Too close for comfort aka near miss at Waterford?
  • bumitch
    Unverified User
    Unverified User
    Posts: 71
    Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 8:56 pm

    Too close for comfort aka near miss at Waterford?

    by bumitch » Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:37 pm

    Fri 14 October 2011, 11.15am local approx.

    Light twin, possibly Seneca, doing steep turns on or just outside Waterford zone boundary, at estimated height of 1500ft
    ATR descending inbound to same level heading directly for circling twin
    ATR appears not to have seen twin until last moment, ATR banks to port as avoidance manoeuvre
    Estimated minimum separation between two aircraft well less than 1 mile, with twin bearing round onto ATR.

    Not funny.
  • User avatar
    aeroreport
    Unverified User
    Unverified User
    Posts: 7
    Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 5:33 pm
    Location: Ireland

    Re: Too close for comfort aka near miss at Waterford?

    by aeroreport » Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:57 pm

    It depends what you mean by comfort.
    In my own experience, and especially with all the flying I have done in the UK, I have been flying within a matter of feet in my single engine or twin plane and have had boeings roar past. The worst I ever had was flying Learjet 45 and a DA-42 training plane coming straight at us. We both "dodged" each other using the old turn right rule. This happens when your on basic service!

    Glad to hear anyways no one was hurt in waterford.
  • User avatar
    hum
    Verified User
    Verified User
    Posts: 596
    Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 1:28 pm
    Location: Co Limerick
    Contact:

    Re: Too close for comfort aka near miss at Waterford?

    by hum » Fri Oct 14, 2011 4:22 pm

    Bumitch, were you in one of the aircraft or did you see this 'incident'? Did the ATR get a TCAS alert? Did someone file an MOR?

    If the ATR was at 1500' in class 'G' airspace at the zone boundary then that's 'see and avoid' territory.
  • willo
    Verified User
    Verified User
    Posts: 478
    Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 9:33 pm
    Location: EIAB
    Contact:

    Re: Too close for comfort aka near miss at Waterford?

    by willo » Fri Oct 14, 2011 9:30 pm

    Would agree with Hum on this one, and also thought it was unusual for an airliner to be @ 1500' QNH with 10 nm to run.

    Is there a panhandle at Waterford? If so, was the alleged airprox within same. from memory, there isn't, but if there is, this would fall into Shannon CTR to 2500'.

    From my trips to EIWF, SNN will always give handover well before the EIWF CTZ, usually about 20 nm out,and EIWF ATC has always been very good at routing VFR traffic out of the way.

    Presume we can expect suitably understated headline in the Mail in next few days of near catastrophe, and "Think of the Children" panic!

    One for GASCI?

    Brian
  • Balkanhawk
    Unverified User
    Unverified User
    Posts: 23
    Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 6:44 pm

    Re: Too close for comfort aka near miss at Waterford?

    by Balkanhawk » Fri Oct 14, 2011 11:31 pm

    From the language of bumitch post I guess he observed this from the ground. The ATR at 10nm would/should have been at 2000ft sitting pretty on the localiser. There may have been a TCAS warning if there Was a high descent/ascent rate.

    Anyway if it was as close as described there definitely would have been a report.
  • bumitch
    Unverified User
    Unverified User
    Posts: 71
    Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 8:56 pm

    Re: Too close for comfort aka near miss at Waterford?

    by bumitch » Sat Oct 15, 2011 1:32 pm

    @Balkanhawk
    I said height, not altitude.

    @Hum
    Yes, I wondered about TCAS myself, which was why I was so surprised the ATR did not give the twin an early wide berth.
  • bumitch
    Unverified User
    Unverified User
    Posts: 71
    Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 8:56 pm

    Re: Too close for comfort aka near miss at Waterford?

    by bumitch » Sun Oct 16, 2011 11:43 am

    @Balkanhawk, @Willo

    Maybe I misled you by saying ”descending inbound”.

    For the record, the ATR appeared straight and level, on a constant course below the cloud layer for maybe 10 to 15 seconds before going by the twin. This was not a localiser approach.

    The geniuses amongst you may wish to consider where a 1500QFE visual intercept onto final would put you in terms of distance from the threshold on a standard glideslope, may wish to take a look at the EIWF visual chart and see if there may be any significant visual landmarks which might assist such an intercept, and then consider further your comments regarding my height estimation.

    Have fun!
  • vanman
    Verified User
    Verified User
    Posts: 159
    Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 1:51 pm

    Re: Too close for comfort aka near miss at Waterford?

    by vanman » Wed Oct 19, 2011 3:58 pm

    I often hear Shannon warning Aer Arann flights going into EIWF that they will be descending into Class G airspace during the approach. Meaning the that see and avoid will be their own responsibility. At 1500 feet it's unlikely the Seneca would be on radar. I find out in the midlands that I only appear on their radar at about 3000'.

    But both aircraft would have been talking to Waterford at that point. So should have been aware of each other.
  • bumitch
    Unverified User
    Unverified User
    Posts: 71
    Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 8:56 pm

    Re: Too close for comfort aka near miss at Waterford?

    by bumitch » Wed Oct 19, 2011 8:16 pm

    So we have

    - Everyone responsible for lookout and their own separation cause it’s class G airspace
    - TCAS on the ATR presumably giving traffic information or advisory, assuming twin is transponding
    - Both aircraft possibly on the same frequency

    The implication seems to be that what was seen was indeed intended or ok?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests