Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Merged: Senate Inquiry

Old 28th Mar 2014, 04:02
  #1781 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Futile and self explanatory.

28th March 2014. The Honourable Michael McCormack MP. Member for Riverina.
11-15 Fitzmaurice Street Wagga Wagga NSW 2650.
I write this letter addressed to you as my local member and in your capacity as Parliamentary Secretary to The Minister for Finance, plus as a conduit to Minister Truss, Deputy Prime Minister and in this case Minister for Transport, to put on record my deep concern at the series of recent events that culminated in Minister Truss’ response to Senate inquiries into The Civil Aviation Safety Authority. I am also concerned that the Review he instigated into CASA appears to have a pre-ordained outcome supportive of CASA and dismissive of the plethora of concerns raised by industry. It appears to me that he is captive to, and blindly supportive of both CASA and The ATSB despite clear evidence in submissions to both Senators and his Review Board that at best, (in my opinion), are both incompetent, and at worst, a visual and credible account of abuse of their mandates.
Without laboring individual points which I’m sure Senators Heffernan, Fawcett and Xenaphon would gladly elaborate on for you, and with a full understanding of what is expected of you along Party lines, I advise I can no longer support you or your Party with my vote in the future and, in protest, will vote for The Labor Party at the next Federal elections unless there is a quantum shift in attitudes toward what, (in my opinion), are out of control regulatory authority’s that constitute a real and present danger to the traveling public and aviation industry.
It gives me no pleasure in telling you this, and as a long time Conservative Voter you will understand such an action is not taken lightly although it appears to be of no consequence in the big scheme of things. It will similarly give me no pleasure in saying ‘I told you so’, when Minister Truss is found out of his depth when the inevitable, and over due tragedy takes place in our skies that prompts people to ask why so many inquiries over so many years have led to nothing but lip service emphasizing a ‘safety’ mantra but no action, absent since Seaview, Monarch, Lockhart River and more recently Cabramatta and Pel-Air. You may like to start with ‘The Morris’ inquiry which I believe was the longest running in Australian history and compare it with subsequent findings to see what I’m on about. You may also like to ask The Minister for Finance why $150+ million has been spent over some 23 + years for a ‘regulatory review process’ that is still incomplete and will never be acceptable to industry while templates along the lines of US FAR’s, New Zealand and New Guinea are immediately workable and acceptable by ICAO and other signatories to the Chicago Convention.
Perhaps a plausible explanation as to why the flight data recorders and cockpit voice recorders have not been recovered to date from VH-NGA still in shallow water may ameliorate further damage to LNP election prospects. I’ll willingly circulate this. Be in no doubt, the last Minister gave me no reason for optimism, but at least he was a known quantity and nobody expected anything from him. The industry expected better from this new government. CASA, (in my opinion), and in particular are an impediment to productive industry growth and $millions are being wasted to further handicap it.
Your Constituent. cc to industry.
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2014, 21:51
  #1782 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
A Saturday twiddle, just for a smile.

While we wait for an earth shaking response to Franks humble missive, a scary thought. What if we get a safe, sanguine, competent DAS, what then?. The BRB and IOS would be bereft of a solid, constant supply of ribald humour. If comic relief disappears overnight what then?; I mean there are other bit players, some even mildly amusing but none in the class we have come to know and enjoy. Aye, tough times ahead kids; but never mind, looks like we'll always have Beaker. Now, I wonder, should we not contemplate a new name. I mean the real Beaker is not a bad sort of chap; the more I watch, read and listen to Hansard, the more the Dickensian character Uriah Heep creeps into my imagination; any other offers?

Uriah Heep

It fits, very neatly into the dichotomy, does it not?
Kharon is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2014, 22:09
  #1783 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Sunday ruminations.

