Keep winding CC, the jack will eventually come out of the box...

You talking to me?
 

I haven't read anything in particular targeting me but that is not to say that someone or other didn't put something up and then take it back down again, so that I just thought I had better check to make sure. If you (you know who I mean) did put something up and then take it back down, you had better put it up again so that I can demand that you take it back down, otherwise I am going to be very upset with you!

As to the Queen of Sheba, I flew with her as my FO in a Cessna 441, until I told her that she was not going to be allowed to smoke in the cockpit. At that point she burst into flames so that our trip from Lagos to Sokoto only took ten minutes, a new record. Last I heard, she had gone west.

Sue Smart 'blows' her cover.
 

Perhaps Sue, alias 'chuks' you could tell us what is going on.

As soon as I find out...
 

I was just amused to see that the Prancing Pussycat had made some grave transgression against the secret code of behaviour, at least according to some, so that I thought I had better check that the persistent feeling I have that people are talking about me behind my back is unjustified. Or not, as the case may be! Well, it's a slow news day....

It's jolly difficult keeping up with personalised censorship restrictions but we try to accommodate all phantasies.
One thought though arrived in the middle of the African night. Given the increasing stridency of protest coming from certain anonymous sources whose only previous Pprune experience has apparently been on this particular thread, isn't it possible that the protester in question is in fact the individual starring in the recently posted biopic?
No opp****ium intended toward anyone or anything. At the very worst an idle and amusing speculative conjecture.

Well that wouldn't be me. I actually want CC and Captain Livingston to speak their minds so we can find out all the bits they have to offer. My only peeve is if you are going to say what you mean and then realize you have gone to far. Do not take it back. In other words say what you want and stand behind it - but do not hedge.

To far?
 

Yes, well, you may find that having written something your view of it later changes after a period of reflection, when you want to retract, rephrase, or amplify your original statement, perhaps even make it quietly disappear.

Heck, you may even notice a mistake, such as writing 'to' for 'too,' so that you simply want to make a belated correction to what you wrote.

I don't think doing any of these things warrants a sort of virtual drumming-out, to be stood there before the files at dawn to have your buttons and epaulettes ripped off to the beat of a muffled drum as some sort of arrant coward. If you want to hold yourself to such a high standard that is all very well but that's not necessarily the standard for all of us. I prefer having more freedom of maneouvre than that!

There's something very wrong with this thread recently... A bloody good pilot, husband, father and friend was tragically killed in a plane crash. News, opinions and information relating to that accident is appropriate, as is discussion on weights, performance, management, weather or whatever relating to what happened. All that I get.

What I don't get is how this thread has deteriorated into a personal slagging match over cryptic comments between various people and posts.

If this thread can continue to try and help explain what happened to Martin and the others who died in October, well and good. However at the moment its diverted so far away from the original subject that I really think it needs bringing back in line pretty d.....d quickly.

Foxcotte, I understand your disappointment at the way that this thread has, in your words, 'deteriorated'. These comments are the result of pure frustration at the apparent lack of progress in this investigation. They are asides and not a reflection of the significance of the discussion in hand or indeed meant to demean the memories of Martin and his passengers.

Flyingharry, I am not sure what you mean by; ‘speak your mind’. This would be conjecture. That is the last thing that one would wish in the case of an accident investigation. I, personally, am not holding back any relevant information.

I have operated everything from puddle-jumpers to heavy four jets on this continent over a period of more than 30 years. I have seen some cover-ups during that time. This is heading in that direction.

I would like to see a press statement from Moremi Air reporting on the progress being made in this investigation.

Unfortunately in this corner of the world, we are more accustomed to idiots who :mad: up royally being given medals for having survived despite their total lack of ability, responsibility and basic common sense. Accident reports, if they ever come out, are humerous white-washes or pointless bureaucratic speak that say nothing despite the reams and reams of paper. And it is rare for a lesson to be learned - regardless of how many people were killed. Those at fault are rarely brought to task, and as a result we are doomed to repeat the same mistake. Over and over and over again.

