Erebus 25 years on
Whispering "T" Jet
And several of us here having looked at all the facts closely, strongly believe that even without the benefit of hindsight, better could reasonably have been expected of Collins (and Cassin) on the day.
I don't blame Air NZ and Muldoon for going after the pilots. A US$40,000 odd payout per passenger's family compared to airline liability US$100 million. The Chippindale report lacked so much credibility. Mahon straightened it out. Even after the appeal the Privy Council delivered two judgements:
The Privy Council upheld Mahon’s view that pilot error was not to blame and that the administrative system of Air New Zealand at the time was insufficiently error-proof. The Privy Council did, however, agree with the Court of Appeal ruling that Mahon had exceeded his terms of reference in his statement that the airline had presented sections of evidence which involved a “pre-determined plan of deception” such that he was forced to say that he had listened to an “orchestrated litany of lies”.
30
30
Perhaps Mahon’s choice of words too closely linked the administrative errors that led to the changed flight plan with evidence that appeared to indicate its concealment. If Mahon had referred to an “unfortunate catalogue of errors” the Privy Council decision may have been different.
I am not sure what prompted Holmes to put pen to paper. Mahon's findings about pilot error, not being a cause, still stands today.(I know not officially acknowledged because of a legal technicality.) The NZ government has erected a memorial to the disaster, apologised to everyone, including the crew's family and hopes everyone will now move on. This request for exoneration baffles me. What are the crew being exonerated from?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New Zealand
Age: 64
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Privy Council bid not uphold Mahon's finding about the culpability of the crew, because it was not at issue. Don't believe me? Try reading quite a lot of words. I know it's scary, but give it a go:
Mahon v Air New Zealand Limited [1983] NZPC 3; [1983] UKPC 29; [1984] AC 808; [1983] NZLR 662; [1984] 3 WLR 884; (1983) 4 NZAR 33; (1983) 50 ALR 193; [1984] 3 All ER 201 (20 October 1983)
Who cares about where Mahon's findings stand or sit or whatever? That's like quoting the findings of the Warren Commission to a Kennedy conspiracy theorist. The issue is not what Mahon found. It's whether he was correct. Does this relieve the feigned bafflement?
Mahon v Air New Zealand Limited [1983] NZPC 3; [1983] UKPC 29; [1984] AC 808; [1983] NZLR 662; [1984] 3 WLR 884; (1983) 4 NZAR 33; (1983) 50 ALR 193; [1984] 3 All ER 201 (20 October 1983)
Who cares about where Mahon's findings stand or sit or whatever? That's like quoting the findings of the Warren Commission to a Kennedy conspiracy theorist. The issue is not what Mahon found. It's whether he was correct. Does this relieve the feigned bafflement?
Whispering "T" Jet
Have read it ALL and more ampan.
More disappointment for you too: In case you missed it all those years ago.The Mahon report was tabled unsolicited into parliament. You can read it in the Hansard, as you are a fan of
More disappointment for you too: In case you missed it all those years ago.The Mahon report was tabled unsolicited into parliament. You can read it in the Hansard, as you are a fan of
reading quite a lot of words
Whispering "T" Jet
Sorry ampan, missed your #1020 post.
You would have to ask Jim Collins and his crew those questions. Oh, that's right, they can't testify. So we will all just have to keep assuming, presuming, guessing and creating "educated"(I use that term loosely) theories as we have been doing for the past 37 years !!!!
You would have to ask Jim Collins and his crew those questions. Oh, that's right, they can't testify. So we will all just have to keep assuming, presuming, guessing and creating "educated"(I use that term loosely) theories as we have been doing for the past 37 years !!!!
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Auckalnd
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3 Holer wrote:
Well, I'm with you there.
I suspect the connection to the family goes way back. Somewhere on the internet I saw a summer holiday photo containing Himemoa Elder, Holmes's future wife with Katherine Collins.
ampan wrote:
I'm not sure the bafflement is feigned. While the fact that 3 Holer quotes Mahon like it's Scripture is baffling to us; for some, the very concept that Mahon might have been wrong simply won't compute. There is, as someone once wrote in the Herald, a messianic adherence to the Mahon report which in those that have it, supersedes the quest for balance, and truth.
