First page verdict?? - ![Dodgy Dodgy](https://auntypru.com/forum/images/smilies/dodgy.gif)
Some excellent (but disturbing) OBS so far "K" and Ol'Tom...
The Kingair pick up alone provides food for thought (ie Kingair descent rate vs Travelair). However what really rang my bells was that the first time the departing a/c JQF was given any indication that they had conflicting traffic was 1min 46 seconds before the collision occurred...
I must admit that I've only just had a chance to open up and read the final report, so it was with dismay and disbelief when I read the following under the 'what has been done as a result' (or more accurately what hasn't been done):
Hmm...so CASA OAR were only prompted to have an interest in this matter 17 months after a fatal mid-air collision occurred in a busy block of airspace within secondary radar coverage and adjacent to Melbourne CTA. Why weren't these reviews and proposed actions implemented within weeks of the accident occurring??
Quote from the preliminary report, issued 2 months after the accident:
P2 comment: Not sure how a mid-air collision involving two flight training aircraft, flying under IFR rules in busy (radar environment) airspace, adjacent to CTA, does not automatically trigger the promulgation of a critical safety issue??
MTF...P2
![Dodgy Dodgy](https://auntypru.com/forum/images/smilies/dodgy.gif)
Some excellent (but disturbing) OBS so far "K" and Ol'Tom...
![Wink Wink](https://auntypru.com/forum/images/smilies/wink.gif)
The Kingair pick up alone provides food for thought (ie Kingair descent rate vs Travelair). However what really rang my bells was that the first time the departing a/c JQF was given any indication that they had conflicting traffic was 1min 46 seconds before the collision occurred...
![Sad Sad](https://auntypru.com/forum/images/smilies/sad.gif)
I must admit that I've only just had a chance to open up and read the final report, so it was with dismay and disbelief when I read the following under the 'what has been done as a result' (or more accurately what hasn't been done):
Quote:Airservices Australia (Airservices) have proposed a change to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to introduce a surveillance flight information service (SFIS) around Mangalore Airport, designed to provide enhanced traffic information services to all aircraft operating in a 20 NM radius of the airport. The proposed service would require all aircraft to broadcast on the CTAF within the broadcast area, while providing a dedicated air traffic controller operating on the CTAF to provide a flight information service utilising surveillance.
By listening on the CTAF, the controller would be able to determine whether aircraft have arranged their own separation following receipt of traffic information and provide updated traffic information if required. A similar service was introduced around Ballina Airport in August 2021.
In September 2021, the CASA Office of Airspace Regulation (OAR) announced an aeronautical study into the airspace within a 25 NM area of Mangalore Airport, up to an altitude of 8,500 ft. The scope of this study involves:
- a review of traffic type and density over the previous 5 years
- an evaluation of the suitability and efficiency of the airspace
- a review of the equitability of access to the airspace, the appropriateness of the airspace classification and the suitability of the existing services and facilities provided by Airservices Australia.
As of February 2022 this aeronautical study has not been published.
The proposal for the introduction of an SFIS on the Mangalore CTAF is currently on hold pending completion of the OAR review.
However, a dedicated controller is providing safety alerting on the Mangalore CTAF in the interim period. Communications on the CTAF are recorded by Airservices when the safety alerting service is operational. A further consultation has been raised by Airservices to lower the base of Class E airspace around Mangalore Airport. As of February 2022 that proposal was in review by Airservices following an industry consultation period.
Hmm...so CASA OAR were only prompted to have an interest in this matter 17 months after a fatal mid-air collision occurred in a busy block of airspace within secondary radar coverage and adjacent to Melbourne CTA. Why weren't these reviews and proposed actions implemented within weeks of the accident occurring??
Quote from the preliminary report, issued 2 months after the accident:
Quote:Should a critical safety issue be identified during the course of the investigation, the ATSB will immediately notify relevant parties so appropriate and timely safety action can be taken.
P2 comment: Not sure how a mid-air collision involving two flight training aircraft, flying under IFR rules in busy (radar environment) airspace, adjacent to CTA, does not automatically trigger the promulgation of a critical safety issue??
MTF...P2
![Cool Cool](https://auntypru.com/forum/images/smilies/cool.gif)