Qantas B763 and Virgin Blue B737 near Melbourne on Dec 5th 2010, loss of separation
Last Update: May 3, 2012 / 13:30:14 GMT/Zulu time
Incident Facts
Date of incident
Dec 5, 2010
Airline
Qantas
Aircraft Registration
N97325
Aircraft Type
Boeing 767-300
ICAO Type Designator
B763
Contributing safety factors
- The Departures North controller expected the two aircraft to climb at similar speeds, did not recognise the loss of separation assurance, and assigned both aircraft the same flight level.
- The Auto Release procedures at Melbourne Airport allowed for aircraft to be departed at or close to the separation minima, with no documented requirements to ensure jet aircraft would maintain a set climb speed or flight crews would advise air traffic control if the speed could not be achieved. [Significant safety issue]
Other safety factors
- The Departures North controller did not effectively manage the compromised separation recovery.
- Although the Melbourne Airport Auto Release procedures were based on those in use at Sydney Airport, the safety assessment report did not provide a detailed comparison of the procedures in use at both locations.
Other key findings
- The Boeing Company B737-7Q8 aircraft climbed at a reduced profile speed, approved under local speed restrictions, to meet the Standard Instrument Departure height requirement.
- The Boeing Company B767-338 flight crew maintained visual contact with the preceding aircraft.
The Boeing 737 had been released from Melbourne at the NONIX NINE Standard Departure route, the 767 at the DOSEL SEVEN standard departure route, both departure routes were identical until waypoint BEATO. The assigned departure route required the 737 to cross waypoint PEART at or above 10,000 feet at a speed of 250 KIAS or less, the 767 was required to cross waypoint RIDAL at or above 10,000 feet.
Then the B767 climbed out separation between the aircraft was more than 1000 feet vertical and 3.4nm horizontally in excess of required separation minima of 1000 feet vertical or 3nm horizontally.
In the turn at HOPLA waypoint the 737, who had been climbing at a speed above ground 20 knots faster than the 767 until that point, experienced a significant tail wind increase prompting the captain to suspend airspeed increase to 250 KIAS as they would not be able to cross waypoint PEART at 10,000 feet otherwise. As a result the ground speed of the 767 increased to about 60 knots above the ground speed of the 737 resulting in the 767 closing up to the 737.
When the separation reduced to 1300 feet vertical and 3.1nm horizontal the North departure controller recognized the reducing separation and cancelled the 737's SID clearance issuing a direct to KASEY. The controller thought this would take the 737 further away from the 767, the separation however reduced resulting in a loss of separation 11 seconds later when vertical separation reduced to 900 feet and lateral separation to 2.9nm. At that point the controller cancelled the SID clearance for the 767 as well and instructed the 767 to turn onto a heading of 050, shortly followed by the instruction to stop the climb at 9000 feet. The 767 crew advised they already climbed through 9000 feet, radar data showed they were at 9300 feet at that time with a vertical separation of 500 feet. The 767 crew descended their aircraft from 10,000 feet to 9,000 feet.
The minimum separation reduced to 300 feet and 2.0nm with the trailing 767 being 60 knots faster above ground than the 737 ahead. At about that time the short term collision alert activated and was acknowledged, 5 seconds later the separation had increased to 500 feet vertical and 1.9nm horizontally, 19 seconds after the short term collision alert the required minimum separation was re-established.
The 767 crew later reported they had the 737 in sight all the time.
A similiar occurrence had been identified on Oct 12th 2011, the minimum separation between an A320 and a 737 reduced to 800 feet vertical and 2.1nm following waypoint HOPLA.
The ATSB analysed that other than Sydney, which had set minimum speeds for aircraft following auto release procedures, Melbourne had not set minimum speeds and did not require air crew to notify ATC on unusual speeds. The ATSB said "The lack of any related occurrences at Sydney, compared to two in Melbourne, suggests that these speed requirements are useful risk controls."
Air Services Australia took a safety action to establish a speed profile similiar to Sydney for auto release procedures at Melbourne, which the ATSB was satisfied with.
Aircraft Registration Data
Incident Facts
Date of incident
Dec 5, 2010
Airline
Qantas
Aircraft Registration
N97325
Aircraft Type
Boeing 767-300
ICAO Type Designator
B763
This article is published under license from Avherald.com. © of text by Avherald.com.
Article source
You can read 2 more free articles without a subscription.
Subscribe now and continue reading without any limits!
Read unlimited articles and receive our daily update briefing. Gain better insights into what is happening in commercial aviation safety.
Send tip
Support AeroInside by sending a small tip amount.
Related articles
Tuifly B738 near Geneva on Jun 7th 2009, smoke in cabin
The Swiss Bureau for Air Accident Investigation (BFU) released their final report concluding the probable cause of the serious incident was:The…
Mesa CRJ2 at Des Moines on May 2nd 2012, unsafe gear after departure
A Mesa Airlines Canadair CRJ-200 on behalf of US Airways, registration N97325 performing flight YV-2747/US-2747 from Des Moines,IA to Phoenix,AZ…
Fleet type match
Qantas B789 over Pacific on Apr 14th 2024, electrical problem
A Qantas Boeing 787-9, registration VH-ZNH performing flight QF-76 (dep Apr 13th) from Vancouver,BC (Canada) to Sydney,NS (Australia), was enroute at…
Fleet type match
Qantas A332 at Perth on Mar 25th 2024, engine shut down in flight
A Qantas Airbus A330-200, registration VH-EBA performing flight QF-781 from Melbourne,VI to Perth,WA (Australia), was descending towards Perth when a…
Fleet type match
Qantas B738 near Kalgoorlie on Oct 25th 2021, fuel imbalance and engine shut down in flight
A Qantas Boeing 737-800, registration VH-VZT performing flight QF-888 from Perth,WA to Adelaide,SA (Australia) with 88 passengers and 6 crew, was…
Fleet type match
Qantas B738 and Qantas B738 at Sydney on Apr 29th 2023, loss of separation between go around and takeoff
A Qantas Boeing 737-800, registration VH-VZW performing flight QF-146 from Auckland (New Zealand) to Sydney,NS (Australia) with 100 passengers and 7…
Fleet type match
Qantas B738 over Tasman Sea on Oct 19th 2023, radio failure
A Qantas Boeing 737-800, registration VH-XZF performing flight QF-142 from Auckland (New Zealand) to Sydney,NS (Australia), was enroute at FL360 over…
Newest articles
Fleet type match
ANA B738 at Yonago on Apr 7th 2024, GPWS saves the day
An ANA All Nippon Airways Boeing 737-800, registration JA69AN performing flight NH-389 from Tokyo Haneda to Yonago (Japan), was on a circling…
Fleet type match
ANA B788 at Sapporo on Apr 24th 2024, hydraulic leak after landing
An ANA All Nippon Airways Boeing 787-8, registration JA804A performing flight NH-71 from Tokyo Haneda to Sapporo Chitose (Japan) with 213 people on…
Subscribe today
Are you researching aviation incidents? Get access to AeroInside Insights, unlimited read access and receive the daily newsletter.
Pick your plan and subscribePartner
A new way to document and demonstrate airworthiness compliance and aircraft value. Find out more.
ELITE Simulation Solutions is a leading global provider of Flight Simulation Training Devices, IFR training software as well as flight controls and related services. Find out more.
Your regulation partner, specialists in aviation safety and compliance; providing training, auditing, and consultancy services. Find out more.
AeroInside Blog
Popular aircraft
Airbus A320Boeing 737-800
Boeing 737-800 MAX
Popular airlines
American AirlinesUnited
Delta
Air Canada
Lufthansa
British Airways