Jandakot Crash
It is sad that most of you on this post generally accept that the 404 was over weight e.g carrying max fuel etc.
It would be nice if you gave the pilot the professional respect he deserves and assumed that he was operating the aircraft within it's limitations.
I am sure when all the facts come out over time it will be shown that (a) The aircraft was not overweight (b) The pilot did everything he possibly could to get the aircraft down safely.
Anyone noticed the clear area of sand about 100 mtrs further along the flight path? That he was possibly trying to reach
Anyone wondered that he may have turned left off 24R to avoid the built up area?
Give theses guys and there families a break and try to stick to the facts.
It would be nice if you gave the pilot the professional respect he deserves and assumed that he was operating the aircraft within it's limitations.
I am sure when all the facts come out over time it will be shown that (a) The aircraft was not overweight (b) The pilot did everything he possibly could to get the aircraft down safely.
Anyone noticed the clear area of sand about 100 mtrs further along the flight path? That he was possibly trying to reach
Anyone wondered that he may have turned left off 24R to avoid the built up area?
Give theses guys and there families a break and try to stick to the facts.
Bill Smith
What a load of crap. No one has made that accusation at all. Titan Driver and myself were discussing how much fuel could be carried with 6 POB after a question from Captain Sand Dune asking if a 404 would be overweight with 6 POB and full fuel. The reality is that it most likely would be. Nowhere in any of the posts written has anyone said that this aircraft had full fuel. How the hell would we know, we didn’t refuel it. We will leave it to the investigators to determine what happened. Maybe you can go back and read the posts again before jumping to any conclusions, something you have accused us of doing.
It is sad that most of you on this post generally accept that the 404 was over weight e.g. carrying max fuel etc. It would be nice if you gave the pilot the professional respect he deserves and assumed that he was operating the aircraft within it's limitations.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fire Services at YPJT
Should be careful what you wish for with an RFF capability. They may end up providing it .. then doubling landing fees 
am I too skeptical?
On another note, what does a 404 hire for these days?
PAF
am I too skeptical?
On another note, what does a 404 hire for these days?
PAF
I don't want to be the best pilot in the world - Just the oldest
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G'day PAF,
Skeptical? Not at all.
Whether or not it (RFF) is truly needed is not a debate I care to partake in. However there are those outside this forum who will lobby quite hard for it to be provided and expect it to be provided for free. Maybe if for no other reason but to have their own egos massaged should it come to fruition. Am I being skeptical?
I wonder if any cost/benefit analysis and a safety case has been completed to objectively wiegh up the advantages/disadvantages of such a service. How does JT compare to BK, PF, AF, MB for example? Do any of them have dedicated fire services on the field. Anyone know how long ago was it since the fire service that was provided was taken away? This would have been back in the days when the annual movement figures would be nowhere near what they are today. Yes we will certainly pay for it in landing fees but just how much is the question
In my 8 years at Jandakot I can recall only one accident prior to this resulting in fire. That was when an R22 caught fire a couple of years back after it impacted heavily with the ground during a training session in the middle of the field. Luckily both occupants were able to escape but the only initial response was an airport employee quickly loading a few extinguishers into his ute and getting to the scene. FESA turned up about 10 minutes later. But their ability to respond even in this time frame normally is going to be dependent upon the crew from the closest station not being on another task at the time. Another serious accident was when a C172 landed on top of an ultralight. No fire resulted and I'm not sure whether or for how long the ultralight pilot/s were trapped before being released.
If it is statistics that may well decide or give weight to what, if any changes are going to be made, I'd suggest that Jandakot like most other GA airfields stack up fairly well. It will also be these statistics which leave us with no qualified RFF capability should an unlikely event such as this occur again.
Skeptical? Not at all.
Whether or not it (RFF) is truly needed is not a debate I care to partake in. However there are those outside this forum who will lobby quite hard for it to be provided and expect it to be provided for free. Maybe if for no other reason but to have their own egos massaged should it come to fruition. Am I being skeptical?
