Paul Holmes and Erebus
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: with the porangi,s in Pohara
Age: 66
Posts: 983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well Holmes(for what its worth)....did write a great article on "Waitangi day"..and its worth.....outside of that,I never listen to a word the clown says....he,s like a singer who has a one-hit-wonder....
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: new zealand
Age: 74
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This article appeared in tuesdays NZ Herald and recieved almost universal approval which is well warranted in my opinion. This was written by an experienced Pilot, not a journalist or Judge with no understanding of Airmanship.
Derek Ellis: Erebus - why the pilot was at fault - National - NZ Herald News
Derek Ellis: Erebus - why the pilot was at fault - National - NZ Herald News
Guest
Posts: n/a
Richard J. McGrane: Do justice to the Erebus facts - Opinion - NZ Herald News
Can anyone still believe the Mahon version is correct after these two articles, one from a very experienced aviator, and one from a legal mind who was very close to the Royal Commission at the time?????
Can anyone still believe the Mahon version is correct after these two articles, one from a very experienced aviator, and one from a legal mind who was very close to the Royal Commission at the time?????
Last edited by prospector; 14th Mar 2012 at 05:42.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Auckland
Age: 81
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Consider this scenario:
The coordinates are correctly entered for a waypoint that gives a track down the flat expanse of McMurdo Sound. The pilot has plotted this on his chart. With no confirmation of position, he descends. Unknown to him the AINS has drifted onto a track towards Erebus.
If he hits Erebus, is there any degree of pilot error?
The coordinates are correctly entered for a waypoint that gives a track down the flat expanse of McMurdo Sound. The pilot has plotted this on his chart. With no confirmation of position, he descends. Unknown to him the AINS has drifted onto a track towards Erebus.
If he hits Erebus, is there any degree of pilot error?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New Zealand
Age: 64
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which is why the captain purported to descend VMC, when he knew that he was actually in instrument flying conditions.
There were only two ways down, being the radar or the TACAN. He couldn't get either, so what do you do? You go to the Dry Valleys, where the sun was shining.
"I prefer here first"
There were only two ways down, being the radar or the TACAN. He couldn't get either, so what do you do? You go to the Dry Valleys, where the sun was shining.
"I prefer here first"
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Auckland
Age: 81
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the AINS drifts, a crash is all pilot error. Self-evident, isn't it*.
I await an answer from DozyWannabe. He might be gone for some time.
To this old VFR pilot, there is a "red light" between VFR and IFR. I stop. I politely suggest to my betters, the light is just as red between IFR and VFR.
Collins descended to 1500ft amsl, (QNH from McMurdo or radioaltimeter?) how high above the surface was he? Was the ground rising slowly as he proceeded south? EDIT: Silberfuchs#135 "crossing the cliffs, about a mile from impact"
*EDIT: If one source of error in the AINS leads to in a 100% pilot-error CFIT then it is not logically possible that some other source of error can lead to a 0% pilot-error CFIT.
How many airline pilots (privately) find Collins blameless? EDIT: Perhaps passengers should ask as they board, so they know if they are sitting behind a pilot or a train driver.
I await an answer from DozyWannabe. He might be gone for some time.
To this old VFR pilot, there is a "red light" between VFR and IFR. I stop. I politely suggest to my betters, the light is just as red between IFR and VFR.
Collins descended to 1500ft amsl, (QNH from McMurdo or radioaltimeter?) how high above the surface was he? Was the ground rising slowly as he proceeded south? EDIT: Silberfuchs#135 "crossing the cliffs, about a mile from impact"
*EDIT: If one source of error in the AINS leads to in a 100% pilot-error CFIT then it is not logically possible that some other source of error can lead to a 0% pilot-error CFIT.
How many airline pilots (privately) find Collins blameless? EDIT: Perhaps passengers should ask as they board, so they know if they are sitting behind a pilot or a train driver.
Last edited by Ornis; 23rd Mar 2012 at 22:47.
