No Fuel at Perth Airport (YPPH/PER)
I think the audacity from the airport is in their statement ....not really shouldering the blame but saying this happens throughout the world and then compares technical issues to weather. Seriously....they are beyond a joke.
This was a massive failure by the airport and or whoever they contract with to maintain and provide this service (is it in house now?). ...Responsibility needs to be identified and steps in place to ensure that such an event has appropriate contingency.
Now I'm wondering if airlines will be claiming compensation? The poor passengers as usual at Perth will be out of pocket and many with ruined or disrupted holidays due to this incompetence of not having strategic back up plans in force.
This was a massive failure by the airport and or whoever they contract with to maintain and provide this service (is it in house now?). ...Responsibility needs to be identified and steps in place to ensure that such an event has appropriate contingency.
Now I'm wondering if airlines will be claiming compensation? The poor passengers as usual at Perth will be out of pocket and many with ruined or disrupted holidays due to this incompetence of not having strategic back up plans in force.
An interesting chain of events.......
As far as I am aware, airports can only be closed by CASA or the airport owner, ATC used to be able but that disappeared with Government Operational Control years ago
So someone decided to close Perth Airport at 312326UTC. Why, because the fuelling system had failed. (It turns out that the tanks had lost pressure, there was plenty of fuel, so all that was needed was a competent engineer to fix the problem.)
Is this a reason to close an airport and force the diversion of inbound aircraft to remote, unfamiliar airports, without adequate facilities, in Class G airspace?
I would not have thought so...
To my mind, the lack of refuelling capability, is surely a decision that should properly be made by the PIC, after consulting his/her operating company.
So did CASA make the decision, my guess would be no. There was not a safety reason to close the airport. So it must have been the airport owner. Why?
There was no risk associated with aircraft landing in Perth, other than not being able to depart. A commercial risk for the operating company. So why?
Here I invite Pprune speculation.........first a few of my own.
Legal issues - being sued by airlines
Airport commercial issues - gates blocked by aircraft unable to depart
Occam's Razor favours my last suggestion.
Someone, who had no knowledge of how the airline industry operates and no knowledge of who is actually responsible for the safety of an aircraft, made a knee-jerk decision, to close a perfectly safe and serviceable airport to air traffic.
Perhaps though there are other issues, about which we have not yet been informed.
As far as I am aware, airports can only be closed by CASA or the airport owner, ATC used to be able but that disappeared with Government Operational Control years ago
So someone decided to close Perth Airport at 312326UTC. Why, because the fuelling system had failed. (It turns out that the tanks had lost pressure, there was plenty of fuel, so all that was needed was a competent engineer to fix the problem.)
Is this a reason to close an airport and force the diversion of inbound aircraft to remote, unfamiliar airports, without adequate facilities, in Class G airspace?
I would not have thought so...
To my mind, the lack of refuelling capability, is surely a decision that should properly be made by the PIC, after consulting his/her operating company.
So did CASA make the decision, my guess would be no. There was not a safety reason to close the airport. So it must have been the airport owner. Why?
There was no risk associated with aircraft landing in Perth, other than not being able to depart. A commercial risk for the operating company. So why?
Here I invite Pprune speculation.........first a few of my own.
Legal issues - being sued by airlines
Airport commercial issues - gates blocked by aircraft unable to depart
Occam's Razor favours my last suggestion.
Someone, who had no knowledge of how the airline industry operates and no knowledge of who is actually responsible for the safety of an aircraft, made a knee-jerk decision, to close a perfectly safe and serviceable airport to air traffic.
Perhaps though there are other issues, about which we have not yet been informed.
The following users liked this post:
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: I prefer to remain north of a direct line BNE-ADL
Age: 49
Posts: 1,290
Likes: 0
Received 43 Likes
on
13 Posts
Just remember during COVID the west was the economic powerhouse of the nation (GDP about 15% of country actually) but in fact it is a backwater that quite frankly should be ostracised from the rest of the country. I lived there for 4 years and I just shake my head at how things are run in WA, A deer with no eyes comes to mind…
The following users liked this post:
The following 2 users liked this post by mates rates:
The following users liked this post:
Thread Starter
I think the audacity from the airport is in their statement ....not really shouldering the blame but saying this happens throughout the world and then compares technical issues to weather. Seriously....they are beyond a joke.
This was a massive failure by the airport and or whoever they contract with to maintain and provide this service (is it in house now?). ...Responsibility needs to be identified and steps in place to ensure that such an event has appropriate contingency.
