Mt Erebus Disaster 40th Anniversary
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One might also add that one would think our Prime Minister would be taking her information on this tragedy from her own Government Departments official Accident Report.
Now who would be pushing the Mahon version?? could it be members of an association that pressured Air New Zealand to give all their members a turn at this Antarctic flight, first time down as Captain, rather than all the advice from experienced operators to the ice who ruled that one had to do some 20 hours in the right seat before going down in command??
Now who would be pushing the Mahon version?? could it be members of an association that pressured Air New Zealand to give all their members a turn at this Antarctic flight, first time down as Captain, rather than all the advice from experienced operators to the ice who ruled that one had to do some 20 hours in the right seat before going down in command??
But the above comment has come out of left field and is totally bizzare. Firstly, even though some within NZALPA might think they have powers beyond Harry Potter, they don’t. Ardern wouldn’t have made the public comment that she did because NZALPA had ownership of her, because they don’t have that level of power. Secondly, even if NZALPA were more influential than Al Capone and his merry men, why would they push her Government to make that statement 40 years on? I don’t buy it. Yes she is a politician and there will be an agenda, but I don’t believe the NZALPA are pulling Mrs Ed’s strings. C’mon mate...
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Auckalnd
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't believe so either; but it's not beyond the realms of possibility that in preparation for her speech they offered her "helpful advice". They did with Justice Mahon after all.
(And yes - "Mrs. Ed" - stil laughing)
(And yes - "Mrs. Ed" - stil laughing)
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Paraparaumu
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is part of her statement, and if you believe the Nav Dept set the aeroplane on a collision course with the side of the mountain, and the crew sitting in the sharp end could do nothing about it, then so be it.
"It found the airline reset the plane's navigation systems without telling the pilots, inadvertently setting the aircraft on a collision course with the side of the mountain."
"The report's author, judge Peter Mahon, also accused Air New Zealand officials of telling "an orchestrated litany of lies" to cover up the mistake and keep the blame on the pilots."
She never mentioned anything about the NZ Appeal Courts findings on the Mahon investigation, nor did she mention the fact that Mahon appealed the Appeal courts decision to the Privy Council and got the response that has been printed in this forum a number of times, nor is it ever mentioned that after Morrie Davis resigned after the company staff being accused of Litany of Lies was found to be a breach of natural justice, and being challenged by Morrie Davis to, after being found wrong to resign, HE DID.
President of the New Zealand Air Line Pilots' Association Andrew Ridling said the apology was a game changer.
"The pilots on board the aircraft that day were subject to unfair conjecture and blame that affected their professional reputations," Captain Ridling said.
"We have waited a very long time to see that put right."
He said it was very important to the association and the families to hear the Prime Minister say the pilots were not responsible for the tragedy.
"It's impossible to underestimate the effect of just a few words," Ridling said.
If the statement was Not .SOLELY responsible, it would be a more accurate representation of fact.
.
.
"It found the airline reset the plane's navigation systems without telling the pilots, inadvertently setting the aircraft on a collision course with the side of the mountain."
"The report's author, judge Peter Mahon, also accused Air New Zealand officials of telling "an orchestrated litany of lies" to cover up the mistake and keep the blame on the pilots."
She never mentioned anything about the NZ Appeal Courts findings on the Mahon investigation, nor did she mention the fact that Mahon appealed the Appeal courts decision to the Privy Council and got the response that has been printed in this forum a number of times, nor is it ever mentioned that after Morrie Davis resigned after the company staff being accused of Litany of Lies was found to be a breach of natural justice, and being challenged by Morrie Davis to, after being found wrong to resign, HE DID.
President of the New Zealand Air Line Pilots' Association Andrew Ridling said the apology was a game changer.
"The pilots on board the aircraft that day were subject to unfair conjecture and blame that affected their professional reputations," Captain Ridling said.
"We have waited a very long time to see that put right."
He said it was very important to the association and the families to hear the Prime Minister say the pilots were not responsible for the tragedy.
"It's impossible to underestimate the effect of just a few words," Ridling said.
If the statement was Not .SOLELY responsible, it would be a more accurate representation of fact.
.
.