CP # 1829 - "Unless the Chief Commissioner has given a direction under s 43 to the effect that the CVR not be removed from NGA, where is the impediment to someone recovering the CVR to use it precisely for its one and only intended purpose? (A direction to that effect under s 43 would probably be unlawful, because it would be completely contrary to and a complete perversion of the policy of the legislation.)"
Curse you Creamy; (with smile) there I was happily reading through the Canadian CFIT report, contemplating the much anticipated second coffee, then, looking for a reference I re read your post. Now the curiosity bump is itching, again, the old familiar itch – If not, why not recover the OBR. Even of it's only for the sake of ticking the ICAO 13 box. It's not a good look and it's hard to justify. Too deep; too risky; too cold; too little money; puerile bollocks. Then we get the very thin argument ~ we had all the information we needed. Again pure, unmitigated Bollocks.

Since the beginning, there has been a strange 'smell' about the OBR matter, a queer, indefinable aroma. I could easily be persuaded that there never was any intention, from minute one, to recover the box. It's not Dolan's money, it's 'our' money and 'our' elected Senators, representing 'our' interests want the box recovered. Who is Dolan to gainsay them? Why is he being so obdurate? Hell, he may even be right and there is little of interest there, but I feel that now, after all that has transpired, he must prove that statement. Why not, what's to loose?, the Senate wants it, we all want it, so what's the hold up?

I believe we can safely rule out dogged determination to protect the ministry or department from adverse comment, (a) they can spin that away at the drop of a hat, (b) Dolan has had many 'chances' to legitimately do so, and have some semblance of credibility remaining. Again I reach the Gordian knot, why not take the easy, honest way out? Why defy a fully armed, hostile Senate committee? Aye, it's a puzzle.

Not – repeat not – pushing conspiracy; but I always end up wondering, what in the seven hells can be so bad that it warrants this level of abstruseness. The incident was, after all said and done, a fairly straight forward event; which, honestly managed would have had very little, if any, notice taken (well not for too long anyway). There were some good safety 'holes' identified, which may assist in preventing a reoccurrence. Had we been less focussed on persecution, prosecution and just followed the investigation script, the industry could have learned some valuable lessons. Perhaps how to improve life raft deployment, life jacket selection, weather advisory, TAF and METAR forecasting, perhaps even taken a fresh look at alternates, the pit falls of bad fuel planning, ATC and airspace management; etc. etc.

So, once again, I just don't get it (shakes old wooden head). What's the driver behind the now public actions, akin to the defence of Stalingrad, of CASA and ATSB that is worth this much aggravation, suspicion and credibility loss. This is the Australian aviation safety system on display to the world and it's wife, WTF are they thinking. Why not just say, OK Senator, if you'll foot the bill, ex budget, we will re examine the matter, retrieve the OBR and provide a report of value to industry. It's all gone well beyond the incident now, which has morphed into history and no longer the subject of serious discussion.

We can, I believe, reasonably rule out sex as a motive, that only leaves us with either money or power, even then, cui bono?. Neither IMO justify the performances we have witnessed. I am tempted to consider a pre ordained verdict needing to be 'justified' and the resources of a department being 'utilised' to support the desired end result; perhaps all was well until the inescapable, inconvenient facts started to pop up like mushrooms.

Dunno, but you'll own; it's all passing strange and getting stranger by the day. Just happy it's not me who has attracted the wrath of that Senate committee. I'll just toddle off now for coffee #2 and perhaps, steal one of Min's fresh baked blueberry muffins, that's enough risk for one Sunday morning. Then back to the excellent TSBC CFIT report, now that report is worth the time.

Toot toot.
Kharon is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2014, 02:07
  #1784 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
The only reasonable explanation that I can come up with is that the CVR may contain information that supports the conclusion that the timing and content of weather information transmitted to NGA gave the crew a misleading picture of the actual and forecast conditions at NFI. That outcome would be inconvenient and embarrassing for ATSB and others.