Taking the book "Daughters of Erebus" to bed with you PapaHotel6 won't give you an insight to too many facts.
I am not sure what prompted Holmes to put pen to paper.
ampan wrote:
The issue is not what Mahon found. It's whether he was correct. Does this relieve the feigned bafflement?
Last edited by PapaHotel6; 4th Jul 2016 at 07:24.
Whispering "T" Jet
supersedes the quest for balance, and truth.
His report contained false allegations of flight below MSA and low flying (when almost all crews did it with Air NZ's approval), CVR editing (which Mahon admonished Chippindale vehemently for during his cross examination at the Inquiry)and the big one, the crew were lost.(BIG mistake taking that tack)
It was a good job the general Kiwi public didn't buy it. Let's remember, if it wasn't for them and NZALPA, the Honourable Justice Peter Mahon may never have had the opportunity of displaying his impartial and well balanced findings.
No wonder he was recommended for a Knighthood.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New Zealand
Age: 64
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those on the other side of this argument, NZALPA in particular, remind me of that mad ovine rabble whose mass hysteria led to the conviction of Peter Ellis for something he clearly didn't do, and which led to numerous similar convictions in the UK and USA.
Whispering "T" Jet
No "mass hysteria" on this side of the fence ampan. Just pure and simple balance & truth, as it always has been during the last 37 years of debating this topic.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Let's remember, if it wasn't for them and NZALPA, the Honourable Justice Peter Mahon may never have had the opportunity of displaying his impartial and well balanced findings.
Peter Mahon died on 11 August 1986, a folk hero, an outcast to politicians who declined to honour him, far from well off financially and embittered by his shabby treatment.
Folk Hero: noun: A hero in the eyes of a particular group of people.
3 holer, I guess you would be in that particular group.
Last edited by prospector; 4th Jul 2016 at 10:12. Reason: Left some out of post.
Whispering "T" Jet
Peter Mahon died on 11 August 1986, a folk hero, an outcast to politicians who declined to honour him, far from well off financially and embittered by his shabby treatment.
I myself, prefer to remember him as a man of integrity (staying true to his moral and ethical principles), initiative (his proactive, resourceful and persistent approach to the accident) and inclusion (by embracing and valuing the perspectives and contributions of all during the testimonies and investigations). I doubt he would care what politicians thought of him and I doubt he would consider he was treated "shabbily". He would never entertain such trivial nonsense. However, if you, in your opinion, say he would, then I differ from your opinion.
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Auckalnd
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If that is your opinion and how you want to remember the Honourable Justice Peter Mahon, you are entitled to your opinion prospector. We live in a democracy and have that right to freedom of speech.
I myself, prefer to remember him as a man of integrity
I myself, prefer to remember him as a man of integrity
I have my own Mahon anecdote below (utterly irrelevant to the prevailing discussion, hence the italics. But I want to share it anyway).
It was the end of 1982. Mahon was the invited guest speaker at my school's prizegiving. This was only just after his report had been released, and for my humble high school to have secured the Hon. Peter Mahon was no mean feat indeed. Anticipation surrounding the event was huge, and the hall was packed.
When he took the podium to speak, he immediately declared that he wasn't going to speak about Erebus. The disappointment in the audience was utterly palpable. He then went on to say how it was never a good idea to invite members of the legal fraternity to speak at such occasions, because they would invariably be over-wrought, drawn out and dry.
Well, he was true to to his word there. For what seemed like an eternity (it was probably about 40 minutes) he droned on about some obscure legal topic. At the end of it the hall was full of faces that all looked like they'd surely have committed suicide there and then, had they possessed the means.
But for me the evening was redeemed totally when I received my prize (for 6th form Physics) - a compendium of Graham Greene novels. Mahon warmly shook my hand and said "Congratulations. He's one of my favourite authors." I felt immensely proud.
Last edited by PapaHotel6; 4th Jul 2016 at 12:27.
A beautiful memory to treasure PH6 . . .. (When I was a ten year old Douglas Bader came to our school not to give us one of his acerbic dryly witty speeches but simply to sit at a desk signing his autograph for a string of ATC cadets lined up in awe. At least awe from those who had read Brickhill's 'Reach for the Sky'. )
The tone of the ongoing Erebus debate is good. Mainly cordial . The speaker has had to bring the house to order rarely. .. What is most illuminating about studying and trying to reconcile the conflicting views posted here is the depth of knowledge and understanding being shared by those with undoubtably specialist insights.