Those of us in Martin's camp were - and still are - extremely concerned that because he is the one absentee in this scenario that his voice won't be heard, and its the easiest solution in the world to blame him for what happened. Particularly as other major players are apparently doing a good job of muddying the investigatory waters. Officials in this case may only be taking the easy way out or might be lethargically letting conclusions be assumed at best, or at worst might have much more calculating reasons for what appears to be happening. All of this is probably nothing much that pilots and friends can change.

Martin was a straight-down-the-line person, he said what he thought, and if he didn't like something he talked to someone about it. He didnt suffer fools, and didn't like dishonesty or fraud. He deserves the truth to be told.

So what we can do is to speak up, keep the pressure on, and say what we heard/saw/know.

Hear hear.

Yes I agree that this thread has deteriorated somewhat and there have been some personal attacks. Those attacks have not been confined to this Sue Smart character who, I learn more and more about each day and I am not impressed with what I hear regarding her management and people skills. Attacks have been made against Martin as well. For the record I posted performance figures for C208 operations in defense of Martin’s operation of the aircraft and after some questionable remarks by Cavorting Cheetah regarding Martin/AKD being too heavy and then the pilot ignoring the WAT tables in the back of the POH. I did this because I did not believe Martin had exceeded the POH having met the man and briefly spoke to him on and off over a few weeks some years back. I believe he was not the type of pilot who would have done that. Although I understand your frustration as some here attempt to argue what should and should not be posted and in the end edited, and maybe the reason some like flying harry may be upset is like me there are people out there who believe Martin’s name should not be damaged by idiots throwing unsubstantiated rumors around. Maybe we should expect that people should think about what they say before they say it (as previously mentioned by others) so that people like Martin don’t suffer in their own absence. If said, print a retraction of sorts, seems like a fair system.

As for the suggestion that Moremi Air should issue a press statement I wouldn’t believe it if I read it. I have been told it would be so much b******t if it came out. When AKD’s accident happened Moremi Air took three days to release a press statement and even then Sue Smart could not get the number of people on the aircraft correct. I have spoken to pilot’s who heard the number of people on board as it was communicated over the radio during the accident response. Yet Ms. Smart could not get it right in an official company press release after 72 hours. You can equate this to Management deliberately doing this or accidentally doing it – either is pretty disgraceful under the circumstances. If I hear anything Foxcotte I will pass it along. I understand he was your friend.

Am I missing something here?
 

All of these supposed attempts to find out the reason for a crash seem to have a sub-text, bloviating about how poor old Joe Bloggs was the world's greatest pilot who loved his profession, so that for this to happen was inconceivable. Yet The World's Greatest Pilot usually seems to have made a boo-boo, just on the face of it! That is to say, he or she crashed!

I think one has to accept that one of the risks of flying in Africa is that the accidents often are not investigated properly or else they are the subject of a cover-up. I can think of about a dozen that fall into one or both of these categories.

If the authorities are moved to investigate (and you may be surprised to find out that there is some sort of investigation under way, since that is usually kept out of sight until it's done) that is fine, supposedly what you want.

On the other hand, here some of you are trying to argue a case without having any facts to argue with. You obviously want some proof right now that will contradict the unfortunate assumption that the accident pilot was somehow to blame.

Once you have some facts in hand, that might be the time to slag off the authorities or the CEO or whomever contributed to the accident but until then, the one or ones in the crosshairs is/are the late pilot/crew of an accident flight, when that is just another risk we have to accept.

Chuks. You are a d%*#.

Since when has it become acceptable to be guilty until proven innocent?

Why is it ok now to start going after members of our own profession when if given the chance, we would have been buying them beers the night before?

Since when did we stop considering mechanical failure?

Thread Deterioration
 

Oh dear. In the interests of keeping this thread constructive and positive I will not comment on the Chuks post.

How many professional pilots, of say at least a couple of thousand hours experience, have NEVER had a mechanical failure? Or a bird strike or a serious air-miss through no fault of their own? Shall I go on? I have lost two friends who were highly skilled operators neither were pilot error. I have crashed due to a mechanical failure (no casualties). I have had two extremely close air-misses, neither were pilot error. I have had so many mechanical failures of varying degrees I cannot begin to count them. This includes a double engine failure.

All factors have to be considered. A significant and over-riding factor in this accident is that the aircraft got airborne and flew for some distance before coming down.

I am still trying to find out about the engine inspection. Does anyone know if the survivors have been interviewed yet? They hadn't the last time I asked.

