Fatal crash pilot should not have flown: coroner [Archive]

Push it real good

19th Dec 2002, 14:48

I have read with interest the various reports which have been published regarding the level of skill and competancy of the Police pilot in command of the ill fated 310 at Newman.

The Pilot was not qualified, had training difficulties, eye sight issues and tended to panic when encountering an emergency, are to name but a few reports. The coroner has recorded that such reports are now facts. (dead men tell no tales)

I reiterate that the flight had all but completed, the Pilot had aviated, navigated and arrived over head..... lack of fuel system management was found to have preceded the impact.

What management process allowed this Pilot to be placed in such an environment? Why did the Chief Pilot permit this to occur. What safety management systems were in place to prevent this circumstance from occurring ?

Obviously the pilot must be aportioned some blame in this tragic event, however without hesitation I would suggest that the police management must accept the greater portion for permitting this to occur.

Likewise where was CASA in all of this... ?????

It is evident that Police persons have a career path or pecking order that is linked to their pay cheques... 310 pilot 55 - 60k per annum. Rock the boat and back to pounding the beat you go. What pressure was applied to this pilot to get the job done?

Now put yourself in that position, walking the beat means being relieved of flying duties but keep the money or give up the money and try to get a position in GA to keep flying..... I guess no rocking the boat sounds pretty good.

I am very confident that a civillian Pilot would not compromise his life, his passengers lives or his chances with Cathay or Qantas over any safety issue and I would hope that CASA would be consulted if the Operations Manager or Chief Pilot or even the Commissioner of Police was not doing his job. A civillian Pilot would have the support of the aviation community where he/she would be free to raise well founded concerns without fear of being sent to confront criminals.

For a state the size of Western Australia, Turbines are the only suitable option and professional Civillian Pilots as the Coroner has pointed out should be employed.

Let the Police ride as passengers and do the policing and let the professional civillian air crews do the flying.

The Coroner forgot to add the Police should; Get proffessional, Get Turbines, Get Training, Get a Budget, Get out of aviation and Get Civillians.

PIRG

Push it real good

21st Dec 2002, 06:26

Safeskiesabove

Below is a record of some of the Coroner's findings.. As you should know he is the final authority on what happened and the causes.

The only difference is that if this tragic event was attributed to a civillian operator I have no doubt the Chief Pilot, Op's manager and Operators would be facing criminal charges for negligence and in any event CASA would have closed them down.

Leave the emotion aside concentrate on the facts and issue at hand... please leave the rhetoric and expletives out of your posts/messages if you wish to receive a response.

Police air unit under fire 18/12/2002 West Aust Newspaper

By Minh Lam

CORONER Alastair Hope reprimanded the WA Police Service yesterday, saying it allowed air safety to be compromised through factors such as budgetary concerns, inadequate pilot training procedures and failure to follow an internal air operations manual.

He said regular safety audits of the police air support unit should be carried out and civilian pilots hired to ensure there was not a repeat of the Newman air crash which killed four officers in January last year.

Mr Hope was delivering his findings into the deaths of police pilot Sen. Const. Donald Everett, 49, and his passengers Sen. Const. Phillip Ruland, 32, First Class Const. David Dewar, 31, and Const. David Capes, 27.

The men were killed when their twin-engined Cessna 310R crashed just short of landing at Newman airport.

In finding the deaths arose by way of accident, Mr Hope said Sen. Const. Everett should never have piloted the plane because he did not have the necessary qualifications.

"There is a need for the air support unit to be a professional organisation comprising skilled and highly trained pilots and appropriate, well-maintained aircraft," he said.

"In my view the air support unit did not provide the deceased officers with a service of that quality."

Mr Hope said Sen. Const. Everett was the sole pilot whose responsibility was the entire Pilbara and Kimberley region when he was sent to Karratha at the beginning of January last year.

He was only a trainee line pilot and had not finished learning how to navigate using the plane's instruments, meaning he was breaching the unit's operations manual by flying on the night of the crash.

Family members of the men killed wept as Mr Hope delivered the findings and briefly mentioned personal details about each officer.

Outside the court, the families' lawyer, Alan Skinner, said they were very happy with the way the inquest was conducted and Mr Hope's recommendations.

"They are hopeful that those recommendations are carried out by the West Australian police force," Mr Skinner said.

Assistant Commissioner John Standing said after the finding: "This finding really portrays just how dangerous and how difficult policing is across the State.

"We also believe the coroner's verdict also highlights the maturity of the Western Australian Police Service in relation to its openness during the investigation and subsequently this inquest."

PIRG

Square Bear

21st Dec 2002, 20:08

Push it real good,

You make a lot of generalisations regarding this subject and in the most thats all it seems to be. You attack Police Aviation on the basis of an Operation in 1 State out of the 6 States/2 Territorys of Australia.

Just a few points (out of the many) that I consider not quite correct (from my acknowldeged 2nd hand information) and like to comment on.

Now put yourself in that position, walking the beat means being relieved of flying duties but keep the money or give up the money and try to get a position in GA to keep flying..... I guess no rocking the boat sounds pretty good.
That may very well be the case in W.A. but check your facts regarding the other States and Territories. N.T. & QLD are two operations crewed by, to use your words " professional civillian air crews", and its my understanding from knowing some of these guys are that they are very high time experienced "civillian" pilots flying prety sophisticated equipment.

It is also my understanding that Vic and and NSW also do most, if not all, their recruiting outside the Police Service.

I have no doubt the Chief Pilot, Op's manager and Operators would be facing criminal charges for negligence and in any event CASA would have closed them down.
On what do you base this? There have been many deaths in general aviation where this has not been the case. One recent example being the smash north of Cairns a few years ago. The Senior Base Pilot of the largest Shrike operator in Australia killed himself and 3/4? passengers by hitting a mountain flying under Visual Flight Rules, whilst in CLOUD, some 2400 feet below LSAT. That company wasn't closed down, didn't face criminal charges etc.

The Coroner forgot to add the Police should; Get proffessional, Get Turbines, Get Training, Get a Budget, Get out of aviation and Get Civillians.
Why should Police get out of operating Aviation on the basis of this crash. A well run, budgeted, equiped and trained Police Air Unit would be no different from a well run Gereral Aviation Company with the added bonus of not having to worry about profits, with probably a more stable and long serving crew with job specific training. Very similiar I would imagine to the Air Ambulance and RFDS type set up.

The one thing that I do agree with with you, however, is that pilot recruitment should be from outside the Police Service which would allow a much greater experience base to select from.

