Donated.
I don’t get the reason for the use of a separate frequency between DA62 and ATC, is there a specific reason not in the report? my thunking either you are in the traffic flow and you speak on same RT channel or you are not?
AFAIK this applies to military aircrafts when operating in CAS, you have to keep two-way comm with civilian ATC even when speaking to your controller on other frequencies, the only exception if flying in formation following someone else…
Too much blahblah during a calibration. Better to have it on a separate freq.
The question is was the PIC aware of the traffic on the main frequency? normal circuit instruction/calls should have been in the main frequency no?
You rarely get taken to a different frequency (say emergency with load of blabla)
Calibration flts can always monitor a second freq if they want. But normally (in our ops at least) they get al the essential tfc info needed on their designated frequency. Al the RT associated with calibration flts is just too much to add it to an already overloaded freq. Don’t forget normal flt ops just continue but now with only one RWY available for departures and arrivals.
Prior to departure, the flight crew met air traffic control and airport representatives to discuss the calibration flights. Among the items discussed it was agreed that air traffic control would communicate with the DA62 on a separate frequency.
At 1808 the Aircraft departed OMDB from runway 30R to fly its first calibration approach to runway 30L. The Aircraft flew a total of nine circuits performing different aerodrome lighting checks.
At 1929, the Aircraft entered the final to runway 30L for the tenth approach, following a Thai Airways Airbus A350-900, which was flying the approach to the parallel runway 30R. The Airbus was approximately 3.7 nautical miles (nm) ahead of the DA62.
When the DA62 leveled off after turning onto final at an altitude of approximately 1,100 feet (ft) and at an airspeed of approximately 130 knots (kt), it rolled slightly but was recovered after nine seconds. Seven seconds later, the Aircraft abruptly rolled to the left until it became inverted and it then entered a steep dive. The Aircraft impacted the ground approximately 3.5 nm from the runway 30L threshold. The impact was not visible to the runway approach camera.
Evidence noted at the Accident site indicated that the Aircraft impacted the ground at an elevation of approximately 130 ft while travelling at high speed in the direction opposite to the direction of flight, on a heading of approximately 100 degrees.
Sounds like they recovered it into level flight but didn’t quite manage to pull up.
There is a bit in there
The DA62 would apply own separation to other arriving aircraft to the parallel runway
30R while operating under VFR, which meant that ATC would not be responsible for providing
wake turbulence separation.
which perhaps not many know about. This experienced crew would have known that, but perhaps was not aware of the A350.
At 1929, the Aircraft entered the final to runway 30L for the tenth approach, following a Thai Airways Airbus A350-900, which was flying the approach to the parallel runway 30R. The Airbus was approximately 3.7 nautical miles (nm) ahead of the DA62.
The wind was unfortunate. 020/05.
And at that latitude it would have been night at 19:30 local, wouldn’t it? Picking out another aircraft’s lights and maintaining separation at night might have been tricky depending on the background lighting.
