Merged: Senate Inquiry

[gaunty]

Someone around here was suggesting that the very clever PM & C persons could sort the whole CASA thing out in a trice.

If it wasn't them who prepared the response, who did. Either way brickbats.

re: the CVR I'm still getting my head around the timelines but if it does have 120 minutes, then those 120 minutes preceding its stopping, which I imagine must have been on impact, will or should contain some interesting answers to some questions I still and I suppose a few others may have.

Time of impact 1026:02.UTC?? so we should be able to go back to at least 0826:02UTC?? which at the least includes 0940 top of the drop and period of activity prior. As well as the pre-ditching and pre-impact info, maybe some post impact who knows until we drag it up.

The other question/answer I may have missed, is did the aircraft have the capacity to carry the additional CPDP fuel, if indeed it had been computed? And, what on the day should it have been. The answer begs some questions.

Just sayin?

[Creampuff]

I think Sunfish gave up his 'kid geniuses in PM&C fixing this' idea a while ago.

Mugged by reality ....

[Kharon]

Opinion - Of pooches and the screwing thereof.

Steam On - Checked.

Credibility eh? – I wonder if our miniscule has considered that. In a less than stellar career our remittance man from Qld has not assisted himself by relying on and blindly supporting 'institutions'. He cannot seem to believe, despite clear evidence that CASA is an asylum; cannot possibly consider ATSB as a right royal cock up. His response to Senate amply reflects this. Was Beaker publicly terminated with extreme prejudice?; was McComic sent for analysis before ever being allowed out in society again; alas, no. There they sit, smug, well paid and happy within their isolated, protected orbit. A cartoonist could portray Truss as a monkey at the end of the organ grinders chain, capering, scampering about picking up pennies and hoping for a pat.

There is a mountain of fact, evidence provided by a very credible Senate investigation, supported by over 20 previous 'investigations' /inquiries etc; industry comment, analyst comment, expert advice and international censure, all available to the miniscule, being steadfastly ignored.

For example; at the hub of the Pel Air investigation we find a manager (acting) madly signing off NCN as fast as they are written. In some instances, even signing them on behalf of the 'investigator' before signing them off as acquitted. A manager who was at the same time copying and pasting plagiarised wisdom to complete a secret 'report' as damning of the CASA methodology as it was of his own investigating team. All of this while Humpty Dumpty of Pel Air was put back together again, in record time. Hansard provides all of this as fact and tested evidence not supposition. The contradictory, capricious actions of this one manager, standing alone are worthy of very serious consideration by honest folk as they so clearly represent and identify much of where CASA has failed industry under McComic.

The Senators have witnessed a small portion of this aberration, been presented with solid facts and have made some righteous determinations. Miniscule Truss has consciously, (IMO with malice and aforethought) agreed to support an institutional response, which not only flies in the face of fact and logic, but insults the hard working conscientious Senators who provided the information to the miniscule. Industry is inured to such blatant insults; but men the calibre of Fawcett, Heffernan, Sterle and Xenophon are not. That committee does have the horsepower to call for an inquiry, I believe only a committee majority is needed to turn the trick (?). Perhaps the next one will include the miniscule response to their inquiry into Pel Air.

Must we now ask why even a simple Navy exercise to retrieve the OBR device from NGA cannot be contemplated? Hells bells, the miniscule will spend more on lunch and airfares the next 12 month than the exercise would cost. So, if not, please explain why not. Only this time, please try to present a believable, logical explanation; at the least one we could reasonably expect to be fooled by.

You see the miniscule, ridiculous capering at the end of the departmental chain is shameful. After the pathetic, humiliating 2008 effort an honourable man would have at least ordered a new ATSB investigation and opened an inquiry based against the evidence provided by the Senators. By supporting the institutional stance, denying the problems exist, burying the injustice and generally dancing to a flawed tune, Australia is shamed, parliamentarians humiliated and a mockery made of a once proud industry.

By the way miniscule, the hysterically barking, part blind, part mad dog tied to the back fence is yours. Please; put it out of it's misery or take it away. Because when it bites someone, and it will, the blame belong you and the blood will be on your hands.

Steam Off – Checked.

Selah.

[majorca]

Minicule's head on a platter

Come on, Sarcs
That drongo Albo has done nothing, if not did nothing, to enhance aviation safety in Australia. Bravo for him coming out and denouncing Truss, who has been in the job "5mins", he needs to look back to what he presided over! AsA is a shambles! From CASA to ATC. AsA needs a shakeup and all the politicians want to do is shift the blame.

[Sarcs]

Paper shuffling, Beaker and that lint moment??