Finally I must ask....whats the barrow do you push, you appear to have some agenda about all this.

Mount'in Man

23rd Dec 2002, 11:17

Push it real good.

Methinks you 'pull it too hard!'.

Firstly coroners are not the final authority. Such issues may go considerably further in the court system such as Air Ontario discovered at Dryden and Air New Zealand at Mt Erebus - Royal commission, high court, privy council…

Secondly the Royal Canadian Mounted Police operate 43 airplanes (mostly turbine) flown by some eighty officers in some pretty demanding conditions, and do a damn good job of it. To say that civilian pilots are more professional than police pilots is highly debatable. Well disciplined police officers would probably provide a better end product than many of the young folk who enter the industry without life experiences. How many of your police air wings in Australia use former officers in a civilian capacity to pilot their airplanes?

No pilot will compromise his life unless he hopes to depart the gene pool. For any corporate aviation department to be successful requires a lot of support and understanding from management. Pilots will do the best they can with the equipment and training they have at their disposal. It is up to management to ensure that such equipment and training meets the demands that they impose. Systems fail and one would hope that the managers of this system would look closely at options to improve and consequences if they pursue the industry approach. Cost cutting for competition never resulted in an effective system.

PIRG, you don’t spell so well for a professional – get a dictionary!

No rhetoric or emotion in this post.

Sincere condolences to all concerned.

Mount'in Man

Towering Q

27th Dec 2002, 13:57

Assistant Commissioner John Standing said, "This finding really portrays just how dangerous and how difficult policing is across the State."

Well how about that! And what exactly does this have to do with the enquiry? I think the man is a twit and should keep his ill-informed comments to himself.

The "top brass" have a lot to answer for in this sorry mess and sprouting dribble like, "We also believe the coroner's verdict also highlights the maturity of the Western Australian Police Service in relation to its openness during the investigation and subsequently this inquest." does nothing to improve their image.

They should accept some responsibility for what occurred and take steps to ensure it never happens again. This will not be possible whilst they have their collective heads up their collective a*ses.
:mad: :mad:

Wagit

27th Dec 2002, 23:53

There is a very valid point made here by the coroner.

"There is a need for the air support unit to be a professional organisation comprising skilled and highly trained pilots and appropriate, well-maintained aircraft," he said.

Regardless of whether police officers or professional pilots are operating this aircraft aviation safety at this level is:

“Competent pilots flying serviceable aircraft”

Believe me this is something general aviation has lost sight of………….

shipreck

28th Dec 2002, 04:27

Quote Assistant Commissioner John Standing

"We also believe the coroner's verdict also highlights the maturity of the Western Australian Police Service in relation to its openness during the investigation and subsequently this inquest."

What the Hell does this mean ?????

We had the choice to cover it up ? We had the choice not to cooperate with the Coroners inquiry ? But we decided to tell the truth out of the spirit of cooperation...

The Coroner just found that the Police ran a sub-standard operation that regularly ignored its own operations manual, ignored safety and allowed an unqualified pilot to conduct passenger op's at night in excess of the duty time limits etc etc.

Maturity was a wake up call minutes after the 310 went in at Newman.

I am sure cover up was considered, however what with a Royal Commission into Police Corruption happening over in the west at the same time.... John you didn't have any choice at all......

If this was a charter operator who killed 4 paying public passengers I have no doubt their AOC would be cancelled for sure and the Chief Pilot and Directors held to account. Every trainee Pilot will bust a gut to fly and it is up to the management to make sure it is safe..

Maybe because the victims were all Police that makes it different.

burger

30th Dec 2002, 14:22

Ref the tradgic accident in Newman WA. I think from where I sit that we shouldn't try to pinpiont the blame of an accident on the background of a pilots previous employment, but more to the point the background of the inhouse training and prior experience of a pilot to forfill a particular specialised type of operational flying required to carry out his or her roll within the job your employed to carry out . My thoughts go back to the EMS chopper that crashed in fog due to fuel starvation in Marlborough central QLD killing all five on board. Then 9 months later their new state of the art chopper ditches by their 10000hr plus chief pilot 132nm out to sea under NVFR rules! I recall the service had a near fatal incident not long befor these involving an oxygen explosion. I read the BASI report on the Marlborough accident but have yet to read anything on the ditching incident. I should think that is a lot for young players to learn from both accidents as has been brought out in the WA accident. I understand from reliable sourses that the rescue service was independendtly audited by three different companys. Nothing has been made public as yet. I, as I'm sure the community of central QLD, would like to read the Basi report on the ditching as well as the recomendations from the Safety audits. What were the CASA findings in both cases? Are the same pilots still operating there? Where they involved in the tail rotor accident not long after the ditching? What conditions have been changed if any? Was the board found to be lacking in its roll? What measures have been put in place to prevent incidents turning into accidents in the future.
Just plane bad luck or just bad management.

Burger

SPLATR

31st Dec 2002, 01:17

Burger, all good points but there is some need for accuracy here. I understand that the central Qld operator you refer to now no-longer exists. The tail rotor strike occurred to another operator working under contract. The ATSB report for the ditching has not been issued yet.

I believe that often, many operators particularly in EMS and police support get themselves into trouble more through ignorance rather than malice. The ones that do get into trouble have rarely looked at the big picture thinking that, for example, having an experienced pilot will answer all the issues. When it comes to managing anything, I believe it is the management capability that is more important than any particular specialisation. Good managers listen to their experts and seek out information to help them make decisions.

Alas, good managers are very few and far between.

shipreck

31st Dec 2002, 08:02

Funding is essential to ensure a high level of safety.

More than adequate Funding ensures that staff are remunerated correctly, which in turn attracts professionals to the fold. (not a problem here because the police pilots earn 55-65 K as cops, not crew)

Funding ensures proper hours flown during training, endorsements and check rides.

Funding ensures aircraft are properly maintained and up graded.
(WA needs turbine aircraft to provide any effective service)

Funding was the one commodity that I suggest that was severely restricted before this sorry and tragic mess.

I happen to know a pilot who has since left the wa air support operation and upon perusing his log book, 1.2 hours in a period of 1 year was spent by the Police on recurrent training. (no FUNDS) Everything else was paid for by the pilot.. (nothing unusual here, however this only encourages pilots to seek out cheap training)

It is a well known fact that the WA Police have had major funding problems and as the coroner is reported to have found, management were totally preoccupied with budget......

No Funding NO SAFETY.

