Originally Posted by
Ixixly
Bend Alot, all well and good, how do you know it was an open Entry and that a LAME didn't go out with the fuel to sign it off? How do you know there was no Flight Permit thusly issued to get it off the highway and back to Broome? It didn't land and take off within a 15minute window, you think someone couldn't have gotten hold of CASA especially with the dang thing sitting on a Highway? You don't think CASA themselves would have been pretty quick to call up themselves? I've had to call a Pan Pan before and CASA had already called up my Chief Pilot to let him know about it before my wheels touched the ground again about 20mins after making the call.
Pretty sure with an Aircraft sitting on a Highway that CASA would have been very keen to make sure there was an appropriate response and a LAME and others getting out there ASAP to figure out what state it was in, whether everyone was safe and then what would be required to get it off said Highway right smart, LAME gets out there, determines whatever the issue was, signs it off and being fine for the short flight back to Broome, CASA are called and give the ok and away it goes. Nowhere in the report does it state it was flown with an open MR entry nor whether it was checked before that or not, you're assuming from that fact that they didn't specify that a LAME went out at that time to refuel it that therefore none did.
CAsA would not give a rats about any inconvenience to traffic hold ups on the remote road.
The ATSB would have included in their report to date of any maintenance carried out to determine airworthiness and such findings (such as they did with water based contamination) prior to and after refuel. They have not and if you suggest they have not seen the MR or asked if the aircraft was inspected prior to that flight, then you don't know how these investigations happen.
Mention in the report would have mentioned a flight under a Permit issued by CAsA or a delegate - it was not.
No I don't think CAsA would have been pretty quick to call them up, it takes some time for rumours to hit CAsA and who would have been contacted Perth or Darwin? - well not Darwin or it would still be on the road! Perth traffic is wonderful, do a u turn when you get to your driveway and go back to the office. A Special Flight Permit is not a 5 minute job and it requires specific information current hours as parked on the road, serial numbers of airframe, engines and props details of what happened and from memory even a copy of the MR. The SFP is then required to be attached to the MR and its details written on the MR. The SFP requires what needs to be done prior to flight and a LAME to say the aircraft is safe for flight.
Now the problem is what is required to be done for such an event? I don't have a C441 manual in front of me but I do have them (may not be current). But there is no reference in the Manufactures Approved Data for inspections required for "running out of fuel" that I recall.
So that makes it very hard to sign off an entry that should have been put in the MR by a LAME.
Are the airframe fuel pumps to be changed/inspected/overhauled?
Does the aircraft need to be fully fuelled to inspect for leaks?
Does the fuel system need to be bleed?
I have had aircraft run out of fuel before and the insistence of there being enough fuel for the flights has required massive maintenance inspections and tests (said aircraft suffered damage to fuel tanks so quantity could not be physically checked).
CAsA would also be waiting to hear of ATSB intentions before any consideration of issue of a SFP.
Any info on the CAsA branch attendance at the Broome inspection and the date of the inspection?