onetrack Posted January 7 Posted January 7 (edited) Well, 2025 is starting off on a bad footing, aviation-wise. The latest bad news is someone has crashed their seaplane into the Indian Ocean off Rottnest Island, W.A. Not much information to hand at present, the only indication is a VH registration visible, updates to come. EDIT - I suspect it's VH-WTY, a turboprop Cessna Caravan 208 on floats. Major rescue operation underway as plane crashes off Rottnest Island - ABC News WWW.ABC.NET.AU Emergency services are currently attending the scene of a plane crash off Rottnest Island. Edited January 7 by onetrack 1
marshallarts Posted January 7 Posted January 7 (edited) Yes just saw this too. Doesn't look good. I think it is VH-WTY, a Cessna Caravan floatplane operated by a Queensland company. Flightradar24 shows that it went from Jandakot to Perth this morning, then on to Rottnest, landing at about 9:30. That's the last recorded movement as far as I can see. The story has just been updated - two serious injuries, and might be more, as nobody (among the rescuers anyway) seems sure about how many were on board. I think a Caravan can have 8 or 10 passengers, so this could get a lot worse. Let's hope NOT. Edited January 7 by marshallarts 1 1
onetrack Posted January 7 Author Posted January 7 (edited) Witnesses are saying it was a failed takeoff, the aircraft just barely got airborne, and then nosedived into the ocean. Police are indicating the aircraft hit Phillip Rock at the entrance to Thompson Bay, on takeoff. Multiple numbers of people injured, four at last count. There's a huge level of confusion over how many were on board, some sources stating 6 or 7 on board. That's not good, the pax numbers should be immediately available to authorities and rescue groups. Edited January 7 by onetrack addendum....
marshallarts Posted January 7 Posted January 7 Further update - the incident happened as the aircraft was gathering speed to take off, from the water in Thomson Bay. A witness is quoted as saying that it had just about left the water when it "tipped over and crashed". Sounds like it might have hit something floating on the water, or just under the surface. Or even a sea creature - shark? dolphin? There were a lot of people around in boats, so there would have been helping hands there very quickly. Lots to find out about this yet. 1
BrendAn Posted January 7 Posted January 7 (edited) Home Database Investigation Statistics Contact us About Home » ASN Aviation Safety WikiBase Date: Thursday 28 January 2016 Time: 15:18 Type: Cessna 208 Caravan I Owner/operator: Hamilton Island Air Registration: VH-WTY MSN: 20800522 Year of manufacture: 2010 Total airframe hrs: 1510 hours Engine model: Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-114 Fatalities: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 11 Other fatalities: 0 Aircraft damage: Substantial, written off Category: Accident Location: Chance Bay, Whitsunday Island, QLD - Australia Phase: Landing Nature: Passenger Departure airport: Hamilton Island Airport, QLD (HTI/YBHM) Destination airport: Chance Bay, Whitsunday Island, QLD Investigating agency: ATSB Confidence Rating: Accident investigation report completed and information captured Narrative: The pilot of a Cessna 208 Caravan amphibian aircraft, registered VH-WTY was conducting a series of charter flights in the Whitsunday region of Queensland, Australia. The pilot was conducting his third flight of the day when the aircraft departed Hamilton Island Airport at about 14:15 local time with 10 passengers on board. The tour included a scenic flight over the Great Barrier Reef for about 50 minutes before heading to Chance Bay, on the south-east tip of Whitsunday Island, about 11 km north east of Hamilton Island Airport. Following a water landing at Chance Bay, the group was to spend 90 minutes at the beach before a short flight back to Hamilton Island. The tour was originally planned to include a landing at Whitehaven Beach, however wind conditions at the time required the water landing be altered to Chance Bay. The aircraft approach Whitsunday Island from the north and conduct an orbit about 2 km north of Whitehaven Beach at about 15:10, before heading toward Whitehaven Beach. It flew over the southern end of Whitehaven Beach and the strip of land that separates it from Chance