Dear Sir/Madam,
Regarding the article, "Diverting stricken plane wrong - doctors" by Ian Steward and Dan Hutchinson - The Press, I believe that the doctors involved have no basis nor understanding on any of the factors nor reasons for choosing to divert to Blenhiem instead of landing the aircraft in Wellington.
I am a pilot of a similar type of aircraft to the one involved, however I do not work for Air New Zealand nor Eagle Air.
Blenhiem was chosen in regards to several factors. The Air Traffic level at Blenhiem is much less than Wellington. Why risk putting further lives at risk with placing a aircraft in trouble into an already heavily congested area of airspace?
Wellington's runway is also bounded on both ends with the harbour. A undershoot or overshoot into the water would have a much bigger risk if the decision was taken to land at Wellignton. The outcome would have been unacceptable.
Blenhiem was the logical choice. Emergency helicopters and aircraft would have been on hand in Wellington to fly the injured to Wellington Hospital. This is less than a 30 minute flight.
Doctor Guy Gardiner has no experience in aeronautical decision making and this shows in his comments. He has no appreciation in the other factors involved in the landing of a damaged aircraft nor any appreication in the judgement used by the pilots in avoiding an accident and the use of his medical services in the first place.
Dr Gardiner's comments made my blood boil.
A letter to the editor is in order I think.
He should stick to what he does best, playing golf and charging exhurbant prices and leave aeronautical decision making to the proffessionals that are trained in and experienced at making those decisions.