And there is a fine sensitivity displayed to the situation of others forever affected at the deepest level by the tragic events. That is why comments such as this one serve to remind us to be ever mindful of wounds that will never entirely heal.
The tone of the ongoing Erebus debate is good. Mainly cordial . The speaker has had to bring the house to order rarely. .. What is most illuminating about studying and trying to reconcile the conflicting views posted here is the depth of knowledge and understanding being shared by those with undoubtably specialist insights.
And there is a fine sensitivity displayed to the situation of others forever affected at the deepest level by the tragic events. That is why comments such as this one serve to remind us to be ever mindful of wounds that will never entirely heal.
What people like Holmes desperately need to realise is that they are perpetuating the pain of the Collins family, not alleviating it.
Last edited by Fantome; 4th Jul 2016 at 16:44.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fantome, with due respect.
'Perpetuating the pain of the Collins family' it may be. But what about the pain of the families of those situated in the cabin?
Like it or not, Capt Collins was the Pilot in Command of NZ901. According to ICAO (and every other PIC I've ever been taught by or indeed have met), the PIC is responsible for ;
, or
You takes your dollars, you takes your chances.
There are some undeniably simple facts here. The PIC ignored several tell-tale signs that the aircraft wasn't where he 'thought' (not knew..) it was.
No VHF, TACAN or radar reception inside well defined and promulgated areas of operation (i.e because there's terrain in the road.)
No visual sighting of ANYTHING familiar, despite the fact that a
mountain taller than Mt Blanc should be within spittles throw away.
Despite the fact that Collins made the executive choice to descend 'VMC'.
I understand your argument. Essentially it's "'they' (ANZ Planing) plugged the wrong coordinates into the INS'.
That 'they' did is beyond question. Regardless, that doesn't alleviate the PIC of his responsibilities.
3 Holer's comments would make me laugh if it wasn't so shattering for the families involved.
"It was all the companies fault, Your Honor. They made me do it."
If that is what the sole survivor Capt Collins had argued, he would have been pilloried.
The crew were the final, largest (and fatal) hole in the Swiss Cheese model. Like it or not.
To argue otherwise simply shows a basic lack of knowledge of any aviation safety systems e.g a Walt.
'Perpetuating the pain of the Collins family' it may be. But what about the pain of the families of those situated in the cabin?
Like it or not, Capt Collins was the Pilot in Command of NZ901. According to ICAO (and every other PIC I've ever been taught by or indeed have met), the PIC is responsible for ;
Originally Posted by ICAO
..the final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight
The pilot-in-command of an aircraft shall have final authority as to the disposition of the aircraft while in command.
There are some undeniably simple facts here. The PIC ignored several tell-tale signs that the aircraft wasn't where he 'thought' (not knew..) it was.
No VHF, TACAN or radar reception inside well defined and promulgated areas of operation (i.e because there's terrain in the road.)
No visual sighting of ANYTHING familiar, despite the fact that a
mountain taller than Mt Blanc should be within spittles throw away.
Despite the fact that Collins made the executive choice to descend 'VMC'.
I understand your argument. Essentially it's "'they' (ANZ Planing) plugged the wrong coordinates into the INS'.
That 'they' did is beyond question. Regardless, that doesn't alleviate the PIC of his responsibilities.
3 Holer's comments would make me laugh if it wasn't so shattering for the families involved.
"It was all the companies fault, Your Honor. They made me do it."
If that is what the sole survivor Capt Collins had argued, he would have been pilloried.
The crew were the final, largest (and fatal) hole in the Swiss Cheese model. Like it or not.
To argue otherwise simply shows a basic lack of knowledge of any aviation safety systems e.g a Walt.
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Auckalnd
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Perpetuating the pain of the Collins family' it may be. But what about the pain of the families of those situated in the cabin?
I made the comment about the Collins family's pain in relation to those who keep telling them what they desperately want to hear - ie. that he wasn't at fault at all. This is so patently false that as well as sparking an outcry from people like ourselves, it must cause a degree of internal conflict in the Collins's themselves. Whereas if they were allowed to accept that their husband/father was placed in an unenviable predicament, that things didn't go his way but also he made some errors of judgment himself; perhaps they too could find acceptance and move on.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ph6, the crew made a mistake that cost not only their lives, but the lives they were responsible for as well.
