Hawker Hunter down at Shoreham
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pitsextra
You have to read paragraph one and two together, basicly im saying that if you don't get a report right first time the ambulance chasing lawyers will rip the report apart resulting in the AAIB loosing credibility, so the answer to this is to take time to make sure the report is watertight.
The other issue is that once the report is written all the interested party's get to read the draft and comment, this may result in some parts being rewritten to correct of clarify some of the facts.
Unfortunatly in these times of 24 hour rolling news journalists with little understanding report things as if they were fact and the public digest this as fact and a matter of record ( I have also herd a radio journalist mis correct an AAIB report because they did not understand it !) so the AAIB takes time to ensure that what is written is as near the truth as is humanly posable.
It is much better for those affected by the situation to wait for a definitive report than have a report that has not fully covered all the issues and then have the pain of a controversy where the Journalists and lawyers can shout "cover up " just to line their own pockets.
The other issue is that once the report is written all the interested party's get to read the draft and comment, this may result in some parts being rewritten to correct of clarify some of the facts.
Unfortunatly in these times of 24 hour rolling news journalists with little understanding report things as if they were fact and the public digest this as fact and a matter of record ( I have also herd a radio journalist mis correct an AAIB report because they did not understand it !) so the AAIB takes time to ensure that what is written is as near the truth as is humanly posable.
It is much better for those affected by the situation to wait for a definitive report than have a report that has not fully covered all the issues and then have the pain of a controversy where the Journalists and lawyers can shout "cover up " just to line their own pockets.
I hear you A&C and I'm sure we are two sides of the same coin.
As a pilot we should be less interested in how lawyers earn there money than about the process that decides and governs how we and others fly. After all very often it takes an event that gets the AAIB involved for other pilots to even be made aware what goes on elsewhere with other spheres of aviation - yet at some point we are in the same sky.
The irony with the typical lawyer argument is that when you press someone for example it won't be long before Rogers v Hoyle gets thrown in there. Despite the aviation world getting its pants in a twist over the use of an AAIB report in court during the build up, ultimately it made no difference. The plaintiff's case ultimately was unsuccessful.
Its the same with this fashion of pointing a finger at the media when actually I don't think they are so terrible. Maybe they miss name a type of aircraft, maybe they use poor terminology in trying to describe events (stunt pilot, loop the loops and the the "B" is randomly switched in Air Accident Investigation... etc). That said is that the worst we suffer?
Maybe the "media' just listen to any summer Sunday RT and roll their eyes in confusion.. "Errr..Hullo...Golf....err.....request....errr....passin g.. err no overhead, etc."
I digress. The point is that yes there is 24hour news, internet feeds, social media. So why not produce robust and professional press releases? The AAIB could easily send out a release that sets out the work they are doing and when there will be an update. How hard can that be?
It seems very hard because with Glasgow they explained that they had a draft final and gave a very broad final release date - which they then missed! It was post that expectation and the continued silence that triggered others, including political figures, to get involved.
Looking at part of the Glasgow report (page 79 & 80 if you care to find it) talks about a 3-4 min delta between No1 and No2 engine flameout when in the event it was 32 seconds. How that sits in the mind of other 135 pilots and what their personal plan is in the event of OEI who knows but that kind of information is of a timely nature and its release nothing to do with the whims or desires of lawyers and the "media".
Who knows what Shoreham will uncover ultimately but the aviation community is served better and serves the public better if we get on with it and move beyond arguments as fundamental if it was even a 1/4 clover or not!
As a pilot we should be less interested in how lawyers earn there money than about the process that decides and governs how we and others fly. After all very often it takes an event that gets the AAIB involved for other pilots to even be made aware what goes on elsewhere with other spheres of aviation - yet at some point we are in the same sky.
The irony with the typical lawyer argument is that when you press someone for example it won't be long before Rogers v Hoyle gets thrown in there. Despite the aviation world getting its pants in a twist over the use of an AAIB report in court during the build up, ultimately it made no difference. The plaintiff's case ultimately was unsuccessful.
Its the same with this fashion of pointing a finger at the media when actually I don't think they are so terrible. Maybe they miss name a type of aircraft, maybe they use poor terminology in trying to describe events (stunt pilot, loop the loops and the the "B" is randomly switched in Air Accident Investigation... etc). That said is that the worst we suffer?
Maybe the "media' just listen to any summer Sunday RT and roll their eyes in confusion.. "Errr..Hullo...Golf....err.....request....errr....passin g.. err no overhead, etc."
I digress. The point is that yes there is 24hour news, internet feeds, social media. So why not produce robust and professional press releases? The AAIB could easily send out a release that sets out the work they are doing and when there will be an update. How hard can that be?
It seems very hard because with Glasgow they explained that they had a draft final and gave a very broad final release date - which they then missed! It was post that expectation and the continued silence that triggered others, including political figures, to get involved.
Looking at part of the Glasgow report (page 79 & 80 if you care to find it) talks about a 3-4 min delta between No1 and No2 engine flameout when in the event it was 32 seconds. How that sits in the mind of other 135 pilots and what their personal plan is in the event of OEI who knows but that kind of information is of a timely nature and its release nothing to do with the whims or desires of lawyers and the "media".
Who knows what Shoreham will uncover ultimately but the aviation community is served better and serves the public better if we get on with it and move beyond arguments as fundamental if it was even a 1/4 clover or not!
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like you would prefer if accident investigation was just an aviation technical issue but unfortunately there are others who want to stir the pot for there own ends, the AAIB is not and should not be put under pressure from anyone to publish until they have the report as close to the facts as posable.
This is inconvenent for politicians , journalists and lawyers who all have agendas that are unlikely to be in the intrest of flight safety.
My view was also held by late wife (PPL/IMC/Night) who started her career as a journalist, in her opinion air accident investigation was far too important to be swayed by any of the above mentioned professions by rushing out a report and getting some of it wrong or having it written in a manor that can be misinterpreted.
My guess is in the case of the Glasgow helicopter accident much political pressure was applied and just as the AAIB had announced a publication date new evidence came to light, the resulting delay needed for reevaluation of the facts resulted in a missed publication deadline, naturally that women from the SNP was all over this for self promotion purposes and the AAIB ended up looking less than professional............ Well it is the last time they will do that !
This is inconvenent for politicians , journalists and lawyers who all have agendas that are unlikely to be in the intrest of flight safety.
My view was also held by late wife (PPL/IMC/Night) who started her career as a journalist, in her opinion air accident investigation was far too important to be swayed by any of the above mentioned professions by rushing out a report and getting some of it wrong or having it written in a manor that can be misinterpreted.
My guess is in the case of the Glasgow helicopter accident much political pressure was applied and just as the AAIB had announced a publication date new evidence came to light, the resulting delay needed for reevaluation of the facts resulted in a missed publication deadline, naturally that women from the SNP was all over this for self promotion purposes and the AAIB ended up looking less than professional............ Well it is the last time they will do that !
Sims Fly Virtually
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Used to be 3rd Sand Dune from the Left - But now I'm somewhere else somewhere else.
Posts: 704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A & C
Sorry to hear that (PPL/IMC/Night) is now "late" - sounds like she was a wise lady 
- we could do with more journos like her.
ExSim
- we could do with more journos like her. ExSim
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,623
Received 294 Likes
on
162 Posts
As a pilot
Give us a clue to your qualifications then? I witnessed Shoreham first hand. Let the AAIB do their stuff in their own time. Please.
Was helicopter crash pilot 'under pressure' to complete flight? - Get Surrey
The day before the tragedy Mr Barnes had flown for the East Midlands air ambulance, the inquest heard.
In a handover phone call to fellow air ambulance pilot Shaun Tinkler-Rose, he said he was under "extreme pressure" to carry out a job picking up a private client, Richard Caring, from Elstree in Hertfordshire to take him to a shooting party in Yorkshire.
Mr Tinkler-Rose told the inquest: "Probably 80% of the conversation was that he wasn't going to fly - 20% of the conversation regarding the weather was that, in his exact words, he may 'give it a go' and go up to Elstree and make some noise."
