Erebus 25 years on

[prospector]

This accident happened nearly 40 years ago but now we have some instant experts who profess to know exactly what the cause was.

40 years ago, so what, many of us were actively aviating at that time. And the "causes" have not changed at all.

Was it not the ALPA people who insisted that their senior captains all have a "turn" at this perk flight?

It was a simple case of pilot error. The reason for the continued argument is that Mahon was duped by the union and botched things up, and the union then sought to enshrine its victory.

Simply put, the airline placed their crews in a situation where errors were more likely to occur. They simply weren't trained for what they were being asked to do.

Be interesting to know what aviation experience they have that they can make these profound statements.

.


Nothing profound about any of those statements, simply the facts seen a different way then the Mahon report. .

[Fantome]

ahhh . . dead right PLovett . .. . . we do not want to get immersed in tortuous debate yet again. .. . my opinion is as worth a crumpet as yours in the broad scheme of air accident investigation. If you have read and tried to grasp everything you can lay your hands on about TE901 are you then an authority on the subject? Maybe. Maybe not.

There are still many in the airline industry, and retired from it, who ever will respect and admire the late Gordon Vette for his fearless pursuit of the truth, as he saw it.
This from The Auckland Herald last August -

A seeker of justice they couldn't silence

Captain Alwyn Gordon Vette, 82, whose death the other day was largely overlooked by the news media, played a vital role in obtaining justice in New Zealand's most controversial air disaster - the 1979 Erebus crash.

As Air New Zealand and its spin machine worked overtime to blame the crew for Flight TE901 crashing into Mt Erebus in the Antarctic, killing all 257 people on board, Captain Vette quickly began to consider the crew was not to blame.

He did not accept the cause of the crash was pilot error, and at Justice Peter Mahon's subsequent Royal Commission of Inquiry into the crash, he presented his investigative efforts to Justice Mahon - and they were accepted.

Effectively written off by Air New Zealand, Captain Vette's investigative efforts - which cost him his career - were part of the public debate and demand that precipitated the Mahon Inquiry - six months after the release of the official accident report.

Justice Mahon presented his extensive findings, which supported Captain Vette's provocative and original theories about the tragedy of TE901.

Justice Mahon described a single cause of the Erebus disaster: "In my opinion therefore, the single dominant and effective cause of the disaster was the mistake made by those airline officials who programmed the aircraft to fly directly at Mt Erebus and omitted to tell the aircrew. That mistake is directly attributable, not so much to the persons who made it, but to the incompetent administrative airline procedures which made the mistake possible."

For me IMPACT EREBUS did a lot in helping to understand something of the front of house crew in a wide body. I think Gordon Vette should be accorded better respect by those who rejected his book and bagged him almost belligerently. Read it before daring to venture an opinion -

[Pakehaboy]

Quote....For me IMPACT EREBUS did a lot in helping to understand something of the front of house crew in a wide body. I think Gordon Vette should be accorded better respect by those who rejected his book and bagged him almost belligerently. Read it before daring to venture an opinion -

Ditto!!!

[prospector]

As such the organisation responsible must bear their share of the blame

Obviously, the point of all these debates is that Mahon completely exonerated the crew from all blame.

That is patently wrong, and the reasons why that decision is wrong have been clearly established by many facts that have been presented in this forum.

[Fantome]

. . . .. so now it is also clearly established that we must cede to the invincible arguments of those with insights superior to misguided souls such as the late Captain Gordon Vette.

[Pakehaboy]

Originally Posted by Fantome

. . . .. so now it is also clearly established that we must cede to the invincible arguments of those with insights superior to misguided souls such as the late Captain Gordon Vette.

Not really,that's why everybody has an opinion,some I find more palatable than others.Ive always held the view that the crew was/is/should be held accountable,as prospector notes.Vette at least pursued the issue by not allowing AirNZ to camouflage important information.
Am I slightly biased that I met the man?maybe,he saved a good friend of mines life,Jay Prochnow,you may remember that??

[prospector]

..

so now it is also clearly established that we must cede to the invincible arguments of those with insights superior to misguided souls such as the late Captain Gordon Vette.

Gordon Vette was trying to establish why they flew into a mountain that everybody knew was there, and why they did not see it.

It is not a question of insights. There were many rules and regulations governing these flights to the ice. This crew (Captain) broke all of them, CAA regs, company requirements for any descent below MSA, the mandatory descent requirements as to area approved for any descent, any descent at all below MSA when the reported weather conditions at McMurdo were below those required for the approved descent procedure, he was even told by the people at McMurdo that the weather was no good for sightseeing and it would be better to go to the dry valley.

He disregarded all of these, flew a perfectly serviceable aeroplane into a mountain that everybody knew was there, and according to some, including Mahon, was Blameless???

