YSBK First solo flight ends in crash landing
 

First solo flight ends in crash landing
From First solo flight ends in crash landing



April 12, 2010 - 11:22AM

A pilot's first solo flight has ended with a crash landing at Sydney's Bankstown Airport.

The solo pilot was not hurt in the incident about 9.30am (AEST) today, a spokeswoman from the Sydney Metro Airport Bankstown said.

"A single engine aircraft has made a heavy landing this morning," she said, and the emergency service plan had been activated.

The pilot's instructor was supervising nearby and when the plane came down heavily he rushed over to the aircraft, leading to incorrect media reports that there were two people on board.

The airport spokeswoman could not say if the pilot was male or female.

A minor fuel leak was being cleaned up by fire brigade officers, she said.

One of the three runways at the airport remains closed.

AAP

The airport spokeswoman could not say if the pilot was male or female.

Does it matter? The important thing is they're ok (though probably in need of a clean pair of undies)! :)

fly
 

And more importantly get back on that horse!

Such info is required so that the appropriate change of underwear can be brought to the crash scene. ;)

bugger..........beaten to the punch line. :D

We all remember our first solo with some level of satisfaction, this poor sod will remember it for all the wrong reasons. I just hope they get back on the horse and ride it, and learn.

J

Isn't someone going to publish the last half dozen TAFs for us?

Someone made a good post on this a while back, I'll have to find it.

Something along the lines:

- Post a picture of the aircraft from airliners.net saying how it looks fine in the picture

- Provide the last dozen weather reports for the area, METAR, TAF, etc

- Comment on how the pilot must have felt and what you would have different if it happened to you

- Comment with your condolences even though you neither know the pilot or are even involved in the industry

- Tell everyone how you "eagerly" await the results from the ATSB

- Post references to as many "similar" incidents that you can find for that aircraft type and for that airfield and draw as many meaningless conclusions that you can between the two

Or comment on how the aeroplane stalled, the Pilot is dangerous and what cowboys we all are.

Miss ya work Planky :cool:

Of course we COULD kick off with theory that it was an unintentional CFIT..... in this case it could have some merit!!!
Back into the saddle mate!

Look's like that's the tail of VH-HCE I can see there.

Pilot makes hard landing at Bankstown Airport - Local News - News | Canterbury-Bankstown Express

There you go Peter:

METAR: DGAA 120400Z 28006KT 9999 SCT010 28/25 Q1008 NOSIG
short-TAF: out of date (68 hours)
long-TAF: DGAA 120330Z 1206/1312 29003KT 9999 SCT010 BKN100 BECMG 1208/1210 23010G20KT SCT013 SCT120 BKN250 TEMPO 1216/1218 TS FEW030CB BECMG 1220/1222 27005KT BKN010 TEMPO 1304/1306 00000KT 5000 BR SCT009 BKN090

Gold GG!

Of course we have OZBUSDRIVER to now replace the Plankmeister...

C'mon OZ, show us a google earth photo...

j3

nahhh, not worth touching...not an airfarce trainee:}

"unintentional CFIT" - hmmmm I think more of a UFIT.

Well, who just pulled a rabbit out of a hat?

Well done, that man! you should be a moderator!

I Remember when HCE almost had it's tail completely severed. THAT was a few years ago :}

TID

does anyone know the flying school

I don't see anything wrong with the first two, unless actual facts are not allowed here?
As long as its one of each.

Hi all,

I provide a feed to LiveATC.net for bankstown tower 132.80. If the circuit training frequency was patched together the audio should be archived on the LiveATC website.

I'm looking for it now. But if anyone else wants to help - feel free. Then cross check the rego to see which school

But in this case there isn't (yet?) video footage of an aircraft stalling it on! :}

No, we must wait for the report... only an accident investigator could possibly understand how such an accident could occur. None of you have the years of training required to analyse the causes of this tragedy, so no further comment is allowed.

Oh, and no condolences!:=

:ok:

Probably, but no-one wants to see the info presented so some jorno can "get the information from a "reliable" (HA!) source".

i can understand that but if anyone could let me know by msg a school or tail number i just want to know if it was my school

Tail number????

Real pilots don't call it that.

Which paper are you from?

sorry only done 6 hours into my gfpt with basair thats why i want to find out if it was my school if it is im going somewhere else

Well you could work through process of elimination... who at YSBK still run C152s?

well my school has a heap of them, thats why i think its them, plus with the training i have so far i get the impression they might send you up even when your not ready

Here fishy fishy fish...

:ouch: I may be opening up a can of worms here....but care factor -10. I have sent thousands solo over the many years and never had a single mishap. Not luck....luck has nothing to do with it, it is good solid training, which covered every possible scenario. A lot of our training went far beyond the day VFR syllabus and we were often ostracised (sic) by the regulator for "overtraining" but we never lost an aircraft or pilot. Hours to solo were never a consideration, it was on ability, skill and absorbtion of knowledge. When the candidate was ready for solo.....he or she knew it in themselves. When you've tried every emergency, bounce, porpoise, go around, engine failure in every part of the circuit ... and you're just sitting there observing the student correct every mishap and fly copybook c/l time after time.....its time to hop out and give him/her their one lap on their own. I put the incident in this thread down to poor instruction.
Old fashioned....you betcha but I'm still alive (13500hrs) and so is every single one of my students. OFF THE SOAPBOX.

