The tools for risk management have existed for 50 years at least. No one can say"we can't afford it" or "nobody will pay for it" without doing the risk management sums - probability of occurrence times cost of occurrence vs. cost to mitigate.

Take Ballina perhaps. What is the cost and probability of a fully loaded B737 mid air with a VFR light aircraft?

If everyone was listening on appropriate frequencies and talking to each other then surely these incidents wouldn't happen.

I'm not IFR but flying in and out of caboolture you talk to people who are in the same area and self separate.

The thought of instructors turning down radios is a little scary.

Quote:

---

If it is keeping them awake at night due to the risk then I would suggest they cease operating into those places. A tower very well may be a smart idea in those places however no one seems willing to pay for it.....

---

Yrs, do that, people in these areas can just hop in their car and drive instead right? I'm betting you live in Brisbane or Melbourne right?

No one seems willing to pay for it...........Let's ponder that. Who paid for the existing towers? Who are you suggesting should pay for a tower at any of these places? What makes you think that existing users of your system aren't already paying?

Looks to me like you're on the ASA kool-aid.

All of your previous posts are typical of the ASA justification for lack of service. I'm tipping you're pretty green in this 'game.' If you aren't you'd know that Class E airspace is the solution. But whilst ever that costs a dime good ole ASA wont have a bar of it. Cost, cost, cost.

Eurocat HMI air situation display updates every 200ms. I don't believe there is a five second update cycle anywhere else in the chain.

I do fly a bit. I get the concept of mutually arranged separation. It assumes each aircraft is aware of and communicating with each other.

Do you reckon AEM and JQF were aware of and communicating with each other? I don’t reckon they were, and I reckon there’s a reason.

The ASD very well may update every 200ms. However the surveillance position symbols update every five seconds. If you zoom in close enough you can actually see the update, count 5 seconds, and then see the next update. I believe it’s a hangover from when all surveillance was SSR and 5 seconds was how long one sweep of the radar took.

Agreed but from the looks of the radar returns people have posted here (if accurate), and either by self separation or because ATC we’re giving them warnings, it looks like JQF tried to level out at 4K . If Going to LACEY, you would normally climb straight to 7000. Something caused them to stop that.

I concur that even with all factors , this is such a horrible fluke of a collision when you take all things into consideration.

surely 20 mid airs can’t be right in that time frame ? World wide maybe?

Mildura would wanna sort out radar to the ground ASAP ..

Never mind flarm and FR24. Look at this https://consultation.casa.gov.au/reg.../consult_view/

Did my CPL at Bendigo and Chris was the ATO for my flight test. Fond memories of him. There could not have been many people in GA more experienced or with a better name than Chris Gobel. He ran a tight operation, which is probably why Bendigo Aviation Services had such a good safety record.

Any word on the funeral?

Hi Leady and Homesick Angel - just want to clarify my comments which you guys responded to. My comment was not regarding this tragedy. I was responding to Andrew R's stand alone comment of "We know aircraft in IMC cannot adequately self separate". I was pointing out the fact that IFR aircraft CAN adequately separate themselves. Most of the fails I give out at work when doing airborne checks are based on pilots not ensuring "positive" separation. "you go left, I'll go right" is not positive separation. (actually that should be you go right and I'll go right if approaching head on). Separation must be based on altitude, DME, radial/bearing, or geographical features.

As I said, I wasn't referring to this case. The experience levels in this accident were certainly high enough to ensure positive separation one would think. So what went wrong? At this stage, God only knows.

Reference the comments about Mildura - yep, I reckon an accident is on its way there. Why the hell do flying schools send training flights out in waves??? We did that in the military but we were operating in protected Restricted airspace. Mildura and Ballarat send em out in waves and arriving aircraft are greeted with 6 in the circuit or none in the circuit. Surely they can do better than that.

the Coroner mostly conducts an investigation into certain deaths and fires as required by the ACT where the identity of the deceased or the cause of death is unknown. The Coroner only carries out an inquest as a follow-on to a small number of those investigations.

The SJ rules apply but a Coroner is part of the judiciary and generally thought to be trained to disregard what might be prejudicial in jury trials. . An inquest is also a civil matter so the threshold is again far higher than in criminal matters. The fact that there will almost certainly be no criminal charges arising and that discussions here are not savaging reputations of the deceased are further factors that might be considered if contempt proceedings were contemplated.

There is no right to free speech...merely a right to freedom of political communication found by the High Court. We have no federal Bill of Rights unlike almost every other first world nation much to our shame in the international scene.

NB I have little experience in the Coroner’s Court and this is my personal opinion, not legal advice and anyone concerned should therefore seek independent advice from a suitably experienced practitioner.

Yes... goes with what I’ve been saying. Like it or not, if everyone was forced to fit ADSB out and have an ADSB in-display, the risk of mid-air’s would be reduced, but you’re not going to end up with every aircraft with an iPad or TSO’ed display any time soon.

The idea of the reduced cost ADSB units being permitted seems to be a positive move and I assume they have weighed up the chance of erroneous information being sent and decided it’s not an issue or at least they are asking us if we think it is.

You’ll still need ADSB-in though as even if everyone has out, you’re relying on the controller to help you avoid a collision.

There is also no way you will get adsb mandated in all ra aircraft or gliders etc.

Agreed TTL: They “can” self-separate as a matter of abstract principle. Whether they can in a particular set of circumstances depends on that particular set of circumstances.

IF - big IF -JQF was in fact deliberately levelled out at around 4,000’ there will be a reason. And it cannot logically be that PIC JQF understood that AEM was also at around 4,000’.

Successful self-separation depends on a mutual understanding of the same set of ‘facts’ - either accurate or inaccurate. Doesn’t matter whether the ‘facts’ are true or untrue, provided that the understanding is mutual.

And I agree (“absolutely” and “100 percent”) re Mildura. I’ve said it many times in many different ways: If the level of risk to which passengers on HCRPT aircraft are exposed during flights in and out of Mildura are ‘acceptable’ to the regulator and the operators, I can’t see why the regulator bothers with the risks of e.g. ‘Community Service Flights’ (other than for reasons of political expediency).

CASA's risk and risk mitigation strategy in so many ways is managed by absolute over regulation. The idea that if there are enough regulations, we can make aviation safe, is just laughable.

Just watch the regulator run for cover if it turns there are systemic factors in this event that could have been mitigated by pragmatic oversight.

This is a terrible tragedy and I hope the senseless loss of life was not in vain if there are lessons to be gained from this..

If JQF was on a flight test the PIC would not have had any input in organising traffic separation. His role is to observe and asses the candidate and only take over if safety is an issue. Maybe he was to late in taking over?

That’s a little too far fetched to think that the instructor sat back to watch the student continue into a mid-air!

not as far stretch as you would think, 7700.

They would have been given trafic information from Mel center on taxi, of AEM a fair distance to the south inbound with intentions and an estimate. For an inexperienced IFR candidate they may have assumed they would be well out of the way before their arrival plus their intended tracks weren’t the same. As the examiner they would obviously have a more accurate idea. However do they intervene and stop the test on the ground or do you give them a chance to manage the situation. Maybe he have them too much of a chance.
7700, the IFR and examining world is a lot different to bashing around Tooradin in a Jab.

I’m pretty certain that both instructors would have a greater respect for the preservation of life, than to deliberately place themselves, their student and the aircraft deliberately into harms way for the sake of teaching the student a lesson!

Hopefully the pilot of the third aircraft at Mangalore, VH-TFX, will provide the answer to this unfortunate accident.