Are we to expect an amendment to CAO82 (i think it was 82?) with regards to the alternate requirements/"remote" aerodromes?
You may remember the ambiguity raised in the previous NLK threads, and the different interpretations. This accident may cause CASA to amend them to something more clear-cut.....
Especially considering it appears (from other reports) that the supposed CASA dispensation for Pel-Air to not carry alternate fuel on aeromed flights may have been a somewhat contributing factor. The words 'arse covering' come to mind now!
Bloggs, in regards to Hempy's post, I've got the feeling that he means as the plane is still 'accessible' (ie not completely destroyed into a million bits), then how come it hasn't been raised to the surface?
Probably cost- but one would think recovering it may also provide other useful information.
Lester, it appears that "people with Westwind knowledge" have differing views on how the gear stays up! Some have said no uplocks, and just recently it has been mentioned that they do... Doesn't help those with no knowledge figure out what is going on!