Originally Posted by
turboshafts
I fully agree with HeliComparator!
Seeing in the light of how the bereaved from former accidents
are feeling towards the openness of the investigation, it is high time
that there is put some pressure on it!
Not to leak, but to be frank, humble and correct in the statements made.
Up until now I have found several contradictions in the info stated by CHC
Also the need to have a public advisor present, and thus is hesitating to
the most extent to confirm or make clear any of the questions asked by the press.
This is not alone only the case with CHC, but also Statoil and
as well AH.
I'd just like to say a couple of comments re the above and helicompartor.
The AIBN is the investigation authority, no-one else. They areinvestigating a significant, complicated (beyond our laymans understanding)accident without all of the evidence available. Everything they publish is as a result of comprehensive expert analysis of factual evidence available to the investigation, not us. To suggest that they are 'hiding' (my paraphrase) facts shows a very clear misunderstanding of the process of air accident investigation.
Issues relating to immediate airworthiness are published when the evidence and analysis shows that the airworthiness of an aircraft type is in question. All of the issues that may show 'deficiencies' will be investigated and reported as appropriate in the final report.