The truly inspiring aspect of all this is the way in which the professional pilot community has united to take decisive action to protect its interests, by arranging the recovery of the OBR equipment despite ATSB's obfuscation.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2014, 13:47
  #1785 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
The Styx River never runs dry

Since the beginning, there has been a strange 'smell' about the OBR matter, a queer, indefinable aroma. I could easily be persuaded that there never was any intention, from minute one, to recover the box. It's not Dolan's money, it's 'our' money and 'our' elected Senators, representing 'our' interests want the box recovered. Who is Dolan to gainsay them? Why is he being so obdurate? Hell, he may even be right and there is little of interest there, but I feel that now, after all that has transpired, he must prove that statement. Why not, what's to loose?, the Senate wants it, we all want it, so what's the hold up?
The hold up has been for several reasons. The first reason was that the abysmal Beaker didn't want to dip into his pot of money. Being a career bureaucrat and Comcare 'accountant' will dull the senses and fry ones brain cells. Hence his bulging eyes. The second reason which would have hit home early in the peace was that the ATsB stuffed up, and they realised the CVR could contain something that makes them look rather silly (even though Beaker himself makes them look rather silly anyway)

I think the Senators did the best they could do with limited powers. The bigger issue is why that fool Truss hasn't given Beaker, McComick and MrDak an instant DCM? Skull is the only scalp to be skinned thus far, and even that is a weak, wet lettuce dismissal by any standard. But then again, this has never been about safety has it? It's all about politics. Dirty, devious, dishonest politics. One day those in power will reap Karma for all the deaths that have occurred due to their malfeasance and when that day comes I am confident that the River Styx Houseboat Captain will joyfully pick up his passengers while those who have been victims to Australia's aviation farce and died as a result will be lining the river bank, placards in hand and waving farewell to these parasites.

Toot Toot indeed!

TOOT TOOT
004wercras is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2014, 19:51
  #1786 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Ah, yes; but.

Naughty Creampuff; I'd say most pilots (of all castes) their families and insurance companies would like to be able to believe that should an unfortunate event occur, every effort would be made by the responsible authority to recover all data pertaining to the event and would make a honest attempt to determine the cause and circumstances. If only to prevent a repeat. The prevention of recurring events should be a yardstick used to measure the effectiveness of not only the performance of the national safety agency' but the effectiveness of supporting regulation. I might add, we already spend significant sums attempting to do this. The disappointing results of the Pel Air incident reflect an abject failure to meet any of the mandated criteria, let alone contribute to improved safety standards. This from what should have been a straightforward investigation.

Although it seems like great fun, the notion of a privately funded venture, even for a team of the Norfolk pro's would be 'legally' problematic; or else they would have had the whole shooting match up on the beach by now. There are some 'serious' matters which need to be sorted, like jurisdiction, ownership, insurance, custody, provenance, chain of evidence. All those 'minor' irritations of the law (rules of evidence) which, despite the best efforts of CASA to ignore, could, I suspect become problematic. I don't know, but I imagine recovery would have to be Navy or police supervised. Anyway, something more than just a bunch of well meaning, non accredited, non aligned 'private' crew; just to ensure that there was no call of 'monkey business' from interested parties. We may even want to know if the box was serviceable, or even plugged in during the flight.

We would need to know and be able to prove that there had been no tinkering, before, during and after any data recovered was used in anger. The real expense is going to be analysis. We certainly cannot allow ATSB to do it; look at the R/T transcript again, we don't want bits and pieces of data being accidentally 'overlooked' do we?.

But, the physical act of recovery is not a problem. I expect that happy bunch of pirates on No-poke Island know, to the inch, where the wreckage is and have been keeping a watchful eye. Good crew out there.

Last edited by Kharon; 30th Mar 2014 at 20:04. Reason: Late, stray thoughts.
Kharon is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2014, 21:33
  #1787 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
So everyone will sit around, whinging and whining and waiting for ‘the government’ to ‘do something’? Ain’t gonna happen, because it could be inconvenient and embarrassing.

If the ATSB did retrieve the OBR equipment and announced: “The OBR information does not provide a substantial basis on which to change the conclusions of our Report”, what then? Who’d believe it?

As I’ve said, if I’d been the PIC I’d have had the boxes out long ago.

Nobody’s actually identified the legal impediment to retrieval, or why that impediment is insurmountable.

