Performance Pledge
Performance Pledge!!! This is one major root cause of this unfortunate accident, in concert with the organizational failures of management. Regardless of the severity of any casevac, is it responsible to put time pressure such as this Performance Pledge of "20 minutes to land on site" on aircrews? Nothing wrong with OTP, but it must be recognized that the pilot has little control of circumstances once airborne (ATC, Traffic, Weather etc.). Why was the pilot discussing the pressure of this Performance Pledge continuously throughout his journey to work and as recorded on the CVR? Obviously he (and maybe others still alive) had some problem with it. A pledge to be airborne within a reasonable time period would seem more appropriate and would allow the crews to be properly prepared for what awaits them. Search & Rescue and EMS crews are not immune to human failings and are just as susceptible to the same problems as any other aircrew. It is not good enough to say that the pilot made errors; it is deeper than that, and rests with those that made the policy. GFS is an ISO 9001 certified organization to which customer satisfaction is a main criteria. Did the HK Gov't institute this performance pledge to meet that criteria? Are the aircrews pressured just so an ISO standard can be measured? No mention in the accident report of interviews with the medical staff at Cheung Chau: why is it that there are an inordinate number (usually nightly) callouts to a single island? Are the callouts actually abusing the system and costing HK taxpayers (and in this case lives) unnecessarily? I think the Accident Report leaves a lot of open questions and was unsuccessful in deflecting the blame onto the pilot and crewman.