onetrack Posted November 7, 2023 Posted November 7, 2023 The aircraft was doing fire-mapping. Now, I'm not privy to what equipment they had on board, but obviously it was imaging equipment of some kind. When you're aerial mapping, many a time there's a requirement for variations in the mapping level, mapping speed, and direction, according to the level of detail required, the vegetation types, burnt VS unburnt areas, etc, etc. All these requirements often demand unusual flight profiles, as compared from the regular aviating style, of just getting from point A to point B in quick smart time. So, accordingly, I wouldn't read too much into the substantial variations in altitude and speed at this point in time - and certainly not until we get some information about how scattered the wreckage is. https://www.bushfirefacts.org/fire-maps.html 1
facthunter Posted November 7, 2023 Posted November 7, 2023 By the way, an autopilot can CAUSE a stall in many modes, S&L being one If power is reduced or drag increases, Air speed is a safe Mode. And I know of no autopilot I would trust to recover from an upset. Emergency descents in a Jet can achieve 10,000 FPM rate of descent but I doubt this plane could get anywhere near that.. Is there any record of the radio transmissions and what sort of clearance was applicable to that Airwork? Nev 1
RFguy Posted November 7, 2023 Posted November 7, 2023 no transmission reported. They were high, has hypoxia been ruled out ?
FlyingVizsla Posted February 7, 2024 Posted February 7, 2024 ABC News & ATSB report Lack of oxygen could have caused fatal plane crash in Outback Queensland: ATSB - ABC News WWW.ABC.NET.AU A preliminary report suggests hypoxia could be the reason three aerial firefighting crew members, including 22-year-old William Jennings... https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2024/report/ao-2023-053 1
Student Pilot Posted February 8, 2024 Posted February 8, 2024 On 07/11/2023 at 7:43 AM, RFguy said: no transmission reported. They were high, has hypoxia been ruled out ? Expand There were radio transmissions, it's been mentioned on prune control questioned the pilot about pressurisation. The pilot referred to oxygen rather than pressurisation, he was a very experienced ex military pilot used to pressurisation, it was thought an unusual comment.
facthunter Posted February 8, 2024 Posted February 8, 2024 Fair chance it is Hyperbaric Hypoxia related The garbled speech for one and why were they on oxygen? The first descent WHY? AT 280 you'd need constant oxygen if the pressurisation has failed. I wouldn't call it OPS NORMAL. Nev 2 1
onetrack Posted June 19 Posted June 19 Well, the final report is out on this one, and it only reinforces the preliminary report, and it's pretty damning of the aircraft operators procedures. I can see lawyers rubbing their hands over the liability claims here. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-06-19/atsb-final-report-fatal-plane-crash-outback-qld-2023/105435330 2
Student Pilot Posted June 19 Posted June 19 The company has changed hands since, will the previous owner/management personal still be liable? 1
onetrack Posted June 19 Posted June 19 On 19/06/2025 at 11:33 AM, Student Pilot said: The company has changed hands since, will the previous owner/management personal still be liable Expand I would opine that all liability for aviation laws and procedures breaches at the time of the crash, or prior, would be on the directors and management of the company at that time. When a company changes hands, only the assets and liabilities and contractual obligations in place at handover, or those items specifically listed at handover, are transferred to the new owner/s. Liabilities for previous statutory breaches would most certainly not be listed as being one of the liabilities being transferred. 1 1
turboplanner Posted June 19 Posted June 19 On 19/06/2025 at 12:29 PM, onetrack said: I would opine that all liability for aviation laws and procedures breaches at the time of the crash, or prior, would be on the directors and management of the company at that time. When a company changes hands, only the assets and liabilities and contractual obligations in place at handover, or those items specifically listed at handover, are transferred to the new owner/s. Liabilities for previous statutory breaches would most certainly not be listed as being one of the liabilities being transferred. Expand Depends what happened at the hand over. We paid out big after a Race Car demonstration at a Shopping Centre. A track was marked out by orange plastic barriers (as a safety fence), the drivers of a variety of unrelated unsuitable cars were told to be careful. One went through the barrier and injured someone in the crowd. The car type was unsuitable for the track, and came under our jurisdiction so we were dragged in. (We didn't organise or take part in the display) Our defence centred around the Organising Official telling the drivers to e careful; we lost. 1