If there’s an allegation of ‘tampering’ by a ‘private’ recovery team, so what? If the raw CVR recording were published and reviewed against the estimated timings of events like ground radio transmissions and ditching, I reckon a bunch of professional pilots would be able to judge whether bits were missing or added ex post facto.

I’d like to see someone convince the CDPP that it’s in the public interest to prosecute someone for doing the ATSB’s job for it, by retrieving the OBR equipment and using the information on it for the purpose for which it is fitted.

The only outcomes could be:

1. No information retrievable from the OBR equipment. Status quo re the Report's conclusions, but lingering criticism of ATSB for not retrieving the equipment sooner.

2. Information retrievable from the OBR equipment supports the conclusions of the Report, or does not cast doubt on the validity of the conclusions. Status quo re the Report's conclusions, but ATSB looks better.

3. Information retrievable from the OBR equipment suggests or shows that the timing and content of weather forecasts and reports provided to NGA provided a misleading view of the prevailing and likely weather conditions on arrival at NFI. ATSB looks worse, but the OBRs have served their one and only purpose.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2014, 22:00
  #1788 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Iraq
Age: 30
Posts: 150
Friends dive on wrecks around the pacific. They tell me that unless it has been designated off limits you should be able to dive on it.
No Hoper is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2014, 23:00
  #1789 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
At least, by leaving everything where it is, no chains of evidence have been broken. The real test is who recovers that evidence and what they do with it thereafter. Oh, and who would believe them to not abuse it whilst in their care. Seeing as Beaker has taken an active interest in the Malaysian Airline affair we should ask the Malaysians to do the recovery and hand the evidence to someone like NTSB. That should square us all up.
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2014, 23:14
  #1790 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
Sunfish has the skills to retrieve the box, all he needs is the financial backing.
It could be retrieved covertly, then hidden. On the day that Beaker finally gets pushed it could be brought out, wrapped in barnacles and a ribbon, and presented to him as a farewell gift from the IOS.
004wercras is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2014, 14:21
  #1791 (permalink)  

Don Quixote Impersonator
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 73
Posts: 3,408
Creampuff.

Why isn't it possible:
The only reasonable explanation that I can come up with is that the CVR may contain information that supports the conclusion that the timing and content of weather information transmitted to NGA gave the crew a misleading picture of the actual and forecast conditions at NFI. That outcome would be inconvenient and embarrassing for ATSB and others.
that the exact opposite is shown to be true, or am I missing something.

just saying!
gaunty is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2014, 20:12
  #1792 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Was the wreck ever raised ? - truth or dare.

Gaunty - [that] the exact opposite is shown to be true," etc.
Furry muff. But, does it matter either way though? really. Thankfully, this one 'lucky' time the coroner is not involved (always a plus) but there must be insurance and compensation issues to deal with which are probably in need some sort of 'independent' umpires decision, if only to decide how many cuts of the cane James deserves. The point I am labouring to make, is simple. No one has yet been provided 'all' the available evidence and information on which to make a decision. Access is being denied for all kinds of fanciful reasons. I'm not claiming expertise in this field, however, I doubt a judge or coroner would be prepared to entertain hearing a case without 'all' the available evidence being offered; particularly if that evidence was obtainable. Even the least aviation aware member of the public (include journalists) knows that the 'black box' is essential; if they know nothing else.

M'lud - "So, where's the orange thing-gummy; this black box whatsit then?, temperature, TAS, effective TAS, groundspeed and SGR would be really nice". "Just so we can establish the flight data exactly, beyond speculation and reasonable doubt".

ATSB – "Oh, it was far too much trouble to recover M'lud; we had a rope around wreck engines, used an expensive robot to do all that; but to spend the extra few pennies for a cable and crane seemed a bit over the top". "In short, we left the wreck where it was and cut the rope; anyway, we were told that we had all the answers we needed".

M'lud – "So, do we have a co-pilot statement".

ATSB – "Oh no M'lud, can't have anything like that".

