A sharp reminder about island hopping.....

[martinc]

Six saved in Norfolk Island rescue drama.

AAP From: AAP November 19, 2009 12:

SIX people including a sick woman have been rescued after a medical evacuation plane was forced to ditch in the sea off Norfolk Island.

The NRMA Careflight flight operated by Pel-Air Aviation was on a mission from Western Samoa to Australia and was trying to land at Norfolk Island to refuel last night.

But bad weather prevented the jet from touching down and the pilot decided to ditch into the ocean off the remote Australian territory.

According to Careflight the pilot of the Westwind jet performed a successful landing on the water and all on board were rescued by boat.

[Graham Eccleston]

Well, I guess I'll now have to remove yet another aircraft from my AI collection.

[Serge]

Here is an interesting view on the event that raises a couple of valid questions.

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2009/11/19/lets-get-real-about-the-norfolk-island-ditching/

Regards,

Serge

[John Bosch]

Serge,

That artilce almost duplicates my initial thought when I heard about the ditching. How did he run out of fuel?

[Hugh Johnston]

We can speculate all we want but we weren't on that flight so lets not pass judgement until we know the findings

[John Bosch]

We can speculate all we want but we weren't on that flight so lets not pass judgement until we know the findings

I don't see anybody here passing judgement, Hugh.

Asking why they ran out of fuel when CASA laws state that fuel to reach an alternate must be carried is not passing a judgement. It's a simple curiousity. What I don't like with in that article is the accusatory nature based on little information. There may well be a good reason we don't know of yet. I'd certainly like to know what it is though!

[Hugh Johnston]

Sorry John, I wasn't referring to anyone in particular but just stating that we can speculate all we want but we just don't know what happened exactly, yet

[Extra260]

We can speculate all we want but we weren't on that flight so lets not pass judgement until we know the findings

I don't see anybody here passing judgement, Hugh.

Asking why they ran out of fuel when CASA laws state that fuel to reach an alternate must be carried is not passing a judgement. It's a simple curiousity. What I don't like with in that article is the accusatory nature based on little information. There may well be a good reason we don't know of yet. I'd certainly like to know what it is though!

I think that article mined most of it's information from here :

http://www.pprune.org/dg-p-general-aviation-questions/396269-merged-pel-air-westwind-ditching-off-nlk.html

Vincent.

[mozzy_06]

Hi All,

Here's a followup to this ditching story, taken from the lates Crikey bulletin:

http://atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2009/aair/ao-2009-072.aspx

And the prelim report: http://atsb.gov.au/media/1345477/ao-2009-072-prelim.pdf

Fascinating read.

[Hugh Johnston]

Good read

[Bandit]

Its interesting to note

"The flight crew had previously conducted ditching procedures wet-drill training, which included the simulated escape from a ditched aircraft. Similarly, the medical staff normally flew in aeromedical helicopters, and had previously conducted helicopter underwater escape training. The pilot in command and medical staff stated that their ditching training had helped them when escaping from the aircraft."

Having done HUET (Helicopter Underwater Evacuation Training) I have no doubt that this sort of training helped them survive.

[real]

Very interesting. Just wondering where i can buy the aircraft on the screenshot above. (for FSX)

Real

[tim_A]

I don't know much about this kind of commercial op, but when flying to a remote island, do they not have a point of no return Go/No go decision process? There was nothing mentioned in the prelim report. Certainly as a private pilot, particularly flying to somewhere with effectively no alternate, I'd be very concious of my Point of No Return...

[grumman]

I'm surprised that it has taken two months for the ATSB to release a preliminary report that is little more than a factual description of the accident. All of the information presented in the report would have been available within a few days of the event, after interviewing the crew. Indeed most of the story was published in the media at the time.

The bureaucracy traditionally moves in ponderous and mysterious ways, unpertubed by society's expectation of timeliness and efficiency. But this isn't good enough where there are major questions being asked about the safety of a commercial operation, e.g. how could this aircraft arrive at a remote island at night with only about 45 minutes fuel on board and no alternate?