Mid Air in Sydney ? Any info.

[Guest weekendwarrior]

To anyone running the traffic argument, I'd say read the book by the guy who managed the Berlin Airlift or fly into O'Hare - we're not up to max levels yet.

Mmm may be but let's compare apples with apples, we are talking VFR traffic, not IFR with controllers looking after separation with the help of radar (and even then, with TCAS, midair does happens, as in Switzerland or Brazil). By definition a VFR environment is much less forgiving if you are not looking out the window, aircraft doesn't get remotely as close in IFR as we do routinely around Bankstown in VFR (and I assume it's the same at other busy VFR airfields). Am not saying it cannot be done, but it wouldn't hurt to have a long and hard look at the existing GAAP procedures.

 

Also very good point Tony about built-in "sloppiness".

 

 

[Barefootpilot]

So Tony thats where I got it from! I was always wondering why I did it but if I'm out there in the Thruster I'm alwasy mainting 2800' or 1300' and it has saved me already with a twin going straight over the top of me a couple of hundered feet above.

 

 

[facthunter]

Bob Hoover.

 

Was going to mention Bob. The yanks took his licence from him, arguing that he was too old. He was given an Aus licence to do the show at Avalon? (I was rhere) and I can assure you that it's a pretty impressive routine, with aero's in an Aerocommander, some of which are done with one engine being feathered and then two shut down still more aero's and then a deadstick landing and taxi to a fullstop mark on the tarmac apron. Better performance at his age, than most could achieve at any age. Nev.

 

 

[Yenn]

Todays news stated that the toung woman student was "hyped up" The only reason to state that was to get headline effect, as they go on to state she was merely very happy to be going flying, rather than on drugs which is what the headline was intimating in my opinion. With that young woman and the 89 year old instructor being on the opposite sides from where the collision took place, they would have had less ability to see it coming, and if it was the Liberty's gear which did the damage, the Cessna pilots would have been hard pressed to see it coming, unless they were overtaking the Liberty.

 

 

[Guest weekendwarrior]

Article from SMH. Not taking it at face value but some interesting comments

 

Aviation body ignored advice - National - smh.com.au

 

 

[Gibbo]

Several factors at play..

 

High / Low wing view issues.

 

High traffic area.

 

Uncontrolled converging traffic.

 

Dick Smith nailed it this morning with his interview on Channel crap (9).

 

I have found it very interesting watching the traffic at moorabin and how many 'near' misses occur there. The system needs to change before more accidents occur.

 

Gibbo

 

 

[Student Pilot]

A couple of words about ‘reporting points’ or indeed even prominent way points on general nav. that may be worth considering for your flying.For myself (providing it is practical to do so and when VMC) I seldom fly at

 

‘neat’ altitudes (eg 2,500 QNH etc. I will always climb or descend 150 – 250’ prior to the point.

 

This is especially so with VORs where you can assume everyone will be at their neat flight plan altitude and have their heads firmly on the dial and yet will converge at a very precise point.

 

In addition I am an habitual map reader and when on the last 5 miles inbound to a way point or VOR I will adjust track laterally by a NM or so to miss an exact overfly of the way point.

 

That little bit of vertical and lateral ‘sloppiness’ builts in a little extra safety, especially for faster traffic coming up in a blind spot.

 

In principle we may all dwell on the fact that when nearing an airfield we may boost our arousal in the expectancy of more traffic and a way point is really no different so a bit of extra thought there could pay dividends.

All good points,

 

SP

 

 

[Gibbo]

All good points,SP

Till you run into me. I do the exact same thing. ;)

 

Eye Ball Mk1 and blind spot checks are still the best solution. Maybe if high wing aircraft were at (circuit height) +100' and low wing at -100' it may help in the future with the low / high wing issue. The amount of near misses this issue cause's should have started the alarm bells ringing years ago.

 

Thoughts go out to all the persons involved and not just the victims.

