Near collision involving Robinson R22, VH-MFH, and Lancair, VH-XCG, Ballina Byron Gateway Airport, New South Wales, on 22 April 2016

What happened

On 22 April 2016, an instructor and student were conducting flight training in a Robinson R22 helicopter, registered VH-MFH (MFH), at Ballina Byron Gateway (Ballina) Airport, New South Wales (NSW). The lesson involved practising transitioning from hovering to forward flight.

On the same morning, the pilot of a Lancair aeroplane, registered VH-XCG (XCG), was conducting a private flight under the instrument flight rules (IFR),[1] from Wedderburn Airport, NSW, to Ballina Airport, with one passenger on board.

At about 1006 Eastern Standard Time (EST), the instructor of MFH broadcast on the Ballina common traffic advisory frequency (CTAF) that they were established on runway 24 and would be conducting low-level operations on the runway for the next 15 minutes. 

At about the same time, XCG was approaching Ballina via an area navigation (RNAV) approach to runway 24. The pilot reported that their attention was focused on the newly installed electronic instrumentation and associated navigation system. When the aircraft was descending through about 500 ft on final approach, the pilot sighted a helicopter (MFH) ahead on the runway threshold, and realised they had omitted to select the CTAF and to broadcast an inbound call.

At about 1012, MFH was stationary on the threshold of runway 24, facing along the runway to the south-west. The instructor of MFH communicated with the pilot of another helicopter operating at the aerodrome to arrange mutual separation. Soon after, the pilot of the other helicopter broadcast ‘the plane coming in on runway 24, your intentions?’ There was no response to this transmission.

That call alerted the instructor of MFH to the aeroplane approaching runway 24 (XCG). The instructor looked out of the helicopter door, and sighted XCG, which was behind them on final approach to runway 24, and estimated the aircraft to be about 200 to 500 m away. The instructor immediately took control of the helicopter from the student and vacated the runway to the grassed area north of the runway.

After initially sighting MFH on the runway, the pilot of XCG considered conducting a go-around, but then observed MFH lift off and move to the grass area north of the runway. The pilot of XCG elected to continue the approach, and landed on runway 24.

Safety message

The ATSB SafetyWatch highlights the broad safety concerns that come out of our investigation findings and from the occurrence data reported to us by industry. One of the safety concerns is safety around non-towered aerodromes.

Pilots are encouraged to prioritise their attention carefully and appropriately as they near non-towered aerodromes. An effective lookout for other aircraft, supported by communication with traffic in the vicinity, should be a high priority.

The ATSB report Limitations of the See-and-Avoid Principle outlines the major factors that limit the effectiveness of un-alerted see-and-avoid. Insufficient communication between pilots operating in the same area is the most common cause of safety incidents near non-controlled aerodromes.

Most occurrences reported to the ATSB at non-towered aerodromes involve conflicts between aircraft, or between aircraft and ground vehicles. In particular, active runways should be approached with caution. The ATSB publication A pilot’s guide to staying safe in the vicinity of non-towered aerodromes, stated that a large number of the conflicts between aircraft involved:

•        ineffective communication between pilots operating in close proximity
•        the incorrect assessment of other aircraft’s positions and intentions
•        relying on the radio as a substitute for an effective visual lookout
•        failure to follow published procedures.

Aviation Short Investigations Bulletin - Issue 51

About this report Decisions regarding whether to conduct an investigation, and the scope of an investigation, are based on many factors, including the level of safety benefit likely to be obtained from an investigation. For this occurrence, a limited-scope, fact-gathering investigation was conducted in order to produce a short summary report, and allow for greater industry awareness of potential safety issues and possible safety actions. Publishing information  Released in accordance with section 25 of the Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003 Published by: Australian Transport Safety Bureau © Commonwealth of Australia 2016 Ownership of intellectual property rights in this publication Unless otherwise noted, copyright (and any other intellectual property rights, if any) in this report publication is owned by the Commonwealth of Australia. Creative Commons licence With the exception of the Coat of Arms, ATSB logo, and photos and graphics in which a third party holds copyright, this publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia licence. Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence is a standard form licence agreement that allows you to copy, distribute, transmit and adapt this publication provided that you attribute the work. The ATSB’s preference is that you attribute this publication (and any material sourced from it) using the following wording: Source: Australian Transport Safety Bureau Copyright in material obtained from other agencies, private individuals or organisations, belongs to those agencies, individuals or organisations. Where you wish to use their material, you will need to contact them directly.

-------

[1]  Instrument flight rules permit an aircraft to operate in instrument meteorological conditions (IMC), which have much lower weather minimums than visual flight rules. Procedures and training are significantly more complex as a pilot must demonstrate competency in IMC conditions, while controlling the aircraft solely by reference to instruments. IFR-capable aircraft have greater equipment and maintenance requirements.