Deano747

Question for the admins - how does one block a topic?

Yes - edited my post. All areas does not include onboard .......

An ASIC for aviation related industries has your company name on it - it IS your company ID ........... Tradies ID's are not getting ypo past the door. Do you believe that they would get a chippie to fix a seat or a plumber fix a toilet?

No airline employee is going to let anyone on as a passenger with a very obvious tool belt full of sharp pointy things. Tradie is never getting that stuff in the cabin. Only a LAME working for the airline with an appropriate security pass visible is going to be permitted on board with tools to fix something, but never allowed to remain unsupervised even with the pass, or permitted to stay until doors close. Boarding pass has been bandied about by the media that really know very little about aviation nor security .............though I did hear my old colleague mutter boarding pass on National TV. (suspect he has been hanging around the media too much)

Try dropbox. It works to copy routes between my iPad, iPhone and MacBook laptop. Might work in reverse.......

Mate - give it rest. The absence of an ASIC worked as intended. Sorry ........

The actual fact is that the person was questioned because he was not displaying an ASIC. ASIC seemed to have worked - probably to the horror of some that decry it's effectiveness ............

Sorry - we assumed that this was a rhetorical question. 1) A VFR flight must submit a flight plan when operating in class C or D airspace, so a flight plan was required to depart Darwin. MOS 09.02 Rule has been around since at least 1978 though the reference was different back last century......... 2) A flight plan may be submitted by radio if you do not have online access or a phone. Airservices - forget the reference

I don't have concerns besides the 'experts' looking for their 15 seconds of fame. The crash occurred because the Blackhawk crew failed to follow the 'don't crash into the airplane' instruction. The 'how and why that happened' should be left to real experts and not those seeking likes .......

So do you close the airport (or the runway 33) that the pollies there love as it's close to work, or the military route that the pollies there love? I do agree that the separation standards that have become the norm there have been proved to be too loose, and a third option will undoubtedly be implemented.

My unanswered questions would be 1 Who was actually flying both the RJ and the Blackhawk? Comments about the F/O on the RJ who should have been looking out for traffic assumes the Captain was the PF. Male voice on the Blackhawk radio doesn't mean it wasn't the voice of the pilot flying. It was usual for the flying pilot in the helicopter in both the RAAF and RAF world to do the ground and tower radio with the non flying pilot doing the enroute and tactical radios. 2 Military training flight just means it's non operational flight - doesn't mean it was a check ride. They don't fly for fun - only really 4 types of Military flying - positioning / training (recency) / instructional (which is your initial training and also check flights) / and operational. My opinion only but "Training flight" smacks of recency. Who's recency - Instructors need to retain recency as well as the lower life pilots (NVG recency with the RAF while I was there was something like 10 hours pm). I believe that it would be unlikely the crew were using augmented vision for that part of the sortie - and no one has detailed where they were going after - lots of dark airspace south of Fort Washington to get your NVG work in. Which pilot was Captain - just because one pilot had more hours and was an instructor doesn't automatically make them the Captain for a flight. Senior squadron pilots and also Instructors often had the 'bog rat' as the Captain on recency and positioning flights for their experience and development. As mentioned - there are a whole heap of 'experts' that have weighed in on this - very few that have both military helicopter and commercial experience operation in that bit of airspace. Most are just cobbling together bits of gossip from various sources and trying to make it sound factual. Let's wait for the real 'experts' ...........

Lot of assumptions made by Juan (and other 'Experts') with little to no actual evidence to support.

Fact 1 - is correct 2 - tower radar readout has them at 200' - to be verified by the Blackhawk's flight recorder 3 - had turned through up to 90 degrees left and right of track along the route 4 - aircrew had NVG's attached to their helmets - whether they were being used for 'augmented' vision or flipped up will be a matter for the accident review. My opinion (based on quite a bit of experience with NVG's in helicopters) is they would have been flipped up for that part of the sortie as the sheer volume of background lighting would have caused too much flaring.

And the Blackhawk pilots were on NVG - no depth perception using them so no 'rate of closure'.

When passengers were still able to come to visit the flight deck, we had one lady come up with both front windows a full blown lightning storm. It was a spectacular show but as she ran shrieking all the way back through business class and down the stairs, we figured that it may not have been such an appropriate time for a pax visit.