 

Gibbo

 

 

[turboplanner]

Not a bad thought Gibbo

 

 

[Guest weekendwarrior]

Maybe if high wing aircraft were at (circuit height) +100' and low wing at -100' it may help in the future with the low / high wing issue

This is a brilliant idea ! It's so simple it's beautiful. Spot on mate

 

 

[Guest Graham Lea]

That is ok for the downwind, and even maybe the base leg, but eventually on the final you are going to hit as you head for the keys...

 

 

[turboplanner]

Back to the drawing board

 

 

[Guest weekendwarrior]

Gibbo suggestion is good all the way from reporting point to joining downwind, by then you are being sequenced in the circuit by the tower and can get down to the normal 1000 ft AGL so vertical separation is no longer an issue.

 

It has been reported that the 89 years old instructor aboard the Liberty is Ken Andrews. He's actually not exactly an instructor but a very respected ATO, he is a bit of a legend around Bankstown.

 

 

[Yenn]

It doesn't matter where the aircraft converge. Eventually they are all going to converge on Bankstown.

 

 

[poteroo]

TOSGcentral is right about flying just a little 'off' the altitude or track when going major waypoint to major waypoint. You just need to be aware of your allowable tolarances if in range of radar, and if flying along the bottom of a CTA step. Higher is a definite no no. Also, when you vary from the VFR hemispherical levels, you are getting closer to the IFR hemisphericals - and these aircraft are likely to be on a/p with the PIC reading the FIN !

 

Also, if going into a GAAP location such as Jandakot,Parafield,Moorabbin etc - be aware that student pilots tend to wander up/dn, and R/L, often more than a little - so it's not really ever 'safe'.

 

happy days,

 

 

[Ultralights]

what i find annoying is that there is radar coverage in the entire syd basin, and live radar on the internet, as the media got hold of quite rapidly, yet why isnt there a controller monitoring? as there is in the US? wonder how much cost is a factor in such things?

 

 

[Guest brentc]

Regarding 'off track' flying, you are required to fly atleast 1 mile to the right of track when flying off a GPS so as to avoid or atleast reduce the possibility of colision. As for flying off course to an approach point or off the approach point slightly, not a brilliant idea.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Brent, is that a requirement or a recomendation?? re the gps tracking..

 

cheers

 

 

[kevinfrost]

I,ve always flown about 1 mile right of track. But when it's said and done, if we all abide by this rule the collision risk is much the same as we all flew true track.

 

 

[facthunter]

really?

 

I cant see that . On reciprocal tracks you are 2 miles apart. Surely better than being DEAD on course. Nev..

 

 

[kevinfrost]

You're quite right. I was only thinking of a/c tracking in the same direction. On two occasions I've had a/c come up from underneath when leaving large flyins and was lucky to spot them before any major drama. The mile to the right has to be the safest way to go but you can't beat a good look out to complement it. Coming from a gliding background that's all we had as the batteries were either flat or the radios weren't working and it used to get quite busy on good thermal days. There were very few accidents.

 

 

[facthunter]

!00 percent agreement.

 

KF. The points you make, are right on. Since I took up the AUF/ RAA scene the mid air "near miss" thing has alarmed me. People do not look out enough. The "big sky" concept is fallacious. There are far too many mid air collisions.. Nev..

 

 

[Guest brentc]

Motzartmerv, pretty sure it's a recommendation and if not just a recommentation it should be in the regs. I'm not sure where to look that one up to see if it's true. One of my instructors told me that a long time ago and I think I read it in Flight Safety magazine.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Isn't keeping right of track still being taught in situations like following a road, railway or power lines as well as turn points? It was back in the 80's

 

 

[Guest TOSGcentral]

Seems to me that the rapid increase in Rec Flying, along with sophisticated gadgetry, is giving us a trend in piloting behaviour towards de-facto ‘instrument flying’ in VFR conditions - with the consequent reduction of usage of VFR piloting skills (and maybe training?).

 

 

The rules of the air, and consequent Regulation, were written in blood. But as is the way of our race we become complacent, are too easily dazzled by concepts that are not entirely valid in application, and presently seem condemned to repeat the original learning experience.

 

 

This will naturally be at the expense of more deaths until those old tried and true instinctive VFR precautionary flying habits have once more been learnt – or it is deemed that we only fly in controlled airspace or with proximity warning devices etc.