"The overall gist I got from the conversation was that he didn't really want to fly.
"When we finished the conversation I was pretty much under the impression that he wasn't going to fly."
Mr Tinkler-Rose added Mr Barnes had told him he was tired of the pressures of the private helicopter industry and wanted to move into the environment of private jets.
"He did actually say that he was under pressure on the day to fly," Mr Tinkler-Rose said.
"He wasn't showing outward signs of worry, but he was a little bit cheesed off."
But Mr Barnes was "extremely experienced" in charter operations, he added, saying he was known as "the guru" to "everybody in the industry" and that he was extremely good with clients and always tried to fulfil his obligations to them.
Mr Barnes' vast experience allowed him to safely take risks that less experienced pilots would not, Mr Tinkler-Rose said.
After discussing the weather that morning, Mr Tinkler-Rose told the inquest he had advised Mr Barnes to "bin" the flight.
In a handover phone call to fellow air ambulance pilot Shaun Tinkler-Rose, he said he was under "extreme pressure" to carry out a job picking up a private client, Richard Caring, from Elstree in Hertfordshire to take him to a shooting party in Yorkshire.
Mr Tinkler-Rose told the inquest: "Probably 80% of the conversation was that he wasn't going to fly - 20% of the conversation regarding the weather was that, in his exact words, he may 'give it a go' and go up to Elstree and make some noise."
"The overall gist I got from the conversation was that he didn't really want to fly.
"When we finished the conversation I was pretty much under the impression that he wasn't going to fly."
Mr Tinkler-Rose added Mr Barnes had told him he was tired of the pressures of the private helicopter industry and wanted to move into the environment of private jets.
"He did actually say that he was under pressure on the day to fly," Mr Tinkler-Rose said.
"He wasn't showing outward signs of worry, but he was a little bit cheesed off."
But Mr Barnes was "extremely experienced" in charter operations, he added, saying he was known as "the guru" to "everybody in the industry" and that he was extremely good with clients and always tried to fulfil his obligations to them.
Mr Barnes' vast experience allowed him to safely take risks that less experienced pilots would not, Mr Tinkler-Rose said.
After discussing the weather that morning, Mr Tinkler-Rose told the inquest he had advised Mr Barnes to "bin" the flight.
The inquest was told that in the weeks prior to the accident, Mr Caring had argued with another pilot from RotorMotion, either over a diverted flight or his perceived general attitude.
It was then decided that only Mr Barnes or owner and chief pilot Philip Amadeus would fly him in future.
It was then decided that only Mr Barnes or owner and chief pilot Philip Amadeus would fly him in future.
Then consider that this accident happened in Jan 2013 and then in March 2014 G-LBAL crashed. Its report contained this gem:-
Decision making
In its report of the accident involving a commercially operated complex helicopter
(7)the AAIB noted that:
‘...pilots will often be subject to pressures – real or perceived – to complete a
task. These pressures might lead pilots to continue with flights in circumstances
where otherwise they would not...’
Discussion with industry participants during the investigation of the accident involving
G-LBAL indicates that increased regulation is not a complete solution if these pressures cause pilots to operate a flight in violation of the regulations, and that mitigating the pressures themselves is necessary to improve safety.
Footnote7
Report on the accident to Agusta A109E, G-CRST, near Vauxhall Bridge, Central London on 16 January2013.
In its report of the accident involving a commercially operated complex helicopter
(7)the AAIB noted that:
‘...pilots will often be subject to pressures – real or perceived – to complete a
task. These pressures might lead pilots to continue with flights in circumstances
where otherwise they would not...’
Discussion with industry participants during the investigation of the accident involving
G-LBAL indicates that increased regulation is not a complete solution if these pressures cause pilots to operate a flight in violation of the regulations, and that mitigating the pressures themselves is necessary to improve safety.
Footnote7
Report on the accident to Agusta A109E, G-CRST, near Vauxhall Bridge, Central London on 16 January2013.
Of course until then we had the usual flaming of anyone who dared to speculate on the why's and wherefores.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Truth, justice & Legal decisions plus a mix of politics
Courts in the UK are nothing to do with truth or justice, they are constructed to find legal decistions.
