Near miss sparks docs' safety plea
 

THE Royal Flying Doctor Service wants transponders made compulsory in all aircraft.

The call comes after a near collision with a light plane in the state's South-East.

The RFDS Pilatus PC12, carrying a pilot and three medical staff, and a 50-year-old Aeronautica Macchi AL60 with two people on board, came within 6m of each other about 56km northwest of Mt Gambier.

The RFDS pilot told the Australian Transport Safety Bureau his Pilatus "rocked" as they passed during the incident in July last year.

His aircraft was on its way to Mt Gambier for a medical retrieval, while the Aeronautica had been bought in Tasmania and was being flown back to South Australia.

The Aeronautica was not fitted with a transponder unit, which would have transmitted its exact location to the RFDS aircraft.

RFDS general manager of aviation and operations Barrie Hocking said that despite the RFDS pilot having followed all published procedures, a potentially serious incident had occurred.

He said all aircraft that flew in and out of "uncontrolled" airfields in regional and remote areas should be equipped with transponders.

"All high-performance aircraft accessing regional ports, not just the RFDS, are exposed to the risk of mid-air collision," Mr Hocking said.

"All RFDS aircraft are equipped with transponders and (Terminal Collision Avoidance Systems) that will alert pilots of other aircraft. Mandatory transponders in all aircraft would place another layer of defence in the system to prevent a mid-air collision."

In a report to the ATSB, the pilot of the small plane said he did not have a full appreciation of the proximity of his planned outbound track with the Adelaide-Mt Gambier inbound track.

His plane was not fitted with a transponder and he was flying directly into the sun.

The RFDS pilot told the ATSB that after descending through the cloud base and transmitting his intended flight path, he saw the other aircraft pass to the left of him flying in the opposite direction.

"The other plane was in such close proximity that his aircraft `rocked' as it passed," the pilot said.


SIDEBAR

"HOW DRAMA UNFOLDED"

CASA FINAL REPORT

On 1 July 2010, an Aeronautica Macchi S.P.A. AL60 aircraft, registered VH-ELI (ELI), departed Devonport, Tasmania (Tas.) for Portee Station, South Australia (SA) with planned refuelling stops at King Island, Tas. and Hamilton, Victoria (Vic.).
While enroute from King Island to Hamilton, the crew observed low cloud along the track and diverted to Mount Gambier, SA to refuel. After departing Mount Gambier, the crew observed that the left fuel tank gauge was indicating half full. The crew discussed the situation and elected to continue the flight. Also, the directional gyro had to be aligned twice by the crew due to gyroscopic precession. As a result, the aircraft diverted to the left of the planned track by about 2-4 km. The crew commenced correcting the track when an inbound Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. PC-12/45 aircraft, registered VH‑FDK (FDK), passed to the left in close proximity.
It was estimated that the distance between the two aircraft was between 5 and 15 m horizontally and about 20 ft vertically.
While the operator of FDK determined that their pilot had complied with the required procedures, they advised the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) that they will be conducting an internal education to remind pilots that maintaining a lookout and the use of radio telephony procedures are the primary tools used for traffic separation, supported by the traffic alert and collision avoidance system (TCAS).



THE QUESTIONS:

I have to ask, why was the doc so low (730m) when he was 53km away from Mount Gambier?

Don't ALL VH registered aircraft have to be fitted with a transponder?

discuss:

GEN 1.5 6.1.1

All aircraft must be fitted with a serviceable Mode A and Mode C, or Mode S, SSR transponder for operations within classes A,B and C airspace and any class of airspace at or above 10,000FT AMSL

Have you possibly misunderstood the wording they have used? I read that as the pilot had commenced his descent from cruise (which they don't specify) down to circuit height of 2500ft, Not that he was almost at 2500ft.

Quite timely after last nights Air Crash investigation TV episode involving the 737 and the private Embrayer jet.

At that low altitude it's every pilot for himself looking out the windows....

(ironic that the doc has THE doc's rego FDK)

AusNic

yep. you may have something there.

I wonder how low the cloud base that the PC emerged from was?

And that still didn't work. They didn't see each other.

The technology exists but so do luddites.

Kelly

the point being made is that the TCAS fitted to the RFDS aircraft would have identified ELJ as traffic/threat etc.

In regards to an exemption, depends on any legislation that would need to be passed.

A few months ago I flew across Vic in a 60+ year-old aeroplane. It had a transponder!

The only exemptions to be considered should be for aircraft that do not have a suitable electrical system - and then they should have limitations placed on them.