I'll leave M'lud's response to your foetid imaginations. But, trying to sell the same fairy story to a Senator like Fawcett is, of it's self, stupid, suspicious, not to mention incredibly arrogant. You have to ask why a potentially career ending gamble, which Dolan freely took, was attempted. He was never going to get away with the -
- version ploy; not ever. The bait was offered and he snapped it up, thinking the hook was avoided. Sarcs posted the - Annexe 13 - Hansard recording; have a careful look, it's all there in glorious Technicolor.

Yup, the box would be nice to have; but the truth would be better.

I believe I'll end there; I can hear the peals of laughter, guffaws and bellows of delight from the legal eagles at my naiveté. But that's OK.

This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.
Farewell. My blessing season this in thee.

Last edited by Kharon; 31st Mar 2014 at 20:24.
Kharon is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2014, 20:16
  #1793 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
Gaunty

You are confusing the possible outcomes with the possible explanations for inaction by ATSB.

The 'exact opposite' to the outcome in the passage you quoted is envisaged in my list of 3 possible outcomes above. (See outcome 2).

The only reasonable explanation I can see for inaction by ATSB ain't that outcome.

Any refusal by any aviation accident investigatory body to retrieve OBR equipment is always going to look absurd.

If the equipment were in the Mariana Trench and there were no controversy surrounding the incident, there'd be a reasonable excuse.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2014, 01:09
  #1794 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
Yakkity Yak shades of Hempel - Part one

What posters’ seem to be forgetting is the two tonne elephant in the room that refused to contribute to the VH-NGA black box recovery slush fund…
Basic chronology of relevant period (my bold):

8 December 2009: E-mail from ATSB to CASA raising the possibility of contributing to a joint fund sharing arrangement to recover the black box and CASA advised they didn’t have the necessary funds.

16 December 2009: CASA accept the Pel-Air ‘Management Action Plan’ which consisted of three phases.

18 December 2009: Pel-Air successfully completed Phase 1 items and were able to recommence domestic operations.

21 December 2009: ATSB, with the assistance of the Victoria Water Police, use a remotely-operated vehicle (Rover) with an underwater video camera was to assess the wreckage.

23-24 December 2009: CASA overseeing FOI of Pel-Air Eric Demarco issues 14 RCA and a number of AOs. The RCAs needed to be acquitted by 28/01/2010.

24th December 2009: Dominic James notice of suspension of CPL, ATPL, CIR pursuant to CAR 265(1)(a). Also given notice to undertake examinations under CAR 5.38.

24 December 2009: Pel-Air successfully completed Phase 2 items and were able to recommence international operations.

8 January 2010: CASA issue 7 more RCAs and several more AOs, all of which Roger Chambers the Audit Coordinator signed on behalf of several SAR team members.

8 January 2010: Audit Report completed.

13 January 2010: ATSB issue preliminary report AO-2009-072.

3 February 2010: Video conference meeting between the ATSB and CASA to discuss critical safety issue.

So FF shirked the slush fund....but even then the ATsB (up till at least the 13 January 2010) were still determined to recover the black box. Apparently they carried out a feasibility review that was then forwarded to bean counter Beaker as a brief for assessment:


{Comment: Sure would like to get a copy of the Beaker brief…FOI anyone?? }

Kharon: …“Was the wreck ever raised ? - truth or dare…”
Interesting question put… Heard a rumour that the Rover (21 December 2009) had actually managed to get a rope around the tail section of VH-NGA…

Hmm so curious I took a look at the S25 released Rover footage…






Although not very long the time stamp is interesting to follow i.e. it has been significantly edited. The footage starts at 08:38 then jumps back to 08:28, then jumps forward again 08:33, then 08:36, then finally back again to 08:29.

The footage does match the findings as stated in the report…
“….The wreckage came to rest on a sandy seabed. Video footage showed that the two parts of the fuselage remained connected by the strong underfloor cables that normally controlled the aircraft’s control surfaces.

The landing gear was extended, likely in consequence of the impact forces and the weight of the landing gear. The flaps appeared to have been forced upwards from the pre-impact fully extended selection reported by the PIC.

