flying dog Posted October 27 Posted October 27 Well, asred750 just said: 31 minutes ago, red750 said: Ch 7 lists the other POB as a student (unnamed). The named pilot was a QANTAS captain for 36 years, and a former member of the Roulettes The Jabiru had previously been involved in a landing accident in Qld. about a year ago. Where did you get your news?
flying dog Posted October 27 Posted October 27 1 minute ago, BrendAn said: was that the jab that lost the oil filter and flipped nose over in a paddock My take is the QANTAS pilot was flying the Cessna 182. The Jab was in a prang a year ago.... Not that that is really relevant..... I think that is the news trying to sensationalise something. And AFAIK, the other people have not been identified or named. 19:19 Sydney time. 1
BrendAn Posted October 27 Posted October 27 25 minutes ago, flying dog said: My take is the QANTAS pilot was flying the Cessna 182. The Jab was in a prang a year ago.... Not that that is really relevant..... I think that is the news trying to sensationalise something. And AFAIK, the other people have not been identified or named. 19:19 Sydney time. just interested if it was a jabiru i knew thats all. so it is relevant to me.
BrendAn Posted October 27 Posted October 27 Just now, flying dog said: I am sure the number will come out as time goes by. yes. the rego numbers are available on this thread. i am pretty sure its the plane i am thinking of but i might be wrong.
flying dog Posted October 27 Posted October 27 1 minute ago, BrendAn said: yes. the rego numbers are available on this thread. i am pretty sure its the plane i am thinking of but i might be wrong. Sorry? "I'm pretty sure its the plane I am thinking of but I might be wrong" Only you know that answer. 🤷♂️
BrendAn Posted October 27 Posted October 27 4 minutes ago, flying dog said: Sorry? "I'm pretty sure its the plane I am thinking of but I might be wrong" Only you know that answer. 🤷♂️ well i am right i just found the old news story. same rego. bugger.
Deano747 Posted October 27 Posted October 27 Sad news. Flew with XXX for a number of years in the RAAF, the Wollongong Aerial patrol and QANTAS. He was very involved in all things aviation with a school and an aerial survey business as a side hustle. What he was doing at that altitude is anyones guess ....... Another reason for ADSB in/out. 1 1
BrendAn Posted October 27 Posted October 27 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Deano747 said: i tried to post a link to the channel 9 news wouldn't work though. Edited October 27 by BrendAn
onetrack Posted October 27 Posted October 27 News article below.... Sydney plane crash: Off-duty Qantas captain Gary Criddle and man Khadiervali Gagguturu named as two of three killed in light plane collision WWW.9NEWS.COM.AU Grandfather Gary Criddle, 72, known by his friends and family as 'Gaz', was one of two men aboard the Cessn... 1
Moneybox Posted October 27 Posted October 27 2 hours ago, Deano747 said: Sad news. Flew with XXX for a number of years in the RAAF, the Wollongong Aerial patrol and QANTAS. He was very involved in all things aviation with a school and an aerial survey business as a side hustle. What he was doing at that altitude is anyones guess ....... Another reason for ADSB in/out. I guess the ADSB in/out is only useful if both are equipped that way? 1
BurnieM Posted October 27 Posted October 27 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Moneybox said: I guess the ADSB in/out is only useful if both are equipped that way? Both need to have ADSB-out to be seen but if even one conflicting aircraft had ADSB-in then your odds go up significantly. If you are thinking of a panel mount transponder then also seriously consider something wih audio alerts (may require audio panel or new VHF radio with builtin audio) Eyes out with ADSB-in audio alerts is your best option. Edited October 27 by BurnieM 3 1
Deano747 Posted October 27 Posted October 27 A Skyecho and iPad with AV Plan or Oz Maps would have done it Rolls Royce solution is Transponder with mode S and ADSB in/out and a Flarm. https://www.flarm.com/en/ 1
Roscoe Posted October 27 Posted October 27 21 hours ago, skippydiesel said: Of possible interest - The Oaks is a Camden airfield inbound reporting point. Camden's circuit height is 1800 ft. Descent to circuit height is usually required some distance to the east of The Oaks (MT Hunter). On occasion aircraft overflying The Oaks, inbound to Camden, are well and truly on descent (low) over The Oaks. Actually, Circuit height at Camden is 1300ft. Aircraft are usually instructed to enter the Camden CTA at 1800 ft and then cleared for a visual approach. Their are notes on the chart regarding overflying the Oaks not below 2500ft. The 182 may have been doing a practice forced landing or precautionary search procedure at the Oaks and not monitoring their CTAF 126.7 or had the volume turned down.
Deano747 Posted October 27 Posted October 27 Do we know if the Cessna was solo or 2 up? It may well have been a check flight as Gaz was a grade 1 with CASA check & training certifications so the idea of a 'practice' into Oaks is a definite possibility. Problems with big blind spots on high wing airplanes .....
