Paul Holmes and Erebus

[waren9]

Or PIC of anything else for that matter. That man is hardly a shining example with his own exploits.

[Wally Mk2]

It's amazing that this accident gets so much attention after 32 yrs or so.

Look on the morning of the accident Capt Collins got out of bed to conduct a sight seeing flight & with good intentions to complete that mission to live another day. Obviously he wouldn't have had any other intentions. ANZ & it's employees likewise had no other intentions other than to do their part in an operation that was to make money for the Co. Chippendale am sure also didn't get out of bed that morning to do anything other than his normal tasks for the day.
BUT & yes there always a but when the accident occurred & it was becoming obvious that ANZ had played a major part in the chain of events then self protection by way of lies etc came into play on an individual basis as well as a corporate basis.
Pure & simple we ALL will go to extraordinary lengths at times to protect ourselves, our beliefs or integrity, fight or flight as they call it.Nobody wants to be hung out to dry so a human trait is to save face when their up against it, our courts would be full of lies & deception every day due fear of being found guilty & all that entails, self preservation is a powerful thing.

Capt Collins was human, he 'may' have made judgment errors (we ALL make errors)but am sure he did so without malice, the latter can't be said for the way the whole mess was handled at a higher level.

Let the dead rest in peace & the living rest assured that life is precious & finite.


Wmk2

[prospector]

My comments taken from a previous thread on this subject.

Your comments re Ron Chippendale are far from the truth, it would really help if you did a bit of research on these people before printing such garbage. I have taken the following from "New Zealand tragedies,Aviation" compiled by John King.

Ron Chippendale was the first witness to take the stand when the hearing began in an Auckland office building on 7 July 1980.

But while Mahon praised his witness for being a model witness, composed, impertuble and sure of his position, he belittled the capabilities of both the Chief Inspector and his staff. None of them, he said had ever been jet pilots, etc etc

The commissioners assessment of his first witness ignored Chippendales considerable experience as a flight instructor and transport pilot in the RNZAF.He had been formally involved in military flight safety and accident investigation for several years before being seconded to similar duties in civil aviation, and his standing in the world community is such that as someone scrupulously fair and independant, he has been asked to help investigate some accidents of a particularly delicate political nature. (Recently, for instance, he was appointed to the five strong United Nations team to investigate the loss of the Korean Airlines Boeing 747 airliner, Flight KAL007, shot down by a Soviet fighter near the Island of Sakhalin in 1983.)

Credentials far from the qualifications and aeronautical experience that the poisonous toad called Holmes can call on to offer to back his opinion on the events of that day and subsequent to that day.

[framer]

Credentials far from the qualifications and aeronautical experience that the poisonous toad called Holmes can call on to offer to back his opinion on the events of that day and subsequent to that day.

Yeah Paul is totally out of his depth here.As was Mahon when it came to understanding what is said and done on a flight deck. Don't get me wrong, I think Mahon's work on the corporate/political side of things was astute and probably principled. Some of the flightdeck stuff was off the mark though.
The thing that amazes me about Holmes's book is that it derides Chippendales professional abilities as well as his character, yet Holmes is quick to say in interview that the dead can't defend themselves when he is talking about the crew and how their good names were forever stained. Hang on Paul....isn't that what you're now doing to Chippendale? Are you qualified to do that? I guess if crashing planes is a qualification then you are.
In my book Collins, Chippendale, and Mahon were all most likely men of good character, each with different jobs and skills.

[hoggsnortrupert]

All good men:

History judges us all, by our deeds, not by our intent, and alot of the time without understanding the individual.

Yes! thirty + yrs on and it still invokes debate such as this:

It is not a bad thing, but Paul Holmes for *&^% sake:

I can think of no other aviation accident, or event, that has evoked so much debate, and emotion:

Neither do I think emotion as being misplaced in such:

[gulfairs]

I always had a chart in the cockpit and checked the latitude and longtitude readout, but the crew of the fatal flight never referred to it."

In those days we were overawed in the accuracy of the triplex INS compared to the nearly correct doppler that was still used on the DC8.
After loading a flight plan into the computer, if it wasn't aleady loaded as a route as a 'from via to format', one rarely if ever cross checked the CDU waypoints with the printed edition at hand.
It wasn't until we operated the steam driven, cable operted switch, B747-200 was the stage by stage cross checked; and that was because the 747 INS was almost clockwork, as well we had all had our arses kicked after the horse got out( so to speak)
A.G Vette's redition of mind set, visual accurity ,seeing what you expected even it it did not quite fit theses, is probably closer to the truth than most pilots would or will admit.
It certainly was not Morry Davis's fault that the accident took place, but the brains in Flight route planning/flight planning do really have to look at them selves and try and be honest about the pre 901 events.
Jim Collins and crew were victims of a system that was run by a bunch of men who did suffer from alto ego, particularly if one challenged them over any point in navigation ,operation and performance.
Air New Zealand broke more rules in performance operation because of cost in useable dollars than most people would ever believe.
Another incident was discovered by a very poor take off performance at Hong Kong one evening, due to a power plant change in allowable limits, the aircraft then increased in mauw for take off but the new limits on the engines were not applied because it woudl shorten the hot section overhaule life.
I succeeded in getting 5(five) consecutive route checks because I challenged aircrew management over this issue and we were technically taking off over weight.
Such was the thinking in those days.
In fact I retired 5 years early over a disputed take of performance in a steam driven aircraft out of LGW again because it would increase operating costs if we did it according to the manufacturer's specifications.
I could write on but Have diverted a little from Poor old Jim Collins case.
He was not at fault---Air New Zealand flight management was.
I flew on after leaving Air NZ, working in Europe, Ireland NZ and self employed,.
I make the unreserved statement that.
In all my working life, Air New Zealand LTd stand head and shoulders above the rest as being the WORST employer I ever worked for.

Now go back and look again at the Mahone report, Impact Erebus, and other publications on that accident and the route cause is obvious.

[prospector]

I will copy and paste from the other thread to.

" Now go back and look again at the Mahons report, Impact Erebus, and other publications on that accident and the route cause is obvious."

Yes, the cause certainly is obvious.

Mahons publication,containing what one would expect it to contain, is actually titled "Verdict on Erebus".

Gordon Vettes publication is entitled "Impact Erebus"

There are many other publications and reports on this accident, many by Pilots with many years of experience in airline flying, and very few of them agree with Mahons findings, which is not suprising as he had absolutely no aviation experience or expertise.

His findings were admittedly of value in the aftermath of the accident, the political sheenanigans, the shortcomings of some of Air New Zealand's operational staff, but his knowledge of cockpit behaviour in large, or for that matter, any aircraft, as he accused the Chief Accident inspector of, was non existant.

All this happened after the accident, if the mandatory descent requirements were adhered to, even one of them, then the accident would not have happened.

[Fantome]

hoggsnortrupert


Framer:

. . .there are equally other arse holes that toe'd the company line with being whiter than white! that are still about, may they never get a good night's sleep!

There but by the grace of God go I:

It is my airman's prayer to my God on high, that I be judged on my truthfulness, and faithfulness to the better good of my fellow pilot, may my stool at the bar be reserved for all my faults..

Last from me on the subject!

Dear Rupe . .. . . so glad it has not been. (I'd insert an amen or two in the above.)

[framer]

All this happened after the accident, if the mandatory descent requirements were adhered to, even one of them, then the accident would not have happened.

Well one of the things that we as an industry do better in 2011 than back then is respect hard altitudes. Maybe Erebus contributed significantly to that? Although I can think of another more recent loss where the defence of the hard altitude was given away. Whether the altitude is from CAA, the manufacturer, or the company, it is there for the same reason, it's the last backstop, to protect against all the other factors/problems/errors leading up to that point that you may or may not be aware of as the pilot.
Now days, 99% of the time, if management suggested to a pilot that he could go below a hard altitude, the pilot wouldn't do it, they'd say "no thanks, it's my licence".
By decending below a hard altitude you are giving away a very important layer of defence. I don't think that was understood as well in 1979 as it is today. I'm sure it wasn't.

[Mr & Mrs Rocketboots]

This report on Radio New Zealand's Mediawatch summed up the value of this book brilliantly (IMHO).

http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/pr...ember-2011.asx

Starting point 7:27 into the programme.

[prospector]

To me. all that that interview with Holmes does is just confirms what an odious little man he is.

[4Greens]

I knew Ron Chippendale well. He was as straight as a die.

[Old Fella]

Understanding "white-out"

I recall some reference to the crew of the accident flight "not understanding white-out". If this is true I find it inconceivable. I was involved in several flights to McMurdo as part of Operation Deep Freeze during December 1978 and we were most certainly well briefed regarding "white-out". We, in fact, maintained HF skeds with McMurdo en-route to get the trend and if "white-out" was likely we would not go beyond PSR and return to Christchurch to await more favorable conditions at McMurdo.

[27/09]

I recall some reference to the crew of the accident flight "not understanding white-out". If this is true I find it inconceivable.

Why do you say inconceivable? I don't doubt you knew all about whiteout, but who's to say these guys had been briefed correctly about it. These guys hadn't been there before, plus I think that many peoples understanding of whiteout is/was a little flawed.

Many think of it as being in conditions where visibility is obscured by ice crystals or similar, and never ever realise that it's to do with the inability to see terrain ahead even though visibility is good, due to the ambient light and the colour of the sky and terrain playing devious tricks on the vision of those experiencing whiteout.

[reubee]

The book didn't really add anything new, except for telling you that Paul Holmes and the family doesn't like Chippendale (Starts right from the beginning, digs the knife in as early as Page 15), and some innuendo against Geoffrey Palmer.

I'd like to have seen Paul Holmes the investigative journalist try and uncover the outstandinging questions. How did the US Navy manage to erase their ATC recordings, the 2 burglaries, the missing exhibits recovered from the Antarctic. If anyone did something untoward they must be getting on and maybe willing to confess

What did the Air NZ Board of Directors discuss in the months after Nov 1979?

Can the CVR tape be reexamined using 2011 technology? Will it be released publcially in 2049. (70 year limit applies I believe)

[flatfootsam]

[Can the CVR tape be reexamined using 2011 technology? Will it be released publcially in 2049. (70 year limit applies I believe) ]

Good question. Under the US freedom of information act, it can be released 2 years after the event, providing the authority has a copy.
It is not clear if a copy exists, but perhaps the manufacture has a copy as that is where it was downloaded before heading to Washington.
Air NZ have a copy as it under the previous legislation, it was considered the property of the airline (See Mahon - Verdict Erebus).
Running it through a modern CVR analysis would be very interesting

[prospector]

Have just attended a book sale meeting with Paul Holmes giving his version of events as seen by Mahon. One example, Holmes went on at some length to explain that the descent was approved by McMurdo Radar, but did not explain to the audience that at no time was the flight identified by radar, or that the Captain had requested a VMC descent, which Mahon and Holmes neglect to explain that by definition the crew are now responsible, by their own request, for their own terrain and traffic separation.

His treatment of Ron Chippendale was quite disgusting, at the end he would not answer any relevant questions, just said to read the book.

[ampan]

bbg #66: A DC-10 captain in 1979 might not usually have checked all the waypoints against the chart, but what if he had received conflicting information about one of them? What if he had been told at the briefing that the final waypoint was at X and then discovered, the night before, that an old flightplan he had taken from the briefing had the waypoint at Y? Wouldn’t you check that particular waypoint, especially before going down to 1500 feet in the vicinity of 16000 foot mountain? Wouldn’t you check that particular waypoint before descending VMC through a hole in the cloud when you knew it was “very hard to tell the difference between the cloud and the ice”? As Prospector points out, he went down without verifying his position. All he had was the AINS, which was completely dependent on the final waypoint being at Y, rather than at X, as he had been told at the briefing. And there is absolutely no doubt that Captain Collins was told, at the briefing, that the waypoint was at McMurdo Station, rather than at a point 27 nms to the west, in middle of nowhere. The briefing used an audiotape, the transcript of which contained the following: “A standard route definition will be used employing the From-Via-To format. Enter NZAA then 78s/167E being the approximate co-ordinates of McMurdo Station.” Even if the captain was asleep during that bit, he then went into the simulator and practised and a descent procedure to McMurdo Station. The procedure was not a straight line descent from a point to the west of McMurdo Station. Instead, it was an out and back procedure from directly overhead McMurdo Station. So where would that suggest the final waypoint to be?

[reubee]

Originally Posted by prospector

Have just attended a book sale meeting with Paul Holmes giving his version of events as seen by Mahon. ...

His treatment of Ron Chippendale was quite disgusting, at the end he would not answer any relevant questions, just said to read the book.

... was that you getting a mention in the Herald today then Paul Holmes: Book tour brings out all sorts - friend and foe - National - NZ Herald News

[27/09]

was that you getting a mention in the Herald today then Paul Holmes: Book tour brings out all sorts - friend and foe - National - NZ Herald News

Well, the pompous prat hasn't improved with age.

We started in Taupo where we booked into a flash hotel, the Hilton, on the lakefront looking across....

By the way Paul, the Hilton isn't in the lake front at Taupo in fact you'd probably struggle to even see much of the lake from the Hilton. If you can't get that right one does wonder how much poetic licence you used in the book.