Phearless Phelan has rehashed a classic article covering the 'other' side of the fence take on the causal chain of the Whyalla tragedy...
:
Hot Spots – Whyalla accident revisited
Now most would agree that the ATSB Whyalla investigation was (prior to 2008..
) not one of the bureau's finest hours in AAI..
It was also probably about the time that FF began to believe they were untouchable when it came to heavyhanded
enforcement action post accident/incident. It was also probably the start of their standard
modus operandi of burying an unfavourable third tier operator (LCRPT/Charter)..
PP article quote:
In a post-accident pattern of behaviour now familiar to the general aviation industry, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) launched a series of post-accident “special audits,” interviewing various individuals including a former chief pilot (who had been dismissed six weeks earlier for alleged misconduct not related to his aviation duties); the chief pilot of another operator; and the bereaved partner of the deceased pilot.
You can read the rest of the text on FF's actions/shennanigans...best summed up by stating
.."GROUNDHOG DAY!" 
But I diverge...at the tailend of the PP article there is a link which takes you to a critique/analysis of the ATSB Whyalla report, plus a couple of more plausible scenarios for the accident itself:
Pelican's Perch #57:
The Whyalla Report — Junk Science?
Many on here have probably read, or can vaguely remember reading..
, this John Deakin article but for old time's sake it is well worth refreshing the memory. Needless to say (with a title like that) Deakin does not hold back in lambasting the ATSB final report...
:
In December, 2001, the ATSB (Australian Transport Safety Bureau, similar to the U.S.'s NTSB) published one of the worst accident reports I can remember reading.
In my opinion, the ATSB has taken junk science, pure speculation and profound ignorance to levels seldom before seen. They have not only perpetuated "Old Wives' Tales," but they have invented a few new ones. I'm afraid we'll be hearing about "lead oxybromide deposits" for all eternity. As best I can tell, that term seems to have been INVENTED in this accident report. (Try a search on the Internet for "lead oxybromide"!)
So here is a thought..
..maybe, at the time, the bureau had got too big for its boots?? And then after the resounding pizzling they got over Whyalla followed by their subsequent back-peddling on the Final Report conclusions we had set our safety watchdog on the downward spiral to today's insipid...'
beyond all sensible reason' (BASR..
)..politically correct..penny pinching...lapdog bureau that we have today!
Food for thought: Hmm..maybe if they had swallowed their pride, spent some money and called in the experts we would still have a credible AAI??