Last edited by prospector; 15th Dec 2019 at 22:59.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The NZALPA statement is excellent. I fully endorse it. But it still doesn’t indicate that they are a power player and have the Government by the balls, neither back then or now.
Knowing how the machine of government works, I still don’t trust the reason behind Ardern’s public statement. I still suspect that there are some damning Government documents on file that may be released as this is the 40th year since the accident, and those documents might not reflect kindly upon actions the Government were involved in back in 79. Hence her coming forward to eat a **** sandwich that was buttered decades ago. A bunch of Government documents have coincidentally recently been released after 40 years under lock and key. That would be a more plausible reason for her statement. Just saying....
Knowing how the machine of government works, I still don’t trust the reason behind Ardern’s public statement. I still suspect that there are some damning Government documents on file that may be released as this is the 40th year since the accident, and those documents might not reflect kindly upon actions the Government were involved in back in 79. Hence her coming forward to eat a **** sandwich that was buttered decades ago. A bunch of Government documents have coincidentally recently been released after 40 years under lock and key. That would be a more plausible reason for her statement. Just saying....
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Paraparaumu
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you saying you believe the statement ??
"It found the airline reset the plane's navigation systems without telling the pilots, inadvertently setting the aircraft on a collision course with the side of the mountain."
Not that I am trying to neigh say Mrs Ed
"It found the airline reset the plane's navigation systems without telling the pilots, inadvertently setting the aircraft on a collision course with the side of the mountain."
Not that I am trying to neigh say Mrs Ed
Last edited by prospector; 15th Dec 2019 at 23:48.
Knowing how the machine of government works, I still don’t trust the reason behind Ardern’s public statement. I still suspect that there are some damning Government documents on file that may be released as this is the 40th year since the accident, and those documents might not reflect kindly upon actions the Government were involved in back in 79. Hence her coming forward to eat a **** sandwich that was buttered decades ago. A bunch of Government documents have coincidentally recently been released after 40 years under lock and key. That would be a more plausible reason for her statement. Just saying....
Whispering "T" Jet
The usual critics will come up with more theories and garbage about Privy Council determinations in 1981 but they will not matter and will not change what is set in stone.
What is not garbage is despite his resignation from the High Court, Mahon decided to appeal to the Privy Council against the Court of Appeal's judgement and the government agreed to pay his costs. A four-week hearing was held in July 1983. In October the Privy Council 'very reluctantly' agreed with the Court of Appeal's judgements and dismissed Mahon's appeal. They also placed on record a tribute to the 'brilliant and painstaking investigative work done by the judge'.
The Privy Council also pointed out after it's findings: QUOTE: The Privy Council expressed the wish that everyone caught up in the Erebus conflagration would move on from it. "The time has now come for all parties to let bygones be bygones so far as the aftermath of the Mt Erebus disaster is concerned. The time for bitter feelings is over."
The New Zealand government has done that. On 18 August 1999 the Minister of Transport, Maurice Williamson, who worked at Air New Zealand as a corporate planner at the time of the crash, tabled the Mahon report in Parliament. Present for the occasion were Maria Collins and Anne Cassin, the widows of two of the pilots on the flight, and Margarita Mahon, Justice Peter Mahon's widow.
Williamson argued that the time for apportioning blame was over; he was tabling the report because 'of the lessons it taught'.
I would respectfully suggest that the Mahon Report is indeed alive and well even if the disaster of Flight TE901 is now in the archives of history.
Lest we Forget.
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Paraparaumu
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It found the airline reset the plane's navigation systems without telling the pilots, inadvertently setting the aircraft on a collision course with the side of the mountain"
Obviously you are a believer that this statement is correct. .
Obviously you are a believer that this statement is correct. .
The Mahon report just can't be taken seriously as it would suggest that the Passengers and Crew were 'doomed' from the moment that the updated flightplan was given to the crew without notification and from that point they were going to impact the mountain effectively rendering the crew as passengers. Finding the crew 'blameless' further enforces that view, as it has been pointed out time and time again in this thread that is just not the case, there were multiple missed steps or opportunities that could have avoided the whole tragedy and to alleviate all responsibility from the crew and their decision making leads to an unbalanced and dangerous report as it means lessons aren't being learned.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because it is still a raw nerve. And if any damning documentation was to be released from the archives it would still damage the Government of today, even if it is a different Party to who was ruling in 79.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QUOTE: The Privy Council expressed the wish that everyone caught up in the Erebus conflagration would move on from it. "The time has now come for all parties to let bygones be bygones so far as the aftermath of the Mt Erebus disaster is concerned. The time for bitter feelings is over."