[PapaHotel6]

You are correct slice. Anyone who thinks differently, is either a private pilot with very little experience or has never attended Crew Resource Management/ Human Factors training.

Agree with you 3 Holer. This accident happened nearly 40 years ago but now we have some instant experts who profess to know exactly what the cause was. Be interesting to know what aviation experience they have that they can make these profound statements.

. . . .. so now it is also clearly established that we must cede to the invincible arguments of those with insights superior to misguided souls such as the late Captain Gordon Vette.

All the above are examples of emotive, vaguely irrelevant passive-aggressive utterings that do nothing to take the argument forwards that are sadly all too predictable from those who hold the views of Mahon/Vette to be sacrosanct.

I think Gordon Vette should be accorded better respect by those who rejected his book and bagged him almost belligerently. Read it before daring to venture an opinion -

I've read it - from cover to cover at least twice, and flicked through it many times in between. What is actually almost laughable about Vette's treatise, is that he passes his theories off as "science" and his investigations "scientific". Nothing could be further from the truth - his assertions regarding mindset, whiteout, optical illusions are simply his theory - nothing more, nothing less. There is no credible science in there at all. That's not to say he is necessarily wrong - but there is nowhere near enough evidence to assert with confidence that he is right. Yet he put forward his theories as though they were gospel - and were accepted by Mahon as such.

Also, Vette's own interpretation of the CVR, full of his own surmising, is nothing but fantasy - but again, presented as reality.

we do not want to get immersed in tortuous debate yet again

Unfortunately - we are doomed to carry this discussion on forever, thanks to Peter Mahon. Because as long as there are newcomers to this pursuit, there will always be those that have to go through the mental process and information gathering that many of us have done here.

[3 Holer]

Talking of profound statements ...................." an orchestrated litany of lies"
is one of the best!

[rog747]

the crash and aftermath was a terribly sad state of affairs, which still here cause blood pressure to overload!

a unique tragic crash and such a sad impact for New Zealanders as many knew someone who was lost on this sightseeing fight which back then was ANZ's show case day trip and they all sold out -

Qantas still do these flights every season from Oz airports with a 747-400ER BTW - i would like to do one - would you??
see here
http://www.antarcticaflights.com.au/

i recall the 1979 crash well at the time of the DC-10 ''bad news stories'' happening with regularity so not just the unique accident location and type of joy flight but yet another DC-10 (but which here this a/c type had no contribution to the crash but of course impacted the news story)

so many blindingly obvious what ifs' and the crash would never have happened - one of which had the tour narrator doing the cockpit commentary been on the flight deck at that moment the chances are he would have known that they were in the wrong place - edit I maybe wrong here

the accident now should be used as a major learning tool for all budding crews and operations staff and air safety boards - its is a fantastic piece of very sad history and the events pre, during, and post the crash used as a benchmark of learning.
and also airline companies and aircrews and operational bodies should note that to cover up blame & mistakes for whatever reason will always come back to haunt them as will their arrogance.

the crash is fascinating and happened at a time of major innovations of air travel - big wide body jets - day trips to the south pole - cheap mass air travel - this was all NEW and spectacular must haves and must do's for both companies and public alike.

time to maybe stop letting your blood pressures rise almost 40 years later and accept that things happened that day in that cockpit and prior to take off which are inexplicable to us now so we must study and learn from it -

I was recently at a lecture by explorer Sir Ranulph Fiennes about Shackleton and remote polar explorations held in London at the Royal geographical society and we chatted about the Erebus crash as he was there at the time and helped in the recovery

as an aside was it Capt Vette who was the PIC on the DC-10 flight from HNL to AKL that searched over the Pacific for many hours and found the lost PPL flyer and escorted him to land in NZ on fumes

[prospector]

so many blindingly obvious what ifs' and the crash would never have happened - one of which had the tour narrator doing the cockpit commentary been on the flight deck at that moment the chances are he would have known that they were in the wrong place

Not so, Mulgrew was the narrator.

although Mulgrew told the passengers, less than four minutes before impact, "I still can't see very much at the moment, keep you informed soon as I see something that gives me a clue as to where we are"

[rog747]

thank you for correcting that Prospector - i was somehow under the impression he was not in the cockpit at the time of the crash

[Pakehaboy]

Quote.."I've read it - from cover to cover at least twice, and flicked through it many times in between. What is actually almost laughable about Vette's treatise, is that he passes his theories off as "science" and his investigations "scientific". Nothing could be further from the truth - his assertions regarding mindset, whiteout, optical illusions are simply his theory - nothing more, nothing less. There is no credible science in there at all. That's not to say he is necessarily wrong - but there is nowhere near enough evidence to assert with confidence that he is right. Yet he put forward his theories as though they were gospel - and were accepted by Mahon as such.