So be it. It has happened before and it'll happen again.
The lessons learned seem to be though 'don't trust flight planning with your life (Collins seems to be the only pilot I've seen who didn't know this anyway), and 'watch out for sector white-out'.
Holding any actual 'responsibility' as PIC seems to have gone missing...
So be it. It has happened before and it'll happen again.
The lessons learned seem to be though 'don't trust flight planning with your life (Collins seems to be the only pilot I've seen who didn't know this anyway), and 'watch out for sector white-out'.
Holding any actual 'responsibility' as PIC seems to have gone missing...
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New Zealand
Age: 64
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The two lessons referred to in your third paragraph had already been learned well before 1979. Inertial navigation systems had been around for nearly 10 years. This was not the first occasion where a programming error had occurred, hence the well-established rule that the AINS was not to be used for landings or other descents below the Minimum Sate Altitude. That is confirmed by Vette in his book and confirmed by Collins when he declared he was VMC. But he wasn't - and he knew it. Sector whiteout didn't have to be covered at the briefing for him to know about it. The fact that Amundson got to the South Pole first wasn't covered at the briefing either, but I'm sure Captain Collins was aware of that fact. He clearly knew about sector whiteout: (1) He said so on the CVR tape; (2) He spent 5 years with the RNZAF at Wigram on the Canterbury Plains, right next to the Southern Alps; (3) He and F/O Lucas visited Operation Deep Freeze shortly before their flight; (4) The phenomena was common knowledge amongst pilots, even those who did not fly in snow-covered regions. He was, therefore, not VMC below the cloud layer, however many times he might have said he was. So everything ended up resting on the AINS, which turned out, on this occasion and on other occasions, to be wrong - but on this occasion the aircraft was below MSA. The error in the AINS was obviously not the captain's fault, but the altitude clearly was. He flouted a well-established rule and the co-pilot did nothing to stop it. When the captain started into that figure-of-eight descent, why didn't the co-pilot say something like: "Ah, we haven't got the radar fix yet"? You can't blame F/O Lucas, who was seated down the back, who heard the announcement about the radar, and who would have assumed, when the descent started, that the position had been confirmed by radar.
Love it when people say "with due respect" than immediately proceed to talk down to you as though you are some kind of half-wit.
It is the grossest presumption to ascribe to me a relative lack of concern or empathy for the thousands who will forever grieve. There are no distinctions.. The paste is evenly spread. It is not like apportioning a bit out here and a bit out there. That that concern includes equally the Collins family and the families of all on the flight deck in the last stages of the flight would be apparent to anyone who has felt my pulse in previous posts. It is irksome that there should even be a need to waste time and oxygen trying to explain.
It is the grossest presumption to ascribe to me a relative lack of concern or empathy for the thousands who will forever grieve. There are no distinctions.. The paste is evenly spread. It is not like apportioning a bit out here and a bit out there. That that concern includes equally the Collins family and the families of all on the flight deck in the last stages of the flight would be apparent to anyone who has felt my pulse in previous posts. It is irksome that there should even be a need to waste time and oxygen trying to explain.
Whispering "T" Jet
The lessons learned seem to be though 'don't trust flight planning with your life (Collins seems to be the only pilot I've seen who didn't know this anyway), and 'watch out for sector white-out'.
ph6, the crew made a mistake that cost not only their lives, but the lives they were responsible for as well.
So be it. It has happened before and it'll happen again.
So be it. It has happened before and it'll happen again.
Qantas have been operating sight seeing flights to the Antarctic for years. An excellent safety culture, organised briefings with qualified personnel and trained crews carrying out the sorties. It's not as cut and dry as you would have us believe Hempy.
Guest
Posts: n/a
That that concern includes equally the Collins family and the families of all on the flight deck
But what about the pain of the families of those situated in the cabin?
Hempy specifically states "All in the cabin".
I would like to add All the families of company personnel, including Morrie Davis, who apparently were getting hate letters for years after the crash, based on Mahons findings, which to many were wrong.