[Peetwo]

Addendum: LinkedIn comments cont/-

AFAP - ATSB DFO report on social media?? -   

Via LinkedIn:

Australian Federation of Air Pilots (AFAP)
5,504 followers
6h • Edited

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has found the private operator of the Essendon Airport largely ignored modern safety standards when it built a shopping centre close to the runway.

While investigating the crash [of a Beechcraft King Air into the DFO shopping centre on 21 Feb 2017] the ATSB discovered the #DFO was within 150m of the southern runway, in an apparent breach of safety standards in place since 1987, which mandated a 300m “stripwidth” on such a runway, or a 150m buffer zone on each side.

"… the ATSB said it could find no evidence the Civil Aviation Safety Authority had given the airport a concession to use that 180-metre clearance zone" … [and] "could not confirm how the airport determined the development was compliant with the rules."

“… the ATSB report largely agreed with the federation’s concerns that the airport largely ignored regulations intended to protect aviation activity and safety … pilots were increasingly concerned about overdevelopment at airports nationwide.”

A comment in reply:

Adrian Young
2h

Certainly not the first airport where the strip has been infringed upon. It must also be remembered that at the edge of the strip an imaginary slope starts (transitional slope) through which objects should not penetrate. The shopping centre penetrated both the strip and the transitional.
Clear safeguarding rules and their consistent implementation are key here.

Via LinkedIn:

Naseer Mohammad Nazir (MIE Aust, NER, RPEQ, IRSE)
Locomotive Design Engineer - Electrical
2d

Now the question is who approved the construction and how CASA inspectors missed such a grave breach of safety regulations.

This has to be probed further.

This finding means over construction structures must be demolished?

---

Gregory Holland
EASA/CASA part 147/Part 145,Part 42/Part 66 L.A.M.E Consulant at TAFE SA
2d

Sounds cynical but it's one way to close an airport by building close to or infringing minimum standards then plead for forgiveness whilst leaving the structure in place still infringing the standard.

---

Simon Hatfield
Airworks Consulting - Airport Operations/ Masterplans/Designs simon@airworksconsulting.com.au

1d
I think this article misses a number of key points. Take into consideration the aircraft that crashed was a Beech 200 Kingair and only requires a strip width of 140m overall under the CASA Part 139 rules - not 300 which is a requirement for a an A380 sized aircraft. The weight of the aircraft exceed takeoff (but did not contribute to the crash) it was put down to the flight control trim tabs being set incorrectly.

Hmm...what Simon says maybe technically correct from a CASA Part 139 ruleset POV (Ref: CH6 para 6.17 Table 6.17 (4)). However what Simon says neglects the fact that runway 17 is a code 3 (non-precision) runway and runway 26 is a code 4 (precision approach) runway, which (even under the 468 pg CASR Part 139 MOS) requires a runway strip width of 280m.

As for the comment that the cause of the accident.. "was put down to the flight control trim tabs being set incorrectly" ..please refer to P9's latest post..

Perhaps, not so elementary.


 
MTF...P2