Search results

It was, but it also had lateral movement at the time, which makes it no threat, whilst the other aircraft on finals had a constant bearing. I don't think that there's much doubt that they never locked on to the dangerous aircraft. From what I understand about flying with goggles, you have to be...

Who listens to the radio? I rarely want to hear what is said on youtube.... Anyway, it's about what could be seen, not heard.

This is a simulation, but I suspect it’s extremely close to reality.

Sounds like the RAAF pilots' course. It averaged 50% failure rate. And then a few more would bite the dust on the operational conversions. At one point QF's 767 command training had something in the order of 70% missing out, though that wasn't the norm. My father had a PhD. He was generally...

Presumably that will ultimately result in others reducing their number of flights/seats by an equivalent amount. And for the sake of openness, it would be interesting to know if anyone associated with this gets any form of free flights (or anything else). As best I can tell none of these...

In part that's simply because QF management has only been investing in JQ vice QF since Joyce took over.

The pilot flying doesn't really need to have the CRJ in sight. In large part that's the job of the other pilot. If either pilot had the correct aircraft in sight, they wouldn't have done a beeline for it.

Look carefully at the background.

From what I gather it actually happened a while back and the video has just come to light, in which case the answer is probably nothing. If they’d known at the time, probably an engineers ‘daily’ inspection of the entire aircraft. I gather he’s no longer employed at the airport, but I think...

A friend of mine got himself involved in this Whisper experiment. Results did look good. But, after a closer look he came to the conclusion that the results were being skewed (for want of a better term), and that it’s basically useless.

A couple more, taken when we went up to Manila to pick up OJK.

Which I guess works until you don't actually have a person to look out the window (for whatever reason), and then it doesn't. The question is how much 'deviance' should be allowed to normalise.

Apparently conflict warnings were so common, that they became normal.

When the aircraft take off, the brakes are automatically applied as part of the retraction sequence. If there were issues with that, then the MEL may require the gear to be left down for a specified length of time. That dramatically affects the performance calculations, as you have to consider...

A few more from a long time ago.

It should be relatively easy. Helicopters are basically slow, and 200’ is high. These are army pilots…10 feet is the sort of flying they would do in some circumstances, albeit not at night. Even if they were above the height they should have been at, the separation is woefully inadequate. I...

When you’re low flying, you rely on the radar altimeter. Any form of pull up warning is also radar based. I have no idea what you’re talking about with regard to zeroing a QNH to make a warning go away.

No, never.

Yes. It removes it.

Whilst I don't normally recommend pprune, the discussion about this subject seems to have remained on the rails, and has lots of commentary from people who know the aircraft, airport and the procedures. To be honest, it's terrifying.