Bloody tragic.
Of all the things which haunt a pilot’s conscious – a mid-air – in cloud – is the least spoken of. Probably because the chances (statistical probability) of such an event are fairly much off the planet – these days. Or: they should be. In CTA it’s a very, very low risk matrix; but OCTA the risk increases – slightly. One reason perceived for reduction of service is the alleged reduction in risk simply because of the low volume of traffic (statistics) – but does that analysis work only away from ‘known’ instrument flight practice and testing facilities? In the densely populated airspace? Close to a city, OCTA, with a navigation aid? Given the cost of ‘dual’ in a multi engine aircraft – it is only reasonable that a place, close to town would attract ‘a crowd’. It can and does get busy. But, it still only takes two to ‘Tango’.
Flight crew are only human. The ‘candidate’ or ‘student’ is usually ‘under the pump’. Particularly when engine failure is simulated and an instrument approach is to be completed within tight parameters. The examiner is paying close attention to the ‘victim’. Should things in the cockpit get a little awry, then it becomes a ‘thing’ which can distract. How easy is it to miss a call? Particularly when two frequencies are being monitored. Sure, area is on low volume, CTAF is noisy, all crew are paying attention to their allotted task. Put ‘em both in cloud and the risk matrix goes off the scale- unless there’s some assistance.
This is known risk, a given, across the globe. Yet here, with relatively uncluttered skies, pretty fair weather (mostly) two aircraft manage the almost statistically impossible point of collision. How?
The cost cutting and constraints placed on ASA operations – in an effort to show a profit – (or pay for One Pie) have produced a first world cost for a third world system of traffic management. Slow, weighed down by rules and regulation to avoid government ‘responsibility’. Placing the ATCO’s in an almost untenable situation; short of facilities and authority. ATSB won’t help –you could get very old waiting for any sort of helpful report in three years time.
However; I would like to have just two questions answered honestly.- How many at Melbourne centre ‘saw’ the two aircraft? How many of those thought – ‘Oh, they’re going to be close’? And; for a choc frog – who spoke up and said something? My Choc Frog is very, very safe – ain’t it.
A sad, bleak day. Six foot clearance would have saved it – an early warning would have avoided it – Alas. We live in an age of high technology and Fate is still ‘the hunter’. We can only hope things improve – for ‘safeties sake’.
My respects and sincere condolences to those left behind – waiting on ‘the report’.
Soto voce – Toot – toot.
Of all the things which haunt a pilot’s conscious – a mid-air – in cloud – is the least spoken of. Probably because the chances (statistical probability) of such an event are fairly much off the planet – these days. Or: they should be. In CTA it’s a very, very low risk matrix; but OCTA the risk increases – slightly. One reason perceived for reduction of service is the alleged reduction in risk simply because of the low volume of traffic (statistics) – but does that analysis work only away from ‘known’ instrument flight practice and testing facilities? In the densely populated airspace? Close to a city, OCTA, with a navigation aid? Given the cost of ‘dual’ in a multi engine aircraft – it is only reasonable that a place, close to town would attract ‘a crowd’. It can and does get busy. But, it still only takes two to ‘Tango’.
Flight crew are only human. The ‘candidate’ or ‘student’ is usually ‘under the pump’. Particularly when engine failure is simulated and an instrument approach is to be completed within tight parameters. The examiner is paying close attention to the ‘victim’. Should things in the cockpit get a little awry, then it becomes a ‘thing’ which can distract. How easy is it to miss a call? Particularly when two frequencies are being monitored. Sure, area is on low volume, CTAF is noisy, all crew are paying attention to their allotted task. Put ‘em both in cloud and the risk matrix goes off the scale- unless there’s some assistance.
This is known risk, a given, across the globe. Yet here, with relatively uncluttered skies, pretty fair weather (mostly) two aircraft manage the almost statistically impossible point of collision. How?
The cost cutting and constraints placed on ASA operations – in an effort to show a profit – (or pay for One Pie) have produced a first world cost for a third world system of traffic management. Slow, weighed down by rules and regulation to avoid government ‘responsibility’. Placing the ATCO’s in an almost untenable situation; short of facilities and authority. ATSB won’t help –you could get very old waiting for any sort of helpful report in three years time.
However; I would like to have just two questions answered honestly.- How many at Melbourne centre ‘saw’ the two aircraft? How many of those thought – ‘Oh, they’re going to be close’? And; for a choc frog – who spoke up and said something? My Choc Frog is very, very safe – ain’t it.
A sad, bleak day. Six foot clearance would have saved it – an early warning would have avoided it – Alas. We live in an age of high technology and Fate is still ‘the hunter’. We can only hope things improve – for ‘safeties sake’.
My respects and sincere condolences to those left behind – waiting on ‘the report’.
Soto voce – Toot – toot.