Captain Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 See http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060829/NEWS15/608290365/1144/NEWS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pylon500 Posted September 9, 2006 Share Posted September 9, 2006 More pictures here.... Mid-air collision Arthur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest danda Posted September 9, 2006 Share Posted September 9, 2006 You know I get confused by peoples attitudes regarding safety at times. The other day I complained that the new Holden blimp landed on the main strip without any radio calls (it is raido equiped) then parked on the main strip for 3/4 hour to refuil. I got told by a man who claim's to be a flight instructor that in Holbrook non of this matted, who cared, I then said that it had become a habit amounga few not to use their raidos and I feli that it was sending the wrong message as well as being un safe to which I got told that if I felt like that then they didn't want people like me there. As for all thehuf and puf I culdn't care less however I do care about safety. I just don't know why people why people think they are exempt from the rules. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smokey Posted September 9, 2006 Share Posted September 9, 2006 More pictures here....Mid-air collision Arthur. Just flicked to the 'Nevada Appeal' (I assume that's a newspaper) link from here and found the following statement. " The jet suffered minor damage and was able to make a successful emergency landing, without landing gear, " I don't think the owners will consider it minor when they get the bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Vigilant Posted September 10, 2006 Share Posted September 10, 2006 I agree Don, when I was on my third flight at Gympie a helo on cross country landed and parked within the runway markers and walked off to answer the call of nature. Repeated radio calls to him were unanswered until we saw him walking back to the aircraft. I had just completed an hour and as rules dictated we couldn't land with him parked just off the active runway. The CFI followed it up and had a "chat" but if it had been let pass I as a low time student would have thought what the hell it must be ok. I think everyone needs to remember if it is shown to be ok to cut corners new comers get the wrong idea and when things go wrong the media will make a meal out of the fact that these "Sunday flyers" as some percieve us shouldn't be allowed out and it gives fuel for those that want to close runways and airfields that we rely on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Posted September 10, 2006 Share Posted September 10, 2006 Well said Stuart:clap: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest danda Posted September 10, 2006 Share Posted September 10, 2006 Thank you Stuart and Ian I was told that I was only a winger your comments reenforceall thatI have been taught and that is the rules are there for a reason and no one has thre right to ignore then or think they are above them,complacency is a big killer regardless weather youhave a stearing wheel in your hand or a joy stick. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Longden Posted September 10, 2006 Share Posted September 10, 2006 I just don't know why people why people think they are exempt from the rules. Don Thats because they assume that it does not apply to them.... I see it all the time, and it frustrates the **** out of me.. Ben Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Posted September 10, 2006 Author Share Posted September 10, 2006 You blokes are spot on. I reckon that radios give vital situational awareness and the rules for their use work well. How anyone can choose not to use them as per the latest rules .... or at all .... isa mystery tome and MUST show either arrogance or incompetence if a radio is fitted. Further ..... my opinion is that the RAA is in error not making radios comulsory inall aircraft. If members can't afford a basic radio then they can't really afford to fly. How anyone could contemplate entering the circuit without a radio at Natfly is totally beyond me. Regards Geoff Captain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Longden Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Its a bit like insurance.. if you cant afford to insure the car, then it stays in the garage.. Likewise with aviation. If you cant afford a radio, then you cant afford to fly. Never mind things such as CTAF®.. I believe a radio should be mandatory on all aircraft... and having it on.. and working... with intelligble audio... Ben Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulN Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 I totally agree with Ben. If you want to fly, give some thought to other flyers that just might be in your area. Have a radio and use it. They're not all that expensive, not too heavyand they're not hard to use. Speaking of "intelligible audio". If I had a dollar for every transmission I hear from the GA and RPT fraternity (andour own troops)that is rapidly blurted out or mumbled beyond comprehension I could afford a new radio stack. I will never understand why it has to be this way.Don't we make calls for the purpose of conveying information of interest to otherpilots and ATC so why not speak clearly and precisely. But please, only after thinking about what you're trying to get across. It's not thatdifficult. How many times have you heard someone repeating "umms" and "ahhs" and taking forever to get their message across? With regard to Danda's experience at Holbrook, I won't comment on the blimp thing apart from offering, there's no way it wouldn't be seen in the circuit area. However, regarding the attitude of the other flyers, it's just wrong to the point of stupidity to oppose someone requesting correct procedures and safe airmanship. I'd best climb down off my soap box now before someone kicks it out from under . Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest danda Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Paul visiability wasn't the problem blind freddy would have seen it, the problem was that it landed and took off withouteven oneraido call and when it was on the ground refuiling it remainded on the main strip at the intersection of the cross strip with its crew holding on to its ropes standing in the middle of the cross strip which in fact made the intire airfield unuseable. My contention was that in an emergancy by the time they cleared either of the runways that emergancy could have escalated into a fatility and no one wants to see that. <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulN Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Don, That goes beyond annoying and as you suggest, hazardous to other aviators. Do you know if the pilot and crew of the blimp had a good reason to "hang out" on the rwy? I'm not familiar with YHBK, is there somewhere more appropriate, while remaining safe for the a/c, that they could have parked for refuelling? As for theirapparent disdain forradio procedure, I think Geoffgot it right withhis expression "arrogance".There's another expression - "familiarity breeds contempt". Maybe the blimp crew and the others you challenged are well seasoned pilots and in their minds they know best. On the positive side, there are lessons here for all of us. Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Fred Bear Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 There's only like 1 blimb in the whole country and they don't fly cross country much and when they do, it's a big effort. Like your aircraft, it runs on avgas too and needs to refuel! I once saw an Aerochute pilot cop similar flack about setting up next to the runway to lay out his parachute. Trouble is, when he's on the runway he has right of way. Trick is to a happy medium. If you can find a better way to land the Holden Blimp without the 15+ ground crew, they'd love to hear from you! I know one of the pilots and he has well over 10,000 hours. If there were a better way, he would find it, beleive me! I'mbeleive thatwe should support all forms of aviation, so be nice to others andone day they may return the favour for you. For all we know, they may have inadvertantly chosen the wrong frequency for the field... I know many of you have probably done the same on the odd occasion. ClemBrown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest danda Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Paul & Clem First of all I’m told by the one who arranged all this had been phoned about one hour before arrival and they where directed to a very large grassed area beside the cross strip, giving its length if it did swing with the ground wind it would only interfere with the cross strip and given prevailing winds would not interfere with the operation of the airfield, however these direction where ignored. Regardless of your attempt at justification Clem, does any aircraft have the right to interfere with both runways leaving the entire airfield inoperative regardless of the rights and wrongs this was simply arrogant and poor airmanship. And Clem as far as supporting all forms of aviation I was thrilled as was everyone on the airfield at the time that this blimp came to Holbrook and would support its return, support isn’t the issue I believe safety is, you say that the trick is a happy medium and I agree wholeheartedly however had the pilot followed the directions given and for that matter if the directions where given in the first as claimed everyone would have been happy. As for finding an easier to land this thing the skill of the pilot was never in question I do take your point regarding incorrect frequency I guess that was a possibility and could happen to anyone however it does highlight the very real need to be vigilant regardless of the experience one may have. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Posted September 12, 2006 Author Share Posted September 12, 2006 Clement made comment (since edited)about radio use at Natfly ... and while he is right that the circuit can certainly be flown there without radio & onmultiple occasions, surely Clem will agree that the non transmit use of radio, and more particularly not listening to others,reduces situational awareness under the circumstances applying at Narromine. Did you turn your radio right off Clem, or just not broadcast? On the times that I was on the air listening to the Unicom at Narromine it was busy but not unnecessarily congested, and reflected the number of movements in the area. Clem is right that Blimps are "special" but there is something wrong if their operations require that an airport be closed so that they can refuel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yenn Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 There are 2 sides to most stories and radio is no exception. My home field is now a CTAF whereas it used to be right on the edge of an MBZ, which is now a CTAF® and 5 miles smaller in radius. This means I need to monitor 126.7 on takeoff and in very short time I am in an area where for safety I also need to monitor the CTAF® and also the area frequency as RPT's are on descent within a short distance of the field. Fortunately sanity prevails and we all manage to arrange our separation, but we get GA aircract coming to the field and not using radio at all because they know where to look for us. Non use of radio when it is available is not only illegal but plain stupid, but use of it will not ensure safety. Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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