Also, Vette's own interpretation of the CVR, full of his own surmising, is nothing but fantasy - but again, presented as reality."


Needed to delete that comment as I think it has come across in a negative value.The saying...Opinions are like aholes,everyone has one etc etc comes to mind etc etc......read the book several times myself,amazing how differences of interpretation arise!!!

[Fantome]

a unique tragic crash and such a sad impact for New Zealanders as many knew someone who was lost on this sightseeing flight

God has spoken,end of subject !!!!!!

For those who lost family it will needless to say be with them till the end of their days. For the family of Captain Jim Collins I suspect that their grief is in some sense compounded, with them every day until the final curtain. No one. . . absolutely no one but a mindless idiot could imagine otherwise.

Does it help to put the minds at ease of those whose loss was greatest to be told repeatedly that Captain Collins' decisions were wrong on every count?
Regardless of whether it is your father or your husband or someone remote from your own personal circle who is postulated to bear the burden of guilt for multiple manslaughter, that line of thought is akin to arguing parallels with the depressive first officer on the GermanWings flight, which is an absurd proposition.

[PapaHotel6]

Does it help to put the minds at ease of those whose loss was greatest to be told repeatedly that Captain Collins' decisions were wrong on every count?

No, but putting minds at ease is not the purpose of this discussion.

To have to process the knowledge that your loved father/husband made a clanger that resulted in the deaths of 257 people must be nothing short of agony. To this end, the Collins family have actually been badly served by the likes of Mahon/Holmes/Dunne etc. who have fueled their thirst and quest to "clear his name", which is just not appropriate. And also, I believe, somewhat disrespectful towards the families of the 256 other people who were killed on this flight.

[framer]

I agree with PapaH on the last point.
Captaining an airliner is serious business. The consequences of a chain of poor decisions is massive as is evidenced by the fact that folk are still debating an event nearly forty years later. We would do well not to forget this. The Captains of our current fleet of airliners should always have it tucked away in the back of their mind that many peoples loved ones are in their care and that any risk ( there is always some) is to be accepted judiciously.
Next time you see your passengers boarding remember how much faith all their loved ones are placing in the workings of your mind.
To brush over Collins's mistakes is to downplay this responsibility. I have often thought he sounded like a good man and wouldn't want us to do that anyway.

[3 Holer]

We are debating 40 years on because, there were indeed a "chain of poor decisions" but as Mahon discovered, not all were Captain Collins. As Air New Zealand et al were trying to force issue with the public on.

I can understand Air New Zealand and the New Zealand government's surprise and horror at the findings in Mahon's final report but to carry on like a couple of petulant children after the fact is actually disturbing to any professional airline pilot.

To refresh our memories:

“The palpably false sections of evidence which I heard could not have been the result of mistake, or faulty recollection. They originated, I am compelled to say, in a pre-determined plan of deception. They were very clearly part of an attempt to conceal a series of disastrous administrative blunders and so… I am forced reluctantly to say that I had to listen to an orchestrated litany of lies.”

Disgusting!

[framer]

Yes true.
But, as always with this subject the actions/ behaviours of one party often affect how we judge the actions/ behaviours of another.
That AirNZ and the government behaved poorly does not change the fact that Collins was in command of an aircraft, flying in a clean configuration, at 1500ft, below MSA, not in the vicinity of an airport, with crew members saying things like " I'm just wondering where Erebus is" .
The fact that one party behaved poorly does not mean that another party was making good decisions.

[Chris2303]

What about the second first officer who was relegated to the cabin so that the commentator could be on the flight deck?

Knowing that man well I wonder what the outcome would have been if he had been there....

[prospector]

The palpably false sections of evidence which I heard could not have been the result of mistake, or faulty recollection. They originated, I am compelled to say, in a pre-determined plan of deception. They were very clearly part of an attempt to conceal a series of disastrous administrative blunders and so… I am forced reluctantly to say that I had to listen to an orchestrated litany of lies.”

[QUOTE]In their judgement, delivered on 20 Oct 1983, the five Law Lords of the Privy Council dismissed the commissioner's appeal and upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal decision, which set aside the costs order against the airline, on the grounds that Mahon had committed clear breaches of natural justice. They demolished his case item by item, including Exhibit 164 which they said could not "be understood by any experienced pilot to be intended to be used for the purpose of navigation", and went even further, saying there was no clear proof on which to base a finding that a plan of deception, led by the company's chief executive, had ever existed.[/QUOTe

That taken from John King publication. I think it shows very clearly what the New Zealand Court of Appeal, and the Privy Council thought of Justice Mahons methods and utterances.