CASA, ATSB, AD's and other things
Centaurus - Just cast your mind back a little and look at Whyalla Air as an example of the regulator getting it wrong. Remember in this case, the argument did not go to crankshaft cracking/ metallurgical problems, but a fanciful new "deposit syndrome".
Whyalla occurred, there was an ATSB inquiry, there was a coroners inquiry [interesting reading -
http://www.airsafety.com.au/whyalla/d724find.htm], ABC report -
The World Today - Coroner overturns previous Whyalla airlines crash findings, there was a press release about the TIO-540 crankshafts which failed and the Senate enquiry [
http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/senate...ee/s7228.pdf]:
Then no action by CASA to restore / compensate Whyalla for CASA's action to ground Whyalla Airlines for something it did not do.
My question is about how ATSB got it so wrong and the subsequent report [
https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/24343/...157-A_001.pdf] and then the justification [
http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/27767/ar2007053.pdf] for methodology and a dismissal of the MZK accident, saying that the Coroner liked their report for Lockhart River.