ATSB prelim report vid on The Oaks mid-air.

[Garfly]

17 minutes ago, kgwilson said:

 "... as far as I am concerned the SE2 should be on all the time even though it may not be of a lot of use in a circuit scenario, at least it will tell you if another ADSB out aircraft is around. Sadly not the case here."

Yes, I think everyone agrees that the SE2/ADSB should be always on ... I'd say it can even have uses in the circuit (for reasons like the ones given by Neil, above).  

[Kiwi]

Any thing that helps people know that I'm in the circuit is a good thing, especially when flight schools use our airfield as a turning point. (That's me in the Drifter)

Edited yesterday at 04:16 AM by Kiwi

[skippydiesel]

5 hours ago, Markdun said:

What was the wind at ground level like?  Just relevant to whether the Cessna was intending to land in the opposite direction or not.  I note that at Camden the circuit by the Cessna was landing towards the SW, so why reverse at the Oaks?  I’d like to know whether there was any descent to circuit height as well.  My guess is that after an intensive test flight the two pilots in the Cessna were mentally exhausted and the turn over the Oakes towards home at Shellharbour had them both relaxing.  This is like most mountaineering accidents occurring on the way down after sumitting, ie after you have achieved your goal: as Tigger said ‘going up is easy, it’s the coming down that is difficult’.

 The other thing about see and avoid is that objects on collision course do not ‘move’ in relation to the background and our primitive eye-brain system is best at picking up movement, so we don’t see (eye & brain) the very thing that will smash into us, yet we do see that tiny wedge tail eagle circling.  See and avoid DOESNT work, because you only see what you don’t need to avoid.

The wind on the ground was only intermittently moving the two windsox's. 

There was an established circuit pattern direction, 18 . Subject to making sure there was no possibility of conflict, 36 could have been used.

There were reports of turbulence aloft (?ft) .

There were 3 Jabs, from The Oaks, aloft at the time. One some distance away (not in circuit but in CTAF). One landing on 18, at about the time of the accident. The accident Jab which had done a "go round" on 18

 

2 hours ago, kgwilson said:

The 2 major issues from a communication and electronic perspective as far as I can see are.

 

1 The C182 made no radio calls and no aircraft detection equipment either in or out. While non of the pilots, active at the time, recall hearing a transmission from the C180 I dont think you can say with absolut certenty no calls (on CTAF) were made.

2. The Jabiru did have a working radio, made calls on the correct frequency, appeared to be keeping a lookout and had a conspicuity device in and out.

 

Comments.
 

The Jabiru had already established the active circuit. See proceeding comments on circuit direction

The C182 made no radio calls & if they did on the Camden frequency why was this not mentioned? It is inconceivable that the C180 operated in the Camden ATC without radio. They would have eneeded permission to enter, descent,  approval to conduct circuits on the correct heading. Then there would have been departure and exit calls.

The C182 had a mode A/C transponder only visible only to ATC, not to the Jabiru.

Why did ATC not see both aircraft? Good question.

Why were the aircraft on opposing circuits? While it is likely the Jab was on downwind for 18, I don't think you can say with any certainty, that the C180 was in/joining the circuit, just because the accident occured in the vicinity of the circuit. 

I hope the final report will establish reasons/answers for these comments. It is really hard to see any aircraft coming towards you as the frontal profile is small and the closing speed would have been well over 200 knots. as far as I am concerned the SE2 should be on all the time even though it may not be of a lot of use in a circuit scenario, at least it will tell you if another ADSB out aircraft is around. Sadly not the case here.

 

[onetrack]

Has anyone considered the radio in the Cessna may have failed?

[kgwilson]

Both aircraft were at circuit height indicating both thought they were in the circuit . However only one is known to have made radio calls which were heard. The C182s radio may have failed but it must have been working when it performed circuits at Camden. This will be confirmed in the final report.

[skippydiesel]

3 hours ago, onetrack said:

Has anyone considered the radio in the Cessna may have failed?

Of course.

 

If transmit &/or receive failed and you intended to land at a CTAF, I think an overfly, well above circuit height, to visually assess aircraft activity & circuit direction may have been the prudent  choice, rather than a join at circuit height, to what may be the up/down wind leg.

 

There are several possible/legitimate circuit joining strategies at The Oaks, the most common is to join X wind from "the dead side" which is over The Oaks town itself.😈

[kgwilson]

Unless you know other aircraft are in the circuit and therefore the runway in use through listening on the CTAF frequency for that aerodrome you should always overfly at 500 feet above the aerodrome & observe the conditions like wind sock and possible obstructions like animals, aircraft, mowers, vehicles, trees etc before letting down on the dead side to circuit height after making your joining call. While this is not compulsory it is always advisable even if the last aerodrome you were at is close and conditions do not appear to have changed.

 

I do this every time I have been away more than 10NM from my home aerodrome. Kangaroos seem to like the grass there and not just at dusk & dawn and any animal that has died becomes a mecca for wedge tailed eagles. The sea breeze can arrive and change the wind direction 180 degrees in less than a minute when before it may be less than 5 knots to 15-20 knots in the opposite direction.

[facthunter]

Vertical separations is best. IF you have  it you can not have  the same high risk.  Nev

[skippydiesel]

1 hour ago, kgwilson said:

Unless you know other aircraft are in the circuit and therefore the runway in use through listening on the CTAF frequency for that aerodrome you should always overfly at 500 feet above the aerodrome & observe the conditions like wind sock and possible obstructions like animals, aircraft, mowers, vehicles, trees etc before letting down on the dead side to circuit height after making your joining call. While this is not compulsory it is always advisable even if the last aerodrome you were at is close and conditions do not appear to have changed.

 

I do this every time I have been away more than 10NM from my home aerodrome. Kangaroos seem to like the grass there and not just at dusk & dawn and any animal that has died becomes a mecca for wedge tailed eagles. The sea breeze can arrive and change the wind direction 180 degrees in less than a minute when before it may be less than 5 knots to 15-20 knots in the opposite direction.

Like you, I overfly prior to landing however I am usually well over the 500 ft minimum above circuit height - more in line with 1000 ft. Reason; not all pilots are so disciplined to be at circuit height +/-

[facthunter]

Circuit height is not enough. to add 500' to.  People overfly to Join the circuit sometimes as you say. Anyone who strays 500' vertically from where they should be, shouldn't be flying.. Anyhow if a bit more is available why not use it? Nev

[spacesailor]

The Oaks has Camden aircraft passing overhead ! .

spacesailor

 

[skippydiesel]

3 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

The Oaks has Camden aircraft passing overhead ! .

spacesailor

 

True! Unfortunatly all too often at, even below, circuit height. ERSA sais not below 2500 ft, the most pedantic overfly at 2500 ft - so aircraft inbound to, The Oaks/Camden, at same altitude - not good!

[Moneybox]

If fitted do any of these type of safety devices give a audible warning of other traffic in close proximity?

[kgwilson]

 The Skyecho 2 passes data to whatever navigation software you are running and it is up to that system and device to determine what warnings should be provided based on location altitude & track. The transponder only advertises its location to ATC not other aircraft. If in CTR ATC will have established contact with the aircraft and issued a specific squawk code to the aircraft & then it is tracked by ATC & the pilot provided with traffic information via radio.

[Red]

2 hours ago, kgwilson said:

 The transponder only advertises its location to ATC not other aircraft.

Well depends, the transponder needs interrogation from ATC, but transmission is a broadcast that any appropriate receiver in an aircraft or on the ground can receive.

 

There is much misunderstanding in this thread and I would reccomend anyone reading it to fact check