Sarcs # 1330 –"Do we honestly believe that the bureau investigators, without FF involvement in this investigation, would have missed such an elementary and critical point on the erroneously transmitted 0630 METAR cloud base?
Yes, but; is this the only aberration within the documents? We could probably be convinced that a qualified, trained ATSB investigator managed to miss a single item in a draft report, we may even allow some latitude for an item being overlooked when a report is being cross checked during compilation. At a stretch we could even allow that the final edit before release missed one, solitary, albeit important item. This is (was) our trusted ATSB who's reports are relied on by Courts, Coroners and commoners alike. It is just within the realms of possibility that IF one such error was made. El Heffe's* famous 'man' at the back of the room may well accept an honest mistake, made in good faith, especially if the error was admitted to and corrected.
Is this what the Senate or industry is being asked to swallow?, what we appear to have here is layer upon layer of not quite believable 'evidence', obfuscation and rhetoric, presented to convince us that James, and only James is the sole cause of the incident. Having taken that stand at the beginning, CASA and ATSB are scrambling to justify it; irrespective of cost and hazard.
You know, I keep coming back to the why and the how of it?. Why take these incredible risks, publicly, on record, in the Parliament? How do you muzzle the honest folks who clearly understood the situation?: how do you even allow something like the Chambers missive to be written, let alone presented in evidence? (particularly given the 'unfortunate' anecdotal reputation of the writer). All high risk strategy - just the notion of someone being 'persuaded' to break silence, in camera, would keep me awake nights.
We and the Senate are being instructed that we are to accept not one, but several "inconsistencies" within a report. We are confronted with both the ATSB and CASA attempting, in Senate under oath to justify their position and bluff their way past a committee of the Senate in Parliament. This can only be seen as a high handed attempt to convince a jury that the not so well crafted fairy stories are scientifically established facts.
Common sense and a sense of humour are the same thing, moving at different speeds. A sense of humour is just common sense, dancing. William James.
Oh, by the by – I hear on the wind that there is to be an industry generated "Chambers Report", the crew doing it don't mess about or mince words, should be entertaining. More gossip, rumour and indeendtho from the BRB tonight I expect.