Jump to content

What happened at Jamestown today


Recommended Posts

I'm not commenting because I am merely an internet voyeur - I like to read .....

 

Sounds like a very lucky outcome for all involved though. That would have been very messy for aviation in Australia.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who called first is irrelevant. Aircraft on the runway have right of way. Period. Regardless of who called when..

 

Is possible for 2 acft to call at the same time and create a hedradyme, and no one picks up on it.

 

I know its an old school technique, and probably not taught much these days, but before you roll onto a runway, STOP AND BLOODY WELL LOOK!!!...

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Maj Millard

I had an entering-runway incident when departing Natfly earlier this year, although it was nowhere near the same seriousness as the one at Jamestown. Mine was simply solved by a curt and efficient call by the aircraft on short final to the runway I was about to enter, and we took rapid and appropriat corrections to eliminate any danger. The types of aircraft can contribute to this problem IE: hi-wing and low-wing...just as it can also contribute to a midair collision between the two types. Throw in lots of busy radio chatter, and you've got yourself a real danger area !...

 

For instance I'd be pretty happy betting that the Jab at Jamestown probabily didn't even see the Mustang...I mean who in their right mind is going to pull out in front of a spinning 4-blade Mustang prop ??...not me Jose !...

 

If he did know the Mustang was there, he must have thought (and maybe rightly) that it was his turn before the Mustang, so there you have lack of correct, or suitable communication, or simply a missed radio call.

 

The Mustang was threatening to overheat, so wanted to go, so maybe it did jump the line ?...I don't know......any being a low-wing fortunatly it did spot the jab, so it all became a lesson and not a tragedy.

 

In my case at Natfly, the radio chatter was excessive with lots of departing traffic and arriving traffic, using the same runway. Being that I was in a high-wing watching those before me depart, ( I was about 5th in line) I was looking down the runway at the one departing before me, and not up final. The arriving traffic had made the call but I missed it with all the chatter. Once again good lessons all round and no tragedy. Danger area folks ...heads up ! !....................Maj...012_thumb_up.gif.cb3bc51429685855e5e23c55d661406e.gif

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Who called first is irrelevant. Aircraft on the runway have right of way. Period. Regardless of who called when..Is possible for 2 acft to call at the same time and create a hedradyme, and no one picks up on it.

I know its an old school technique, and probably not taught much these days, but before you roll onto a runway, STOP AND BLOODY WELL LOOK!!!...

Motz, I've pulled the comments on #7 and #25 until I can get into the CARS a bit more. You'd be very surprised at who drummed that into me if it's not correct.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think AIP would be helpful. Too tired to look it up now. Rules of the air (right of way) etc hardly if ever (from memory) use a radio call to establish who has right of way. Its always position/ location.

 

Ps, wasnt having a shot tubz, was just making a point that a radio call doesn't give you right of way.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

A good lesson in this mistake. The who's the one to blame part I have some trouble with. good to identify what events led to the mistake is a good thing, but we all do and will make mistakes or have poor judgment. Damning our fellow pilots does nothing for our sport in any way. I am sure both pilots are fully aware of what could have been done better and I would hope the event will make changes to minimise this type of problem in the future. Happy no one got hurt. 012_thumb_up.gif.cb3bc51429685855e5e23c55d661406e.gif

 

Mardy

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

hedradyme??!! Heterodyne - when two signals of nearly the same frequency interfere causing a signal equal to the difference between the interfering signals to be produced, or is it somebody who wears the clothing of the opposite sex? Been so long I cannot remember this stuff...

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
A good lesson in this mistake. The who's the one to blame part I have some trouble with. good to identify what events led to the mistake is a good thing, but we all do and will make mistakes or have poor judgment. Damning our fellow pilots does nothing for our sport in any way. I am sure both pilots are fully aware of what could have been done better and I would hope the event will make changes to minimise this type of problem in the future. Happy no one got hurt. 012_thumb_up.gif.cb3bc51429685855e5e23c55d661406e.gifMardy

It's not so much who to blame but who is to go first in a similar situation in the future.

 

Professional procedure is to enter at the beginning of the runway, even though you don't need to because you add some landing area in the case of an EFATO, but a lot of people will join at an intersection or part way down the runway if the remaining length meets their calculations on the day.

 

In CTA the Tower controller adjusts the priority, but at a CTAF there can be inadvertent (or deliberate) conflicts.

 

So far in my search The Visual Flight Rules Guide has been no help at all, saying on Page 71:

 

An aircraft that is about to take-off shall not attempt to do so until there is no apparent risk of collision with other aircraft.

 

As we know the VFRG often doesn't reflect what the actual rules are, so I'm still digging, but if you followed the VFRG you could have a situation where the pilot at the intersection looked down towards the piano keys, hesitated to see what the other aircraft was doing, decided he was doing pre-flight checks and entered the runway, while the pilot at the end of the runway would be looking at the one at the intersection, see an obvious hesitation, decided he was giving way, and start the take off.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
I find it very difficult to understand how runway infringements such as these still exist, especially on a runway such as this where you can see either end. A simple but good look either way will tell you there are or are not aircraft on the runway or approaching or departing. If there is someone already lined up it must be assumed they are going to roll, unless clear and specific informatiom directly from them is assured otherwise. The Mustang used the radio as far as I can see, giving clear intentions. Judy had lined her aircraft up oblique to the runway so as to see aircraft on final and any on the airstrip. Unfortunately, the departing aircraft had to taxi down the last portion(~30metres) of the runway before turning and lining up. This led to a line of other aircraft being down the runway a little and some decided to pull out of line, enter the runway and depart. It seems just as Judy was rolling, the Jabiru decided to pull out of line, enter the runway and takeoff without warning. I believe it was Judy's passenger who saw the aircraft veer in front and immediately notified her. I'm sure the Jabiru pilot has learnt his lesson, fortunately costing little but the embarrassment and an extra nights cost for Judy and passenger who decided it was better to stay the night after such a close call. It's obvious now a marshal is needed when aircraft are not entering from the end of a runway. I think a little lest haste and more planning by some pilots, especially if suffering `get home itis` would alleviate the problem which happens at most airshows. We have held several airshows similar to Jamestown, and trying to minimise risks such as the above is top priority, but things always slip through the loop and are not realised until the day is over. Well done to the organisers for a brilliant day and to ALL the aircraft and pilots who flew in to make it so great. Safe flying

I think a better procedure would be for all Warbirds to depart first, it will also save them from negotiating the flock of earlier departed Aircraft enroute all heading different directions at a much lower speed and various altitude. This would only add a little time and enhance safety . Lets not bash pilots or GA vs RAA standard operating procedures and Airmanship, this was an Accident I was there as well a great event it was, lets not spoil it , lets learn from it for next time . Thanks Jamestown

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be good if an analysis (without the blame game) could be had, just so we all learn how easily such incidents can occur.

 

Thank God that is all it was ... an incident ... it could have been much worse; I would imagine Judy got quite a fright ... nice footwork on her part.

 

Some one taking responsibility for ground marshaling departing aircraft at the end of the day could be quite an onerous responsibility in a CTAF environment and could only be used as advisory in any case. A clear advantage would be that there would be an extra set of eyes on the maneuvering aircraft and good advice could be broadcast, as long as pilots realised they were NOT being given any clearances just advice.

 

Years ago at one of the Scone NSW shows someone took that responsibility impromptu at the end of the day to great effect and everyone followed the advice and the strip was cleared quite quickly, including some intersection departures.

 

Regards,

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was there on the day and at the time of the incident we were taxiing through the airpark to line up for departure. We heard the altercation (for want of a better word) on the CTAF and there was some debate about whether or not the Mustang touched the Jab but the Mustang pilot was absolutely certain she had not. We also heard her earlier (polite) request for a priority departure because the Merlin was getting a bit warm. There were aircraft entering from the park at the southern end of 34 across the piano keys and the rest of us were lined up along the eastern grass strip to enter from that side about 50 metres short of the piano keys at the same end.

 

After this incident a marshall was placed at the end of the strip and coordinated traffic onto the strip for take-off. It seemed to go very smoothly after this. Perhaps this should have been done at the start? Interestingly the marshall didn't appear to have a radio. As we climbed out to the west we heard an aircraft making calls inbound for 34. I don't know how the marshall could have coordinated departing traffic without being aware of inbound traffic.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably just reiterating what has been said but my observation of the problem is that they had two parking areas, Saturdays and Sundays. The Sat group parked in the camping area south of 34 the Sundays to the large parking area to the north, accessible only by bus.

 

It took a good 15 mins to get to your plane and start up, another 5 mins to taxi to 34. This delay from this parking area could have been used to get the south parked planes airborne more quickly (which some did)

 

However a bottle neck occurred which caused the problem.

 

War birds departing first? They take more times on run ups etc so that would delays departures for the following aircraft.

 

I do think that they should have priority, but how to organise this is possibly to announce that they have this priority on the registration papers on arrival.

 

This does not fix the congestion and confusion that there are a mix of light and warbirds jockeying from the southern area and the craft trying to merge from the backtracking aircraft.

 

A worse scenario would have been if 120 was the active runway.

 

My opionion would be to marshal aircraft when ready and give the warbirds priority

 

More experienced members have stated their views which I fully concur.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The CAR's aren't much of a guide.

 

CAR 161

 

(8) An aircraft that is about to take-off shall not attempt to do so until there is no apparent risk of collision with other aircraft.

 

But common sense says you don't enter a runway at an intersection or in front of another aircraft already using the runway. And common courtesy says you let the big ones go first because they are very thirsty and cost heaps to just sit there idling behind something with an engine smaller than their starter motor.

 

It's called airmanship...

 

Kaz

 

Edit... CAR 163 speaks about not operating an aircraft on the ground so as to create a hazard for another aircraft, but neither reg answers the question as to who has right of way.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the above example I gave Kaz, I'd say both pilots were exhibiting airmanship.

 

You do need a circuit breaker so both know instantly who should be going or who should be stopping. CAR 161 is useless except to make you look around and crane your neck - it's an indictment on CASA. It would be interesting what was listed on CAR 161 in previous years.

 

I was saving the CARs as PDFs so I could quickly search by key words, but recently found CASA had been quietly changing them away from the original prescriptive wording, so now it's safer to go online every time to get the latest, and you can bet we will be taking more and more responsibility for this type of scenario.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...