Air Charter crashes at Essendon

[Madmik]

I wonder if the pilot was trying to make it to the road marked "37"?

Not many other options in peak hour traffic. Compromises in airport planning require contingencies that Essendon just does not have. The Vic Premier cites the strategic and operational importance, the need for it to remain open, etc,etc without the necessary planning controls, rather commercial real estate interests. Lindsay Fox also owns Avalon, so too many vested interests and political influence to close it down.

The last event was in 1978...

 

The Essendon plane crash that turned grief into a public event

 

 

 

[Admin]

I can see very soon that Essendon will be closed to all fixed wing making the pollies happy that they will have more land for development, less chance of crashes whilst at the same time keep it available for services like police air wing, news choppers traffic choppers, fire fighting choppers etc.

 

Personally I put the whole blame of this accident on CASA...they are suppose to be providing safety for us by providing/objecting to anything that may hamper safety in flying.

 

Although I am guessing that in 50 years time fixed wing in light aircraft will be minimal and recreational aviation will be all about verticle takeoff like gyros

 

 

[ben87r]

Not being very familiar with Melbourne, what sort of areas surround EN?

 

How 'far' is it to town etc by ground and can ML/MB/AV cope with the workload?

 

Is there a need for an airport in the area where it sits?

 

Not suggesting it should be closed just trying to understand its use and arguments for/against a bit better.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Not being very familiar with Melbourne, what sort of areas surround EN?How 'far' is it to town etc by ground and can ML/MB/AV cope with the workload?

Is there a need for an airport in the area where it sits?

 

Not suggesting it should be closed just trying to understand its use and arguments for/against a bit better.

Google Map it; you'll see it's a major commercial airport.

The issue here is the negligence of allowing large buildings and retail activities inside an airport boundary.

 

 

[Ron5335]

Take a look at Canberra, and that's an International Airport

 

All that vacant land surrounding the airport, yet they are building office blocks and retail buildings inside

 

the airport's boundary.

 

 

[facthunter]

It's all because they sell the airports off and the new owners only want profit, not aeroplanes. No one wants an aerodrome near them but these airports came before the houses, whose owners then want to be rid of them to have peace and quiet and add value to their properties. The same people want to go anywhere in the world from a place near them at lowest cost and have stuff in their hands which they buy overseas on line go by PLANE. Quickly and cheaply, and jobs for their kids. Nev

 

 

[Akromaster]

Not being very familiar with Melbourne, what sort of areas surround EN?How 'far' is it to town etc by ground and can ML/MB/AV cope with the workload?

Is there a need for an airport in the area where it sits?

 

Not suggesting it should be closed just trying to understand its use and arguments for/against a bit better.

Essendon is a stone's throw from Melbourne CBD and used by air ambulance, Vic police air wing, commercial ops and during summer months is home to the fire fighting skycranes - closest to the northern/vic central danger zones. MB and AV are both significantly further away so I can't see moving services out of EN or it closing any time soon.

 

 

[facthunter]

You are assuming people act sensibly. That's fairly rare. When money is involved money talks, exerts influence and the ordinary people have no way to do much about it, bar voting and you need a media to inform your vote as to the facts as well. We all know people don't like aerodromes, but want the facilities and services they provide. Nev

 

 

[red750]

It is a large airport capable of handling large aircraft and was the main Melbourne airport when Ansett and TAA operated B727's and DC9's from there. BOAC operated services with DH Comets, and I was there when President LBJ's 707 came for the funeral of Harold Holt. It has been closely surrounded with homes for more than 50 years. I lived on the approach to Rwy 27, on Gaffney St, just off the right hand edge of the Google Earth shot below in the late 1960's. I was around 20 at the time and lived in a bungalow behind my parent's milk bar. The jets would fly over low enough to read the rego under the wing.

 

 

 

 

 

[facthunter]

And from 65 till 69 I would bring you beautiful Big Round engine noises as we ran 4 engines up at 2230 each night in the run up bay near your place. Nev

 

 

[red750]

Yes. The DC6's, DC4's and Carvairs. Also the scream of Viscount and Friendship prop tips.

 

 

 

 

 

[pmccarthy]

I lived in Kilburn St Strathmore, on the airport side of Pascoe Vale Rd. About 400m from the threshold of 26. Loved sitting on the balcony and watching the aircraft movements.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

Although it's a macabre way to counter the issue, the road death statistics of the immediate Essendon area would pale these aircraft incidents into insignificance.

 

 

[Marty_d]

Although it's a macabre way to counter the issue, the road death statistics of the immediate Essendon area would pale these aircraft incidents into insignificance.

Well I can't seem to get it down to Essendon, but the urban Melbourne area had 117 road fatalities in 2016. Source: Lives Lost - Annual - TAC - Transport Accident Commission

 

 

[laserfly]

Pretty much all airports get development right up to their boundaries. Essendon is no different to most of them in that regard. Air Ambulance uses it and that's a plus for the community. It was the Major Airport for the Airlines till 1970, and was built up on all sides except the northern end even then. There's been a constant push by real estate entities to get it closed for years. The signs erected and development there should never have been allowed to happen though I doubt it would have made any difference to this occurrence which was a charter company with engines in a plane that have one of the best safety records of any engine built. You can fill an airport up with development but you will rarely remove development to establish an airport. Everyone wants cheap airfares and access to planes but no one wants an aerodrome near them. We as users of airports should understand that principle. Nev

FAA (usa) only allows aviation activity within the airport lands.

 

Even regulates the activity of private hanger's , on any airport that received Federal funds

 

 

[turboplanner]

As it should be, however, in the wake of this incident the public relations activity has been driven by the developers; just about total silence from the aviation community.

 

 

[red750]

Link to a timeline of development of Essendon aerodrome.