I'm now in the middle of reading the Holmes book. I've got a few other books written on the subject and have been writing a uni paper on the accident and investigation that took place.
The more I read the Holmes book, the more he convinces me, through his one-sided approach to telling his angle of the story, that the pilots should never be exonerated for their actions.
True, the cover-ups and errors made within the airline, the weather conditions on the day, the briefing processes and the lack of knowledge imparted to the crew of whiteout were all contributing factors.
But I am convinced more than ever that Collins and Cassin shouldn't have been poking around down at 1500 feet when they clearly weren't sure of their exact position (confirmed by the CVR transcripts). The angle Holmes tries to paint is that the pilots should be completely free of blame because the airline made them think they were somewhere else. And that doesn't wash.
It's actually draining reading the book, as he repeats himself over and over and over again.
The more I read the Holmes book, the more he convinces me, through his one-sided approach to telling his angle of the story, that the pilots should never be exonerated for their actions.
True, the cover-ups and errors made within the airline, the weather conditions on the day, the briefing processes and the lack of knowledge imparted to the crew of whiteout were all contributing factors.
But I am convinced more than ever that Collins and Cassin shouldn't have been poking around down at 1500 feet when they clearly weren't sure of their exact position (confirmed by the CVR transcripts). The angle Holmes tries to paint is that the pilots should be completely free of blame because the airline made them think they were somewhere else. And that doesn't wash.
It's actually draining reading the book, as he repeats himself over and over and over again.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the risk of repetition, pilots are affected by many factors. In this case Management pressure to make sure the pax get their money's worth. All that way and no look at the Antarctic.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New Zealand
Age: 64
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He had plenty of fuel and had the Dry Valleys out to the west, with the sun shining. Captain Ruffell, in a similar situation, and with a Japanese film crew aboard, baled out, headed west, and everyone ended up happy - as opposed to everyone ending up dead.
topend3: The real scandal in the Erebus inquiry was NZALPA's manipulation of the evidence given by the line pilots, particularly the evidence of Captain Simpson. Having won their famous victory, via a series of dirty tricks and a judge with a brain tumour, NZALPA now seeks to lock it in, forever. They do not seem to appreciate that exoneration of the crew means the sanctioning of the airmanship displayed on TE901. Perhaps a senior member of the cult could advise whether NZALPA approves of a pilot flying visually when he knows he can't see properly, or flying on instruments below MSA with nothing more than the readout from some gyroscopes.
Here's a good topic for a uni paper: "Has there ever been a CFIT accident where the crew was found to be blameless?" Answer: Yes, one, being TE901. That's it. There are no others, because "controlled flight into terrain" almost presupposes an error by the person in control. It might be possible to invent a scenario where the crew could be exonerated, but this case doesn't come anywhere near it. Doomed from takeoff? Absolute nonsense.
topend3: The real scandal in the Erebus inquiry was NZALPA's manipulation of the evidence given by the line pilots, particularly the evidence of Captain Simpson. Having won their famous victory, via a series of dirty tricks and a judge with a brain tumour, NZALPA now seeks to lock it in, forever. They do not seem to appreciate that exoneration of the crew means the sanctioning of the airmanship displayed on TE901. Perhaps a senior member of the cult could advise whether NZALPA approves of a pilot flying visually when he knows he can't see properly, or flying on instruments below MSA with nothing more than the readout from some gyroscopes.
Here's a good topic for a uni paper: "Has there ever been a CFIT accident where the crew was found to be blameless?" Answer: Yes, one, being TE901. That's it. There are no others, because "controlled flight into terrain" almost presupposes an error by the person in control. It might be possible to invent a scenario where the crew could be exonerated, but this case doesn't come anywhere near it. Doomed from takeoff? Absolute nonsense.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Auckland
Age: 81
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ampan.
Email the PM. Briefly make the point the crash was not inevitable.
Key John <[email protected]>
EDIT: The two cabinet ministers who were calling for a parliamentary exoneration, Peter Dunne and Maurice Williamson ("dead when they left") have both been very quiet. But one thing organisations can do that individuals cannot, is to keep on and on forever, which is why ALPA has set up the website dedicated to keeping the matter alive.
Email the PM. Briefly make the point the crash was not inevitable.
Key John <[email protected]>
EDIT: The two cabinet ministers who were calling for a parliamentary exoneration, Peter Dunne and Maurice Williamson ("dead when they left") have both been very quiet. But one thing organisations can do that individuals cannot, is to keep on and on forever, which is why ALPA has set up the website dedicated to keeping the matter alive.
Last edited by Ornis; 24th Mar 2012 at 18:42.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To ensure that the right amount of responsibility for the "Error" is placed on the right humans.
Guest
Posts: n/a
, I come away from the threads here that some people would have preferred Captain Collins to have survived the accident, so that he could be hung, drawn and quartered, and his head stuck on a pike in the town square.
Mine being if the crew had of complied with SOP's and CAA requirements and just plain common sense, there would not have been an accident and everybody would have survived, including Capt Collins.
To then pillory the remaining ANZ staff, who did not make the decision to commence an illegal descent, as Mahon did, is what a lot of people disagree with.
If anybody still agrees with Mahons reasoning that they were justified in commencing the descent when and where they did,after all the evidence and fact to the contrary, then one is surely pushing water uphill.
If one looks at the thread re Pacific Blue and their disputed departure from Queenstown, all because of a minor deviation from SOP's, one wonders how Mahon could so lightly dismiss the requirement to comply.
Last edited by prospector; 25th Mar 2012 at 04:44.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Auckland
Age: 81
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Years ago when I requested the coordinates of the VRPs to enter into a GPS, I was advised by a NZCAA staffer to keep my head outside. It was with some satisfaction, after entering the data on a moving map GPS and spotting a discrepancy, I was able to advise CAA that two digits had been transposed, putting one VRP in the wrong place.
As a humble VFR pilot I remain incredulous nobody checked the McMurdo waypoint on a chart; Lucas had been an RNZAF navigator. Collins was prepared to use the AINS to fly at nothingness at 1500ft; why didn't he take a readout when it was pretty clear Mulgrew couldn't see where he was?
The spontaneous change from IFR to VFR was just not a good idea. But it wasn't irretrievable. I know I would have flown along the coast to try to make sense of it, because I am only a simple recreational pilot who needs to see where he is to fly, I would have had no choice.
To me the lesson is not new, in a general sense. It is: stick to the plan if you can. If you can't be very very careful because you have not prepared yourself.
Seems to me some pilots - very experienced professional pilots, some with military backgrounds - who find the crew blameless, are saying that essentially these pilots did not have a free will. I don't buy that, although some, like theoretical physicist Gerardus 't hooft, might.
In my view, and I realise pilots won't value it, at least 51% of the blame rests with the crew. Therefore they cannot be exonerated in any meaningful way. But then, when did politics have anything to do with reality?
As a humble VFR pilot I remain incredulous nobody checked the McMurdo waypoint on a chart; Lucas had been an RNZAF navigator. Collins was prepared to use the AINS to fly at nothingness at 1500ft; why didn't he take a readout when it was pretty clear Mulgrew couldn't see where he was?
The spontaneous change from IFR to VFR was just not a good idea. But it wasn't irretrievable. I know I would have flown along the coast to try to make sense of it, because I am only a simple recreational pilot who needs to see where he is to fly, I would have had no choice.
To me the lesson is not new, in a general sense. It is: stick to the plan if you can. If you can't be very very careful because you have not prepared yourself.
Seems to me some pilots - very experienced professional pilots, some with military backgrounds - who find the crew blameless, are saying that essentially these pilots did not have a free will. I don't buy that, although some, like theoretical physicist Gerardus 't hooft, might.
In my view, and I realise pilots won't value it, at least 51% of the blame rests with the crew. Therefore they cannot be exonerated in any meaningful way. But then, when did politics have anything to do with reality?
In my view, and I realise pilots won't value it, at least 51% of the blame rests with the crew.