I wonder if any cost/benefit analysis and a safety case has been completed to objectively wiegh up the advantages/disadvantages of such a service. How does JT compare to BK, PF, AF, MB for example? Do any of them have dedicated fire services on the field. Anyone know how long ago was it since the fire service that was provided was taken away? This would have been back in the days when the annual movement figures would be nowhere near what they are today. Yes we will certainly pay for it in landing fees but just how much is the question
In my 8 years at Jandakot I can recall only one accident prior to this resulting in fire. That was when an R22 caught fire a couple of years back after it impacted heavily with the ground during a training session in the middle of the field. Luckily both occupants were able to escape but the only initial response was an airport employee quickly loading a few extinguishers into his ute and getting to the scene. FESA turned up about 10 minutes later. But their ability to respond even in this time frame normally is going to be dependent upon the crew from the closest station not being on another task at the time. Another serious accident was when a C172 landed on top of an ultralight. No fire resulted and I'm not sure whether or for how long the ultralight pilot/s were trapped before being released.
If it is statistics that may well decide or give weight to what, if any changes are going to be made, I'd suggest that Jandakot like most other GA airfields stack up fairly well. It will also be these statistics which leave us with no qualified RFF capability should an unlikely event such as this occur again.
With full fuel in the C404 and 6POB the Titan is already 100kg over MTOW. This is without bags and allowing for survey equipment which will probably add another 200kg???
Sorry if I offended but seeing the comment above specifically referred to survey equipment, and the aircraft was on a survey mission. I thought you were referring to one and the same
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Aus
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G'day 404 Titan
Yep one of our girls is ex cairns. Currently getting a make over at the moment and should look a treat when she comes out
Bill Smith
I too was not saying that the aircraft in question was carrying full fuel nor did i mean to imply it was over weight. My intention was simply to point out that with full fuel the aircraft would be well over the limit (ie not an option). More than likely a more realistic fuel figure will be around the 1000 lb mark.
Yep one of our girls is ex cairns. Currently getting a make over at the moment and should look a treat when she comes out
Bill Smith
I too was not saying that the aircraft in question was carrying full fuel nor did i mean to imply it was over weight. My intention was simply to point out that with full fuel the aircraft would be well over the limit (ie not an option). More than likely a more realistic fuel figure will be around the 1000 lb mark.
Last edited by Titan Driver; 19th Aug 2003 at 13:40.
Titan Driver
That is a beautiful example of a Titan you have there. I have many hours in her and fond memories. She would have to be one of the lowest time C404’s in the country except for another one that I know of in Cairns. My old company imported her from Germany in 1990’s but that was before I was there. What is she going to be doing? Passenger charter, RPT, survey or freight?
That is a beautiful example of a Titan you have there. I have many hours in her and fond memories. She would have to be one of the lowest time C404’s in the country except for another one that I know of in Cairns. My old company imported her from Germany in 1990’s but that was before I was there. What is she going to be doing? Passenger charter, RPT, survey or freight?
I don't want to be the best pilot in the world - Just the oldest
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Praise for burnt pilot
Part of today's story in the Sunday Times
SUNDAY TIMES 17 AUG 03
By Nick Taylor
As pilot Alec Penberthy lay suffering from shocking burns his first thoughts were for his passengers.
After escaping from his aircraft that crashed and exploded in a ball of flames at Jandakot on Monday, he began looking for his mates.
But as the bush burnt around him he collapsed under a tree and could only wait for help.
"He was not concerned about himself," helicopter paramedic Bevan Grove said. "He was asking how everyone else was. He had walked out of the plane and all he knew was that there were other people somewhere. That was his main concern" "He said, 'Oh, my god, what have I done?' "From what I could see and from what I have been told there was nothing more he could have done. He battled to bring the plane down safely."
Mr Penberthy had just taken off fwith a team from Fremantle-based marine technology company Nautronix for survey work off Rottnest Island.
Lets all pray for a full recovery for the survivors of this tragic event
Also from SUNDAY TIMES.
It is a sad commentary on life, but it happens all to frequently - it takes a disaster to ram home a potentially dangerous situation that has been staring at officialdom in the face for years.
A tragic example occurred this week when a twin-engined Cessna 404 crashed and exploded soon after take-off at Jandakot Airport, killing one man and dcritically injuring five others.
What the crash highlighted was the lack of a dedicated fire service at the airport, although it needs to be said that even if there had been one on this occasion, the result of the crash could have been the same.
That aside, the crash brought into sharp focus the Federal Government's unfortunate decisioon to scrap the airport's fire service in 1992 to reduce costs. Thsi followed a change in safety regulations which allowed the airport to not have a dedicated service because of low passenger numbers.