Hey Chookboy, check your PM.

I don't think anyone should be going solo without at least 10 hours, its one thing to spend time to show a student how to do it, its another for the student to spend time and being able to safely land a plane.

Someone correct me if im wrong and if i am i do apologize but when i phoned atis at around 11-midday it was indicating a swinging wind at 10 gusting 20 knots.. Surely not conducive to a first solo even if mostly down the runway? bit to handle for a first solo student from my flight training experience from a few years back anyways.

I did my first solo at 8 hours and never had a mishap.

Anyway I've looked through the archives at liveATC and couldn't hear anything. let us know if anyone else has success

Edit: I did however have a dedicated and experienced instructor who knew his ****. I've been through a few of the late flying schools and notice that the majority of the instructors are only there because they want to get hours up not because they want to teach. I think that's the problem going on.

Good job you weren't instructing in the RAAF in my time. You would soon be up in front of the Commanding Officer explaining why you didn't have the confidence or ability to send a student on the first solo within 12 hours max.

Of course if the student was hopeless that is another story and in that case the scrub test would sort him out one way or another. But by hanging on to the student so he can be taught all sorts of nice to know things rather than need to know before things before first solo, is being unfair to your student and an unnecessary financial burden to him. It is command time that will build his confidence - not hours and hours of dual.

There are operators (instructors) in flying schools that think the more dual a student has the better he will be. For that reason they deliberately delay a students first solo for 15-30 hours or more because of perceived "safety".

In reality it is a blatant rip-off. There are new grade 3 instructors who either do not have the confidence to put their student for a CFI check for first solo or worse still want to squeeze a few more bucks out of the student dual and hang on to the poor bastard for as long as possible.

This Poor bugger! I really do feel bad - and i hope he does jump back on the horse -

On another note why are we all feeling so bad???? - HASNT THIS KID JUST SATISFIED THE DIRECT ENTRY REQUIRMENT FOR QANTAS??? :}

A37575

:mad: Yes it is a good thing I wasn't instructing in the RAAF in your time. All my instructional hours were done in the real world not sheltered workshops. The first moron that bashed me on the back of my helmet to advise that i was scrubbed would've ended up with two black eyes. There are times when you must be upfront and explain to the student that perhaps flying an aircraft is not for him/her and they are wasting their money. You can always tell the ex RAAF boffins who were used to flying state of the art machinery, all at tax payers expense, in contrast to struggle street in GA. Robots v People. It was not a matter of hanging the student up there to make an extra buck, at times I GAVE hours to them to overcome handling difficulties....at my expense, not taxpayers!! There was never a grey area with the RAAF, like all boffins it was black or white........no flexibility. The ex RAAF self confessed top gun FOI who insists you go to the minimums and not hold 50' above for "turbulence", and then pulls an engine so you dip below the minimum for a split second and fails you. However when you ask him to do the same excercise to see how he would go, but he knows whats going to happen, states " Oh I couldn't do it either" don't worry you'll get it next time. All ther time flying a fuel guzzling twin which costs you your weekly hard earned wage to hire. I have no time for some ex RAAF cowboys who place themselves on a pedestal, who would not and have not survived in the REAL world.

A37575,

There are also ex RAAF pilots who are HUGE TOOLS. They prance about thinking that civvie street should be just like the RAAF and that they are Gods gift to aviation.

Now that I've generalised just like you...care to edit or retract some of that post.

j3

PS. Legendary PA39

:) J3....Good for you mate.
Regards
PA39

Hmmm funny that, the same species of tool also infest the RAF and the RNZAF... normally identified by their propensity for wearing their forces-issue leather flying gloves everywhere. Clowns...

off topic I know...but
 

I remember a TOOL of the highest order, an ex RAAF scrubbed at 1FTS that would fly an Auster with his bone dome and leather gloves whilst towing gliders for the local cadets....

He would strut around in his flying suit and mirror glasses pontificating his greatness to one and all.

I feel the need......

the need to throw up!

or to quote from the movie Red Dawn...

I'm an Auster driver!

absolute garbage!

E actly the reason ex or current RAAF shouldn't be involved in civil aviation.

Firstly, the average civil flying school doesn't have the option of chosing only 17yr old pimply faced kids that have gone through days of aptitude tests.
The average flying school cannot(if they want to stay in business) show students the door if they don't come up to standard in set minimum times.

Flying schools would not survive if their safety record was that of the RAAF.

Flying schools do not have their own 10,000ft runways with no or little traffic. They have little in the way of distractions whilst doing their early training, and thats after hours of briefings.

It would be easy to go on and on about the differences but I know it will fall on deaf ears when it comes to our ex mitary friends.

Well said,

Unfortunatly I was one of these kids back when I first started. I was one of the lucky ones that realised I was perpetually funding greedy old bastard owner/CFI's retirement and left for a better school. Others didn't and their careers were destroyed before they started. :mad: