Wikiposts
Search

Notices
Space Flight and Operations News and Issues Following Space Flight, Testing, Operations and Professional Development

Mid Air collision

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 5th March 2007 | 12:26
  #1 (permalink)  
Sinbad1
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Unhappy Mid Air collision

It just been reported on Al-Jazeera English " Austria-Mid Air collison 8 pepole dead" Any news.

Also it has been reported the the EU baned most PIA flight??
 
Reply
Old 5th March 2007 | 12:49
  #2 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
From: Here 'n there
light a/c vs chopper by all accounts. 7 occupants of heli and light a/c pilot all reported as perished. Never nice news to hear at all. My sympathies.

On another note, cant think why Sinbad made mention of PIA on the same post??

Last edited by VSB via OL; 5th March 2007 at 12:50. Reason: poor spelling - again
VSB via OL is offline  
Reply
Old 5th March 2007 | 12:57
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 980
Likes: 11
From: On the dark side of the moon
Helicopter and small plane crash in Austria, several people presumed dead

VIENNA, Austria: (AP) A helicopter and a small plane collided in the air and crashed near a ski slope in Austria, police said. Several people were presumed dead.

The late-morning collision occurred near Zell am See, in Salzburg province, but it was not immediately clear how the accident happened and how many people died, Salzburg police said.

Gerhard Huber of the Red Cross was quoted by the Austria Press Agency as saying that eight people had been killed in the accident. Police declined to confirm the figure, saying it was unclear how many people were in the two aircraft.

Austrian broadcaster ORF reported the helicopter contained seven people and that the small plane contained one person. Wreckage was scattered in a wooded area, according to ORF.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/03/05/europe/EU-GEN-Austria-Air-Crash.php
J.O. is offline  
Reply
Old 5th March 2007 | 12:59
  #4 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 314
Likes: 6
From: Confusio Helvetica
http://salzburg.orf.at/stories/176231/

Super-puma registered to a Swiss firm, HELOG, delivers a piece for a power company, then continues for some lumber-delivery work.
On the way, it lands at a parking lot near Weißbach bei Lofer (Pinzgau) to pick up passengers. Shortly after takeoff, around 11 AM, a Katana with only the pilot on board takes off from Zell am See. They collide; currently eight fatalities.
DingerX is offline  
Reply
Old 5th March 2007 | 13:54
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 342
Likes: 1
From: right here
from the bbc:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6419729.stm
Austria air collision kills eight
Diamond Katana plane in Austrian crash
The Diamond Katana plane had taken off from the local airport
Eight people have been killed in a collision between a helicopter and a light plane near an Austrian ski slope, local officials have said.
The crash happened late morning in the ski resort of Zell am See, central Austria, the Red Cross said.
The transport helicopter had seven people on board and was reportedly carrying equipment to a power plant.
The plane had only the pilot on board and had taken off from Zell am See airport, an employee there said.
Scattered
It was not immediately clear how the accident had happened, police in Salzburg said.
map
Gerhard Huber, of the Austrian Red Cross, said that weather conditions in the area had been excellent at the time of the crash, which took place at an altitude of 1,000m (3,280 ft).
Wreckage from both aircraft - a Diamond Katana plane and a Super Puma helicopter - was scattered over a wooded area.
The helicopter, owned by Swiss company Helog-Heliswiss AG and the local government, was on its way to the German town of Berchtesgaden, Reuters news agency reported.
FCS Explorer is offline  
Reply
Old 5th March 2007 | 14:06
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 649
Likes: 0
From: .
Dear dear, this is terrible news.

RIP all those involved. Condolences to all family and friends.
Captain Smithy is offline  
Reply
Old 5th March 2007 | 15:30
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
From: Littlehampton
If only both had been fitted with Flarm...

www.flarm.com
Basil Smallpiece is offline  
Reply
Old 5th March 2007 | 16:30
  #8 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 1997
Aviation Qualifications: ATCO
Posts: 4,452
Likes: 1,164
From: Europe
There is still some resistance among " motor" pilots and aircrfat operators to equip with Flam, and more awareness about the produtc needs to be made in y opinion . The Glider communauty in Germany. Swiss, Belgium, NL, France ( to a certain extend only) are taking this seriously. The rest waits to see.
But for the device to work everybody needs to b equipped.
With a current installation cost of 700 euros, it is not yet cheap enough for widespread.
If it would be ordered by the 10.000,s instead of a few hundred the price will drop considerably. (the firm that makes it not a greedy multinational ).

With more LoCo flying into E, G or F airspace everyday, it would make sense for everybody to have the device. It really helps.

Beaking the Cu ceilings at 6-7 000 ft in class E, F or G at 250-300 Kts in will end badly one day.

( I say this totally outside the Austria accident above, not knowing the facts yet , Sad day for Austria. )
ATC Watcher is online now  
Reply
Old 5th March 2007 | 16:53
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
From: Grand Com f'Ort
Danger

Hmmm, FLARM is, to my mind, a very flawed bit of kit. It strikes me that it may address some hazards (eg glider/glider mid-air hazard) whilst worsening the risk of other events.

Frightening to know that there are glider pilots in the UK flying with it - and, presumably (or, for certain, subconsciously) relying upon it...

Kit d'Rection KG is offline  
Reply
Old 5th March 2007 | 17:20
  #10 (permalink)  
F4F
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
From: on the Blue Planet
6-7 000 ft in class E, F or G at 250-300 Kts
... one of the reasons I see the 250kt "speed limit" under 10K feet (as used in my company) as a good safety measure, gives one more time to see and avoid, and costs merely a few seconds on the dep/arr route
Kit d'Rection KG, what are your arguments against the FLARM? For one, (and I sure have no connection with them) I see only the price tag working against it...
F4F is offline  
Reply
Old 5th March 2007 | 17:45
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
From: Grand Com f'Ort
Cool

Err, it's not a collision avoidance aid, and it won't be fitted to CAT aircraft... Is that enough?

Now, lightweight transponders are another matter...
Kit d'Rection KG is offline  
Reply
Old 5th March 2007 | 19:06
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
From: JNB
I sencerely doubt that either the fling wing or Katana was doing 250 kts mate!
V2+ A Little is offline  
Reply
Old 5th March 2007 | 21:04
  #13 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 1997
Aviation Qualifications: ATCO
Posts: 4,452
Likes: 1,164
From: Europe
it's not a collision avoidance aid, and it won't be fitted to CAT aircraft... Is that enough?
You miss the point totally. Flam is not an anti collision device it is a situation awareness enhancing tool. What do you expect for 1000 Dollars, a TCAS substitute ? For me every bit than can avoid accidents is worth looking into. Flam is a bloody good idea,( but not the only one )
I sencerely doubt that either the fling wing or Katana was doing 250 kts mate!
Totally different subject my friend, My remark was made for LoCo jets when operating into ( small ) regional airports in Europe , not refering to this perticular accident.
ATC Watcher is online now  
Reply
Old 5th March 2007 | 21:37
  #14 (permalink)  
F4F
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
From: on the Blue Planet
Thanks ATC Watcher
PPRUNE is a great place, pity those aggressive posters always trying to make a point outta nothing...

Last edited by F4F; 5th March 2007 at 21:43. Reason: time to go to bed :)
F4F is offline  
Reply
Old 5th March 2007 | 22:53
  #15 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,092
Likes: 10
From: uk
Could never understand why someone could not invent a simple transmitter receiver that could send a signal say 5 miles range.
It could say transmit a signal for 2-3 seconds then listen out for 2-3 seconds.
A simple beep in the cockpit would warn of the presence of other aircraft.
Make it cheap and make it mandatory, after all we all have to have medicals, and cough up the cash to do, so surely a device could be made for not much more.
BigEndBob is offline  
Reply
Old 6th March 2007 | 01:49
  #16 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 2,787
Likes: 206
From: Toronto
The helos would definitely benefit from FLARM as it also warns of cable locations.

What really should be done is have the heavy iron install Flarm or integrate it into the TCAS box.

Mode S or even mode C transponders are a bit rich to mandate installing into gliders, microlights, hang gliders and parachutes (powered and unpowered) to say nothing of the required battery capacity and radiation hazard to an unshielded human body mere inches away
RatherBeFlying is online now  
Reply

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.