Being as one side has to prove a point and the other repute it the story's you will get from the prosecution lawyer will paint an entirely different picture than the defence lawyer and that is precicly why you can't trust what the lawyers say, with this in mind we have a jury that hopefully sees through the legal profession twisting the truth and gives a sound verdict.
Once politicians get involved things get worse, following the crash of a Cypriot airliner the Cypriot courts tried three of the directors of the airline and found them not guilty, during the investigation the Cypriot authorities looked at all involved and decided there were no further cases to answer. Because the aircraft crashed into a Greek hill the Greek courts needed to find guilty person, they wanted to try the three airline directors but could not do this as EU legislation prevents trial for the same offence in two jurisdictions. So what do they do ? Spend years trying to convict a licensed engineer who the Cypriots did no think had a case to answer. All this because the crew who made a number of mistakes were dead and could not face a court. To crown the issue the Greeks also breached EU & international law by attempting to use data from the flight safety investigation to try the engineer. Fortunately after years of chasing the engineer the case ended as the Greeks realised that there was a good chance all of europes flight deck unions would put a ban in the place and stop the tourists with the money visiting.
Justice ? Is it Justice when a court finds a person who has over medicated a late stage terminally ill loved one in order to put them out of their pain guilty of murder ? Unfortunately a murder conviction is what they will get !
I think Mr Pittsextra you might see what happens when Lawyers, courts and politicians get involved with flight safety, have a misguided journalist stir the pot and the first victim is the truth.
Fortunately the UN via ICAO & the EU split accident investigation from all the party's with their own agenda and try to ensure ( despite the worst efforts of the Greeks) that information disclosed in an accident is not used to prosecute anyone, this results in people disclosing things that their lawyers would stay silent about. This serves the cause of flight safety very well and is a pain in the butt to those with agendas.
Truth ? Well you won't get it from the courts, all you get is a leagal decision, you won't get it from a politician unless it serves their career and journalists won't let the truth get in the way of a good headline.
If you truly want the truth then the only place to get it is from the AAIB or NTSB as the only axe they have to grind is air safety.
As for Justice ? How can there be any justice for the people who unconnected with the air show at Shoreham had a jet land on them just because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time ?.........There can't ! But closure for the bereaved can only come with the full truth and you won't get that by rushing the AAIB into putting out a half baked report.
Being as one side has to prove a point and the other repute it the story's you will get from the prosecution lawyer will paint an entirely different picture than the defence lawyer and that is precicly why you can't trust what the lawyers say, with this in mind we have a jury that hopefully sees through the legal profession twisting the truth and gives a sound verdict.
Once politicians get involved things get worse, following the crash of a Cypriot airliner the Cypriot courts tried three of the directors of the airline and found them not guilty, during the investigation the Cypriot authorities looked at all involved and decided there were no further cases to answer. Because the aircraft crashed into a Greek hill the Greek courts needed to find guilty person, they wanted to try the three airline directors but could not do this as EU legislation prevents trial for the same offence in two jurisdictions. So what do they do ? Spend years trying to convict a licensed engineer who the Cypriots did no think had a case to answer. All this because the crew who made a number of mistakes were dead and could not face a court. To crown the issue the Greeks also breached EU & international law by attempting to use data from the flight safety investigation to try the engineer. Fortunately after years of chasing the engineer the case ended as the Greeks realised that there was a good chance all of europes flight deck unions would put a ban in the place and stop the tourists with the money visiting.
Justice ? Is it Justice when a court finds a person who has over medicated a late stage terminally ill loved one in order to put them out of their pain guilty of murder ? Unfortunately a murder conviction is what they will get !
I think Mr Pittsextra you might see what happens when Lawyers, courts and politicians get involved with flight safety, have a misguided journalist stir the pot and the first victim is the truth.
Fortunately the UN via ICAO & the EU split accident investigation from all the party's with their own agenda and try to ensure ( despite the worst efforts of the Greeks) that information disclosed in an accident is not used to prosecute anyone, this results in people disclosing things that their lawyers would stay silent about. This serves the cause of flight safety very well and is a pain in the butt to those with agendas.