onetrack Posted June 20 Posted June 20 Turbo, I can't see any tie-up between the Gulfstream crash and your personal experience, as there was no company or other entity involved in a sale and transfer of assets and liabilities in your event. Your event would come under "chain of responsibility", would it not? A company is a distinct stand-alone entity which can be sold or traded, along with its assets and liabilities, but those assets and liabilities are normally clearly defined at the point of sale or trade. However, I must admit, it has been the case on more than one occasion that new company directors or owners have discovered that liabilities attached to the sale were not fully listed, and undisclosed liabilities were only discovered after the handover. But I have never known of liabilities incurred by breaches of laws or operating procedures by previous owners or directors, to be included as part of a corporate structure handover in any sale. The new owners would have to be total mugs to knowingly accept such liability. This crash appears to be a pretty straightforward case of failure to adhere to even basic aviation regulations and aircraft manufacturer instructions, and I find it incredible that an aircraft operator could get away with such lax procedures and illegality in this age of ever tightening controls and scrutiny. 2 1
facthunter Posted June 20 Posted June 20 The actual operators were certainly not fully aware of the nature of Hypoxia. Before you operate a pressurised Aircraft you used to have to do a stint in a reduced pressure hypobaric chamber as Part of the COURSE. It's insidious and you don't realise how muddled your actions become. Your Writing is illegible your Nails go blue. You are certainly not capable of operating a Plane or rational behaviour. The one we used was at Pt Cook. Nev 1 2
IBob Posted June 20 Posted June 20 On 20/06/2025 at 1:04 AM, facthunter said: The actual operators were certainly not fully aware of the nature of Hypoxia. Before you operate a pressurised Aircraft you used to have to do a stint in a reduced pressure hypobaric chamber as Part of the COURSE. It's insidious and you don't realise how muddled your actions become. Your Writing is illegible your Nails go blue. You are certainly not capable of operating a Plane or rational behaviour. The one we used was at Pt Cook. Nev Expand Insidious is exactly the right word. I attended one such course and what surprised me was there are no warning bells: nothing at all, in fact quite the opposite, it is euphoric and everything is just cruisy. That is in complete contrast to just about any other physical danger we may face and where we invariably experience a reflexive physical and/or mental alarm. And it explains, for instance, why a hypoxic diver (same problem) may happily just swim on down... 1 2
Student Pilot Posted June 20 Posted June 20 There seem no consequences for continually flouting regulations and workplace law, the way whistleblowers are treated in this country doesn't help the issue. There is a real fear (justified or not) of making complaints of law breeches and disregard being turned against the whistleblower/reporter. If there are consequences they are delayed, deferred or diffused. Appears the longer a prosecution can go the more the waters are muddied the more chance of justice not being served. Is that just a revenue raiser for the defence? Seems contrary to truth. Truth is a casualty in trials with obfuscation and duration seemingly being priorities. 1
Student Pilot Posted June 20 Posted June 20 On 20/06/2025 at 1:04 AM, facthunter said: The actual operators were certainly not fully aware of the nature of Hypoxia. Expand They had been operating pressurised aircraft for at least ten years, Aero Commanders and Citations. The full final report has history and detail of company operations. 2
