case thing" .
Taking that the aircraft recovery went to plan, it proves the plan was good enough.
It is funny that you feel under attack when people disagree with you, but deny you are are attacking this crew when you don't agree with them.
This crew proved they can work well when under pressure.
The following 3 users liked this post by donpizmeov:
The following users liked this post:
The only person that seems fixated on only one particular landing place seems to be your good self.
The PIC in this incident had a fairly traumatic incident, recovered quickly, and then aviated, navigated and effectively communicated.
Given the time frame, this would seem to be a very good example of natural decision making. He took the information available and came up with a plan. He had sufficient spare capacity to think ahead, and plan his arrival nominating his preferred runway and approach preference (and at 2000 feet to give more options). His request for a runway inspection after landing was a consideration taught at my past airline after any non normal landing. And this wasn't because we thought bits would fall off, it was a "just in case thing" .
Taking that the aircraft recovery went to plan, it proves the plan was good enough.
It is funny that you feel under attack when people disagree with you, but deny you are are attacking this crew when you don't agree with them.
This crew proved they can work well when under pressure.
The PIC in this incident had a fairly traumatic incident, recovered quickly, and then aviated, navigated and effectively communicated.
Given the time frame, this would seem to be a very good example of natural decision making. He took the information available and came up with a plan. He had sufficient spare capacity to think ahead, and plan his arrival nominating his preferred runway and approach preference (and at 2000 feet to give more options). His request for a runway inspection after landing was a consideration taught at my past airline after any non normal landing. And this wasn't because we thought bits would fall off, it was a "just in case thing" .
Taking that the aircraft recovery went to plan, it proves the plan was good enough.
It is funny that you feel under attack when people disagree with you, but deny you are are attacking this crew when you don't agree with them.
This crew proved they can work well when under pressure.
If YOU were involved in a mid air mid Port Phillip Bay and Avalon was available, you would pass that up and go to home base? Even given all the other alternatives require flying over built up areas?
Yep. Have you checked the YMAV landing fees lately?!? 
FWIW, I now remember at the time thinking it strange that ATC had cleared all traffic (and it was busy day!) off of the into-wind runway 17 at YMMB for a while there and made everyone operate from 13 in a slight crosswind instead. Presumably they were getting prepared, just in case?? Hmm.
Depends on how much damage the aircraft has sustained and if it's controllable. I have no problems with the PIC's decision to go to Essendon as a known airfield he had planned for given the (as far as we know) very light damage that was able to be visually seen from the cockpit. MB not suitable, extra track miles to Avalon for minimal gain given the condition of the aircraft. It's been explained in depth in this thread from pilots with real world experience in this type of flying, with a lot more experience than I have.
I distinctly remember the firies driving behind me at Pearce while taxying in once after a piece of speed tape was dangling off a flap. Very much SOP to ask for it, doesn't necessarily mean you're worried about big parts of the aircraft coming apart. Obviously can't speak for the PIC but given their background may have asked for similar reasons.
The following users liked this post:
Depends on how much damage the aircraft has sustained and if it's controllable. I have no problems with the PIC's decision to go to Essendon as a known airfield he had planned for given the (as far as we know) very light damage that was able to be visually seen from the cockpit. MB not suitable, extra track miles to Avalon for minimal gain given the condition of the aircraft. It's been explained in depth in this thread from pilots with real world experience in this type of flying, with a lot more experience than I have. Plan worked on the day after a traumatic event, can't ask for better than that.