Bay. The pilot advised that he flew over the western end of Chance Bays main beach in order to conduct a visual pre-landing check of the bay. The pilot noted the positions of various vessels moored in the bay to determine the best taxi path to the beach. During this fly-over, the pilot also noted the sea state and observed evidence of wind gusts on the water surface. The pilot then initiated a right downwind turn toward the landing area. The approach was from the south with the intent to land in the most suitable location within the designated landing area and then taxi to the beach. The pilot reported setting up for landing at about 50 ft above the water and then delayed the landing in order to fly through an observed wind gust. Passenger video footage indicated that, during the subsequent landing, WTY bounced three times on the surface of the water. After the second bounce, with WTY getting closer to the beach and terrain, the pilot increased engine power and initiated a go-around. The third bounce, which occurred almost immediately after the second, was the most pronounced and resulted in the aircraft rebounding about 30 to 50 ft above the water. While increasing power, the pilot perceived that the torque was indicating red, suggesting an over-torque for the selected propeller configuration. Noticing that the climb performance was less than expected with the flaps at 30°, the pilot stopped increasing power and reduced the flap to 20°. As the aircraft climbed straight ahead towards a saddle, climb performance was still below the pilots expectations and he assessed that WTY would not clear the terrain. In response, the pilot turned right to avoid the surrounding rising terrain. The aircraft clipped trees during this turn, before colliding with terrain and coming to rest in dense scrub about 150 m from the eastern end of the main beach, near the top of the ridge. The pilot promptly advised the passengers to exit and move away from the aircraft. Some of the 11 people on board suffered minor injuries but all were able to quickly leave the aircraft. There was no post-impact fire. Contributing factors - The aircraft's initial touches with water were past the nominated decision point and beyond the northern boundary of the ALA, which reduced the safety margins available for a successful water landing or go-around. - The pilot initiated a go-around without using all available power and the optimal speed, turned towards higher terrain and placed the aircraft in a down-wind situation, which ultimately resulted in the collision with terrain. Other findings - The aircraft was equipped with lap-sash seatbelts, which have been demonstrated to reduce injury, and the use of emergency beacons and satellite phone facilitated a timely response to the accident Edited January 7 by BrendAn
onetrack Posted January 7 Author Posted January 7 (edited) The aircraft in the crash event above was written off? They must have acquired a replacement, and kept the rego? EDIT: Aircraft in above crash that was written off, was C/N: 20800552, ex N1027V. Crashed aircraft off Rottnest is C/N: 20800586, ex N7129S. I just realised, two different companies are involved, although both are registered in FNQ. Edited January 7 by onetrack 1
bull Posted January 7 Posted January 7 14 minutes ago, onetrack said: The aircraft in the crash event above was written off? They must have acquired a replacement, and kept the rego? EDIT: Aircraft in above crash that was written off, was C/N: 20800552, ex N1027V. Crashed aircraft off Rottnest is C/N: 20800586, ex N7129S. I just realised, two different companies are involved, although both are registered in FNQ. It was on flightaware...https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/VHWTY 2
onetrack Posted January 7 Author Posted January 7 W.A. Police are now confirming that 3 people from the aircraft are still missing. This is looking really bad. 1
bull Posted January 7 Posted January 7 This was the aircraft,,https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8464334 1
Love to fly Posted January 7 Posted January 7 2 hours ago, onetrack said: That's not good, the pax numbers should be immediately available to authorities and rescue groups. We’re not talking Qantas, JetStar etc so not sure logistically how the pax numbers would logistically be immediately available?
