The ATSB report (when it eventually is released) on this matter is going to be fascinating.
Based on nothing but what I have read in the various threads dealing with the matter I suspect that it will show that when the flight departed Samoa for Norfolk Island it was legal and did not require an alternate due to weather.
I suspect that it will also show that despite the company, either having a dispensation from carrying alternate fuel to a remote island or it was not required due to the fact that the flight was under the airwork category, that it did have sufficient fuel to reach an alternate up to the point about top of descent into Norfolk Island.
The huge question in my mind is why did the pilots decide to carry on with that descent in the knowledge that the conditions at Norfolk Island had deteriorated below the alternate minima? This action committed them to landing at Norfolk Island, one way or another rather than diverting to Noumea.
Now I could easily be wrong on the last point. The pilots may not have know the weather had deteriorated until after they were committed to Norfolk Island. If that is the case then the pilot's licence should never have been pulled. If the former was the case then there is a very strong case for the CASA intervention.
Bring on the report.
Last edited by PLovett; 7th Aug 2010 at 08:34.
Reason: Spelling mong!