Truth ? Well you won't get it from the courts, all you get is a leagal decision, you won't get it from a politician unless it serves their career and journalists won't let the truth get in the way of a good headline.
If you truly want the truth then the only place to get it is from the AAIB or NTSB as the only axe they have to grind is air safety.
As for Justice ? How can there be any justice for the people who unconnected with the air show at Shoreham had a jet land on them just because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time ?.........There can't ! But closure for the bereaved can only come with the full truth and you won't get that by rushing the AAIB into putting out a half baked report.
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,623
Received 294 Likes
on
162 Posts
Thanks for that insightful value add
As for Justice ? How can there be any justice for the people who unconnected with the air show at Shoreham had a jet land on them just because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time ?.........There can't ! But closure for the bereaved can only come with the full truth and you won't get that by rushing the AAIB into putting out a half baked report.
I repeat. I witnessed Shoreham first hand. I await the AAIB report because they will provide a factual report based on the available evidence when all the requirements have been met.
Last edited by treadigraph; 27th Nov 2015 at 23:55.
Well said A and C. It is well to remember that a law court is a court of law. It is not a court of justice and neither it is a court of morals. In law it is permissible to starve or dehydrate a brain dead patient to death but not to administer a drug to terminate their life. And what A and C says about the lawyers versus the AAIB or similar body is absolutely correct.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How can there be any justice for the people who unconnected with the air show at Shoreham had a jet land on them just because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time ?
What 99% of people mean, these days, when they call for "justice" for someone, is some kind of revenge or retribution, and I'm fairly certain that this is what you have in mind. But revenge should never be confused with justice.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capot
All living languages move on, as apposed to dead languages like Latin, so meanings of words slowly change sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse, sometimes it is because of the wish to sound as if user has spcalist knowlage, the careless use of "runway" by the more talentless members of the press when describing any part of an airfield is a good example.
The term justice is now being used to mean a moral outcome rather than a judicial outcome and it is in those terms that I used the term justice.
Murder is the correct judicial term for the mercy killing I described in my post above but most people would not see someone driven to such actions as a murderer in the criminal sence.
The people who died at Shoreham who totally unconnected with the air show and just happened to be in the wrong place had a great moral injustice done to them, through no fault whatsoever they died, it is in those terms I use ( or may be misuse) the term justice.
This is all a bit academic as it is playing on the dynamic use of modern language and its meaning, but one thing about all of this is that the only thing that will bring any closure to the bereaved is knowing the truth of the situation. That truth can only be delivered if it is uncorrupted buy the influence of those with axes to grind or money to make.
The term justice is now being used to mean a moral outcome rather than a judicial outcome and it is in those terms that I used the term justice.
Murder is the correct judicial term for the mercy killing I described in my post above but most people would not see someone driven to such actions as a murderer in the criminal sence.
The people who died at Shoreham who totally unconnected with the air show and just happened to be in the wrong place had a great moral injustice done to them, through no fault whatsoever they died, it is in those terms I use ( or may be misuse) the term justice.
This is all a bit academic as it is playing on the dynamic use of modern language and its meaning, but one thing about all of this is that the only thing that will bring any closure to the bereaved is knowing the truth of the situation. That truth can only be delivered if it is uncorrupted buy the influence of those with axes to grind or money to make.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the context of the victim of an accident, I imagine "justice" as being the public acknowledgement that in some way, a member of society failed to protect the victim. I say this in the most broad sense possible, rather than the specific placing a shield in front of the victim to be the moment before the event.
In this case, a pilot erred somehow, so directly, that pilot failed to protect a fellow citizen. But more than that, there was a failure of imagination as to what could happen. Were the imagination of the show organizers and regulators to have been effective, they both would have acted before hand in their role, to limit or otherwise cause the conditions so no one would be in the path of an aircraft in uncontrolled flight.
The AAIB will take its time to carefully evaluate the role of everyone in this event, not just the pilot. The result will be a report, which will very certainly include recommendations as to how this type of accident could be prevented in the future. Pilot action will likely be one or a few of them, but not all. The "justice" will be the enacting of those recommendations for future events. That will sound draconian - "More rules!
" everyone will cry. But the new rules became necessary to assure "justice" where the actions of a pilot, and the failure to imagine of the organizers, resulted in gross injustice.
Revenge is pointless, this was an accident. Accountability? That's what the lawyers will fight about in court!
In this case, a pilot erred somehow, so directly, that pilot failed to protect a fellow citizen. But more than that, there was a failure of imagination as to what could happen. Were the imagination of the show organizers and regulators to have been effective, they both would have acted before hand in their role, to limit or otherwise cause the conditions so no one would be in the path of an aircraft in uncontrolled flight.
The AAIB will take its time to carefully evaluate the role of everyone in this event, not just the pilot. The result will be a report, which will very certainly include recommendations as to how this type of accident could be prevented in the future. Pilot action will likely be one or a few of them, but not all. The "justice" will be the enacting of those recommendations for future events. That will sound draconian - "More rules!
" everyone will cry. But the new rules became necessary to assure "justice" where the actions of a pilot, and the failure to imagine of the organizers, resulted in gross injustice.Revenge is pointless, this was an accident. Accountability? That's what the lawyers will fight about in court!
I would think that the AAIB have been snowed under this year. Stop for a minute and consider the number of cases that are under investigation at the present time. Their resources are not infinitesimal.
Last edited by OUAQUKGF Ops; 1st Dec 2015 at 11:03.
Lawyers and the so called "media" are going to do what they are going to do regardless of the date of a report - timely or otherwise.
Nobody is pushing for inaccuracies, nobody is suggesting a grand conspiracy and I'm surprised there is push back over better communication and faster reporting given the intended purpose of accident reporting. Timely reporting and good communication would seem front and centre to me.
In fact given the recent "head of communications" appointment at the AAIB I don't think they are oblivious to that need.
The helicopter reports were referenced in this Shoreham thread as an example of why time and communication matters.
G-WIWI was subject to an AAIB investigation over an incident that occurred in May 2012.
Some 18 months later there is an AAIB report and one safety recommendation is 2014-035 that relates to helicopter operation in IMC.
Sadly before the AAIB publish that report both G-CRST had crashed in London and G-LBAL in Norfolk.
When the G-LBAL AAIB report gets published the prior safety recommendation 2014-035 is once again referenced and the CAA have a 1st October 2015 target for response. (which was already knowingly been missed by the AAIB because the G-LBAL report was published October 8th!) But regardless, guess what we are still waiting for that Oct 1 response.
The police helicopter accident in Glasgow highlighted a difference of minutes between reality and published data in fuel starvation between engines. So time does matter.
The inquest currently ongoing over G-CRST has witnessed differing emphasis on the pressures the pilot faced but of course it's almost 3 years since events - perhaps things can be blurred over that time? I guess it doesn't help the families affected, doesn't change events but again I think it shows time matters.
The proof of the continued failings here will be if (and read that word if) the Shoreham report comes it follows that trend set by those previously referenced helicopter reports, which is this. It becomes apparent quite early on that the failures point toward human not mechanical failures. A great deal of time passes before that is confirmed and in the meantime we see a paralysis whilst everyone contemplates their navel hiding behind a narrative which is " let's wait for the final report" which whilst absolutely appropriate they seem to have no incentive / desire to resource that process to ensure its publication is sooner rather than later.
Recent posts from others here give a better illustration
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/547...ml#post9198727
Nobody is pushing for inaccuracies, nobody is suggesting a grand conspiracy and I'm surprised there is push back over better communication and faster reporting given the intended purpose of accident reporting. Timely reporting and good communication would seem front and centre to me.
In fact given the recent "head of communications" appointment at the AAIB I don't think they are oblivious to that need.
The helicopter reports were referenced in this Shoreham thread as an example of why time and communication matters.
G-WIWI was subject to an AAIB investigation over an incident that occurred in May 2012.
Some 18 months later there is an AAIB report and one safety recommendation is 2014-035 that relates to helicopter operation in IMC.
