How unsafe is the ATSB?

[SIUYA]

Petropavlovsk …No-one is defending the ATSB Whyalla investigation report – it was less than competent.

But you draw a really long-bow in saying that everything after the Whyalla report was a fiasco.

Did you ever read the ATSB report into the 2003 IL-76 CFIT accident in East Timor?

That one was an absolutely top-class investigation report, and it was acknowledged in the ICAO Journal – see:

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2003/aair/aair200300263/

https://www.asasi.org/papers/2004/Barter%20et%20al_IL76_%20ISASI04.pdf

http://www.aaiu.ie/sites/default/files/ATSB%20Australia%20Controlled%20Flight%20into%20Terrain%20Il yushin%20IL-76%20RDPL-34141%20Bacau%20Timor%20Leste%202003-01-31.pdf

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/crew-errors-contributed-to-il-76-crash-183768/

The web has got MANY complimentary articles about that investigation. It set the scene for a lot of benchmarks on HOW a complex investigation COULD be managed in a remote location with LIMITED resources EFFECTIVELY to provide a top-class result.And, the report was issued in less than a year of the accident. So, with the right folks, ‘yes’, the ATSB was good at what it did.

Now? Not so sure.

But maybe you need to consider AND acknowledge that the ATSB DID have some very competent investigators at the time of the Whyalla report, who really DID know what they were doing, and ask WHY that’s no longer the case, instead of throwing **** at the good guys who left and then addressing WHY they left? I know a few of them and they are VERY bloody good operators...….and they still work in PNG!

You refer to the PNG AIC…..seen the good work that outfit is doing lately Petropavlosk? Somehow I don’t think so.