Chuks, it seems that without any of the facts, you hare happy to slag off the pilot. Surely all facts must be considered before ANY blame can be attributed. Am I to assume, based on your statement, that until the facts are proven, it is okay to destroy a mans reputation but not acceptable to mention any of the other parties that are clearly involved?

The deterioration continues apace then?
_____________
From the Stewarts Law internet pages and I hope paraphrased fairly and correctly?

Mark Sampson, CAA Botswana says that, as the regulating authority, the CAA is not responsible for an inquiry.
He further states that any inquiry will be conducted by the Department of Transport and Communications, Botswana.
There appears to be nothing on that department's website to indicate that any inquiry is under consideration.

_____________

A synopsis so far..

(Dragnet music fill in from left centre).

Pilots have held their own discussion on the world renowned dried plum website.
Pilots have excluded almost nearly any possibility other than a mechanical one for the accident.
Anyone who suggests otherwise is likely to be the object of a certain degree of abuse.
In the absence of an official inquiry all those who lost friends and relatives on that day must needs, so far, be content with the pilots' verdict?
Should it be necessary to have an inquiry when experts have already reached their decision?
Is there really any need for the public airing of working conditions or any other factors which might have had some effect on human resources and the day's disaster?

Perhaps it might be an idea to rather grasp the old nettle, turn the authorities on their heads and set about demanding a public inquiry specifically to exclude any wobblings in respect of the resources of humans? If any inquiry should decide to subsequently decide that there had been any such wobblings, then that would constitute the downside risk to something which doesn't look as though it's going to happen anyway.
Up to now anyone with an interest in sowing dissension or preserving silence must be pretty well pleased with the way things are going.
So how about organizing a petition, to be presented on Batsnews to the Department of Transport and Communications, for an inquiry? Wouldn't it be sardonically ironic to canvass present charter passengers on disembarkation, or boarding if you're brave, for their signatures on a petition demanding an investigation into an accident that happened nearly four months ago and which still awaits its final destiny?

Edit: Maybe I should edit this. If you don't like it, please conclude that I would have done so had I not decided to let it stand while I think about publishing a retraction.

Why would anyone ever believe that Botswana is capable of investigating an aircraft accident? Does the Botswana Department of Transportation and Communication have a handful of trained and experienced investigators lounging in a back room eagerly waiting to crack their next case? If they did find the motivation to launch an investigation would anyone find the results credible?

The only possibility that people on this site have almost nearly raised is that the aircraft was flown overweight.

Unfortunately I don't think there is any chance that we will find out what brought that plane down. I have equally little faith in the investigative powers of the Botswanan Government and the anonymous posters on PPruNe. That is a real shame for the relatives of the pilot and the passengers killed in this crash, not to mention for the hundreds of caravan pilots flying in similar conditions who would love to know exactly how to avoid this ever happening to them. But it is the reality of living and working in this part of the world, so I am happier to accept that I'm not going to get any answers than to try to stretch the circumstances of this crash to implicate a pilot who isn't going to have the opportunity to speak for himself.

That sounds like a very pragmatic solution.

Read it again...
 

I have no opinion on this accident. Writing about such things in general though, there are a couple of facts some of you might want to stop and think about:

1. Most accidents are due to pilot error. They are not usually due to mechanical failure. This is reflected in the statistical analysis of accidents; it is not an assumption of error on my part about any particular accident. Pilots are human and they sometimes get things wrong.

2. From my experience, post-accident, 'most people' assume that the accident pilot 'must have done something wrong.' In other words, yes indeed, he or she is in the difficult position of having to prove a negative, that they did not do something wrong, due to the incontrovertible fact of an accident having taken place. Dead people usually are unable to do this sort of thing, so that the assumption often persists. It is the obvious answer and it is usually the correct one!

When you are trying to argue against these things without having the facts to back that up then you are in a very weak position. It might be a good idea to stop arguing and to wait for the usual period of time, usually at least a year, for whatever investigation is taking place to be concluded and then for the investigation final report to be published. At that time you may have some facts to argue from, even if that is, as many of you already presume, that there has been no proper investigation. So far you just have the obvious emotional response to the death of a friend and/or colleague. That is touching but largely irrelevant to the general audience here.