Privy
noun
- 1.
a toilet located in a small shed outside a house or other building.
The prevailing corporate culture sent how many flights down to the ice and came back with no problem? bending the rules without doubt, but not impacting terra firma As has been stated many times in this thread, if you want to bend the rules make sure you are fireproof and not bend the rules of common sense.
The general public, and this includes some in this forum, do not seem to realise that the Captain and crew had all the means at their disposal to correct this so called error, and they used none of them, which to professional aviators beggars belief.
One of the most emotive accidents ever.
I did mention a week or so ago on here that Qantas still operate the Scenic Antarctica 12 hour flights with a 747-400 (QF have used both RR and CF6 engined -438's)
I did read that when QF retire the 747 that the long southerly route from Oz to JNB cannot be operated by a A380 due to some issues with Polar flying.
Does that mean that the Antarctica scenic flights will stop?
Anyone down under know?
Best R (UK)
I did mention a week or so ago on here that Qantas still operate the Scenic Antarctica 12 hour flights with a 747-400 (QF have used both RR and CF6 engined -438's)
I did read that when QF retire the 747 that the long southerly route from Oz to JNB cannot be operated by a A380 due to some issues with Polar flying.
Does that mean that the Antarctica scenic flights will stop?
Anyone down under know?
Best R (UK)
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Paraparaumu
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Megan,
This is what caused the accident, Justice Mahon, and then our Prime Minister said it so it must be true.
"It found the airline reset the plane's navigation systems without telling the pilots, inadvertently setting the aircraft on a collision course with the side of the mountain"
I would have thought NZALPA would not agree with that at all. Says very little of the intelligence of their members at the sharp end..
This is what caused the accident, Justice Mahon, and then our Prime Minister said it so it must be true.
"It found the airline reset the plane's navigation systems without telling the pilots, inadvertently setting the aircraft on a collision course with the side of the mountain"
I would have thought NZALPA would not agree with that at all. Says very little of the intelligence of their members at the sharp end..
Whispering "T" Jet
The following statement, however, is correct:
"In my opinion therefore, the single dominant and effective cause of the disaster was the mistake made by those airline officials who programmed the aircraft to fly directly at Mt Erebus and omitted to tell the aircrew. That mistake is directly attributable, not so much to the persons who made it, but to the incompetent administrative airline procedures which made the mistake possible."
No, that statement is incorrect and written by a person or persons with a limited command of the english language and even less knowledge about aircraft navigation systems.
The following statement, however, is correct:
"In my opinion therefore, the single dominant and effective cause of the disaster was the mistake made by those airline officials who programmed the aircraft to fly directly at Mt Erebus and omitted to tell the aircrew. That mistake is directly attributable, not so much to the persons who made it, but to the incompetent administrative airline procedures which made the mistake possible."
The following statement, however, is correct:
"In my opinion therefore, the single dominant and effective cause of the disaster was the mistake made by those airline officials who programmed the aircraft to fly directly at Mt Erebus and omitted to tell the aircrew. That mistake is directly attributable, not so much to the persons who made it, but to the incompetent administrative airline procedures which made the mistake possible."
Admit it mate
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Paraparaumu
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my opinion therefore, the single dominant and effective cause of the disaster was the mistake made by those airline officials who programmed the aircraft to fly directly at Mt Erebus and omitted to tell the aircrew. That mistake is directly attributable, not so much to the persons who made it, but to the incompetent administrative airline procedures which made the mistake possible."
Semantics. Still saying the crew had no say in where the aeroplane was going, which is patently ridiculous, the point is not who made the mistake, but why was it not picked up in the hours the flight was proceeding to the ice.
