In the absence of fresh material, a ramble, (revisit) with your forbearance, in an attempt to answer for Slats 11 one of the many very good, if vexed questions, which remain unanswered.
Slats -"All very odd. Did the AOC change between March 2008 and November 2009? If so, how? During a period when CASA was closely monitoring the operator."
That, along with hints that only six monthly AOC were being issued, up until the 'new' CASA management of Pel Air took over the reigns and smoothed things out begs some interesting questions, which are probably 'awkward' to answer. We must turn to history, which goes back to before the illusion of change, albeit temporary, window dressing of the Chief pilot shuffle, to assist with speculation.
One of the 'problems' the Senate committee had was a very narrow window to wriggle in through. They did a stellar job within the framework provided but were focussed, quite rightly on the ditching only. What the committee managed to reveal – within the confines of their remit – was the tip of an iceberg. We must speculate from here on, but it's reasonable to assume that what they uncovered did truly offend them, hence the call for a deeper inquiry into the 'operations' and actions of CASA within a wider framework.
To be fair, Xenophon (bless) had NFI things were in such a state and was concerned with the surface issues; like everyone else not directly connected to industry. He assumed the government agencies involved were reasonably honest and competent. By the time the awful truth dawned it was too late. The Senate crew initiated the inquiry and had it not been for some solid work from external sources, may never have penetrated the smoke, mirrors and highly polished surface layers of Teflon. The Senate crew only got a glimpse of the beast, but it was enough to call for more and deeper inquiry. The simple fact that the Senate generated some 20 odd scathing recommendations supports the construct. I for one believe what the Senate crew saw, lurking behind the bluff, bluster and spin scared them; it scared industry experts and Fawcett (gods luv 'im) must be counted amongst the 'expert' group. Industry is indeed lucky to have masters Fawcett and Xenophon in the Senate.
The entire Pel Air 'thing' was heading towards a disaster, expanded reference and set to do some serious damage; had it not been for the minuscule and the WLR. It's reasonable to assume that all would be revealed through further Senate inquiry, given the amount and quality of 'evidence' which would be provided. The WLR derailed that wagon, wasted a lot of time and money and despite using a hand picked crew, the WLR still managed to add further fuel to the fire. Now the minuscule had, and still has two potential train wrecks to deal with. Perhaps he believes time will make them go away – news flash – No way.
So Slats, here we sit; should there be a 'proper' open, unrestricted inquiry into the way CASA do business? I believe so. Just one of the more lethal elements will be a comparison drawn between the 'management' of three issues; Pel Air, Airtex and Skymaster. Once you start down that road, Hempel, Quadrio, Barrier, Polar and many, many others are all waiting to greet the traveller, it is not a lonely road. Any half way decent, open, without fear analysis into that handful of case studies is quite capable of fully supporting not only the Senate recommendations, but those of the Forsyth review and demanding more change to system which is not only morally bankrupt, incompetent and dangerous, but has in it's current configuration the potential to cause a FAA downgrade of Australia.
I am not a great believer in the 'smoking hole' theory as a catalyst for change; I do believe the massive economic and social damage being caused by the 'system' will be the harbinger for change as the 'system' and those entrenched within it, slowly, but inevitably strangle the industry.
Was the whole Pel Air thing on the nose, including AOC and compliance with?– In my opinion, on the balance of probability Yes. Was "AWK" category a red herring?, more than likely. Was there a move to lead the Senate committee away from these 'sensitive' areas?; IMO, Yes, beyond all reasonable doubt. Will there be a call from the Senate for a deeper, wider investigation? – well Sir; to my mind, that is the only part of the whole worthy of question and speculation.
What's that old thing about "he who builds on sand". Aye well, enough. The coffee pot sings it's siren song.
Selah._.