It was a decision out of touch with reality. While it is true that there are low passenger numbers, Jandakot airport has a high rate of aircraft because it is a flying school base.
Training flights heighten the risks of a crash and on that ground alone the ariport should have its own fire service. In the wake of the crash, airport safety needs to be scrutinised.
If a fire service is based at the airport it would need to have access to major arterial roads, a factor that needs to be examined. WA's Fire and Emergency Services Authority was quick to pint out that it was not responsible for airport fire services. This rested with the airport's owners.
Fair enough if this is the case, but something has to be done quickly to close the firefighting gap which has left Jandakot out on a dangerous limb.
The airport owners and all users of the facilities should contribute to a levy to help pay for a dedicated fire service which would cost $1.5 million a year. If necessary the Federal Government should also meet part of the cost.
Its a small price to pay when lives are at stake
end of article
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
So all those advocates of location specific charging, hold your breath and be ready to fork out another 4 bucks or so per landing.
SUNDAY TIMES 17 AUG 03
By Nick Taylor
As pilot Alec Penberthy lay suffering from shocking burns his first thoughts were for his passengers.
After escaping from his aircraft that crashed and exploded in a ball of flames at Jandakot on Monday, he began looking for his mates.
But as the bush burnt around him he collapsed under a tree and could only wait for help.
"He was not concerned about himself," helicopter paramedic Bevan Grove said. "He was asking how everyone else was. He had walked out of the plane and all he knew was that there were other people somewhere. That was his main concern" "He said, 'Oh, my god, what have I done?' "From what I could see and from what I have been told there was nothing more he could have done. He battled to bring the plane down safely."
Mr Penberthy had just taken off fwith a team from Fremantle-based marine technology company Nautronix for survey work off Rottnest Island.
Lets all pray for a full recovery for the survivors of this tragic event
Also from SUNDAY TIMES.
It is a sad commentary on life, but it happens all to frequently - it takes a disaster to ram home a potentially dangerous situation that has been staring at officialdom in the face for years.
A tragic example occurred this week when a twin-engined Cessna 404 crashed and exploded soon after take-off at Jandakot Airport, killing one man and dcritically injuring five others.
What the crash highlighted was the lack of a dedicated fire service at the airport, although it needs to be said that even if there had been one on this occasion, the result of the crash could have been the same.
That aside, the crash brought into sharp focus the Federal Government's unfortunate decisioon to scrap the airport's fire service in 1992 to reduce costs. Thsi followed a change in safety regulations which allowed the airport to not have a dedicated service because of low passenger numbers.
It was a decision out of touch with reality. While it is true that there are low passenger numbers, Jandakot airport has a high rate of aircraft because it is a flying school base.
Training flights heighten the risks of a crash and on that ground alone the ariport should have its own fire service. In the wake of the crash, airport safety needs to be scrutinised.
If a fire service is based at the airport it would need to have access to major arterial roads, a factor that needs to be examined. WA's Fire and Emergency Services Authority was quick to pint out that it was not responsible for airport fire services. This rested with the airport's owners.
Fair enough if this is the case, but something has to be done quickly to close the firefighting gap which has left Jandakot out on a dangerous limb.
The airport owners and all users of the facilities should contribute to a levy to help pay for a dedicated fire service which would cost $1.5 million a year. If necessary the Federal Government should also meet part of the cost.
Its a small price to pay when lives are at stake
end of article
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
So all those advocates of location specific charging, hold your breath and be ready to fork out another 4 bucks or so per landing.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: PH 298/7.4DME
Posts: 554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know I would've been happy to pay an extra $10 or so per landing for the on site emergency services. What's $10 when you're spending $150 - $250 per hour for the machine anyway?
520.
520.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Still in Paradise
Age: 60
Posts: 861
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can anyone identify any example of on-field RFF services making a difference to outcomes in GA incidents? Unless they are sitting in the truck 24/7, following every aircraft down the runway on the off-chance of a take-off or landing incident, then their response times will be no better than the local Fire Service which we are already paying for..... and that assumes that the incident occurs ON the field, when in the majority of cases it doesn't.