Comments from Assistant Commissioners about maturity and openess are very empty, of absolutely no value at all and display how far removed from professional aviators the Police management is.

Especially when Management are now apparently paying 750 K compensation to each victims families in a quiet deal....

If that funding was spent on training and turbine aircraft in the first place instead of scrimping on budget, I doubt we would be making comment here.

shipreck

1st Jan 2003, 01:15

Here is an example of another tragic event reported by a ppruner on another forum. I post it here to demonstrate how quickly the CAA in that country moved to cancel a commercial operators AOC after such a tragedy.

Although the actual causes attributed to the crash are different from the Police crash in WA, the end result is the same. The root causes of poor safety management and negligence on the part of the management team from Chief Pilot - Management head are identicle.

This Coroner does not blame the Pilot as it was management who put him in the cockpit in the first place. (for full story go to Reporting point forum) The pilot of the WA Police crash should not be blamed either.. Management put him there.

I reiterate, "Maybe because all the victims were Police, that makes it different" !!

One things for sure no one in the Police will be held accountable for this crash. If this were a Police car accident with the same result, bet some one would lose their licence/job at least....

No further comment your Honor

From The New Zealand Herald :

Airline's approach to safety deplorable, says coroner

30.12.2002
11.45am

Inadequate safety procedures and a lack of anti-icing equipment caused a fatal crash in the Tararua Ranges five years ago, says Wellington coroner Garry Evans says.

Timothy Thompson, 27, was killed when the twin-engine Beechcraft Baron aircraft he was flying from Palmerston North to Christchurch crashed 2km southeast of Paraparaumu on June 11, 1997.

The company that owned the plane, United Aviation, went into receivership in August 1997, with the Civil Aviation Authority permanently revoking its operating certificate the following month.

In his findings, Mr Evans said the court was satisfied the cause of the crash "was the act of United Aviation in causing or permitting him to fly an aircraft not equipped with anti-icing or de-icing equipment or with ice detection lights on a winter's night freight flight".

The safety culture at United Aviation "left very much to be desired" and there was no way to ensure that Mr Thompson understood or complied with the company's operating procedures.

"United Aviation failed to ensure that Mr Thompson had... sufficient knowledge of the dangers associated with in-flight icing conditions to plan to avoid those hazards," Mr Evans said.

"Mr Thompson had carried out only one return trip from Palmerston North to Christchurch during winter months... the aircraft being flown by him was not approved for flight in forecast or known icing conditions."

Mr Thompson could not be criticised for failing to recognise the dangers of the icing conditions.

Mr Evans said it was possible that carbon monoxide poisoning caused by a faulty heater in the plane had also contributed to the crash. The gas could have impaired Mr Thompson's performance and caused mental confusion.

"The failures on the part of United Aviation.... were serious, fundamental in nature and are to be deplored," Mr Evans said.

"Mr Thompson's death was preventable."
:( [B]

Wagit

1st Jan 2003, 09:54

Shipreck

I agree with you up til the point that the pilot climbs in the cockpit and takes off….

The company management has a responsibility to ensure the pilot is competent in the job they have assigned him and responsible for the aircraft being serviceable. But in the end the pilot gets in the aircraft and takes off.

One of the biggest problems with most of today’s young pilots flying GA is they don’t know how to say No to the boss.

Or they are to sacred to say No…… "If I say no I get the sack and they will spread the word that I’m no good" etc etc……

It is simple why would you won’t to work for an operator who constantly puts your life at risk

Maybe you are one of those pilots that keeps a dairy with all the illegal things your boss makes you do so when you move on you can put him in…… Possible get more money out of him, maybe a bit of revenge.

Instead of having a industry of GA pilots trying to stab each other in the back for another twin hour and just maybe if we all stuck together and occasionally said No to the boss, then the operator would be forced to lift his game………..

shipreck

2nd Jan 2003, 01:37

Wagit

I think it is because I have had great bosses and worked for really safety conscious operators that I realise now how lucky I and my co-workers have been. (3 companies so far)

We are all professional pilots and well aware of our capabilities and the legal requirements of conducting flights. (some times over confident)

On more than one occassion the op's manager or Chief Pilot in the companies I have worked, have said NO to us the Pilots, which at the time really piissed us off becuase we took it personally and a slight on our abillities, not to mention the log book hours being missed out on.

More than once my boss has told me NO because although it is perfectly legal, he has a responsibility for providing safe working conditions and ensuring that the reputation of the company is not compromised. He would say but what if ?? I would say what if may never happen, He would say thats what we train for all the time, what if an engine fails on take off? what if the electircs fail? What if !!!

We at my current job are all full time pilots on a good wicket and we are not allowed to have a 2nd job, for duty time & fatigue management reasons.

What better way to improve safety management than by holding the management responsible for the safety of the company operations.

I am not talking about a Pilot who is well resourced, flying a good machine, who is current and well rested and resourced... who then gets it wrong and crashes. What more can an operator/management do?

I am talking about the shonky operator who approves a flight that is over weight, the pilot is not qualified, the plane is not airworthy, the pilot is fatigued from excess duty or maybe a heavy night last night etc etc.

THE FIRST LINE OF DEFENCE AGAINST AIR CRASHES IS ON THE GROUND PRE-FLIGHT...

Any Chief Pilot who knowingly permits a flight to be conducted that contravenes the Act or the Regulations should be prosecuted.

Now the onus is off the Pilot and on to the management.... The shonky operator now has 2 choices GET OUT of aviation or GET SAFE otherwise he/she/they will be the ones prosecuted.

The word KNOWINGLY makes all the difference. People will always make mistakes that become accidents. People who KNOWINGLY permit circumstances to exist are gamblers with others lives with nothing to lose. Put 20 years jail on the losing side of the bet and I am sure the shonky operator will think twice before taking a gamble.

THE MENTALITY OF THE OPERATORS - MANAGEMENT MUST CHANGE. WHEN IT DOES THEY WILL HAVE TO FACTOR IN THE ADDED COST OF SAFETY. THE PUBLIC WILL HAVE TO PAY AND THE SERVICE THEY GET WILL BE FAR SUPERIOR.

And this is where my comments about the Police crash are based, the management failed to say NO to the Pilot and or anyone else. Instead they said YES KNOWING that the Pilot was not competent, well trained, IFR/NVFR rated, well rested and resourced.

Maybe because all the victims were Police, that makes it different.

Enough said...

Gnd Power

2nd Jan 2003, 02:48

Shipreck
States

The pilot of the WA Police crash should not be blamed either, Management put him there.