Dr :8

This is indeed a worry & I am not surprised but just to present the facts here not ALL RFDS A/C have TCAS, besides TCAS is fine but only under certain conditions as mentioned amongst these pages. TCAS doesn't separate planes, pilots do:-)
I'd like a dollar for every time I came too close to a pvt A/C especially ones being flown by foreign students under the VFR. R/T is a huge problem out there as well, some really have no basic idea of navigation either preferring to use GPS for ALL tracking situations.
Here's a doozy of an Eg. I was coming into a CTAFR some time ago & was trying to get a picture of where this guy was whom also was inbound to said CTAFR. I asked basic info regarding his position. You know radial or brg from the station distant out etc.This guy stumbled, fumbled & in the end had no idea where he was in relation to any aid. In fact he started to get very nervous on the radio & mucked up all the radio calls showing a high level of "I don't have a clue'! I landed ahead of him & then he came in about 2 mins afterwards, downwind LDG I might add. I tried to call him on the radio whilst he was taxiing in (low workload for him) just to help him in some way (cause this guy was dangerous to others)but he never said boo & parked well away from the normal GA area. Now that's a worry! I know it's a little off topic but in some ways all the fancy instruments won't help you when there are pilots out there with such little knowledge. Oh btw before some of you get on yr high horses the A/C in question was a C210, an A/c that ought to have been flown by someone whom was switched on, 160kts is not to be sneezed at!


TCAS was for many years not considered for the SE Section's A/c due cost & the fact that being presented with multiple targets in & around a busy CTAF actually can work against you in a SP environment. The eyes & good training/airmanship by ALL is yr best defense:ok:

Wmk2

My initial thoughs were also at what altitude they passed each other. I imagine it would be mighty expensive to run a jet under 10,000 so I'd expect they were in at least class E which, as we all know, requires a transponder.

Perhaps another point to look at might be that the closing rate of these two higher performing craft would still have, more than likely prohibited either pilot from turning away even if thy did see each other.

Perhaps our CASA friends should look at also requiring high speed aircraft to carry a transponder and not limit things to altitiude levels.

Just my 2 cents

rocket

Its called training, communication, and see and avoid. its been going on since the Wright brothers.

Its called training, communication, and see and avoid. its been going on since the Wright brothers.

Couldn't agree more. There may be more to the story than has been told yet, but at face value I'd say it would be a pretty poor show if the RFDS pilot couldn't see and avoid the Trojan bumbling along down sun of him. Gawd, he should just about have been able to hear it coming:).

Sorry, but have to respectfully disagree :ouch:.

I used to think it might be too much of a distration SP, but now that I have it, I completely disagree. It is just as relevant to single pilot as multi-crew ops - if you know how to use it EFFECTIVELY.

Eyes/training/airmanship won't completely prevent a mid-air, it's as simple as that. You might be the best PC12 pilot in the world, it will make f*ck all difference if some 70 year old PPL descends on top of you on base, after having accidentally selected the wrong CTAF frequency. You can't see in all directions from the cockpit of a plane. Your abilities/eyes/training/airmanship are but 50% of the collision equation - two pilots are involved.

I completely agree that transponders need to be mandated. I also think on GA aircraft, it should be required to be left in ALT permanently with a WoW inhibiting transmission on the ground or similar.

Airservices have indicated with mandatory transponders their ground equipment and maintenance costs would save millions and millions of dollars per year - and that part of the money saved could be used as grants so those without tranponders can be subsidised the purchase/installation costs.

What is this, the 1930s? We have had the technology to completely fix this problem for thirty odd years, and yet still 4 people can come so close to death in a TCAS equipped aircraft.

'See and avoid' isn't much help at a closing speed of around 270 + 120 = 390 kts shortly after descending through the cloud base.

Some confusion there. This is the Macchi involved in the incident.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...6/68/VHELI.JPG

270 below 10? Naughty, naughty.

Pilot with a licence who does not know the difference between TAS and IAS? Naughty, naughty.

That's okay 'pete' yr entitled to yr opinion we all are, I believe that cost & the fact that TCAS in a SP environment isn't the answer. No single answer will be a fix for this problem planes will continue to collide as long as mankind desires to be free of our earthly bounds it's just part of the acceptable risk.
What did we all do pre TCAS? We looked out the window where practicable & we had pilots with good airmanship/skills in the air, the latter less & less these days.
Everything about aviation is balanced against cost.



270 kts TAS/GS you guys are drawing a long thin bow there.