Roscoe Posted October 27 Posted October 27 8 minutes ago, Deano747 said: Do we know if the Cessna was solo or 2 up? It may well have been a check flight as Gaz was a grade 1 with CASA check & training certifications so the idea of a 'practice' into Oaks is a definite possibility. Problems with big blind spots on high wing airplanes ..... I was told it was a CPL Licence test flight so 2 pob
BurnieM Posted October 27 Posted October 27 (edited) https://www.9news.com.au/national/belimbla-park-plane-crash "The 72-year-old was instructing a 29-year-old pilot inside a Cessna travelling from the Hunter to Wollongong around midday yesterday when it collided with another light plane over Belimbla Park, in the Macarthur region." Edited October 27 by BurnieM 1
kgwilson Posted October 27 Posted October 27 In the circuit ADSB In is virtually useless given the close proximity of aircraft. The bigger the screen the better though. If both had ADSB In they would have seen one another from about 20 NM even if they were just SE2s. It is possible that the C182 had ADSB Out only as this is the most common and mandatory setup in GA aircraft. Adding ADSB Out is voluntary and it is also expensive. It is possible given this was a training flight that a circuit entry and missed approach was being practiced. In this scenario, and if the Jab did not have ADSB In, and the C182 was on Camden frequency the holes in the swiss cheese line right up. 1
Roscoe Posted October 27 Posted October 27 12 minutes ago, kgwilson said: In the circuit ADSB In is virtually useless given the close proximity of aircraft. The bigger the screen the better though. If both had ADSB In they would have seen one another from about 20 NM even if they were just SE2s. It is possible that the C182 had ADSB Out only as this is the most common and mandatory setup in GA aircraft. Adding ADSB Out is voluntary and it is also expensive. It is possible given this was a training flight that a circuit entry and missed approach was being practiced. In this scenario, and if the Jab did not have ADSB In, and the C182 was on Camden frequency the holes in the swiss cheese line right up. The Oaks and Camden are within my operating area, and the Oaks can get very busy on weekends. Its not unusual on a training flight or flight test to practice simulated emergencies at the Oaks. I was flying south east of the Oaks on Saturday and it was very choppy below 3000ft which may have contributed to pilot distraction in both cases. 1 2
mkennard Posted October 27 Posted October 27 I was with 3 other aircraft from Wedderburn coming from the Kiama to Mittagong then we were going to go to The Oaks and back to Wedderburn but I got the guys to go direct to Wedderburn, too rough for having fun. We landed at 12 so felt sort of lucky since we would have arrived about that time with 4 aircraft. We would have been minimum 3000 possible 4500. 1 3
skippydiesel Posted October 27 Posted October 27 1 hour ago, Roscoe said: Actually, Circuit height at Camden is 1300ft. Aircraft are usually instructed to enter the Camden CTA at 1800 ft and then cleared for a visual approach. Their are notes on the chart regarding overflying the Oaks not below 2500ft. The 182 may have been doing a practice forced landing or precautionary search procedure at the Oaks and not monitoring their CTAF 126.7 or had the volume turned down. Thanks for that Roscoe, It's about two years since I flew at Camden & only remembered the inbound height. The observation regarding the proximity of the two airfields and the potential for traffic inbound to Camden to conflict with The Oaks activity remains. The "not below 2500ft" is insufficient - it should be not below 3000ft. Reason - aircraft inbound to The Oaks are often at 2500 ft, giving a 600ft circuit safety margin, to overfly prior to descending to enter the pattern. Added to the above is the not so infrequent Camden bound aircraft at or below Oaks circuit height. There is no excuse for this as it's perfectly easy for most small aircraft to descent to 1800 ft by Mt Hunter 3 1
F10 Posted October 27 Posted October 27 Seems like there was very little blind radio calls happening? Let alone radio calls between the two aircraft, ironing out any conflict issues. The Cessna cockpit was probably busy with intercom quacking, if it was a PFL on a CPL test. Seems if people don't hear other aircraft then they don't talk....I always make blind position calls in the vicinity of an airfield, even if the radio is quiet. Here at East and West Sale, RAAF traffic does occur on a weekend at times the RAAF pilots are pretty good with making inbound blind calls during CTAF ops. I have often spoken to them or made a position call to generate SA of my presence, when I'm close to East Sale. Interestingly enough the ERSA actually states on the West Sale FLT PROC to "broadcast intentions within 20 NM of West Sale" because of the circuit and instrument approaches overlap, between the two airfields. When it comes to blind radio calls...."less is definitely not more", in this case......I can't help feeling ADSB is a slight knee jerk....regular blind calls and direct comms with other traffic, is essential. Vis out of high wings is a problem. I have often been happy to have the clear lexan cockpit roof of my Gazelle, banked over, it affords a good view to clear during a turn. 1 1
facthunter Posted October 27 Posted October 27 Obviously you both have to be on the same frequency. That's THE issue. Not sure I'd encourage looking out through the roof IN A TURN for most pilots. VERTICAL separation is best. .Nev 1 1
kgwilson Posted October 27 Posted October 27 In Class G there are no mandatory calls other than to avoid a collision. I always make a 10 mile inbound or a 10 mile overflying call but if you are not on the right frequency you are talking to nobody and nobody will respond. 2 2
F10 Posted October 27 Posted October 27 Obviously you need to be on the same frequency, didn’t think I needed to mention that. If you are operating in a CTAF, you should be on that CTAF frequency. For example both East and West Sale CTAF, (in that 20 NM zone), is all 118.3. 1 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now