The underwater video showed a lack of visible damage to the turbine compressor blades at the front of the engines. That was consistent with low engine thrust at the time of the first contact with the sea.
Consistent with the aircraft occupants’ recollections, the video footage indicated that aircraft’s configuration resulted in the bottom of the fuselage below the wing making the first contact with the water.

On contact with the water, the fuselage fractured at a point immediately forward of the main wing spar. The flight nurse was seated nearest to that location and reported the smell of sea water and feeling water passing her feet immediately after the impact. All of the aircraft occupants recalled that the fuselage parts remained aligned for a few seconds after the aircraft stopped moving, before the aircraft’s nose and tail partially sank, leaving the centre section above the surface of the sea. The passenger cabin/cockpit section adopted a nose-down attitude, leaving the wings partially afloat and the engines below the surface…”

So no smoking gun but it would be interesting to get a copy of the full rover video footage, especially with a pan out that takes in the tail after about 08:39…

{Fascinating rumour: Talk around the Norfolk Island traps (BRB ) is that there is a photo floating around of an open access panel to the black box??..}

Addendum: Ben's latest kind of fits..
MH370 PR stunt sees ATSB try to avoid its dismal black box record

The ATSB has sought to leverage a bit of reflected glory out of the MH370 black box search today with an illustrated and indeed useful primer on their uses in air accident investigations.

But for those that have followed its disgraceful mishandling of the Pel-Air crash, this PR exercise will do nothing to restore its damaged integrity, and in particular, its cavalier refusal to retrieve the data recorder from the sea floor near Norfolk Island where the small corporate jet was ditched in November 2009 shortly before it ran out of fuel.

The ATSB was a party to a botched and grievously inadequate investigation of that crash, in which in consultation with CASA, the Australian air safety regulator, an internal document related to CASA’s failures to conduct proper oversight of the Pel-Air Westwind operation was withheld from inclusion in the accident report.

A Senate inquiry into the investigation process which lead to the flawed and embarrassingly inadequate ATSB report being released included an entire section dealing with the unsatisfactory nature of the testimony given to its hearings by the chief commissioner of the ATSB, Martin Dolan.
The black box that the ATSB refused to retrieve from the wreckage of the Pel-Air jet could have provided vital information from the two pilots as to what they had been told about weather conditions at Norfolk Island before they found that they were unable to land and no longer had sufficient fuel to fly to an alternative airfield in Noumea, Fiji or New Zealand.

With such a shabby record in relation to Pel-Air and its flight data records , the ATSB lacks the credibility to add very much if anything to the high powered international task force now focused on seeking every possible piece of evidence that could cast light on the MH370 tragedy.

If it resolutely refused to pursue all the evidence available to it in relation to a small jet crash in Australia, what possible relevance could the ATSB have to determining all of the factors involved in the loss of the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200ER that vanished from air traffic control radars on 8 March, on its way from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing?

Dozens of previous articles on the Pel-Air controversy, the Senate inquiries, and links to the full reports and documents that Australia’s aviation regulator and safety investigator sought to hide from the public can be retrieved from this catalogue.

Last edited by Sarcs; 2nd Apr 2014 at 08:23.
Sarcs is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2014, 07:54
  #1795 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
If the aircraft FDR has been tampered with or removed from the water for any reason and replaced, the evidence is compromised without independent evaluation.

With this break in the evidence chain, one needs to ask if it was intentional, in which case it is a criminal matter, or, if by negligence or incompetence, it is cause to dismiss the public perception of safety in aviation matters attended to by any regulatory body in its current guise.


Read this slowly: Lack of, or feigned lack of knowledge, or awareness of credible, and available evidence, is as culpable as having intentionally destroyed that evidence. If more than one person is involved it is tantamount to a conspiracy.

Last edited by Frank Arouet; 1st Apr 2014 at 10:38.
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2014, 11:07
  #1796 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 1,188
ATSB and MH 370

Above title sounds a bit mutually exclusive ie keep well apart !!