Wmk2

..............really?...........than see and avoid it should be. Not sure that aircraft would go out of sight in a week. I was thinking of the jet variety.

Still I agree if we have the technology we should embrace it and USE IT especially if it prevents midairs.


Rocket

TCAS only becomes a problem in a very high traffic environment with contra circuits. You will get 1 and 2 alerts on a sunny afternoon in these environments.

There is a huge difference between 270KTAS GS and KIAS. EN 1.1 65.1 clearly states Indicated Airspeed. Some people might call it a grey area, I say they need to reprint their AIP because its black and white. :ok:

I would like to know what time of day? How solid was the cloud base? These questions could be taken a long way; perhaps a change in attitude of how VFR pilots operate?

That things been for sale for 10 years, must have sold for about what? 20 grand?

This example is exactly the kind of situation where TCAS could save a life, provided the other aircraft had a transponder.
The pilot broke cloud to find a windshield full of aircraft. There was no time for see and avoid, and, although the RFDS aircraft was lower than normal, both aircraft had every right to be where they were.

My solution:
Transponder mandatory in all controlled airspace and establish an MBZ around all instrument approaches in uncontrolled airspace, plotted graphically on charts with clear vertical limits, and make this transponder mandatory also.
Airmanship would dictate IFR aircraft should not descend through cloud when below 3000' amsl or 1000' agl and not in these protected areas.

Has anyone heard of a Portable Transponder?, have to do a flight to have the Biannial RAD check done & wonder if something like this could be done.
cheers
A172

Indeed, Glek.

So Wally, why do we have TCAS if, in your words, "it isn't the answer in a SP environment"? IMO, it's absolutely essential in a single pilot environment, particularly in the airspace which the RFDS is operating, and the workload under which the RFDS's pilots work (you should know). In this case, see and avoid failed yet again. They were lucky this time. IF the pig had a transponder, then it's likely the near miss wouldn't have been as "near", as the RFDS aircraft would have been made aware via a TA or RA.

And that would have been a good thing.

IMO, the above example is a very good reason to have TCAS in a single pilot, high performance turboprop aeroplane.

In fact, why do most modern airliners have TCAS, when they are all multi-crew, Wally? TCAS has saved my bacon on a few occasions (even though we tried to separate the old fashioned way. Sometimes that just doesn't work, for a multitude of reasons.

The whole idea of TCAS is that it is the last line of defence if all else fails.

Why just high performance turboprops? Are you suggesting that the four people in the RFDS PC12 are more worthy of living than the four people in my V35B? I pop out of the clouds at 160 IAS - would not be much difference in the see-and-be-seen reaction time.

Bring on ADSB!

Dr :8

I don't think I've come across a thread on Pprune where so many people haven't read the f*cking thing properly, :confused:.

The RFDS aircraft was 56km's (30nm's), so on a standard 3 degree profile he would have been around 10,000ft. He was NOT at 730m's (2,400ft), he was on DESCENT to 2,400ft.

The PC-12 (turbo-prop, not jet), is not capable of 250kt's IAS at any time, it's VNe is 230kts.

Rant over, on with the thread.

TCAS is a great tool, especially in a single pilot cockpit (sorry Wal, have to disagree with you). The Collins Proline 21 has TCAS in it and I'm lost if it's not working!

I agree that every aircraft should have a working transponder. As others have said, the technology has been around for donkeys years, why is it not standard equipment?

morno

For f's sake, you can pick up a new transponder for around $1800 and even less for second hand plus install, which would probably total around 4k at the very most. If you can't afford this then you should not own an aeroplane.

That also includes gliders around busy CTAF(R) (YSDU), such as YNRM!

Make transponders mandatory! :ugh:

Is TCAS really that annoying? It has several different modes from off to TA to RA and just ON. I'm not a heavy metal guy but I'm sure the audible warnings can be at very least turned down.

Would rather be bugged by TCAS than be a giant bug squished across a 744's windscreen.

Hey Morno.

My initial reaction was exactly the same - people must have mis-interpreted the altitudes etc. But if you read the final report on the ATSB website....

Quote:

---

When about 56 km from the aerodrome, the pilot of FDK reported broadcasting an inbound call on the Mount Gambier CTAF advising that he was intending to track for a 10 NM (19 km) final for runway 18. Shortly after, the pilot sighted another aircraft (ELI) pass to the left from the opposite direction. The pilot reported that the aircraft was in such close proximity that the aircraft ‘rocked’ as it passed. At the time, FDK was on descent, approaching 2,400 ft.

---

The incident is listed as occuring at 53km NW Mount Gambier.

It would appear the PC12 was very, very low.

No Doc, I was just using turboprops as an example. Of course it is an important tool for all suitably equipped aircraft.

And Jenna, I 1000% agree. :ok:

A statement usually made by someone who doesn't own an aeroplane or Cate Blanchett.

Yes recently in either AVWEB or EAA email, but non TSO'd of course.

EDIT to include link;

LAST - Kinetic Avionic Products

You will need to convince RA-Aus to fit transponders to thousands of aircraft and the GA aircraft that don't have them too.

There is nothing to stop a light aircraft bobbing along clear of cloud below 3000 without transponder and an IFR jobbie punching down through it. Luckily we aren't heavy airspace users in those places without primary radar otherwise this would be a far more frequent occurrence.

What is the solution? ADSB???

There will always be inaccurate or faulty transponders or those without decent radio skills and position awareness.

Slippery_Pete, any pilot worth his salt would know that the 270 below 10 would refer to IAS. Naughty, naughty. Over to you......

Just goes to show a near miss could happen any where any time. My fear has been in and around any aerodrome and the accuracy gps provides with recipricol tracks. This "see and avoid" concept has too many flaws and relies on luck as what happened with this incident. TCAS sounds great and look forward to using it.
One question to those who use TCAS OCTA away from a radar environment. What is the temptation to become your own Air Traffic controller? I have heard stories of lazy types saying things like....."that's ok we have you on tcas, we will continue our climb, gday" and even times where nothing is said at all even though the tcas equipt aircraft is crossing anothers track on final within say a 10nm seperation? These tcas equipt guys I sense get a nice warm fuzzy secure feeling and can disregard acceptable seperation standards. I have a feeling this problem is creeping in. Again a problem that could cause more problems.

Hey morno,

Think you need to quit the rant and take some of your own advice.
The aircraft WAS below 3000', and that's why this occurred because the VFR aircraft had every right to be just below the cloud.

Additionally, a normal profile for an RFDS pc12 is a 2 to 1 (although 3 degree approaches are not uncommon), which actually increases the number of question marks about why the pc12 was down there so far out. That said, the same incident could have happened irrelevant of the distance from the field.

Many years ago an experienced pilot hired a C172 from a long since defunct flying school at Essendon. Maintenance release showed nil defects. En route to Point Cook via Westgate Bridge, ATC advised the pilot to switch on the transponder. The pilot checked and confirmed it was already on and had been since take off. ATC got upset and said it wasn't operating and that it was third time that week this particular aircraft had a u/s transponder and it better get fixed otherwise they would deny airspace.

The pilot decided to return immediately to EN and wrote up the defect and asked the CFI/owner why had he knowingly despatched this aircraft several times with a dodgy transponder? His reply was it was going to get looked at at the next 100 hourly and that so far ATC had always let it go. That same afternoon the CFI sent a student pilot off on his first solo cross-country with the same dodgy transponder. He said it saved him money by waiting for the 100 hourly.

What's the bet similar things still go on in GA and in remote areas?

Luddites Indeed!!

Using that argument, one should also remove the EGPWS, as the whooping can be distracting when shooting an approach. I myself find it difficult to find the inhibit button when dropping like a bleeding stone after missing my TOPD. While were about it, lets also take out the wx radar as it could distract you from trying to visually navigate around those line of storms on that dark night, think of the money it will save.

Straight home and don't spare the horses

Absolutely! Not much has changed in that regard!

Hmmm... whatever the reason, if they aint gunna look out the window then a slower speed at the lower levels would have been more appropriate..:hmm:






.

Especially those who fly in E at any level, just clear of cloud. Some in C at times :ugh:.

Give me a break. Whilst all the "see and avoid" lecturers are right in a general sense, in this instance it is not relevent.

As I understand it, the RFDS aircraft emerged from solid cloud, and within no more than a few seconds the other aircraft had flashed by. It happened so quickly that there was no time to see it, let alone avoid it.
It was pure luck that they did not come together.

I also understand that an initial investigation showed that the lighty had not successfully made any radio calls in relation to his departure from Mount Gambier.
Something wrong with the radio, apparently: They thought they were transmitting ok, but only carrier wave was heard from the other end.

So, the RFDS pilot could not have known the other aircraft was there (no transponder, and effectively, no radio).

And.... no time to see and avoid.

Oh, and no, it wasn't me...