PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Was the Nomad really that bad?
View Single Post
Old 24th Mar 2016, 07:08
  #389 (permalink)  
GregP
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Australia
Age: 73
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by gerry111
GregP,


As you well know, the Nomad was manufactured by a Federal Government owned aerospace manufacturer: GAF which later became ASTA.


So I'm surprised that you, as a government employed investigator, were not privy to the kind of design data Lead Balloon refers to.


Did you ask for it?
When did say i was a "government employed investigator"? I'm not now, never have been and wish never to become any kind if government employee, thank you very much. Moreover, I'm relishing my well earnt retirement from practice.

If you cared to look at the foregoing posts you would see that i told of being 'briefed' (profession clue) to conduct the Inquiry into the crash of Army Nomad A303, not to investigate the design criteria etc. of the aircraft type generally.

Regrettably, because there were no witnesses to the crash of A303 i and the investigation team chased down every report of Nomad 'misbehavior' that we were able to identify in the hope that those alleged 'incidents' might shed some light onto what happened to A303. [They didn't in the least.] In the course of that lengthy process, I was able to 'lead evidence' (another professional clue) that all of the reports of abnormal ops and the film of the stabilator shaking were all of them completely confected.

[Frustratingly, there almost were direct eye witnesses to A303's crash but the two other aircraft in the flight, who were holding over the paddock waiting their turn to use it after A303, turned away from it and A303 a split second before the crash sequence began!]

It was no part of the Board of Inquiry's stipulated task (as per its 'Terms of Reference', which i wrote) to examine and report upon the adequacy or otherwise of its design characteristics -- the Inquiry went long enough thank you without having to spend yet further months on a generalized postmortem of the type! That was simply not our task.

[That year was a particularly harrowing one: only weeks later i conducted an Inquiry into the crash of a Porter at Jasper's Brush (killing and maiming a number of troops) -- less than four years later i was again involved in an Inquiry into the crash of the two Blackhawks west of Townsville .. retirement is a great deal more pleasant!]

But your post raises another regrettable aspect: In theses times of increasing awareness of 'cyber bullying' it is immensely disappointing to see that some people have apparently not yet got the message. What's happened here is that the earlier posts have been ignored, certain individuals have made completely unfounded assumptions and "wild speculation" which has then developed into vulgar slurs and reprehensible bullying.

Lifting of game is called for dear boy ...
GregP is offline