This inquiry certainly indicates that management has many shortfalls, but surely the guy flying had some attributable blame to the accident.

The guy, (with not insignificant experience mind you, 2423 hrs total with 111hrs on type) had successfully got overhead Newman after a 2hr 20min NVFR flight, without incident before it all went wrong. And in a nutshell what went wrong was something as simple and dumb as gross fuel mismanagement.

He arrived overhead with an estimated 165 L of useable fuel, unfortunately in the wrong tanks (ATSB Report) and suffered fuel starvation. From that point on he and his passengers didn’t have much going for them and even the best of us would have had a hard time I would think.

Now take out the other issues (important and serious as they may be) how is the fact of fuel mismanagement not the blame of the pilot.

Its one thing to try and blame management for everything but as PIC you must accept some responsibility for your actions and occupation.

Hopefully we don't end up with a breed of pilots all saying

'NOT MY FAULT, HE CAUSED IT!'

shipreck

2nd Jan 2003, 03:23

Grnd Power

I hear what you are saying and understand your angle. I don't agree with it and neither does the Coroner. Hence the title of this thread.

Quiet simply the management knew he was not NVRF rated and out in the sandy desert area I would assert that at night without a moon it is more like IFR conditions, add some Cb's etc.

The Chief Pilot, Op's Manager, Boss of the Air Support should have said, "No Way you are not qualified". They didn't and 4 people died simple as that........

The fact that he stuffed up the fuel management could be attributed to the fact that he was operating well outside his legal entitlement and experience capabilities. To have made it that far without the training is probably attributed to dtermination,ignorance and or pure luck.

Management took a gamble, threw the dice and lost. I am willing however to bet that if saying yes in this instance would have involved the risk of a jail sentence, the Pilot would not have left the ground... Crash avoided.

I am not talking here about a mistake that the Pilot made which caused the loss of the aircraft.... that is an accident.

What I am talking about is that the Police management KNOWINGLY transferred a Pilot who was not qualified to operate in NVFR of IFR conditions to an area where it is an absolute necessity, was of sub-standard according to the now Civillian Police Chech & Training Capt who prior to the crash refused to issue him a multi-engine endorsement on the grounds of incompetence. The Management KNOWING all of this then authorised the fatefull flight and then when it crashed jumped back and blamed the Pilot, who can't defend himself.

If the Police are not going to obey the rules, then what chance is there for the rest of the industry.

SAFETY LIES WITH MANAGEMENT SETTING A STANDARD AND THE REST OF US UPHOLDING THAT STANDARD. Once this is acheived no Pilot need worry about saying NO because the Management have told us to uphold their own standards.

I say again, Maybe because all the victims were Police, that makes it different. No further debate, pay the victims families compensation and push it under the carpet.

Enough enough said.

AMRAAM

2nd Jan 2003, 06:18

The facts are all there, and so are all the casual factors.

I agree with Shipwreck, the casual factors are the reason this crash happened. If these did not exist then the accident would not have occured.

The CAUSE of the crash occured at Kiwirkarra, where the pilot failed to ensure that sufficent fuel was onboard the aircraft before departure. Is this a fault with the metod of calculation or flight planning ??. At this time the pilot would also have been aware he was going to be arriving at NWN after dark, but he still departed. I can't remember the actual name given to deliberatly diregarding rules and regs (ops manuals) but it was covered in the EA CRM course last year.
I believe that a significant number of accidents occur due to this reason. I also believe that this cause is signifcantly attached to the attitude of the operator or organisation therefore making it a casual factor in this accident.

The corroner identified that the pilot was not approved (NVFR-ME)to be flying the aircraft and this true, but like many, I belive this is a side issue.

I don't believe that the WA Police should be running an AIRWING, it should be conducted simmilar to the QLD Gov (PS) Airwing or NT Airwing with civilian (PS) pilots and suitable aircraft.

Policing is very political in WA with BUDGET restraints and police on the street, always the main issue. This is to blame on the GOV the Public Service and the Police service and should not be forced upon the members of the service trying to do thier job.

I lost an old friend in this accident, I have read with interest and tried to follow the ball (FACTS).

It is my belief that The PILOT is to blame for the crash and the loss of life, and that the reason he was there was due to failings on the part of the Police Service and the Police Air Wing!.

I have recommended this to the family of my friend.

RIP Dave

PS I am astonished to see that the Police is offering a 750K commpo package to the famillies, and am I correct that it is bieng kept quiet??, if so it stinks of KEEP QUIET money.

Icarus2001

2nd Jan 2003, 07:25

Amraam

The CAUSE of the crash occured at Kiwirkarra, where the pilot failed to ensure that sufficent fuel was onboard the aircraft before departure.

I am very sorry you have lost an old friend but have you read the ATSB report? The aircraft arrived overhead Newman with an estimated 165 litres of useable fuel and about 30 litres was drained from the auxiliary tanks at the crash site.

Quantity of fuel was not the issue, its location was.

Traffic

4th Jan 2003, 02:36

Hand over the police air wing and a budget to the RFDS. They have the turbines and the infrastructure.

gaunty

4th Jan 2003, 03:05

Traffic

That is too sensible and practical solution to the farcical operation under which the Members of the service have laboured so far, to even get close to being considered as a result.:)

The pollies are driving around in the very same equipment that access to which the Police should have priority.

Pollies are being flown to open the local fete in the Citation or King Air, whilst the plod are struggling out to the Central desert and the like in a C182 or clapped out C310 and Chieftains.

Problem is the Police service themselves do not have or are resisitant to taking on board the expertise that they need to present their case for the huge budget, that is not only a necessity, but required for them to properly execute their responsibilities.

shipreck

4th Jan 2003, 04:50

The Politicians do indeed fly around in sophisticated aircraft doing all things political, including flogging off the occasional personal cd or cassette.

The aircraft that they use are operated under contract by Civilian organisation/s to a very high professional standard. (correct me if I am wrong here, please)

Understanding how tight fisted the Police & Government budget bean counters are this is what I believe should be done to address the inadequacies of Police in aviation.