Perhaps B B B Beaker does have a sense of humour. It is April 1 after all
aroa is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2014, 11:22
  #1797 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
ATsB and CAsA - Beyond MH 370

Sarcs, succinct timeline of events, nice post. Makes the ATsB and CAsA truly look like the shonks that they are. But don't worry, all is good according to The Skulls tendentious industry letters! And heck, Terry has an A380 endo, they have a magic practising Priest on the payroll and Sky Sentinel is the Holy Grail of I.T software, so we must all be safe?
004wercras is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2014, 20:30
  #1798 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Trust the Australian system? of course you can.

CP # 1844 – "[I] reckon a bunch of professional pilots would be able to judge whether bits were missing or added ex post facto. etc.
Quite often in the CP offerings, there is a little thought provoking gem, like the one above. Think about it; the Canadian report into a CFIT is getting a lot of attention; solid discussion and the considered opinion of a 'bunch of pilots'; a report like that is bound to. The report is 'rock solid' and may be relied on to assist in formulating revised SOP, CRM, training and a whole range of 'safety' related elements. No one doubts the report's probity, no one questions the transcript, the 'pilot' body may examine and glean what lessons may be learned, with absolute confidence that the base information is almost irrefutable. Australian aircrew cannot do this against the current ATSB standard. One purpose of an investigation is to prevent or assist in the prevention of a repeat occurrence. If operators, chief pilots, training and safety departments cannot rely on the report provided to formulate 'policy', it's a sad indictment of the system. If the system can produce one seriously flawed, compromised report into a relatively 'simple' matter, how may it be relied on not to have done this with past reports; and, not to continue to do so with future events. Now it's been proven they can; Truss trusts Beaker – he must be barking.

Great work (again) Sarcs, that time line really spells it out. It really was a 'miraculous' recovery, seems the 'laying on of hands' and the magic healing cupboard work just fine. What a pity Polar and Barrier did not make it to repair station in time; bet they'd have enjoyed the benefits of the fast turn around process.

Yup, there is lots to recommend the great Australian safety myth to the international aviation communities; I expect there's a quite a queue and crowd control measures at HQ; all clamouring for that unique Australian brand of service.

Aye well, at least for time being, the water is drinkable.

Sponsored by the IOS, Lazarus fraternity. (Raising the dead and muff diving).
Kharon is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2014, 08:49
  #1799 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
Yakkity Yak shades of Hempel - Part two

Here 'tis...the rope that is..


From the PBRP (Pirates Bar Room Plunderers..) the story goes that the rover had roped the tail and the locals were all geared up to retrieve the black box. However then mi..mi..mi beancounter Beaker got the trembles and put the khybosh on it citing OHS issues, decompression chambers and of course limited funds...

...then the locals offered (for next to nothing) to drag the wreck towards the shore where the ocean bed rises up to a depth of 30m, thus allowing recovery of the box through a normal freedive. They again were all set to go and had lined up the local freighter to snag the mooring rope with it's anchor, but again Beaker got all squeamish and refused to give the green light...so..so close but no cigar!

..rumour amongst the PBRP is that the box is now proudly sitting on someone's mantelpiece in yonder Norfolk Isle..

Now you can see why this tale has shades of Hempel, in both cases the necessary crew was ready and eager but the powers to be got cold feet right on the vinegar stroke..

Last edited by Sarcs; 3rd Apr 2014 at 13:29.
Sarcs is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2014, 10:00
  #1800 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
I’m not sure why you’re worried about all this ‘chain of evidence’ stuff, Frank. Who wants to bring what court action against whom, on the basis of the OBR information? The TSI Act has some very hairy-chested prohibitions on the use of OBR information for the purposes of prosecution, civil action or administrative action against the crew of NGA.

All that everyone (other than someone who stands to be vindicated or embarrassed) wants to know is: WTF HAPPENED. The CVR might help to answer that question. That’s the CVR’s job…

If the CVR is indeed sitting on someone’s mantelpiece on NFI, that 'someone' should send it to another 'someone' with the equipment and expertise to extract any available record. If it were on my mantelpiece, I wouldn’t be sending it to ATSB…
Creampuff is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.