Sadly before the AAIB publish that report both G-CRST had crashed in London and G-LBAL in Norfolk.
When the G-LBAL AAIB report gets published the prior safety recommendation 2014-035 is once again referenced and the CAA have a 1st October 2015 target for response. (which was already knowingly been missed by the AAIB because the G-LBAL report was published October 8th!) But regardless, guess what we are still waiting for that Oct 1 response.
The police helicopter accident in Glasgow highlighted a difference of minutes between reality and published data in fuel starvation between engines. So time does matter.
The inquest currently ongoing over G-CRST has witnessed differing emphasis on the pressures the pilot faced but of course it's almost 3 years since events - perhaps things can be blurred over that time? I guess it doesn't help the families affected, doesn't change events but again I think it shows time matters.
The proof of the continued failings here will be if (and read that word if) the Shoreham report comes it follows that trend set by those previously referenced helicopter reports, which is this. It becomes apparent quite early on that the failures point toward human not mechanical failures. A great deal of time passes before that is confirmed and in the meantime we see a paralysis whilst everyone contemplates their navel hiding behind a narrative which is " let's wait for the final report" which whilst absolutely appropriate they seem to have no incentive / desire to resource that process to ensure its publication is sooner rather than later.
Recent posts from others here give a better illustration
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/547...ml#post9198727
Last edited by Pittsextra; 2nd Dec 2015 at 19:01. Reason: Link to other thread
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The rush to publish ?
It is very easy to want to rush to publish a report and I do have some sympathy with the argument that witness statements may become blurred with time, however as the witnesses are usually interviewed quickly and statements taken it is likely that any re-interview will find things forgotten in the heat of the moment and/or with other evidence gathered bring a different understanding to the situation.
It is mature reflection of the facts that is needed in air safety investigation not a rush to provide a sound bite for the 24 hour media to misinterpret.
It is mature reflection of the facts that is needed in air safety investigation not a rush to provide a sound bite for the 24 hour media to misinterpret.
Perhaps the important question, not being asked, is "is AAIB being adequately resourced to report as quickly as the aviation community would prefer, as accurately as the aviation community requires".
I suspect that the answer is increasingly "no" - not least because it is also, far too seldom now, publishing any broader reviews of accidents with collective recommendations - that has happened in the past and was a Good Thing, but unless I'm missing something, really isn't happening nowadays.
I appreciate that we have a government busy trying to drive down public sector costs, but aviation does need a competent and adequately resourced accident investigation body, just as it also needs a similarly provided authority. Not having either is causing everybody to suffer.
I'm not proposing that safety is being immediately compromised by lack of resources - but maybe in the longer term it is. Perhaps we need a law whereby the AAIB can bill aircraft insurers for all or part of the cost of investigating accidents - that'll pass the cost on to us as aircraft operators, but it would be a mechanism that resources AAIB better, and keeps t'government happy about the use of taxpayers' money?
G
I suspect that the answer is increasingly "no" - not least because it is also, far too seldom now, publishing any broader reviews of accidents with collective recommendations - that has happened in the past and was a Good Thing, but unless I'm missing something, really isn't happening nowadays.
I appreciate that we have a government busy trying to drive down public sector costs, but aviation does need a competent and adequately resourced accident investigation body, just as it also needs a similarly provided authority. Not having either is causing everybody to suffer.
I'm not proposing that safety is being immediately compromised by lack of resources - but maybe in the longer term it is. Perhaps we need a law whereby the AAIB can bill aircraft insurers for all or part of the cost of investigating accidents - that'll pass the cost on to us as aircraft operators, but it would be a mechanism that resources AAIB better, and keeps t'government happy about the use of taxpayers' money?
G
Last edited by Genghis the Engineer; 4th Dec 2015 at 10:35.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given the number of nasty incidents this year, it is a great shame the AAIB isn't as resourced as it should be. And now we find the MORs are being restricted as well thanks to some EASA rule.
As pilots we aren't like journalists, but tend to use the reports to help in a safety culture. We need as much info as possible
As pilots we aren't like journalists, but tend to use the reports to help in a safety culture. We need as much info as possible