I agree with the general sentiment here that the ATSB report has a strange focus on irrelevant, plucked "statistics" that serve to make Angel Flight look bad.
However, from the first paragraph under the "Recommendations" heading in the Angel Flight response in the Australian is this:
The ATSB offered no safety recommendations to pilots flying light aircraft in bad weather.
and then:
It is regrettable, that the Bureau made no relevant safety recommendations, nor gave any guidance whatsoever, to pilots flying in poor weather conditions
WTF did they want the ATSB to say about this? How many times do the ATSB/CASA/NTSB/FAA/EASA/Flight Safety/etc have to tell people not to fly in IMC when they or their aircraft are rated to only fly in VMC?
Should the ATSB have said - "Pilots are reminded that they should remain VMC when they or their aircraft are NOT rated for flight in IMC - IMC is commonly recognised by NOT being able to see the ground and sky outside at the same time..."
FFS, I agree with most of what they have said in the article, but they do themselves no service by making silly statements like those...
Had Angel Flight offered any "safety recommendations to pilots flying light aircraft in bad weather."?? I think it's more their responsibility than the ATSB's...