1. Immediately increase the police rotary wing aircraft to a minimum of (2) with a budget sufficient to permit an absolute minimum of 4 hours flight time per day, per aircraft (2 hours day & 2 hours night each)
2. Relocate these helicopters to the old Maylands Police academy where they are centrally located and can be hangared in the already existing hangars. This would mean they would have instant access by the elite and be a stone throw away from Police Head Quarters, Perth Airport, Hospital etc... (on numerous occasions valuable time has been lost due to travel time in getting to Jandakot.
3. Staff the helicopters with Civilian staff including Chief Pilot, not Police and pretend Police (deputies). ensure a chain of command that is civilian direct to the Commissioner & incorporate CASA at that and all levels.
4. Immediately award all Police fixed wing travel to the civilian Government contractor, this guarantees the use of safety appropriate, sophisticated aircraft for rapid long distant travel, with Government picking up the tab through consolidated revenue or SPEED-CAMERA fines.
5. Establish rapid deployment protocols for your elite between Maylands heliport and Perth civilian operator, this would allow state-wide coverage within hours.
6. Immediately disband the Police fixed wing unit and send the staff back to their primary jobs of boosting the Police numbers on the street.
7. In remote areas utilise local approved civilian operators for search & rescue and fixed wing travel, this already happens in regional areas.
8. Get rid of the Jandakot hangar, you don't need it... obtain an office in the civilian fixed wing operators complex if you really must have a civilian liaison there, otherwise just do what everyone else does, phone, fax, page, internet.....

Minister consider this....
You will need to buy another chopper, some civilian crew, refurb an old hangar at Maylands and put in a heli-pad. You will cop a bit of flack from the residents, but hey the fight on terror stance can take care of that.

You will gain a tactical advantage for the rapid deployment of special operations, extra Police back on the streets, credible air support unit that actually provide assistance to ground troops. Instead of being 2 days late and $2 short all the time. Along with this all Police Staff travelling fixed wing will have the knowledge that they are flying in state of the art aircraft with highly experienced civilian crews who actually hold the appropriate ratings and licenses.

GOOD ENOUGH FOR YOU TO FLY AROUND IN, GOOD ENOUGH FOR THE POLICE.

IT CAN ALL BE FUNDED BY A COUPLE EXTRA SPEED-CAMERAS, I for one would feel a lot happier paying a fine knowing that the money is actually doing something positive that can be seen every day up in the sky.

Square Bear

4th Jan 2003, 09:26

Sipreck

I have to seriously wonder how much you know about aviation, or whether you you have a certain angle to all this.

You deem the WA Police Service as being incompetent in the running of a Fixed Wing Unit but then in the same breath consider them okay to run Rotary.

Just in case you were not aware of it, rotary:-

Cost more in intial costs, more in training, more in maintenance, more in crew training, etc etc etc and when I say more I mean much much more.

Now you reckon they can't run a C310 safely how do you resile that comment with allowing them to operate Rotary in the demanding role of Polair and Ambo ops.

Let me assure you, any organisation that can do that, could run fixed wing on their ear.

I also take note of one of your previous comments and can no longer hold back from commenting on it.

On more than one occassion the op's manager or Chief Pilot in the companies I have worked, have said NO to us the Pilots, which at the time really piissed us off becuase we took it personally and a slight on our abillities, not to mention the log book hours being missed out on.

Good Grief. :rolleyes:

I hope your OPSO/CP wiped your botty as well.

gaunty

4th Jan 2003, 14:19

Square Bear

On the evidence, whilst the Police Service are structured as they are at the moment, they are not competent to run EITHER rotary or fixed wing in the required role.

They have come from completely the wrong direction and have been led up the garden path by well meaning 'amateurs', notwithstanding that the 'amateurs' may hold "professional" qualifications.

Throw in the usual political train smash from both sides and why are we surprised at the events. I am only surprised it hasn't happened sooner.
They only got out of the helo accident relatively unscathed by good luck rather than good judgement.
Then they turned the insurance money from a helo that they could afford and did a real job for them, into one they couldn't and doesn't.

They need to get their "colleagues" from Vic, NT and QLD to come over and give em a good talking to, on how it really actually works.

Problem is, they are so used to telling everybody else what to do, they have forgotten that they don't know everything.

Unless I'm mistaken, the attitude that seems to prevail and prevents them going forward on this, is that you are either a member or a suspect.

We have the biggest, least populated, most difficult to police State in Australia and we are stuffing around with a C182 and a couple of clapped out old piston twins.:rolleyes:

There is much sense in what shipreck proposes, especially in relocating the helo ops to Maylands and there is absolutely no doubt that the fixed wing ops are better and more conveniently located at Perth Airport.

They need at the very least,
New or very near so, crewed by experienced and professional pilots, they can make em coppers if they want.

A Dauphin type for the heavy and longer range work.
A couple of Squirrels for rapid response around the metro area and out to around a 150nm radius.
With more than one helo around there is a reasonable chance that there will be one available when you really need it.
The helos IMHO need to have the starflex rotor technology or something equally advanced.
A Citation Bravo for the longer distance liaison, whilst they wait for an Excel and a Sovereign and
A Citation or Citationjet 2 for the closer in stuff.
Four Cessna 208s, one in Perth and the rest rotated out at say Kal, Hedland and Broome.

Anything less and they simply can't do the job that they are expected to do with the manpower available.

Simply from a duty of care perspective having officers thrashing around the countryside in cars at high speed by road or trekking through the bush in a 'cruiser for 14 days to check on a couple of communities just doesn't cut it.

And what are they going to do if they have to respond to an "emergency" or "disturbance" in the country or NW, wait for the RPT??

Give 'em a break.

That is where the Multanova revenue raisings should go, then they can give away the bulls hit justification they keep serving us up, about road safety.:rolleyes:

Traffic

5th Jan 2003, 00:28

Gaunty

Sadly you are probably right. I will however send Gallop a note and see if can at least get above the level of Sir Humphry.

I recall some dozen years ago the WA Police pranged a helo into the Kelmscott Primary School playground. They then turned around and wrote a cheque to a Japanese company for a Kawasaki to replace it. This was done through some agent in Melbourne and noone actually sighted the a/c before the cheque was written.

Problem was the people to whom they wrote the cheque didn't own the helo.

It took a lot of work from a mate of mine in Tokyo who ran the Westpac office at the time to sort out the mess. This included very senior representations to Japanese government. They finally got their helicopter and we and all the kids got a flight in the thing and a big lunch at Rotto for saving the day.

IMHO there is no way the WA Police can operate a credible airwing.

The last time I spent any time at Jandakot...in October last year, the RFDS PC12's and King Airs came and went but there were always 2-3 a/c on the hardstand doing sweet FA. I am sure they would be pleased to be more gainfully employed.

FWIW

gaunty

5th Jan 2003, 02:14

I well remember that prang and the purchase fiasco that followed as I worked for the company that was in the business of an Aerospatiale joint venture for helos and fixed wing at the time.