The following poohtube vid shows when Beaker thought he had a “gotcha” moment of the IOS Senators, in particular Senator Fawcett :
CVR/FDR 28/02/13 - 'Shall or should' & ATsB Chief Commissioner. - YouTube

Certainly an uncomfortable point in the inquiry for Senator Fawcett and the smug look on the Beaker’s face almost makes you want to vomit.. However it was also a pivotal PNR moment for Beaker that shredded any remnant of credibility he may have once had in the eyes of the Senators & IOS members…

…Senator Xenophon on AAI Govt response (20/03/14):

I note, in particular, the comments from ATSB Chief Commissioner Mr Dolan, who admitted during questioning that he was 'not proud' of the ATSB's report into the Pel-Air incident. The committee even went so far as to state that Mr Dolan's standing as a witness before the committee had been eroded by his evidence relating to the ATSB's failure to retrieve the flight data and cockpit voice recorders. Mr Dolan justified this position by quoting a version of the statement that sets out the ATSB's international responsibilities in this regard—ICAO Annex 13—that was not in force at the time of the accident or investigation. I pay tribute to Senator David Fawcett's cross-examination of Mr Dolan in this regard, which elicited very valuable information. A reading of the current Annex 13 may leave some room for discretion as to whether the recorders are to be retrieved. A reading of the annex that was in force at the time of the incident and subsequent investigation—and therefore should have been the one used by the ATSB to reach a decision—does not provide for this discretion. The committee report states:

The committee does not accept this argument— that is, the argument of Mr Dolan.

At the time the decision against retrieving the FDR was made the imperative existed for the ATSB to do so. To ignore this imperative by arguing that the benefit did not justify the cost appears disingenuous. To imply that the revised wording in the current version of Annex 13 was the basis for the ATSB's decision in 2009/2010, before this version was in force, is even more disingenuous.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zq3u_QKFEbE" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zq3u_QKFEbE

And yet this miniscule refuses to accept the factually correct, extremely damning Senate PelAir report against a discredited and severely flawed witness like Beaker…

Kharon:

By supporting the institutional stance, denying the problems exist, burying the injustice and generally dancing to a flawed tune, Australia is shamed, parliamentarians humiliated and a mockery made of a once proud industry

“God save the Queen because nothing will save the Governor-General…err miniscule!”

[Kharon]

Elephants – and the inheritance thereof.

Paraphrase W.C. Fields Elephants - I like to look at 'em, but I wouldn't want to own one. Now that the miniscule has had a chance to get his seat warm (for how long is anyone's guess) I wonder how he's getting along with Albo's white paper elephant. Takes a bit of adjustment to get used to having one about the place, especially a large, old cranky one.

I see his boy Beaker has some competition though. Centaurus has kindly put a link on Pprune – which allows access to the Canadian TSB investigation and report into a CFIT. It is a fine example of what an accident report should be. There really is something for everyone and although it is long (215 pages), it's worth the time taken; if for no other reason than it is an example of how it should be done.

I just love the opening statement; I hope the Canucks maintain the high standard when they 'do' our report card. You just never know in this world, do you?

The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Convention on International Civil Aviation, Annex 13, Footnote1 requires States conducting accident investigations to protect cockpit voice recordings. Canada complies with this requirement by making cockpit voice recordings privileged in the Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board Act. While the Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) may make use of any on-board recording in the interests of transportation safety, it is not permitted to knowingly communicate any portion of an on-board recording that is unrelated to the causes or contributing factors of an accident or to the identification of safety deficiencies.

The reason for protecting cockpit voice recorder (CVR) material lies in the premise that these protections help ensure that this essential material is available for the benefit of safety investigations. The TSB has always met its obligations in this area and has restricted the use of CVR data in its reports. Unless the CVR material is required to both support a finding and identify a substantive safety deficiency, it will not be included in the TSB's report.

In this report, the TSB has made extensive use of the CVR recording. In each instance, the material has been carefully examined to ensure that the extracts used are related to the causes or contributing factors of this accident or to the identification of safety deficiencies.

My bold.

Toot toot.

[Sarcs]

Mcomick relief.

To take our mind (and disgust) off the insipid smarmy images of mi..mi..mi..Beaker the (STBR) Das has provided a bit of light relief for a Thank God it's Friday...

Dear Heff...



..L&Ks

PMO diagnosis: First thought rabies but after that (above) definitely FIMD.

PMO prognosis: Retiring should see the condition exacerbate but should consider earlier retirement as the more frequent occurrences and the high blood pressure are ominous signs of a worsening condition..TICK TOCK!

[Frank Arouet]

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.

[Kharon]

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]

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.

[Creampuff]

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.

[004wercras]

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

[Kharon]

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.

[Creampuff]

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.

[No Hoper]

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.

[Frank Arouet]

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.

[004wercras]

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.

[gaunty]

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!

[Kharon]

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 -

Annexe 13

- 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.

[Creampuff]

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.