Now I'm wondering if airlines will be claiming compensation? The poor passengers as usual at Perth will be out of pocket and many with ruined or disrupted holidays due to this incompetence of not having strategic back up plans in force.
This was a massive failure by the airport and or whoever they contract with to maintain and provide this service (is it in house now?). ...Responsibility needs to be identified and steps in place to ensure that such an event has appropriate contingency.
Now I'm wondering if airlines will be claiming compensation? The poor passengers as usual at Perth will be out of pocket and many with ruined or disrupted holidays due to this incompetence of not having strategic back up plans in force.
The following 2 users liked this post by Icarus2001:
It will be interesting to see which if any airline puts their hand in their pocket.
The following users liked this post:
Just remember during COVID the west was the economic powerhouse of the nation (GDP about 15% of country actually) but in fact it is a backwater that quite frankly should be ostracised from the rest of the country. I lived there for 4 years and I just shake my head at how things are run in WA, A deer with no eyes comes to mind…
The following 5 users liked this post by aussieflyboy:
Some interesting points being made about redundancy of fuel supplies - makes you wonder whether this country only having 24 days of jet fuel reserves is adequate……
Also a fair point as to why you’d close the airport because of no fuel supply - the runways and terminals are still ok, having some of those international carriers divert to WA regional towns with CTAFs is not ideal.
And does anyone know if QF10 had the same crew that operated from London to Karratha do the Karratha to Perth leg? I’m surprised they have an FRMS exemption that would allow a diversion, and then subsequent sector given the amount of time the crew would have been on duty:
90 minute sign on (I assume)
16 hour flight LHR - KTA
90 mins on the ground in KTA
1:40 hour flight KTA PER
Also a fair point as to why you’d close the airport because of no fuel supply - the runways and terminals are still ok, having some of those international carriers divert to WA regional towns with CTAFs is not ideal.
And does anyone know if QF10 had the same crew that operated from London to Karratha do the Karratha to Perth leg? I’m surprised they have an FRMS exemption that would allow a diversion, and then subsequent sector given the amount of time the crew would have been on duty:
90 minute sign on (I assume)
16 hour flight LHR - KTA
90 mins on the ground in KTA
1:40 hour flight KTA PER
The following users liked this post:
Perth Airport only bought the fuel system back in August 2023 from the previous operator. BP are contracted by Perth to run and maintain it.
So aircraft that diverted away from Perth to "Oh the humanity" alternate airports that may well have been in G, did so at the pilot's and/or company's discretion? If the first post is indeed an accurate portrayal of the NOTAM, they had the option of continuing. Obviously braving the world outside Perth was a commercial decision.
The following users liked this post:
That is interesting. So I assume the contractual situation is that BP has failed a major KPI and that there should be some cost implications. Why could BP not supply a solution more "timely".
Some interesting points being made about redundancy of fuel supplies - makes you wonder whether this country only having 24 days of jet fuel reserves is adequate……
Also a fair point as to why you’d close the airport because of no fuel supply - the runways and terminals are still ok, having some of those international carriers divert to WA regional towns with CTAFs is not ideal.
And does anyone know if QF10 had the same crew that operated from London to Karratha do the Karratha to Perth leg? I’m surprised they have an FRMS exemption that would allow a diversion, and then subsequent sector given the amount of time the crew would have been on duty:
90 minute sign on (I assume)
16 hour flight LHR - KTA
90 mins on the ground in KTA
1:40 hour flight KTA PER
Also a fair point as to why you’d close the airport because of no fuel supply - the runways and terminals are still ok, having some of those international carriers divert to WA regional towns with CTAFs is not ideal.
And does anyone know if QF10 had the same crew that operated from London to Karratha do the Karratha to Perth leg? I’m surprised they have an FRMS exemption that would allow a diversion, and then subsequent sector given the amount of time the crew would have been on duty:
90 minute sign on (I assume)
16 hour flight LHR - KTA
90 mins on the ground in KTA
1:40 hour flight KTA PER
FRMS is not the old CAO 48 where you get exemptions from rigid duty times. There is probably an allowance that the crew can extend to x amount as long as they get xx time off, built into the FRMS. You just plug the duty into the system and it pops out the requirement, the whole point of it is to allow more flexibility in operations.
All gates occupied, taxiways blocked by aircraft waiting for said gates. How many aeroplanes can the Airfield accommodate before the last aircraft on final is told they can't land as there's no usable tarmac for them? A NOTAM effectively ordering a ground stop seems logical to me.
The following users liked this post: