REPCON supplied the following information to CASA as requested Answers to your questions as follows: Yes it was CTAF operations at the time. No answer on this. Aircraft 1 was IFR and had made the required broadcast on area frequency, but as the other aircraft were VFR no broadcasts were made on the area frequency – nor were they required to be. Both aircraft had been in communication before the incident. Both had made broadcasts on the CTAF that they were taxiing and the reporter (aircraft 1) states that they broadcasted an entering and line up call for runway 28 and visually checked the…

In response to this information the reporter advised that the autopilots were often unserviceable for up to five months and despite pilots reporting the issue it was not addressed. They also advised that some of the freight aircraft only have seatbelts for the left seat, so having a co-pilot was never a real option. The ATSB advised CASA of these ongoing concerns.   Regulator Response 2: CASA is examining the additional concerns raised regarding the autopilot situation and will take appropriate action as necessary.   CASA comment: CASA has reviewed the further advice provided, and…

The reporter advised that crews at foreign ports do not have access to the internet during their pre-flight preparations and hence cannot download the current charts from the Jeppesen website. In response to this the operator advised that they subscribe to a service which provides access to Wi-Fi hotspots throughout their international network and allows crews to logon and access a variety of operational information including updates to charts referred to in the original report. The reporter then advised that they had attempted to use the Wi-Fi hot spot internationally, but concluded that it…