Semantics. Still saying the crew had no say in where the aeroplane was going, which is patently ridiculous, the point is not who made the mistake, but why was it not picked up in the hours the flight was proceeding to the ice.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Auckland
Age: 52
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can I ask some questions here please, just to clarify this in my own mind?
1. What type of INS did the DC10 have?
2. Did it have a triple-mix function?
3. How were the waypoints loaded? Individually as Lat/Longs by the crew or was it already pre-loaded by (say) the Nav Dept?
4. Was the CFP also changed on the day or was the infamous altered waypoint only changed? What I'm getting at here is would the crew have been able to pick up that there'd been a change by cross-checking the tracks/distances or even Lats/Longs?
Thanks.
1. What type of INS did the DC10 have?
2. Did it have a triple-mix function?
3. How were the waypoints loaded? Individually as Lat/Longs by the crew or was it already pre-loaded by (say) the Nav Dept?
4. Was the CFP also changed on the day or was the infamous altered waypoint only changed? What I'm getting at here is would the crew have been able to pick up that there'd been a change by cross-checking the tracks/distances or even Lats/Longs?
Thanks.
Would the crew have been able to pick up a change? at the RCU a few weeks prior they had the opportunity to read a sample flight-plan. That flight plan had the slightly different co-ordinates, track distance, and heading for the final leg, but still had MCMDO MCMURDO as the label, and in the final error by the nav department, no entry to indicate a recent change to draw attention to the entry as there should have been.
MCMDO MCMURDO 188.9 (track)
7753.0S16448.0E 357.4 (dist)
versus
MCMDO MCMURDO 188.5 (track)
7752.7S16658.0E 357.0 (dist)
The crew did not have the opportunity to directly compare the two flight plans, but if as widely believed at the RCU briefing they wrote down the co-ordinates from the first flight plan into a private notebook, they might have had the opportunity to pick-up the difference between what was in their notebook (and plotted on their personal map), versus what was in the flight plan. Thats why the notebook and its missing pages was crucial evidence. Also Cassins notes from the briefing which he accidentally left at home disappeared as well after the event.
In hindsight it would have been prudent to check the line you have drawn on a map versus what you've entered into the computer, but that wasn't something an Air NZ pilot was expected to do on any other flight.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Auckland
Age: 52
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The NZALPA statement is excellent. I fully endorse it. But it still doesn’t indicate that they are a power player and have the Government by the balls, neither back then or now.
Knowing how the machine of government works, I still don’t trust the reason behind Ardern’s public statement. I still suspect that there are some damning Government documents on file that may be released as this is the 40th year since the accident, and those documents might not reflect kindly upon actions the Government were involved in back in 79. Hence her coming forward to eat a **** sandwich that was buttered decades ago. A bunch of Government documents have coincidentally recently been released after 40 years under lock and key. That would be a more plausible reason for her statement. Just saying....
Knowing how the machine of government works, I still don’t trust the reason behind Ardern’s public statement. I still suspect that there are some damning Government documents on file that may be released as this is the 40th year since the accident, and those documents might not reflect kindly upon actions the Government were involved in back in 79. Hence her coming forward to eat a **** sandwich that was buttered decades ago. A bunch of Government documents have coincidentally recently been released after 40 years under lock and key. That would be a more plausible reason for her statement. Just saying....
Trouble is, they are effectively doing it with everything now. When a menu is declared 'classified' due to national security, that's just taking the p-ss. They then raid employees and journalists who dare to leak and then report (respectively) government largess or out and out corruption. Witness K and Bernard are in court probably as we speak, someone in ACT recently released was charged, tried and jailed in secrecy and what do we have for the Minister and Department Head who allegedly illegally ordered the bugging of the offices... nothing, tidy little stint as a consultant with the company that benefited and a lifelong obscene government superannuation pension. What's worse, the reason Witness K had to go to the media was because he got repeatedly blocked from having his disgust (and that of allegedly much of the ADF and ASIS) aired because the person in charge of deciding whether to have an inquiry was the same one that was in charge when the bugging was ordered.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist but this is getting beyond a joke. We will probably find out all sorts of stuff in decades to come that would have had the government of today with their figurative heads on a pike but then, that's really the point isn't it.
I have no doubt it's the same in NZ and there is much more to be revealed.