marshallarts

Hmm well that's interesting, what model Motorola, and which Aldi plan? My phone at that stage was a Motorola Moto G31, not bought from Telstra, and not 5G-capable. It was on the Aldi $19/mth plan. After changing it over to the Telstra SIM, I also got to thinking a 5G-capable phone might be a good thing, so I bought a Motorola G34 from Telstra - not something I ever thought I'd do, but the (very reasonable) price was almost the same as what I had paid for the G31. Nobody else seems to sell the G34, which makes me wonder if Telstra had that variant developed specially to suit their network, i.e. the specific set of frequencies/channels it can use.

Very good to hear that, I wish them well. I live quite near Jandakot and there are a few GA-8s here that ply back and forth almost daily, mainly to Rottnest I think.

Yes, I found this out recently in graphic fashion. I'd been with ALDI for a year or so, quite OK around town and even on some drives in regional WA. But on a recent road trip across the paddock, where Telstra has reasonable coverage almost all the way across the Eyre Hwy, ALDI had zilch - not a dicky-bird of coverage between Norseman and Ceduna. I wasn't impressed, so in Port Lincoln I bought a Telstra SIMM and prepaid plan that wasn't too much more expensive than the ALDI plan, and bingo, coverage everywhere. It was chalk and cheese. Good to know that Boost uses the whole Testra network though, thanks for that.

I don't think it's as simple as that. Both 3G and 4G can work at several different frequencies. The providers have been saying that the old 3G towers would be re-purposed for 4G (or even maybe 5G), which suggests to me that it is not frequency-related, and that 4G can use the same frequencies and it's only the data transmission protocol that changes. The antennas on the towers would have to be designed for the specific frequencies they were to use, so if the frequency had to change then so would the antennas. It's hard to see Telstra et al running around changing antennas all over the place. But I'm no expert either, I just do a bit of work with a guy who works in the RF sphere extensively. I'll ask him what he knows - it would be good to understand this. And of course RFGuy is very active here, maybe he can cast some light on it.

I tend to agree. From what I've seen it's only the police saying this and I wish they wouldn't, because I don't think it's established beyond doubt. In one of the videos, when the aircraft banks left before impact, both floats are visible and both look intact. If it had hit a rock, I'd think at least one of the floats would be severely damaged, possibly even torn off. It's not good quality video, but I don't see that. I've seen some pics of a badly-damaged float that was brought ashore, but that could have been caused by the impact with the water. Lots more to learn here.

One surprising thing (in a good way) is that one passenger got out of this completely uninjured. I'm speculating he might have been sitting in the right seat, next to the pilot. If there is a door on that side too, he would have had by far the easiest exit from the aircraft. And the way it went into the water, on the left side of its nose, may have protected him a bit from the initial impact. Plus the better seat belts there too. I guess this will come out in time.

Sadly, reports are confirming that the pilot is one of the deceased. Egress from a sinking Caravan would be nightmarish - it's very cramped in there, and even though this one wasn't full, anyone would have huge problems getting out. Most of the passengers were apparently over 60, which would only make it even harder. I think there is a separate pilot door, but he/she would of course need to be conscious/capable to make use of it.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.