IBob Posted June 20 Posted June 20 Here is how it went for our group of about 20 in the chamber: At 18,000' we all took our masks off and it was like being at a party where everyone has had a few beers (or something) and are thoroughly enjoying themselves. We were asked a few questions about the lecture we had had beforehand, nobody could much remember the details of that, but this was generally hilarious. Masks on and we went to 25'000, masks then off in pairs while everyone else watched. We had scratch pads and were to subtract 7 from 301, 7 from the result and so on. After about a minute you can't do it...but that's fine, you're happy to keep trying. Every minute or so the instructor holds a finger up in front of you, and you are to repeatedly to touch his finger, then your nose. After about a minute this becomes very difficult: you can touch his finger with a lot of weaving around, but you can't seem to accurately touch your nose, the best you can do is somewhere on your face. You are required to hold your arms out straight in front of you, and you can't maintain that: they go out, but then fall down and you repeatedly jerk them back up, they fall again: hypoxic flaps. It's all fine, but after about 2 mins (or hypoxic flaps, if sooner) you are told to put your mask back on. Whereupon your colour vision comes back, though you'd not noticed you had lost it. We had folk wouldn't put their masks back on, so far as they were concerned they were doing just fine despite being unable to do any of that above. And we had one outstanding example of target fixation: with the nose touching exercise, one of the group wouldn't let the instructor put his hand back down. Each time he tried to, she grabbed it and put it back up in front of her so she could continue trying to do it. Got very indignant about it too. Recovery is usually surprisingly rapid too once you get the mask back on. Though apparently some continue into hypoxia, and we had one of those needed extra oxygen for a bit. And we had one who apparently functioned fine at 25,000ft, and a smoker at that. 3
Garfly Posted June 20 Posted June 20 (edited) On 20/06/2025 at 2:37 AM, Student Pilot said: ... the way whistleblowers are treated in this country doesn't help the issue. // If there are consequences they are delayed, deferred or diffused. Expand To which we could add the case of Bernard Collaery ... Government successfully blocks Bernard Collaery from obtaining documents on legality of spy mission | Witness K case | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Judge says legality of intelligence operation irrelevant to charge of disclosure of classified information Until finally ... Bernard Collaery’s leaking charges over East Timor operation dropped on Mark Dreyfus’ orders WWW.SMH.COM.AU The former ACT attorney-general was due to finally face trial on October 24 after years of delays before the attorney-general intervened. Edited June 20 by Garfly 1 1
Student Pilot Posted June 20 Posted June 20 (edited) The PIC was an ex F18/ Lear pilot, he would have known the possible hypoxia outcomes. The aircraft had been operated for years with pressurisation problems. Flick me a PM if you want to know any details about this companies modus operandi. Edited June 20 by Student Pilot Brainfart 1 1
BrendAn Posted June 20 Posted June 20 (edited) years ago i was working nightshift on a drill rig at leonora in wa. i heard someone say on the uhf that a sons of gwalia mine flight flew straight past leonora. my father was in the perth bound plane which was waiting at the threshhold for the kingair arrival which never happened. next morning we got a message saying it had crashed in queensland. all onboard were unconscious , believed to be a pressurisation problem Edited June 20 by BrendAn 1
facthunter Posted June 20 Posted June 20 I think that one had a pressurisation failure and flew to fuel exhaustion, then crashed. Nev 1 1
Garfly Posted June 20 Posted June 20 On 20/06/2025 at 8:02 AM, BrendAn said: years ago i was working nightshift on a drill rig at leonora in wa. i heard someone say on the uhf that a sons of gwalia mine flight flew straight past leonora. my father was in the perth bound plane which was waiting at the threshhold for the kingair arrival which never happened. next morning we got a message saying it had crashed in queensland. all onboard were unconscious , believed to be a pressurisation problem Expand 3
BrendAn Posted June 20 Posted June 20 On 20/06/2025 at 8:05 AM, facthunter said: I think that one had a pressurisation failure and flew to fuel exhaustion, then crashed. Nev Expand there was talk that the warning light had the sun shining on it and the pilot might not have noticed . one of the blokes on it had been working with us a week before doing some welding on the rigs. 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