PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Merged: Senate Inquiry
View Single Post
Old 24th Jan 2014, 19:42
  #1683 (permalink)  
Kharon
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rolling the dice in Vegas.

Spend some time and carefully examine the Len Veger statement, that which would have been presented at the AAT; if CASA legal had not smartly headed the proceedings off at the pass. It distresses me greatly that a 20, 000 hour pilot could sign his name to such deceptive, homespun claptrap. CASA couldn't even play fair with the fuel planning data even when they had James bang to rights. Make no mistake, the pilot error gun was indisputably well and truly loaded; in advance.

Veger is all 'legal', if extreme; of course. Truth carefully married with spin to provide an 'impression' designed to scare some lay AAT member witless. The slippery, narrow, spin carefully manufactured for the sole purpose of working against any pilot in the AAT potentially resets the benchmark. Much is made of the CASA version of proper assessment of PNR/CP (well at least those who could agree what it was). CASA would have by using the Veger statement essentially declared all sensible, operational bets off.

If we are to accept the CASA 'all things anticipated' (probable or possible) tenet, the accepted 10,000 (depressurised) datum for calculations goes out of the window (literally). Many medivac flights must be conducted with a MSL cabin; given that on any one day the MSL QNH may change by 20Mb x 30 = 600 feet, must we now plan for and descend to 500 for every medivac PNR. Find me an aircraft that can maintain a MSL cabin at 10,000' with a window blown out. Save you the headscratichin, there ain't one. (10 to minus six probability rings a bell, but you see where we are headed, if you play the game with the CASA loaded dice).

The Veger missive implies that PNR 'planning contingencies' for various, multiple failure scenario based examples not normally 'planned' are essential. What the CASA missive fails to mention is (as he well knows) that any PNR milestone is a little like V1; existing for but a fleeting moment. Once past any significant 'milestone' the options reset, tilt, new game. Ask any proper pilot who has flown long haul to describe PNR, a moveable feast conjured by black magic would be a fair assessment. You cannot, as Veger insists you must, plan for every possible circumstance imaginable. But not to do so is heinous says the Veger. (10 to minus six probability rings a bell, but you see where we are headed, if you play the game with the CASA loaded dice).

So then, suddenly, right at one of several possible "PNR" datum's, zero cabin differential: instant pressurisation failure. What is carefully not mentioned is that by the time the "oh close the front door" moment has passed, so has the PNR. Which reduces the turn back options somewhat.

CASA calculations fail (dismally IMO) to account for 'drift down' options. The Veger method calls for calculations based on instant figures for 10,000. So are you going to go for the emergency descent, or assess the entire situation? - there is of oxygen for the punters (say 20 or 30 minutes, just for a number). Can the descent be managed at a rate conducive to arriving a 10,000 (F140 if you know your stuff) just as the oxygen supply expires. Do the maths. F400 < A010 over 30 minutes = 1000 fpm,= power back = fuel saved, therefore SGR improved (30 minutes at even at 300 knots is 150 miles). So we arrive A010, first questions. What is the wind, what is our 'effective' TAS, what SGR are we making and how many miles are there left in the tanks. Do we need a MSL cabin?, speed reduction, LRC, MPC, what if, what then; when will it all end?.....What if can be played all day, and what happens to the best laid plans of mice and men when Murphy takes a hand? (10 to minus six probability rings a bell, but you see where we are headed, if you play the game with the CASA loaded dice). Correct answer Grasshopper; you're wrong, no matter how many calculations you did or did not do, you can't win.

It's this type of operational bollocks that James was to be fitted up with. Sure, James should have nutted out the basic milestones, but Veger very carefully omits the factors which don't suit the CASA pilot error argument and salts it with the esoteric. Mind you, he probably didn't write it all that way, some of the worked wording is easily discernable, paw prints, key words and phrases etc. Anyway Davis decimated the Veger fuel calculations, the erroneous Nadi Metar is conveniently forgotten. Did James make a bollocks of the flight planning – Yes. But the very one sided arguments espoused for the benefit of the AAT did not leave it there.

The Veger statement degenerates into a snide professional cruci-fiction. Past failures are carefully interwoven into a really ugly hand crafted assassination. The way the entire James/Pel Air debacle was managed is utterly despicable, without any semblance of honour, integrity or of plain old fashioned honesty. In court I believe that the prosecution is not allowed to mention previous crimes and may not get away with too many fairy tales; but to the CASA in the AAT all's fair. The prearranged, forgone conclusion barked out by the masters voice must be upheld, no matter what. Aye, the happy life of a willing accomplice eh.

Toot toot.
Kharon is offline