marshallarts Posted January 7 Posted January 7 2 minutes ago, Love to fly said: We’re not talking Qantas, JetStar etc so not sure logistically how the pax numbers would logistically be immediately available? No that's true, but I believe it was a commercial flight - people would have paid money to be on that aircraft, so I would think the operator should be keeping proper passenger records. Anyway, it has been established that there were 7 aboard. 4 have been recovered alive but condition not revealed yet, 3 are unaccounted for. Not sounding good. 1 1
onetrack Posted January 7 Author Posted January 7 Someone took a grainy video of the takeoff. It's difficult to see good detail, such as control surfaces. Now, I'm no aircrash investigation expert - but - to me, it appears the, "hit a rock" story, is not correct. The aircraft got airborne, then seems to develop a pitch up, that is obviously a major increase in AoA. The aircraft appears to level out a bit as it reaches about 30-40 feet of altitude, then the starboard wing drops a little, correction is applied, then the port wing drops viciously (certainly looks like a stall to me), and the port wingtip hits the water, and it's all over, red rover. I'm wondering if W&B was out (tail heavy) on takeoff? Rottnest seaplane crash video 7NEWS.COM.AU Rottnest seaplane crash video 1 1
marshallarts Posted January 7 Posted January 7 Very interesting. Sure does look like a stall. I know these are not fast aircraft, because of the floats, but the lift-off speed looks very slow to me. Also, it's hard to tell but it almost looks like it's taking off in an easterly direction. There was a spanking sea breeze on the mainland this afternoon so I'm pretty sure there would have been one at Rottnest too. Surely it should have been taking off in a westerly direction. Lots more questions. 1
onetrack Posted January 7 Author Posted January 7 By my estimation, the aircraft was taking off in a South Easterly direction, into a SW/SSW strong afternoon wind (typical of Rottnest in the afternoon), running at 25-27kts, and gusting to 31-34 kts around 1600 HRS. The wind was coming across the Island onto the aircrafts starboard bow. Thomson Bay and Phillip Rock are on the East side of the Island. 1
marshallarts Posted January 7 Posted January 7 (edited) Good work onetrack. So not a tailwind maybe, but still a pretty serious crosswind component to be dealing with during a take-off. From water. Edited January 7 by marshallarts 1
BrendAn Posted January 7 Posted January 7 I always thought floatplanes could not handle crosswinds. That they always take off directly into the wind. Is this correct.
Thruster88 Posted January 7 Posted January 7 Not a float pilot but the hulls would track through water just like wheels track on a runway so aircraft goes were the rudder pedals direct. The reason for the cross wind take off in this case is to make use of the calm water in the lee of the island. Looks like a departure stall. 1
BrendAn Posted January 7 Posted January 7 48 minutes ago, Thruster88 said: Not a float pilot but the hulls would track through water just like wheels track on a runway so aircraft goes were the rudder pedals direct. The reason for the cross wind take off in this case is to make use of the calm water in the lee of the island. Looks like a departure stall. Makes sense. It gets really rough once you get out of shelter at rotto.
tillmanr Posted January 7 Posted January 7 (edited) Statements being made today that the aircraft hit Phillip Rock. Edited January 7 by tillmanr add information
marshallarts Posted January 7 Posted January 7 (edited) Quote I always thought floatplanes could not handle crosswinds. I don't imagine you'd be able to set ailerons into a crosswind like you do on land, the risk being that if you dipped the upwind wing even a tiny bit it could cause the upwind float to dig into the water. Wings would have to stay level, I'd imagine. But I've never flown a floatplane so happy to be corrected. I've been a passenger in the same type of aircraft as this one, at the Horizontal Falls a few years back, but I don't remember the wind conditions and in any case there was plenty of room to land in almost any direction out at the falls. It was one of the great experiences of my life. From what I've seen the company operating this aircraft was originally set up by Troy Thomas, the same guy who set up the Horizontal Falls operation. I'm guessing this operation was a way to keep the (very expensive) aircraft earning income during the Kimberley off-season. Visitors here might remember that Thomas lost his life in a helicopter prang in Broome a couple of years ago. Dangerous business, this flying! It's conspicuous that the pilot has not been mentioned specifically in any of the reporting I've seen about survivors and those missing - maybe he/she is one of those still not accounted for. Edited January 7 by marshallarts 2
marshallarts Posted January 7 Posted January 7 Just heard another report on this, and the pilot WAS mentioned, as one of the survivors. In the news report it was stated with some certainty that the aircraft "struck Philip Rock", but the "expert" who was interviewed after the news didn't say that, which I think is prudent. From the video above I'm not convinced of it. The ATSB has confirmed they will be investigating, and things have swung into action to get a team on the ground. Let's see what they discover. 1
bull Posted January 8 Posted January 8 (edited) latest info,,,, https://www.watoday.com.au/national/western-australia/three-people-feared-dead-after-rottnest-island-seaplane-crash-20250108-p5l2rd.html and https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/seaplane-crashes-into-water-off-rottnest-island-off-perth/news-story/d035bcea937d106c7bad59bd911140a8 Edited January 8 by bull
marshallarts Posted January 8 Posted January 8 (edited) Well, one of those reports above says the pilot was among the deceased, so the previous thing I saw was clearly not right. But things are still a bit fluid, so final official confirmation may be yet to come. It won't help the investigation if they don't have the pilot's input on what occurred. Three fatalities, what a terrible thing. Edited January 8 by marshallarts 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