Aircraft Accident Investigation Report

14 1.9 Communications On the day of the accident, there was no reported unserviceability of any aeronautical mobile or aeronautical fixed service communications systems. There was no recording of the radio transmissions in the Tower. The absence of the recording equipment was noted during an earlier regulatory inspection; however the matter had not been rectified despite it forming part of a Corrective Action Plan submitted by Air Traffic Services. The Aerodrome Operator did not have a working set of VHF or UHF radios. Personnel, including Airport Rescue & Fire-fighting Service (ARFFS), were reliant upon mobile telephone communications. This, in the outdoor and tumultuous-environment circumstances, created some communication challenges during the rescue operation. Communication channels were not clearly or properly defined, in that, in the extract provided to the Investigator from the draft Tinson Pen Aerodrome Emergency Plan – ‘Off-Airport Crash Procedure’, instruction and chain-of-command are not clear. 1.10 Aerodrome Information The accident occurred in the vicinity of the Tinson Pen Aerodrome (ICAO: MKTP), in the Greenwich Farm community of Kingston. Tinson Pen, the aerodrome of departure is situated approximately 2.1 Nautical Miles (NM) from the Kingston city center with its aerodrome reference point located at N17 ̊ 59” 19’ W076 ̊ 49” 26 ‘ (WGS 84) 6 . This aerodrome is used only in Visual Flight Rules (VFR) conditions – operators must always be able to determine their position with visual reference to the terrain, and to avoid other aircraft and obstructions. 1.10.1 Aerodrome Design and Reference Code Tinson Pen Aerodrome is defined as an ICAO Code 3C field, with a paved runway length of 1319m (4,326’), oriented along designations 14/32 (runway alignment—140˚/320˚ Magnetic), which accommodates general aviation aircraft, up to the size of a Bombardier Challenger aircraft (which requires a balanced field length 1,223m or 4,013’). 1.10.2 Declared Distances Current AIP Jamaica (AMDT 01/11 dated 31 AUG 11) data erroneously states that the strip is shorter than the runway: Strip dimensions -1218 x 80m vs runway – 1319 x 30m. 1.10.3 Visual Aids 1.10.3.1 There is no Visual Approach Slope Indicator System serving either runway (MAS Chapter 9: 9.4.5.1 refers). 1.10.3.2 AIP entry AMDT AD 01/14 dated 20 OCT 14: Approach & Runway Lighting advises: a) Coloured Wingbar runway-end lights serving RWY 14 as well as RWY 32; 6 Reference Datum: World Geodetic System - 1984