We knew exactly what was going down and why, but the "Force" as it was then called, were entirely resistant then, as they appear to be now, to simple common sense.

They pulled a similar stunt when they replaced the C182 by brokering a brand new one (they obviously thought it was going to be cheaper although we never found out what they actually paid) through the local Piper Dealer, if you can believe that.
We also had stock in the country.
It was also done without the benefit of any formal tender or purchase process.:confused:
They then got all bent out of shape when we as the Distributor dealer insisted that the warranty service and parts they were entitled to, be paid for first and they could then make the claims against the actual selling dealer in the US. This was in the Cessna rules at the time in an attempt to stop dumping and protect the very significant investment they required for Dealer status.
We got the Factory rep on one of his trips down here to talk to them and explain the error of their ways and eventually sorted a warranty process out, but we were not obliged to.
They did not seem to understand the corollary that was offered in buying their Holden Fleet through a Ford Dealer.???:rolleyes:

It goes on, but I've got to go to work now.:rolleyes:

shipreck

5th Jan 2003, 03:33

Dear Square Bear

I believe you are way out of your depth here. Thanks for reading one of my previous posts, sadly you didn't understand that one either. The quote was in reference to best practise and safety, I sincerely wish the Chief Pilot or OP's Manager of the WA Air Support had said NO to the Newman 310 Pilot .... If he had, 4 people would be alive today.

The tone of your email suggests you are more interested in defending the Police air Support unit than addressing the inadequacies of it, which leads me to believe you are probably a Police Pilot scared to go back to the job you are being paid 65K per annum to do. how many C310, C182, B58, PA 31-350 pilots get that much?)

As far as running a 310, I think the WA Police have demonstrated in tragic style that they can't run an aviation operation competently.

Helicopters on the other hand are the only viable aviation tool that can be used in the metropolitan area for search & rescue, Tactical Response deployment, Terrorist-siege incidents and such like. What do you propose re open Langley Park and land the C182 there when you need to deploy troops, drop rescued & injured persons ????

If you had bothered to digest the point, the Rotary Wing operation is Civilian operated and managed and reportable to only the Commissioner with CASA involved at every level. In other words no Assistant Commissioner or other person can override the manager, only the Commissioner and then with the knowledge of CASA as a safety monitor.. Complies with being open and accountable...

As for the cost of rotary winged aircraft, sure they are expensive and selling off the clapped out fixed wings will go some way to paying for it, along with the sale of the Jandakot hangar, the reduction in aircrew salaries and management costs, I reckon there is probably $1.5M saved, now add the revenue of 2 speed cameras that should add up to approx $2.5M per annum I think the lease payments are safe with that and well, 7 or 8 extra cops on the road that don't have to be replaced by new recruits at $145K to train each and 6 months in the academy and the next 3-5 years street experience before they realise their full potential ....

I don't think for one minute the Police Pilots will leave the government job,,,,, because they will never get a job with that much dough in General Aviation, especially not with the benefits they get now and most are too old for airlines or any regional operator anyway...... MINISTER TAKE NOTE HERE!!!!!!

I think the focus should be redirected back to response time. I should imagine response time is of paramount importance to the Police and that is what is achieved by moving the heli ops to Maylands and fixed wing to Perth, hell the time and fuel saved in driving to Perth or Maylands as opposed to Jandakot would add up to significant savings in time & money by itself.

GAUNTY

I think you have hit on probably the most sensible & Cost effective idea, incorporating the RFDS, and they already have regional bases established all over WA.

The Northern Territory Police have proved the worth of the PC12, so why not forget the regional Police fixed wing idea and go with the RFDS providing fixed wing state wide and supplemented at a local level by local charter companies. Search & Rescue is already assigned to civilian operators around the state, so MINISTER jump to it.

The RFDS have a very good safety & performance record with excellent check and training procedures and by coincidence are carrying Police personnel virtually daily on all manner of circumstances, escorts, searches, crime victims etc.

I wonder what the Tactical Response Group would think about having direct access to helicopters 24/7??????...

As the first line of defence against a Terrorist threat I reckon it can't be beaten.

What's the alternative..... Black Panel vans driving at high speed...(slow and risky overall) or maybe waiting for a rotary wing pilot to get out of bed drive to Jandakot, pre-flight, and fly-over to pick them up.... Always a day late and a $ short.

I think what we are all saying in various ways and tones is that the Government must get serious about this issue and provide the funds directly into an Police aviation account that can't be touched by the rest of the Police to cover main stream BUDGET overruns.

The Air Support needs to be run by a manager with business sense, exstensive industry knowledge, and enough balls to stand up to idiots like Assistant Commissioner John Standing and his platitudes about subjects he is absolutely ignorant of.

(I'll be kind and suggest maybe he was the poor bunny told to provide a comment..... ill conceived idea, where was the airwings manager, he should have spoken instead)

Square Bear

5th Jan 2003, 03:44

Gaunty

Perhaps the point I was trying to make was muddied by my gratuitous (and admittedly unnecessary) shot at Shipwreck.

I just can’t see how, and think it naïve, to consider an operator (as Shipwrek does) as being incapable to operate simple Piston Fixed Wing aircraft then in THE SAME POST consider that very same operator capable of not only operating much more sophisticated equipment (Turbine Rotary) but should have more of them.

My point being, you are either good enough to be an Aviation Operator or not, you can’t be both.

Maybe I am just missing something.

Jamair

5th Jan 2003, 03:51

Gaunty me old....

As much as I respect your opinions, WA does NOT want to take a leaf out of the Qld book.

In Qld, there is the State Govt Air wing - good operators, able aircraft (both of them), and a no-nonsense safety culture. They do not have, nor require, an AOC, which means they cannot partake in aeromed tasks (other than organ retrievals).

There is the RFDS, with no less than 6 disparate centres, all LOOSELY following a central theme in the State. They cannot manage the workload they already have, let alone adding more. I suspect the WA mob would be in the same boat.

There are at least 2 civilian contractors running Qld Health contracts for flying speciallists in the western areas; one of whom I believe has just won a contract to fly a medical speciallist from Mt Isa using a 20 year old C414 (ex Qld Air Ambulance).

There is a Police Airwing, with I dunno what at the moment, aircraft-wise.

There is Qld Emergency Services, with 3 B412s at AF, CN and TV. They also have a hand in running a B412 at Cooly, a AS350 at RK, a Jetranger at BUD, a Longranger at TI, a BK117 at MC, and a Longranger at MK. There's an additional flingwing at CDR which is independantly operated.

