PPRuNe Forums - Ferris Wheel crash at Old Bar

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions (https://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-aviation-questions-91/)

- - Ferris Wheel crash at Old Bar (https://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-aviation-questions/470339-ferris-wheel-crash-old-bar.html)

Those photos and the report are damning.

That said, last week I was fortunate enough to fly in two different kit planes (owner-built) that put many (most?) of the US Big Four factory efforts to shame for workmanship and quality of finish.

As an industry we must be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. The failings shown up in this event certainly need to be addressed but not with a knee-jerk reaction against all kit planes, home-builts or RAA generally.

Quote:

The failings shown up in this event certainly need to be addressed but not with a knee-jerk reaction against all kit planes, home-builts or RAA generally.

That is very true, however, this was a factory built plane, not homebuilt.
I would back the quality of my homebuilt against any factory built any day, but surely this must be investigated?

Haven't read the report yet as I'm super busy however it was inevitable that the LSA certification process was always going to fail in standards in comparison to the previous "full" certification, they simply aren't the same and leave too much in the hands of the manufacturer.

In defense of the builder the fuel filter is probably on the rear of the firewall as the engine facing side would likely be covered in aluminum or stainless steel or at least you would hope it was.

Quote:

In defense of the builder the fuel filter is probably on the rear of the firewall as the engine facing side would likely be covered in aluminum or stainless steel or at least you would hope it was.

One would hope. Although one would also hope that the fuel lines wouldn't be held onto the filter with zip ties, or that the wiring wouldn't be zip-tied to the fuel line.

Quote:

I would back the quality of my homebuilt against any factory built any day

Every rivet we stuffed up, we drilled out and replaced. With a factory built plane there is a percentage of rivets that can be 'average'

My aircraft is fully primed, priming is an 'option' for buyers from some manufacturers.

I would go further and say my 'homebuilt' is far superior in every area than any factory built. Hands down!

Quote:

I would go further and say my 'homebuilt' is far superior in every area than any factory built. Hands down!

Me too.........

Have seen some absolutely brilliant home built and experimental aircraft, and a fair share of absolute shockers as well.

is it any wonder that RAA isnt in the same league as proper GA. I guess u can still give the engineer points for improvisation. :ok:

If those rivets missed the fiberglass there I'd hate to think where else they missed the more important parts. I once saw an aircraft of a canine variety where the aileron control horn in the cabin was bolted to the airframe and the bolt holes in the fiberglass were only half into the fiberglass. Bit hard to explain other than it looked like the pic in the report posted here where the glass has torn away from the rivets as there was not enough "meat" around the bolt holes.

Major Tom, you mean you prefer cracked skins, extensive corrosion inside the wings, doors that don't close, windscreens that were great to see through in the 1970's, rigging bruises that make the aircraft fly sideways and one wing down, etc etc etc.

This isn't about RA vs GA or Kit VS Factory, it's about Responsible vs Irresponsible, and it is the irresponsible builders, instructors, and drivers we should be condemning.

Quote:

Or a 45 year C172 with new flap tracks, engine, prop, rigging, cables, wheels, paint, plastics at 1/2 the price of a J230. it's all in the detail that the owner of the aircraft chooses to do IMO, you just have to have the love of it. :ok:

The driver held the appropriate certificate from an appropriate FTF and the rego situation was purely the mis-reading of an S as a 5. He had flown into Old Bar on previous occasions and most recently only a short interval before the day of the prang.. that much is now known.

The ferris wheel appears to have been erected within the splay of the ALA.

Ironically, a heavier and more strongly constructed aircraft may have done what was so luckily avoided here.

All food for thought.

kaz

Final Report now released 17/04/2014

Inadequate training identified by investigation as a significant factor in this accident.

Wow, well over two years have passed and someone has made a profound statement! I am impressed.

the final report was released recently. doesnt paint a pretty picture about quite a few things, regardless of the aircraft quality.

Ummmm blaming the training is like blaming the pub cause someone's pissed. I'm sorry but this nuffy took off with another life on board without doing any fuel checks, without ringing the aerodrome operator (PPR) and had to ask what runway he should use.

He then told the investigators that he thought he landed in the same spot as his touch and go when on the day he told the cops a different yarn.

Cowboy!!!!

Tarnished the name of anyone that has ever taken to the skies, in my opinion.

Regarless of what training anyone has had if I you don't have a healthy dose of self regulation(eg the tanks are full, oh ok I won't check them) then it should be a red flag straight away.

Weasel words & 930 days to produce this...??

Austen Tayshus..."How much can a koala bear??":ugh::ugh:

AO-2011-126

Perhaps best summarised by PT with a Hempel parallel:

Quote:

Ferris Wheel plane crash not part of fun of the fair

This manages to be both serious, and funny, because no-one died. The ATSB has published its final report into what appears to be the world’s only collision between a powered aircraft and a ferris wheel at a fun fair.
This is the ATSB summary of the crash at Old Bar Airstrip in NSW on in October 2011.

What happened

On 1 October 2011, the pilot of a Morgan Aero Works Cheetah Sierra 200 aircraft (Sierra), registered 24-7634, was attempting to land at the Old Bar Airstrip after conducting a private flight from Taree Airport, New South Wales.

The pilot commenced a go-around after touching down. During the climb out the aircraft collided with a ferris wheel that was part of a group of amusements located at a beach festival, adjacent and to the south of the airstrip.

There were two persons on board the Sierra and four occupants of the ferris wheel at the time of the collision. There were no reported injuries from the occupants of the ferris wheel, and the passenger in the Sierra reported receiving a minor injury.

What the ATSB found

The ATSB found that the management of risk in relation to flight training operations by Recreational Aviation Australia Incorporated (RA-Aus) was adequate; however, it had been circumvented in a number of areas during the training of the pilot. That resulted in a pilot operating in the aviation environment who did not possess the required competencies to exercise the privileges of a private pilot certificate.

The ATSB also found that the approach to the management of risk by the Old Bar Beach Festival Committee, specifically relating to aviation operations at the beach festival, was ineffective and resulted in a level of risk that had the potential to impact on the objectives of the festival.
What’s been done as a result

RA-Aus have taken steps to ensure that the flight training facility that undertook the pilot’s training and its staff are aware of the requirements imposed upon them by the RA-Aus Operations Manual, and that RA-Aus staff at the facility have the required skills and knowledge to carry out flight training operations. The pilot underwent a flight review that established the need for additional training.

The festival and airstrip committees reported that in future the airstrip will be closed and aviation operations suspended when the festival is taking place.

Re-read the part of the paragraph that has been rendered in bold type.
Now ask yourself, what does a flying school that the ATSB says was adequate, and then goes on to say produced a totally inaquately trained pilot, have to do to get its authorisations to operate revoked?

This is another example of the comical behaviour of the ATSB in relation to public safety, even though, fortunately, no-one was killed. Less comical of course was CASA allowing an unfit pilot, Barry Hempel, to kill a member of the public on a joy flight near Brisbane because of its resolute inability to take its responsibilities for public safety seriously. When it comes to weasel words, as Don Watson famously called them, the ATSB and CASA are highly accomplished.

And don’t take my word for it, look up the report into the death Barry Hempel and his passenger Ross Lovell by the Queensland Coroner. The news of the day report is here, and the court document, which is the legally privileged basis for the Courier-Mail report, can be found in full here.

Weasel words indeed..:yuk::{

And for Easter hols amusement here is the very dry Don Watson:[YOUTUBE]The Invasion of Management Speak - Don Watson - YouTube

A lot more happened after this event than just a slap on the knuckles for the FTF which can only be a good thing.

If my memory serves me correctly, the aircraft manufacturer of this aircraft type had all of their factory built aircraft demoted from factory built LSA status, to amateur built, thus meaning that none of them could ever be used in a training environment ever again and a significant loss for the aircraft owners. I understand that this was due to the quality of construction identified in the ATSB report, not meeting ASTM standards.

Feel free to correct me if anyone knows more than I do on that above.

Dear ATSB, FYI this does not exist:

Quote:

private pilot certificate

It is known as a "Pilot Certificate."

So basically, someone got a shortcut pilot certificate where it sounds like they skipped some parts of the training syllabus... however that happened, it happened... and RA-Aus gave the FTF a slight caining and all are on their merry way again. CASA didn't let the pilot fly, RA-Aus did, although it sounds like they were jibbed themselves.

In the context of this accident, the whole RAA flight training issue is a bit of a sideshow. I don't deny it needed examining, but it doesn't seem to have been a primary factor.

What would stop a well trained PPL or even CPL in a 172 having the same accident?

Would they not operate at a 540m airstrip, or would they never need to go around, or would they just not hit an unseen obstacle in the splay?

You can't tell me GA pilots never hit obstacles in the approach/departure areas of airfields.

The more relevant issue is the control of obstacles that might be erected around airfields by people who are not necessarily familiar with aviation.

There is a swap meet every year in Ballarat that operates in the old closed section of runway 36. What stops the organisers from deciding one year that a ferris wheel would be a good idea, erecting it one afternoon, and catching some student doing night flying that evening? Or just moving the raised toilet block to the fence closest to the runway and mounting some loudspeakers on top?

Non-pilots are not a good judge of these things. They look at the height, look at the runway and see that there's hundreds of metres available and think that's plenty of room (based on actual conversations).