When incidents DO occur in GA and involve either fire or sufficient occupant space intrusion to cause entrapment, then it is either all over well before the arrival of anyone, or is of sufficient duration that the response time difference (if any) between on and off field services is moot.
Cost = huge; benefit = negligble.
When incidents DO occur in GA and involve either fire or sufficient occupant space intrusion to cause entrapment, then it is either all over well before the arrival of anyone, or is of sufficient duration that the response time difference (if any) between on and off field services is moot.
Cost = huge; benefit = negligble.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: PH 298/7.4DME
Posts: 554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can anyone identify any example of on-field RFF services making a difference to outcomes in GA incidents?
Wouldn't it be better to prevent a situation where this would become measureable by having them there in the first place? At least at ADs where training ops are substantial?
520.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Still in Paradise
Age: 60
Posts: 861
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G'day 520; a difference to outcomes in medical terms, is dependant on the argument. In this case, it is being argued that RFF is a 'life saving' service, so the question of outcomes is whether the patient/s lives or dies.
I would also argue whether there is a demonstrable difference in likelyhood of a serious incident in a training environment - my (brief) research indicates that while training does have a slightly higher incident count, it is of a minor nature and in fact the major incidents (ie death / major injury) which involve training flights are often en-route or training area locations, not on the field.
Those that have occured on-field, like the landing on top of each other thing, were out-of-hours anyway and RFF wouldn't have been on duty.
If an argument were to be made that these services are warranted, then - bearing in mind that the RFF role is puting out fires and cutting up wreckage - there must also be an argument for on-field medical services, and on-field emergency transport services, and........etc, etc. How big is the money bucket, and hands up all those willing to pay to make it big enough, again bearing in mind the fact that
Look also at those places that have RFF - their main role is standing by at on-board medical incidents awaiting the arrival of ambulance crews.
Look at the various GAAPs around the country; I think you'll find the average response time to an incident - on or off field - by the government agencies (Police, ambulance, fire) would be as good or better than that of a dedicated service; and we are already paying for those services.
I am all for making our GA pastime / job / career (tick as applicable) as safe as possible, but this particular case goes back to the 'Ambulance in the Valley' syndrome - better to fix the problem of using old aeroplanes (all we can afford due to a host of reasons) than to argue for a cure for when they break / crash. (Sorry, I've lost the copy of 'The Ambulance in the Valley' poem that someone posted a while ago.)
RFF would not have made any difference in this case and this whole storyline reeks of someone with half a clue trying to fill column inches.
I would also argue whether there is a demonstrable difference in likelyhood of a serious incident in a training environment - my (brief) research indicates that while training does have a slightly higher incident count, it is of a minor nature and in fact the major incidents (ie death / major injury) which involve training flights are often en-route or training area locations, not on the field.
Those that have occured on-field, like the landing on top of each other thing, were out-of-hours anyway and RFF wouldn't have been on duty.
If an argument were to be made that these services are warranted, then - bearing in mind that the RFF role is puting out fires and cutting up wreckage - there must also be an argument for on-field medical services, and on-field emergency transport services, and........etc, etc. How big is the money bucket, and hands up all those willing to pay to make it big enough, again bearing in mind the fact that
When incidents DO occur in GA and involve either fire or sufficient occupant space intrusion to cause entrapment, then it is either all over well before the arrival of anyone, or is of sufficient duration that the response time difference (if any) between on and off field services is moot.
Look at the various GAAPs around the country; I think you'll find the average response time to an incident - on or off field - by the government agencies (Police, ambulance, fire) would be as good or better than that of a dedicated service; and we are already paying for those services.
I am all for making our GA pastime / job / career (tick as applicable) as safe as possible, but this particular case goes back to the 'Ambulance in the Valley' syndrome - better to fix the problem of using old aeroplanes (all we can afford due to a host of reasons) than to argue for a cure for when they break / crash. (Sorry, I've lost the copy of 'The Ambulance in the Valley' poem that someone posted a while ago.)
RFF would not have made any difference in this case and this whole storyline reeks of someone with half a clue trying to fill column inches.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Continental-520 I know I would've been happy to pay an extra $10 or so per landing for the on site emergency services. What's $10 when you're spending $150 - $250 per hour for the machine anyway?
However, unfortunately I hear many people complaining that they will fly without NOTAMS and WEATHER because they don't wan't to pay for a briefing package.