There are also assorted ad-hoc CHTR contracts and Standing Offer Arrangements State-wide.

The upshot is, this entire flock of aircraft SHOULD be standardised and amalgamated into ONE State Government-run Air Unit; as should be the case NATIONALLY. ALL Government agencies SHOULD be flying around in the best available equipment - not for ego sake, but for safety (1st) and efficiency (2nd). I refer you to your own postings on this subject, after the C90 crash at TWB last year.

Don't stop at the WA border - this is a NATIONAL issue.

PS: re the Newman prang, from my reading of the report, was he not actually IN the circuit when he lost power? I would like to think that any CPL pilot with a ME endorsement could dead-stick from within the circuit area to at least a survivable crash, if not a power-off landing on the runway. Not being the one in the seat at the time though, like all the other views here, this is only a personal opinion.

dragchute

5th Jan 2003, 08:22

Jamair,

Rolling up a whole lot of Government aviation agencies into one will not necessarily streamline the end product. Flying injured people out of bush strips is vastly different to transporting government ministers. Could you imagine an RFDS pilot wandering back to serve meals in the cabin? And how would you feel about some AIDS infected junkie with manacles travelling in a medical aircraft? Bad enough when they board an RPT and subject the pax to bad language, bad odours and bad behaviour. As I recall the government and police units in QLD amalgamated in the early eighties and split again shortly after because of the incompatibility of the mission profiles of the two organisations.

Governments aren’t cash cows for every new start-up just because it purports to provide a community service. I think the reason why there are so many rotary wing service providers in QLD is due to the independent community funding that they receive which ultimately minimises input by the taxpayer. If the government was expected to fully fund those start-ups I feel the services would be fewer.

Shipreck,

I would have thought fixed wing would be far more viable than rotary in a state the size of WA. However I cannot imagine why organisations like the coppers use old equipment. Do they buy second hand ‘cruisers’ as well? Obviously you are pretty close to the action (a police rotary wing driver perhaps)? Surprising your government hasn’t palmed its rotary operations (as they seem to be rescue related) out to the industry. In any event directing your ideas to the Minister wont always cut it. The separation of powers between the legislative, executive and judicial authorities is such that ministers only approve funding – their heads of departments request it. With that in mind you should direct your talents to the Commissioner.

Jamair, I think the QLD coppers operate a Westwind, a King Air and a Caravan.

megle2

5th Jan 2003, 10:25

Dragchute

Qld Police operate a Cessna Ultra, a King Air 350 and a couple of Caravans ( I think ).

dragchute

5th Jan 2003, 11:29

megle2

Sounds about right...my info is a bit old. Whatever, they seem to have it together.

Black Maria

5th Jan 2003, 13:03

megle2

What you say is correct.

Ultra BN based, King Air 350 and Grand Caravan CS based, with a Caravan based in MA.

The Air Wing has 25+ years of experience with safety being foremost the overriding issue.

Jamair

6th Jan 2003, 07:48

You got me wrong; I'm not suggesting that the roles be interchangeable, but the ORGANISATION of the operations could or SHOULD be amalgamated. (and the Minister for toe-nail clippings can be just as easily transported via available assets from Police et al as by chartering a 30 yr old PA31). (also, flying an injured patient out of a bush strip should NOT be any different organisationally to flying ministers hither and yon. The same imperatives and restrictions should - MUST - apply. "Can the mission be flown safely, legally and efficiently? Yes = go; No = NO GO. Patient condition, age, situation blah blah blah does not - or SHOULD NOT - enter into the equation.)

I can also categorically GUARANTEE that "AIDS infected junkie" (s) have and do routinely travel in medical aircraft. (& BTW, if you are involved in moving passengers by air, there is a fairly high possibility that you have also moved "AIDS infected junkie" (s) - they don't come with a hazard label.)

It is the ORGANISATION SAFETY CULTURE and mentality that needs to be assured; this can best be done with a single organisational approach. It is the ability of the 'whole of Government' to be able to access aircraft and crews that reflect this suitable SAFETY CULTURE, flying modern aeroplanes, that is vital.

As to the rotary-wing services, having money put in by community groups - laudable as it may be - does not excuse unsuitable aircraft and localised organisations lacking the SAFETY CULTURE that is required to operate these missions. If the missions are there in sufficient numbers to warrant the aircraft, then the aircraft should be a government owned and operated entity, with the SAFETY CULTURE of the best-practice organisations currently functioning. Certainly, community input never goes astray when paying the bills, but it cannot be the governing factor for the operation. Perhaps if the services WERE fewer, they could be better / more efficiently run and coordinated?

I reiterate that Qld is NOT a copybook to look at as the epitome of Government Aerial Operations. Certain parts of it perhaps, some areas definately; but not the whole.

Standardisation - why not? Need a pressurised twin turbine - go the KA200/350, for Aeromed, Executive, Police, General CHTR. Want short / rough field capabilities for aeromed or police ops? then its the C208. Need to be point A to point B in a hurry, executive-wise? The HS125 / Citation Ulta or whatever is the best available product. Gotta get a Chopper? The best available, IFR capable, twin turbine medium lift available, whatever the organisations collectively decide is the best thing. Decide on the fleet, standardise as much as possible across the users, and keep the fleet young. This would HAFTA be a better approach than the usual rag-tag collection.....wouldn't it?

As to the budget issue, if it needs to be done and air is the best way, then the best available should be the standard, not the cheapest available. If the cost makes it non-viable, then it didn't need to be done in the first place.

Cheers.

Sheepdog

20th Jan 2003, 13:17

Push It Real Good I was going to post an answer to your post, but I realized your are not the brightest crayon in the box. I suggest you read the remainder of the posts and learn something.

Vjet

20th Jan 2003, 23:45

This thread has proved most interesting and it has created some very emotive responses but most of all a healthy cross section of views and opinions.

Considering that the Newman Pilot was not qualified M/E NVFR or IFR I believe it would be fair to say he would have been fairly fatigued after being awake for almost 16 hours & having flown 7 or so hours, of which the 3 hours prior to the crash were in darkness. This is a heavy load for even a very experienced & qualified Pilot. On top of that we don't really know what the stress levels that were imposed on the Pilot from doing his Police duties at the remote community.

Now in the context of the above we consider JAMAIR's comment,

QUOTE:
I would like to think that any CPL pilot with a ME endorsement could dead-stick from within the circuit area to at least a survivable crash, if not a power-off landing on the runway. Not being the one in the seat at the time though, like all the other views here, this is only a personal opinion. (end quote)

I am of the opinion that the Police Pilot did the best he could at the time, with the knowledge and skills he possessed, after all he was not qualified to be flying NVFR.

When both engines quit 3 NM from the runway at a mid down wind position .... at 1000 ' it would be like opening two barn doors, (there goes the glide ratio) add to that the prospect of feathering both engines and consciously committing to a crash landing in dense bush at night,........ in this context I believe all of us would be thinking what are my options???

The Pilot probably thought ... I've got 165 lt of fuel here somewhere, I'll just find it restart the windmilling engines.... and all will be sweet... His head goes down between the seats looking for the fuel taps and the air speed washes off as the nose comes up. We all know the rest.

I agree with Shipreck's comments they are very valid and echo the coroners findings, the Chief Pilot should have been a little more responsible. Gaunty and Push it Real Good also I believe have valid contributions.

Sheep Dog your last post is probably the most colourless posting of all....

Personally I think this Pilot (even though he shouldn't have been flying at the time) would have probably made a much better job of it all had he not been so FATIGUED, after all he had made it that far.

dragchute

21st Jan 2003, 01:18

Vjet

Without casting any aspersions on the chief pilot and operator, who have no doubt gained valuable experience from this unfortunate incident, one must also consider the implications of a double engine failure. Normally both engines don’t fail at the same instant therefore following the initial failure the pilot is faced with a control problem. If he is able to feather and restore control, he is going to be faced with the same problem shortly thereafter. Demanding on even an experienced and physically fresh pilot with the benefit of constant checking and training!

I think the crux of the matter is the fatigue issue. It is often better to stay overnight and attack the task in the cool light of the following day. Having managed a corporate operation where the pilot is given a sophisticated aircraft and a task to perform, much of the further management is left up to the pilot. But operators must stress that the ‘mail does not have to get through’ as many pilots, keen to impress their peers, will push the envelope.

Vjet

22nd Jan 2003, 01:20

Dragchute, good comment.

I guess what I was trying to allude to is that the Pilot may have realised that the engine failure was the direct result of fuel starvation, as opposed to a mechanical failure. If so he may have become totally pre-occupied with restarting the engine/s by re-establishing fuel supply.

As I understand it from media reports during the inquest, the Police airwing management had allowed the Pilot to operate in an environment beyond his legal entitlement and abillity. This is where my comment re the chief Pilot is directed.

However there are human factors I feel that may also explain why the Pilot himself undertook this mission, which have more to do with being a Police Officer than being a Pilot.

It is accepted that a Police Officer's occupation can, by its very nature, be dangerous. Often Police Officer's are required to confront extremely violent and dangerous situations and take chances & risks that the rest of the community cannot imagine. (armed offenders, violent domestics, car chases, injured mamed victims, deaths by murder, suicide and accidents.. we see it on tv)

In the daily lives of these Officers, it may- I suggest be paramount for them to OBEY orders and instructions that you and I would not even contemplate doing. When given an instruction to fly to a remote community to quell a violent & dangerous situation, the Pilot followed orders.

If (and I am drawing a long bow here) the Pilot was instructed not to incur overnight costs...........

I agree with others who recommend civillian pilots for the airwing, not because the Police Pilots are inferior (I don't think they are) but because they are already desensitised to danger and conditioned to taking risks and ORDERS,.

Jamair

23rd Jan 2003, 00:04

VJET & Dragchute: my point entirely!

In an organisation with a suitable safety culture and appropriate oversight, these issues are minimised to the benefit of the pilots, passengers (paying or otherwise) and organisation.

At 1000' AGL at night, within the circling area (2.66nm max from the nearest point of the runway) of an aerodrome well known to the pilot, engine failure/s should not be a loss of control event. Speed-Mix-Pitch-Power-pumps-tanks-switches; no engine response, feather, max glide, if unable to make rwy toward most suitable area, & fuel off / minimum speed prior to impact. Nope, ain't easy to make a conscious decision to bingle the aeroplane (or at least, never having had to do it myself I will assume that), but given the choice of a slow controlled impact vs a vertical uncontrolled one........

With the appropriate organisational culture, fatigue and training inadequacies should not be part of the equation. The elements you mention of Police culture may well be true - that is why RFDS have always had a policy of 'one man, one job'. A doctor should not be put in the position of choosing between a medical and an aviation imperative, so RFDS has professional pilots who are not part of the medical information chain (or at least they shouldn't be).

This was a tragedy, but as long as Government and semi-government departments continue to duplicate and dilute resources, and attempt to run a high-dollar enterprise on a low-dollar budget, we will keep seeing government employees on board old aeroplanes and if/when the luck element runs out.........then more of the same.

Towering Q

23rd Jan 2003, 23:10

VJet,
I don't think the overnight expense would have been the issue.

The boys would have been very keen to avoid overnighting at Kiwikurra, the facilities are very basic and the "customers" would come back to haunt them during the evening.

A big factor in the "pressonitis" department.:(

glueing

25th Jan 2003, 15:11

I really think that a lot of the comments here have been somewhat clueless.

What's the bet that the guy WAS competent.
The area remote and the real cause of the prang was that the regional infrastructure is so absent that he had to make the flight without being able to top up the tanks.
The poor bastard just got caught out.

ymmv
glueing

Icarus2001

25th Jan 2003, 19:07

Glueing have you read the ATSB report?

What's the bet that the guy WAS competent.
That is why both engines stopped due to fuel starvation with 165 litres of useable fuel on board.

...make the flight without being able to top up the tanks.
Do you think 165 litres is insufficient?

...a lot of the comments here have been somewhat clueless.

I agree. ;)

thermo-riser

3rd Feb 2003, 23:11

While in Perth last week I was reading the West Australian news paper when I noticed a small article relating to this post.

It said that the deceased Pilot's wife and one of the police passengers partner are taking the Commissioner of Police Mr Matthews to court over the deaths of their respective other halves.

Having read the previous posts I guess the quiet pay off didn't work for these grieving loved ones and they are taking their chances with the legal system.

If it does end up in court on a civil bases I guess there might be some very worried Police managers as I am sure the ensuing media coverage will sensationalise the short comings and any negligence on their behalves.

A civil damages claim might run into millions.....

With this situation I guess the Commissioner will cop the rap (no punn intended) If it was a commercial operator I guess the Manager would cop it. Sobering thought for operators!!!!

:eek: :eek: :eek: