Senate Inquiry, Hearing Program 4th Nov 2011
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FONC:
Yes, I'm sure there was a co-pilot. I'm just not quiet sure where.
Perhaps the 'box' would tell more?
Oh, a statement! Now, that is a box opener in itself.
Cannot see any statement from the copilot, is there one?
Perhaps the 'box' would tell more?
Oh, a statement! Now, that is a box opener in itself.
Last edited by Frank Arouet; 17th May 2013 at 02:42. Reason: SCS. Mate can you drop me a 6 pack of farax
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Victoria
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what pilot files???
Sunfish,
several posts back I explained the situation re this statement made by the now Head of Legals at CAsA in what should be considered a Court of Law (AAT) as Perjury applies.
Van De Wiel and Civil Aviation Safety Authority [2006] AATA 207 (7 March 2006)
whilst reminded by the "judge" E. Fice that he was under oath, Adam Anastasi, stated that
. When prompted later he admitted that CASA do hold medical files on pilots. This later admission, not readily volunteered, probably exonerated him from perjury in the eyes of the AAT. It still did not confirm the existence of operational files.
The AIP does not state that the ARN is used for pilot files, no matter how logical this would be. This is the very intent in the writing of the regs. make them so only lawyers can understand and manipulate them.
Empty Skies are safe skies
several posts back I explained the situation re this statement made by the now Head of Legals at CAsA in what should be considered a Court of Law (AAT) as Perjury applies.
Van De Wiel and Civil Aviation Safety Authority [2006] AATA 207 (7 March 2006)
whilst reminded by the "judge" E. Fice that he was under oath, Adam Anastasi, stated that
CASA DO NOT hold files on pilots
The AIP does not state that the ARN is used for pilot files, no matter how logical this would be. This is the very intent in the writing of the regs. make them so only lawyers can understand and manipulate them.
Empty Skies are safe skies
FONC- The co-pilot has chosen to absent herself from any public airing of her role in the accident. Other than what is stated in the report itself there is a huge hole in the information of what occurred in the cockpit particularly in the final sequences leading up to the ditching. The ATSB would have conducted an interview but a transcript of the interview is not legally allowed to be made public and is not subject to FOI laws.
Her reasons for staying silent can only be speculated on but IMHO this might have soemthing to do with it.
The copilot recalled being alone in the cockpit before moving to the main door and attempting unsuccessfully to open it. The copilot reported that the fuselage then tilted nose downward and that a quantity of equipment and baggage descended or rolled down the fuselage as it filled with water. The copilot abandoned the main door, swam up towards the rear of the fuselage, located an emergency exit door by touch, and exited the aircraft.
Which is at odds with this version:
The CVR would clear up how the crew were responding to each other as the situation developed.
Both quotes would have been from the interviews that the ATSB conducted, bearing in mind that both pilots were recalling a traumatic event.
As far as Sunny's conspiracy theory is concerned, as good a guess as any.
Her reasons for staying silent can only be speculated on but IMHO this might have soemthing to do with it.
The copilot recalled being alone in the cockpit before moving to the main door and attempting unsuccessfully to open it. The copilot reported that the fuselage then tilted nose downward and that a quantity of equipment and baggage descended or rolled down the fuselage as it filled with water. The copilot abandoned the main door, swam up towards the rear of the fuselage, located an emergency exit door by touch, and exited the aircraft.
The PIC reported checking that the copilot was responding before moving rearwards into the cabin and ascertaining that the main door was not usable (Figure 7). Continuing rearwards to the two emergency exits in the fuselage centre section, the PIC opened the port (left, looking forward) emergency exit, and exited as water flowed in through the door opening.
Both quotes would have been from the interviews that the ATSB conducted, bearing in mind that both pilots were recalling a traumatic event.
As far as Sunny's conspiracy theory is concerned, as good a guess as any.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stan,
Re 1767 -I too have issue with the "Pilot File" matter. Whether CASA keep them or where they keep them (operational files etc) is open to speculation. Regardless of this AOC holders are required to keep files on pilots. The matters that may be recorded are not proscribed as far as I know and a pilot has no ability to challenge any matter that may be recorded. This is procedurely unfair and should be changed. A responsible regulatory authority would do so.
A number of years ago I was dismissed from Kendell following the airlines written statements to CASA that the airline had conducted a thorough investigation and determined that I had flown an RPT aircraft with a flat tyre and failed to report the defect.
To cut a long story short it ended in the AIRC with the Commissioner finding that the airline did not investigate at all and that I had not done so. I was paid and re instated.
Yet the matter is still recorded on my pilot records at work!
It seems that CASA and its delegates see themselves as infallible and no review is permitted. What a crock!
Re 1767 -I too have issue with the "Pilot File" matter. Whether CASA keep them or where they keep them (operational files etc) is open to speculation. Regardless of this AOC holders are required to keep files on pilots. The matters that may be recorded are not proscribed as far as I know and a pilot has no ability to challenge any matter that may be recorded. This is procedurely unfair and should be changed. A responsible regulatory authority would do so.
A number of years ago I was dismissed from Kendell following the airlines written statements to CASA that the airline had conducted a thorough investigation and determined that I had flown an RPT aircraft with a flat tyre and failed to report the defect.
To cut a long story short it ended in the AIRC with the Commissioner finding that the airline did not investigate at all and that I had not done so. I was paid and re instated.
Yet the matter is still recorded on my pilot records at work!
It seems that CASA and its delegates see themselves as infallible and no review is permitted. What a crock!
Last edited by Greedy; 17th May 2013 at 04:00.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the interests of flight safety and to also assess the level of probity of ATSB/CASA, how feasible/ridiculous is it to have a private consortium retrieve the FDR material, given the aircraft is only around 45 metres below the surface?
You would think the present "owners" of the aircraft wouldn't have any objection to the recorders being accessed by a party other than the current owner (or ATSB) in endeavouring to establish what occurred in the cockpit that night.
From the approaching 400,000 views on this thread and given the current widespread animosity to CASA/ATSB by both individuals and aviation groups, there is possibly sufficient interest to fund such a project (even cost sharing with ATSB to minimise costs if they're serious about accident investigation).
Once any FDR information has been obtained and analysed, it may well answer most of the questions related to this accident...
Henry
You would think the present "owners" of the aircraft wouldn't have any objection to the recorders being accessed by a party other than the current owner (or ATSB) in endeavouring to establish what occurred in the cockpit that night.
From the approaching 400,000 views on this thread and given the current widespread animosity to CASA/ATSB by both individuals and aviation groups, there is possibly sufficient interest to fund such a project (even cost sharing with ATSB to minimise costs if they're serious about accident investigation).
Once any FDR information has been obtained and analysed, it may well answer most of the questions related to this accident...
Henry
If you looked like succeeding Henry, ATSB will have the lawyers, or the insurers lawyers onto you real quick in my estimation.
You would need to do it stealthily and get the data out and published outside Australian jurisdiction in my opinion.
I've dived on a B17 near Milne bay and a Jap fighter further north in depths of 39 and 10 metres and they were remarkably well preserved. If the data is behind stainless steel it should be there for decades at 45m.
You would need to do it stealthily and get the data out and published outside Australian jurisdiction in my opinion.
I've dived on a B17 near Milne bay and a Jap fighter further north in depths of 39 and 10 metres and they were remarkably well preserved. If the data is behind stainless steel it should be there for decades at 45m.
Last edited by Sunfish; 17th May 2013 at 18:46.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
5 Sleeps ?
What is it now, five sleeps until the Senate report is released? Not sure if I feel like a kid a Christmas or a one of Granddame's lot who were always very careful of "what they wished for". Pragmatism says more 'soft, white paper' – but nagging away in the background there is a cheery little tune of hope. I expect time will tell.
There is a thread -Leopard Moths & Miles Falcon -running on the GA page. The posters speak of early times, when the earth was soft and the sky was misty and life was a lot simpler. Back then, folks seemed to accept the risks and responsibility of flight without the armies of lawyers, mountains of regulation and huge 'safety' budgets – you paid your money and took your chances. There was a need for change back then, but history shows an interest in "Aviation" which touched everyone, from Prime Minister to the wide eyed kid who managed to scrape up the shillings required to 'loop de loop' in a Tiger one unforgettable day. The approach to change back then seems to have been cohesive, integrated and "in the general interest".
It is easy enough to see how we went from carefree, potentially lethal to the Nanny state construct we have today. But I wonder if with the improved technology, knowledge, and history we have of matters aeronautical – do we really need quite so many rules and criminal charges. Then, the answer slides into place – aviation may have changed, but human nature simply has not.
Aye well; enough of my rambling – I've decided to treat the report much like Christmas; be bloody glad when it's all over and life returns to a semblance of sanity......
Selah.
MODS – Any way can we identify viewer 400,000??? – Choccy frog award, bit of fun and all that. It has been a journey
There is a thread -Leopard Moths & Miles Falcon -running on the GA page. The posters speak of early times, when the earth was soft and the sky was misty and life was a lot simpler. Back then, folks seemed to accept the risks and responsibility of flight without the armies of lawyers, mountains of regulation and huge 'safety' budgets – you paid your money and took your chances. There was a need for change back then, but history shows an interest in "Aviation" which touched everyone, from Prime Minister to the wide eyed kid who managed to scrape up the shillings required to 'loop de loop' in a Tiger one unforgettable day. The approach to change back then seems to have been cohesive, integrated and "in the general interest".
It is easy enough to see how we went from carefree, potentially lethal to the Nanny state construct we have today. But I wonder if with the improved technology, knowledge, and history we have of matters aeronautical – do we really need quite so many rules and criminal charges. Then, the answer slides into place – aviation may have changed, but human nature simply has not.
Aye well; enough of my rambling – I've decided to treat the report much like Christmas; be bloody glad when it's all over and life returns to a semblance of sanity......
Selah.
MODS – Any way can we identify viewer 400,000??? – Choccy frog award, bit of fun and all that. It has been a journey
Last edited by Kharon; 17th May 2013 at 22:08. Reason: Sunny if you want your boomerang to come back. etc
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 60
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slight drift, anybody else see the irony in a discussion about retrieving an item from the ocean, with commentary from 'Henry the octopus' and Sun'fish'?
Sorry fella's, I was just enjoying that connection, it gave me a smile on this beautiful morning!
On a final note, and I apologise in advance to Dom as my incoming thought is not intended to be personal. Lets say the 'anti Dom crusaders' are correct, that Dom was a rogue, a shocking pilot who should not have had the audacity to wear the stripes on his shirt, a pilot in command of a Jet, not some weekend 152 joyflighter - How was such a rogue able to exist within a so-called competently regulated aviation industry? Surely adequate oversight would have noticed the red flags? I can tell you this - pilots are a funny bunch. They love a casual drink (or two) amongst fellow pilots (including FOI's), and incredibly a large industry on such occasions becomes remarkably small and I reckon that if Dom was
a loose cannon it would have already been well known, especially to CAsA (take Hempel for example). So again the question should be raised as to what was CAsA doing?
But that is just a random thought and theory. Why? Because as most of us accept, Dom old son, you did stuff up. However the bigger picture paints the full scenery and Dom was also a chess piece within a game that has numerous other pieces that failed.
But lastly, the above is a brief note about Dom and CAsA's contribution to the 'event'. But the ATSBeakers actions (or should I say budget guided non actions) and the way it conducted its investigation is a separate issue, but one which of course highlights the fact that it is another piece of our safety oversight capacity that is completely buggered beyond belief!
Some people say 'why retrieve the boxes' we know what happened. Bull**** to that I bellow. The boxes could shed additional light on the accident, they would provide technical data as well as voice transcript and of which a totally accurate and comprehensive overview of the accident is obtained. Roll that into a 'lessons learned' package and suddenly you have a value benefit to industry. But no, King Beaker and his mighty budget, his bureaucratic background and all his so-intellectual mi mi mi-ing couldn't see the potential in this. Which proves their stupidity and inability.
Sorry fella's, I was just enjoying that connection, it gave me a smile on this beautiful morning!
On a final note, and I apologise in advance to Dom as my incoming thought is not intended to be personal. Lets say the 'anti Dom crusaders' are correct, that Dom was a rogue, a shocking pilot who should not have had the audacity to wear the stripes on his shirt, a pilot in command of a Jet, not some weekend 152 joyflighter - How was such a rogue able to exist within a so-called competently regulated aviation industry? Surely adequate oversight would have noticed the red flags? I can tell you this - pilots are a funny bunch. They love a casual drink (or two) amongst fellow pilots (including FOI's), and incredibly a large industry on such occasions becomes remarkably small and I reckon that if Dom was
a loose cannon it would have already been well known, especially to CAsA (take Hempel for example). So again the question should be raised as to what was CAsA doing?
But that is just a random thought and theory. Why? Because as most of us accept, Dom old son, you did stuff up. However the bigger picture paints the full scenery and Dom was also a chess piece within a game that has numerous other pieces that failed.
But lastly, the above is a brief note about Dom and CAsA's contribution to the 'event'. But the ATSBeakers actions (or should I say budget guided non actions) and the way it conducted its investigation is a separate issue, but one which of course highlights the fact that it is another piece of our safety oversight capacity that is completely buggered beyond belief!
Some people say 'why retrieve the boxes' we know what happened. Bull**** to that I bellow. The boxes could shed additional light on the accident, they would provide technical data as well as voice transcript and of which a totally accurate and comprehensive overview of the accident is obtained. Roll that into a 'lessons learned' package and suddenly you have a value benefit to industry. But no, King Beaker and his mighty budget, his bureaucratic background and all his so-intellectual mi mi mi-ing couldn't see the potential in this. Which proves their stupidity and inability.
Last edited by my oleo is extended; 17th May 2013 at 22:44.
I am sure there would be enough expertise and money from members of this forum who would club together and recover the FDR & CVR simply to have the facts out in the open.
I have no doubt all the occupants on that fateful flight would like to see that as well.
What would be the legalities of that happening????
The beneficiaries would be all who fly, both crew and passengers, as there is always something to learn from, no matter how small a lesson it may be.
I have no doubt all the occupants on that fateful flight would like to see that as well.
What would be the legalities of that happening????
The beneficiaries would be all who fly, both crew and passengers, as there is always something to learn from, no matter how small a lesson it may be.
First “Save our Bureau”!
Oleo said:
Some people say 'why retrieve the boxes' we know what happened. Bull**** to that I bellow. The boxes could shed additional light on the accident, they would provide technical data as well as voice transcript and of which a totally accurate and comprehensive overview of the accident is obtained. Roll that into a 'lessons learned' package and suddenly you have a value benefit to industry. But no, King Beaker and his mighty budget, his bureaucratic background and all his so-intellectual mi mi mi-ing couldn't see the potential in this. Which proves their stupidity and inability.
Although the level of obfuscation and cover-ups instigated by Fort Fumble and revealed by this inquiry is mind bogglingly staggering, it is probably something that industry stakeholders are not overly surprised by. These shenanigans have being going on behind the scene for the best part of 3 decades (as Oleo continuously reminds us). Note: Although there is no doubt that it is only getting worse, much worse!
However the true travesty, again as Oleo points out (above and in posts #1746 and #1755), is the decimation of the ATSB’s once proud reputation in only five short years (i.e. Beaker’s reign). Beaker’s ‘beyond all rational reason’ methodology has been shown up to be the furphy that it is in the many threads that have pointed out defective, spurious and neutered ‘Final Reports’ that are really beyond the pale for the quality and content that we once all expected from the bureau prior to 2008.
Beaker’s methodology would also seem to be in direct conflict with ICAO, here’s a quote from page 31 of the proposed Annex 19 SMM:
We could excuse Beaker and his cohorts for adopting a flawed methodology; after all we are only human and subject to making mistakes. However what I personally cannot excuse is Beaker making the once obligatory Safety Recommendations (that one would expect to be generated from any serious accident/incident investigation) almost totally obsolete. The safety actions section is now no more than a summary of political correctness and will be summarily dismissed to the dustbin of history while the bureau continue to pussyfoot around the sensitivity of various ‘directly interested parties’.
This decimation of the SR would appear to be in contrast to nearly all effective and reputable aviation accident investigative bodies throughout the world, and is also in direct contravention with the ICAO principles on the subject.
To highlight the integral part the SR plays in the accident investigation process (in most parts of the world) here is a quick comparison of Final Reports into some significant ditching accidents…lets start with the Hudson River US Airways Flight 1549:
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2010/aar1003.pdf
The NTSB generated no less than 34 Safety recommendations (refer page 124 and the NTSB SR page)
Then there was the 1971 ditching of a ONA DC9 near St Croix, Virgin Islands which generated 18 safety recommendations (pg 16). These recommendations are still faithfully recorded on the NTSB database today:
http://www.airdisaster.com/reports/ntsb/AAR71-08.pdf
Even the third world country of Ethiopia was able to generate a Final report on Ethiopian Airlines B767 ditching (the Federal Islamic Republic of the Comoros November 23, 1996) which included SRs, page 34 and in the appendices:
http://www.fss.aero/accident-reports/dvdfiles/ET/1996-11-23-ET.pdf
So if nothing else is learnt (besides the ugly cover-ups and revelations of a cancerous regime we are now all acutely aware of), or if no proactive change comes from the Senate Inquiry, let us please..please as an industry push to reclaim our bureau (call it the ‘save our bureau campaign’), let us snatch it back from the bureaucrats and untangle it from the tentacles of the axis of evil prevalent at Fort Fumble.
The deconstruction of Fort Fumble will be a long drawn out process and is reliant on ‘political will’ but saving the bureau is achievable now with industry pressure as well as input from industry experts e.g. Bryan Aherne, Ben Cook, Alan Stray..etc..etc.
“Save our Bureau” or ‘sob’
when it no longer exists and is swallowed up by Fort Fumble!
ps Besides perhaps we would then see the revival of the paperback version of the classic crash comic...hmm doin a Kelpie!
But the ATSBeakers actions (or should I say budget guided non actions) and the way it conducted its investigation is a separate issue, but one which of course highlights the fact that it is another piece of our safety oversight capacity that is completely buggered beyond belief!
Some people say 'why retrieve the boxes' we know what happened. Bull**** to that I bellow. The boxes could shed additional light on the accident, they would provide technical data as well as voice transcript and of which a totally accurate and comprehensive overview of the accident is obtained. Roll that into a 'lessons learned' package and suddenly you have a value benefit to industry. But no, King Beaker and his mighty budget, his bureaucratic background and all his so-intellectual mi mi mi-ing couldn't see the potential in this. Which proves their stupidity and inability.
However the true travesty, again as Oleo points out (above and in posts #1746 and #1755), is the decimation of the ATSB’s once proud reputation in only five short years (i.e. Beaker’s reign). Beaker’s ‘beyond all rational reason’ methodology has been shown up to be the furphy that it is in the many threads that have pointed out defective, spurious and neutered ‘Final Reports’ that are really beyond the pale for the quality and content that we once all expected from the bureau prior to 2008.
Beaker’s methodology would also seem to be in direct conflict with ICAO, here’s a quote from page 31 of the proposed Annex 19 SMM:
Apart from establishing findings and root causes to accidents/incidents , most investigation exercises also result in the uncovering of hazards/ threats. An effective and comprehensive investigation process includes the identification and discrimination between an ultimate consequence, an unsafe event and hazards/ threats that contribute to the accident/incident.
This may include any systemic, latent or organizational factors within the entire aviation system framework. In today‘s proactive safety management environment, there is an important and necessary integration between an accident/incident investigation process and an organization‘s hazard reporting/ identification process.
Investigation reporting forms should have a clear provision to document hazards/ threats uncovered during the investigation process that would require separate follow up action by the organization‘s hazard identification and risk mitigation process.
It is common for some investigation reports to limit their ―Conclusion and ―Action Taken/ Recommend to immediate or direct cause(s) only. Thus, any secondary or indirect hazards/ threats could tend to be overlooked , unless this gap can be bridged by linking the accident/incident investigation and hazard identification processes.
This may include any systemic, latent or organizational factors within the entire aviation system framework. In today‘s proactive safety management environment, there is an important and necessary integration between an accident/incident investigation process and an organization‘s hazard reporting/ identification process.
Investigation reporting forms should have a clear provision to document hazards/ threats uncovered during the investigation process that would require separate follow up action by the organization‘s hazard identification and risk mitigation process.
It is common for some investigation reports to limit their ―Conclusion and ―Action Taken/ Recommend to immediate or direct cause(s) only. Thus, any secondary or indirect hazards/ threats could tend to be overlooked , unless this gap can be bridged by linking the accident/incident investigation and hazard identification processes.
This decimation of the SR would appear to be in contrast to nearly all effective and reputable aviation accident investigative bodies throughout the world, and is also in direct contravention with the ICAO principles on the subject.
To highlight the integral part the SR plays in the accident investigation process (in most parts of the world) here is a quick comparison of Final Reports into some significant ditching accidents…lets start with the Hudson River US Airways Flight 1549:
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2010/aar1003.pdf
The NTSB generated no less than 34 Safety recommendations (refer page 124 and the NTSB SR page)
Then there was the 1971 ditching of a ONA DC9 near St Croix, Virgin Islands which generated 18 safety recommendations (pg 16). These recommendations are still faithfully recorded on the NTSB database today:
http://www.airdisaster.com/reports/ntsb/AAR71-08.pdf
Even the third world country of Ethiopia was able to generate a Final report on Ethiopian Airlines B767 ditching (the Federal Islamic Republic of the Comoros November 23, 1996) which included SRs, page 34 and in the appendices:
http://www.fss.aero/accident-reports/dvdfiles/ET/1996-11-23-ET.pdf
So if nothing else is learnt (besides the ugly cover-ups and revelations of a cancerous regime we are now all acutely aware of), or if no proactive change comes from the Senate Inquiry, let us please..please as an industry push to reclaim our bureau (call it the ‘save our bureau campaign’), let us snatch it back from the bureaucrats and untangle it from the tentacles of the axis of evil prevalent at Fort Fumble.
The deconstruction of Fort Fumble will be a long drawn out process and is reliant on ‘political will’ but saving the bureau is achievable now with industry pressure as well as input from industry experts e.g. Bryan Aherne, Ben Cook, Alan Stray..etc..etc.
“Save our Bureau” or ‘sob’
when it no longer exists and is swallowed up by Fort Fumble!ps Besides perhaps we would then see the revival of the paperback version of the classic crash comic
...hmm doin a Kelpie!
Last edited by Sarcs; 18th May 2013 at 10:26.
Been said before and will say it again, the study, the work and the input of Sarcs and others is tremendous. Surely some good can come from the way in which the internet, and forums such as this airing much insight and valid criticism, has revolutionised the 'outsiders' dissection and analysis of complexities involving legislation and administration. More strength to your arms boys.
T'is the Rising of the Moon,
T'is the Rising of the Moon,
And hurrah me boys for freedom,
T'is the Rising of the Moon.
T'is the Rising of the Moon,
T'is the Rising of the Moon,
And hurrah me boys for freedom,
T'is the Rising of the Moon.
Last edited by Fantome; 18th May 2013 at 10:42.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 60
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Big Chief Crazy John say; “Hmmm me think that where there be cigar smoke there be fire. There be big inquiry, Chief Sitting Bull Nick be looking in Chief Crazy John’s backyard looking for smoking gun hidden in steaming horse pooh in middle of Chief Crazy Johns teepee. Me hope Chief Sitting Nick look hard as he may find Chief Postulating Gollum’s mi mi mi also hidden in there deep from prying eyes and out of reach of request for FOI”.
CASA and ATSB MOU??
Last edited by my oleo is extended; 18th May 2013 at 13:04.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 60
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Potential thumbing of the nose?
After my previous light hearted commercial break, I heard a rumour this evening that after the Senate report is handed down, and in true FF spinning fashion they will announce the name of the successful candidate who will be filling the role of EM Operations, which was vacated by Hoody. An old trick really, the position was to be filled anyway, but wait til after some press and announce the new person, it makes the organisation look like they are serious about fixing things (hahahahaha that old chestnut). Anyway, it is rumoured that in true FF arrogance, as they still believe they are untouchable, Terry has lined up a 'mate' for the role! No surprise really, but to ensure probity, fairness, transparency and core public servant principles are robustly adhered to I would suggest the incoming persons background be thoroughly reviewed by the Senate just to make sure 'mates rates' aren't involved here, nor would we want nepotism to take place and top positions be 'stacked', filled by mates to ensure the upper echelons activities are not exposed?? All rumour of course.
Oh well, lets wait and see what does or doesn't transpire on the 23rd. I have heard that the Skull may be dumped prior to the expirey of his robust contract.
If so, who will be his likely replacement? Taking into consideration the Skulls Star Chamber background at CX, and another previous CAsA CEO's experience at CX Mick 'Ayotoller' Toller, and the Australian governments obvious penchant for ex CX bullies, maybe we should be looking towards CX to see who the new DAS may be this year?? And let's not forget that the current Deputy DAS also spent time working inside the CX machine. So in all there is an interesting background to all this, not to mention the correlation between these individuals work history and the way CAsA is run today?
Will we see the break up of the Cathay boys club? Will we see the opposite with more CX affiliates such as Chen, Barley, Tyler and Rhodes join club CAsA?
Oh well, lets wait and see what does or doesn't transpire on the 23rd. I have heard that the Skull may be dumped prior to the expirey of his robust contract.
If so, who will be his likely replacement? Taking into consideration the Skulls Star Chamber background at CX, and another previous CAsA CEO's experience at CX Mick 'Ayotoller' Toller, and the Australian governments obvious penchant for ex CX bullies, maybe we should be looking towards CX to see who the new DAS may be this year?? And let's not forget that the current Deputy DAS also spent time working inside the CX machine. So in all there is an interesting background to all this, not to mention the correlation between these individuals work history and the way CAsA is run today?
Will we see the break up of the Cathay boys club? Will we see the opposite with more CX affiliates such as Chen, Barley, Tyler and Rhodes join club CAsA?
Last edited by my oleo is extended; 19th May 2013 at 06:20.
You got best braves there. Many walls hold fine paintings in big offices.
More impressive than all the pot plants. We like see fine art work hung about.
Even if only facsimile as on previous page. Help feel inspired, good about
impending war dance. Rehearsal any day now.
More impressive than all the pot plants. We like see fine art work hung about.
Even if only facsimile as on previous page. Help feel inspired, good about
impending war dance. Rehearsal any day now.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Getting very close to the 400,000 target now.
Going to be an interesting week with the report finally out and just a couple of days before estimates.
New exec of operations too?
Going to be an interesting week with the report finally out and just a couple of days before estimates.
New exec of operations too?
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Irony anyone.
Comments by the Ethiopian Civil Aviation Authority on the Accident Investigation of Ethiopian Flight 409, Boeing 737-800, ET-ANB, January 25, 2010
Executive Summary.
Introduction.
1) The Ethiopian Civil Aviation Authority finds that the draft final report is biased, lacking evidences and incomplete, and that it does not present a full account of ET-409 accident.
2) The Ethiopian Civil Aviation Authority observed with serious regrets that before the formal investigation process started too many speculative statements were publicly released by officials of the Lebanese Government, including the very Ministry of Public Works and Transport, which established the investigation committee on the probable cause of the accident. It was noted that the Lebanese Minister of Transport publicly speculated on 26 January 2010 (one day after the accident) “that the pilot’s failure to follow instructions from the control tower caused the crash”. He also ruled out sabotage. Likewise regrettably, the investigation process was guided and was monitored to prove and justify the speculations made by the officials.
3) Secondly, information released by Wikileaks, available on internet, revealed a message from the US Ambassador in Lebanon on 17 February 2010 (23 days after the accident) stating: “Although the result of the investigation is not yet public, it will likely place blame for the crash on the actions of the aircraft’s two pilots.” The source of the information was given as “the NTSB representative leading the investigation” (the full transcript of the Wikileaks cable is attached).
4) The Ethiopian Civil Aviation Authority believes that the deficiencies of the investigation process, the preliminary draft report and the draft final report are only the result of such speculative opinions and biases, which deprived the investigation process independence and strict compliance with Annex 13 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation.
Executive Summary.
Introduction.
1) The Ethiopian Civil Aviation Authority finds that the draft final report is biased, lacking evidences and incomplete, and that it does not present a full account of ET-409 accident.
2) The Ethiopian Civil Aviation Authority observed with serious regrets that before the formal investigation process started too many speculative statements were publicly released by officials of the Lebanese Government, including the very Ministry of Public Works and Transport, which established the investigation committee on the probable cause of the accident. It was noted that the Lebanese Minister of Transport publicly speculated on 26 January 2010 (one day after the accident) “that the pilot’s failure to follow instructions from the control tower caused the crash”. He also ruled out sabotage. Likewise regrettably, the investigation process was guided and was monitored to prove and justify the speculations made by the officials.
3) Secondly, information released by Wikileaks, available on internet, revealed a message from the US Ambassador in Lebanon on 17 February 2010 (23 days after the accident) stating: “Although the result of the investigation is not yet public, it will likely place blame for the crash on the actions of the aircraft’s two pilots.” The source of the information was given as “the NTSB representative leading the investigation” (the full transcript of the Wikileaks cable is attached).
4) The Ethiopian Civil Aviation Authority believes that the deficiencies of the investigation process, the preliminary draft report and the draft final report are only the result of such speculative opinions and biases, which deprived the investigation process independence and strict compliance with Annex 13 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation.
The rest of the report is out there in cyber space if you wish to draw the parallels; or, enjoy a large dose of irony to start the week. Me, I'm just wondering if the pre prepared CASA response to the Senate report will be provided on the same day or, like answers to QON, take a while.....
Maybe the real game will be played during questions without notice. Who knows.
Last edited by Kharon; 19th May 2013 at 20:44. Reason: What can one say???
BRIEF DIGRESSION
Sunny . . . (why does the refrain " sunny . . .sunny . .. " keep coming without the following lines?) . . . . just the other day you posted -
not asking you to elaborate on instances of oversight. That would be intrusive except in the back bar down at flanigans. Only wishing to endorse the 'what don't I know' bit. It does of course come directly
from that great catalogue of imperishable sayings once given useful
airing by uncle Roger in 'straight and level' columns.
ARIAs (always remembered instructor's advice) they were called
thinks . . . . maybe the hip pocket nerve was touched because of inadequate insurance. Could tell the tale of more than one forced landing where driver airframe was roundly abused for not putting the ailing balus through the fence or better still between two trees.
if you going to run up on the reef do a proper job of it . .. . captain
Sunny . . . (why does the refrain " sunny . . .sunny . .. " keep coming without the following lines?) . . . . just the other day you posted -
every time I go near an aircraft I am thinking, " what don't I know?" More than once the answer has been " plenty" because no training system is perfect.
... Speaking as one who has been on the wrong end of that same situation, luckily only at the expense of my wallet.
... Speaking as one who has been on the wrong end of that same situation, luckily only at the expense of my wallet.
from that great catalogue of imperishable sayings once given useful
airing by uncle Roger in 'straight and level' columns.
ARIAs (always remembered instructor's advice) they were called
thinks . . . . maybe the hip pocket nerve was touched because of inadequate insurance. Could tell the tale of more than one forced landing where driver airframe was roundly abused for not putting the ailing balus through the fence or better still between two trees.
if you going to run up on the reef do a proper job of it . .. . captain
Last edited by Fantome; 22nd May 2013 at 19:32.
