Confirmed voice recorder found. Nothing left but the tail. It would have been quick, small mercies.
Cockpit voice recorder of water bomber recovered from wreckage
Printable View
Confirmed voice recorder found. Nothing left but the tail. It would have been quick, small mercies.
Cockpit voice recorder of water bomber recovered from wreckage
Only if it had Australian registration and airworthyness which it doesn't - its Canadian requirements would apply. The ATSB rep who was interviewed indicated they had the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) and didn't mention anything at all about a flight data recorder (FDR).Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh Jars
From the vision of the crash site - the crash has a 1km long very narrow scar with the tail at the very end - so I agree the aircraft was probably intact when it hit the ground.
Garry
Here are some facts and background of the Aircraft
Fire Aviation - News & commentary about aerial firefighting, air tankers, and helicopters
Ah, it was N registered, not Canadian. But I think that which category it operates under is more relevant. Restricted, aerial work, or whatever decrees what equipment is mandatory.Quote:
Originally Posted by 101RRS
I was aware it was N registered.
For the age of the aircraft, ICAO (overarching authority) require turbine aircraft over 5700kg certified before 1987 to have a basic FDR. This, of course, may have been varied by the FAA.
In Oz, CAO 20.18 specifies:
An aircraft of maximum take-off weight:(a) in excess of 5 700 kg and which is:
(i) turbine-powered; or
(ii) of a type first certificated in its country of manufacture on or after 1 July 1965;
must not be flown (except in agricultural operations) unless it is equipped with an approved flight data recorder and an approved cockpit voice recorder system
The only category of operation specified is ag ops. Fire fighting comes under Aerial Work, according to the CARs. Although 20.18 compliance isn't required of an N registered aircraft, CASA may have imposed additional requirements on the operator in order to permit them to operate in Oz. Who knows?
It's only a moot point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh Jars
Don't yer just hate it when folk bring facts into a discussion:mad: [biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][wink11]
That video while mostly accurate is not gospel what goes on in Australia. VLATs and LATs do use both water and foam, depending on where the drops are. In heavy bush they mainly use retardant. Unless really tricky, drops are usually made on the first run. SEATs the same.
Sorry mate, I cannot see how it is a moot point. If it had an FDR it would certainly help in the investigation. For sure the aircraft would have been certified under some form of STC. Just what it was with this particular aircraft, or other VLAT aircraft for that matter, I don't know. I seem to recall that there was / is a problem with the 737 tanker in regards to carrying passengers for example.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh Jars
If anyone is interested the FAA have the following:
https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/FAA_Order_8110_56B.pdf
Also, the FAA have the following, where the last paragraph appears to cover what ever you want it to do.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/21.25
It is noteworthy that all of the VLAT appear to be operating in Australia under "N" registration.
Casa have the final say, but if they were to require Australian registration then I doubt very much if there would be any operating.
b. Seats. Include the number of seats, followed by “No passengers are permitted.” Repeat this limitation in the aircraft flight manual.
c. Notes Section. In addition to any other notes specified in Order 8110.4 or other FAA policy, include the following notes:
“NOTE: Restricted category aircraft may not be operated in a foreign country without the express written approval of that country.”
I assume that as the RFS 737 is owned by the RFS (but still operated by Coulsen) it has changed to VH registration or is in the process of changing (all pics I have seen of it still have N rego). I suspect that as part of this registration process that highlighted the issue of not carrying passengers in Aust that may not apply in North America.
Going by Coulson's website some converted DC10's are going to be forthcoming to an Airport near you, shortly. Adelaide is down for one off.
Not before bloody time eh?[bigsmile1] I guess it will based at RAAF Edinburgh. Makes sense. I doubt the CFS 'dromes would be adequate.
As it happens the DC10 was the very first Wide Body I had stepped inside of with UTA in 1977. Perfume in the A/C ducts was lovely & typically French. Until then it was B727s everywhere from Adelaide.
Ah Happy days.