 

Our History & Timeline | Essendon Airport

 

Here is a photo of the gates across Wirraway Road, which allows aircraft to taxi across the road like a rail level crossing.

 

 

 

[dsam]

As it should be, however, in the wake of this incident the public relations activity has been driven by the developers; just about total silence from the aviation community.

I did hear a spokesperson from AOPA speak on ABC Melbourne radio yesterday afternoon, but much more coverage to our perspective on property development should take place.

RA-Aus, where are you.... or are you unwilling to comment on a class C aerodrome?

 

Take note... aerodrome encroachment takes place all around Australia - join the campaign to support aviation safety ahead of unwanted development!

 

 

[aro]

Interesting discussion with some town planners, they have no say about developments on the airport. (Because it's Federal land?) The style of development at Essendon would not be allowed in other developments in the same area.

 

That may actually be an incentive to keep it as an airport - while it's an airport the lessee can collect rent and develop whatever they like without planning controls.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Interesting discussion with some town planners, they have no say about developments on the airport. (Because it's Federal land?) The style of development at Essendon would not be allowed in other developments in the same area.That may actually be an incentive to keep it as an airport - while it's an airport the lessee can collect rent and develop whatever they like without planning controls.

The planners are correct (see my Planning map and comments in the thread "Encroaching suburbia on airfields #7

 

The DFOs are pop up type sheds and they need to be demolished and removed from the airfields; because of the zoning, this needs to be managed at Federal Government level.

 

 

[Bats]

I did hear a spokesperson from AOPA speak on ABC Melbourne radio yesterday afternoon, but much more coverage to our perspective on property development should take place.RA-Aus, where are you.... or are you unwilling to comment on a class C aerodrome?

 

Take note... aerodrome encroachment takes place all around Australia - join the campaign to support aviation safety ahead of unwanted development!

I'm not sure that this is a fight RA-Aus should be part of, too easy to use them as a distraction and harp on the fact that their members cannot use Essendon anyway. As far as AOPA goes, it is a bit of a case of damned if you do and damned if you don't; a couple of people have already got up the spokesman for apparently agreeing that the airfield should be shut (he didn't, but by only quoting part of the response it appears that he did). Notwithstanding our media apologists, those grubs tend to have a predetermined agenda, invariably one which will generate the maximum attention if not outrage and unless you are savvy to their ways, you'll find yourself looking more than a little silly. The best response is a carefully considered, written statement, in which case selective quoting is easily refuted.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Very sad event and condolences to the families and others affected.

 

I am totally ignorant when it comes to CASA's reach over airport/airfield safety, but it would be very strange if they didn't at least have the ability to refer potentially dangerous development within an airfield (licenced) boundary to some other authority, if not within their own department. Personally, I am not fussed whether or not the on-field business is aviation related or not; the buildings should be constructed to not present a safety hazard to approach/departure paths and reasonable paths in the even of emergencies during take off or landing; the occupants of a building don't make it any more or less safe with respect to airfield operations.

 

 

[derekliston]

Probably shouldn't speculate, especially given the normal accuracy (or lack of it!) in media reports of aircraft crashes. However, if the reports are correct, it sounds as though the left engine failed and the pilot, vastly experienced apparently, then turned left, into the dead engine, an action that has killed lots of experienced pilots over the years, including a highly experienced RQAC instructor some years ago. I also recall watching the Farnborough air show many years ago and a French test pilot was demonstrating the anti-submarine version of the Breguet Atlantic. He came across with the left engine feathered and commenced a turn to the left, my thought was, wow, he must be an expert pilot, but no, the plane stalled and spun down into a hangar. Also back when I was an apprentice at Edinburgh Airport in Scotland I watched a Piper Apache with a failed left engine bank left past the control tower to check if his gear was down and then spun into the ground, cartwheeling across the mainline from Edinburgh to the North of Scotland. On that occasion the occupants were lucky enough to survive. ( Incidentally, the next day I was given a hacksaw an axe and a box of scanners and sent, with a trailer, to bring the wreckage back!) Right from when we first learn to fly two things are drummed into U.S. 1) In an EFATO, do not attempt to turn back to the runway and 2) In a twin with a failed engine, do not turn into the dead engine and yet, people continue to attempt both of those things with fatal results.

 

 

[derekliston]

Probably shouldn't speculate, especially given the normal accuracy (or lack of it!) in media reports of aircraft crashes. However, if the reports are correct, it sounds as though the left engine failed and the pilot, vastly experienced apparently, then turned left, into the dead engine, an action that has killed lots of experienced pilots over the years, including a highly experienced RQAC instructor some years ago. I also recall watching the Farnborough air show many years ago and a French test pilot was demonstrating the anti-submarine version of the Breguet Atlantic. He came across with the left engine feathered and commenced a turn to the left, my thought was, wow, he must be an expert pilot, but no, the plane stalled and spun down into a hangar. Also back when I was an apprentice at Edinburgh Airport in Scotland I watched a Piper Apache with a failed left engine bank left past the control tower to check if his gear was down and then spun into the ground, cartwheeling across the mainline from Edinburgh to the North of Scotland. On that occasion the occupants were lucky enough to survive. ( Incidentally, the next day I was given a hacksaw an axe and a box of scanners and sent, with a trailer, to bring the wreckage back!) Right from when we first learn to fly two things are drummed into U.S. 1) In an EFATO, do not attempt to turn back to the runway and 2) In a twin with a failed engine, do not turn into the dead engine and yet, people continue to attempt both of those things with fatal results.

Spanners!!! I hate autocorrect or auto suggest or whatever you call it.

 

 

[piecrust]

From video footage taken it looks as if his wings are level and he is on a good glide slope. Just no where to go.