Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

Norfolk Island Ditching ATSB Report - ?

The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Norfolk Island Ditching ATSB Report - ?

Old 31st Jan 2015, 08:20
  #661 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Age: 56
Posts: 356
After all this time we will all be following the media to find out what is going on.

The strange thing is that for all the delays and inefficiency of the legal system, it may prove better at getting to the bottom of things than CASA or ATSB.
slats11 is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 08:27
  #662 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 97
Or PPRuNe or PAIN for that matter.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 09:10
  #663 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Age: 56
Posts: 356
The key difference of course is that CASA and ATSB are funded, have statutory responsibility and substantial powers to investigate such incidents.
slats11 is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 09:45
  #664 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Yosemite
Age: 47
Posts: 177
Of things Pelair, REX and CASA

Indeed, what CASA office was responsible for the regulatory surveillance of the Westwind operations of PelAir during the 2006/7/8/9 period?
Sir, from memory that would be the illustrious Sydney office that oversighted/surveilled the little Westwind operation. Because Pelair is part of the REX Group the Sydney office, not Bankstown, held that portfolio. I also recall a particular female FOI who used to have the Pelair operation in her portfolio. I would personally rate her ability at the same level I would rate a particular Brisbane FOI who goes by the name of 'Pothole'! But hey, I can't prove any of this, it's all rumour of course. Perhaps one of the alleged "font of all things aviation" two local trolls might know?

'Corrupt skies for all'
Soteria is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 10:22
  #665 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
[F]rom memory that would be the illustrious Sydney office that oversighted/surveilled the little Westwind operation. Because Pelair is part of the REX Group the Sydney office, not Bankstown, held that portfolio. ...
According to a media release from Rex, Mr Ronald Bartsch was appointed as a director of Rex in November 2010. The release said that Mr Bartsch's experience included "manager of the CASA Sydney Airline Transport Office". During what period did Mr Bartsch occupy that position?
Creampuff is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 10:58
  #666 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Age: 56
Posts: 356
According to his public LinkedIn page, left CASA way back in 2007.

Member - with aviation expertise
Administrative Appeals Tribunal
April 2013 – Present (1 year 10 months)Sydney

Director
Aviation Aerospace Australia
January 2012 – 2014 (2 years)Melbourne Area, Australia
Independent Director

Group General Manager Safety, Compliance and Operational Risk
Qantas
July 2007 – April 2009 (1 year 10 months)Sydney, Australia
Overall responsibility for all safety (operational safety and OH&S) and regulatory compliance for Qantas Airways Limited Air Operators' Certificate

Manager Airline Operations
Civil Aviation Safety Authority
March 1996 – June 2007 (11 years 4 months)Sydney Area, Australia
Regulatory and safety oversight of all airline AOCs and MROs based in Sydney including Qantas Airways, Regional Express, QantasLink
slats11 is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 22:09
  #667 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
Seems to me that some significant rot had developed during the time Mr Bartsch was ostensibly responsible for "regulatory and safety oversight" of Rex. According to Slat's summary timeline:
1. There was a routine CASA audit of PelAir scheduled for October 2007. This had to be re-scheduled as the organisation could not provide sufficient paperwork to allow this 2007 audit to proceed.

2. The re-scheduled audit took place in March 2008. This audit was damning, finding multiple defects. Among the most serious was that the training records of 20 pilots were seriously deficient (for example, 80% of these records contained no evidence of training in emergency procedures). There were numerous other deficiencies - the full report is in the public domain. Most seriously of all, the company conceded its pilots had not been trained in fatigue management as required - this caused CASA to issue an immediate “Safety Alert” requiring the company to immediately cease operating under its existing fatigue management policy until this training was undertaken....
Were the identified deficiencies confined to the PelAir/Westwind aspects of the operation?

It seems very odd to me that, notwithstanding 6 months or so of advance warning, there were still such ostensibly serious deficiencies left to be discovered by the regulator during the audit. If accurate, it would suggest to me that the operator was out of its depth, or unperturbed by the prospect of the regulator finding serious deficiencies during an audit, or a mixture of both. If Slat's summary timeline is reasonably accurate, these regulatory interactions seem to me to have been almost entirely ineffective:
5. Following the crash, CASA conducted a special audit in November - December 2009. This was much more in depth than the routine March 2008 audit. What had been wrong in March 2008 was still wrong. Furthermore, additional serious problems came to light.
It seems to me to be little more than a pantomime - both sides going through the motions of finding and addressing the same deficiencies, over and over again.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 22:09
  #668 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 495
Found a SMH piece about the court case
But Ms Casey says the airline and its pilots knew or ought to have known that Norfolk Island was notorious for sudden and extreme weather variations, and had the crew checked the revised forecast earlier into the flight, they could have diverted the plane to New Zealand or New Caledonia.She also says the pilots failed to activate an emergency locator transmitter or personal locator beacons and failed to deploy the liferaft prior to abandoning the plane.
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/norfolk-is...17-104fpy.html
Seems they are reporting Ms Casey agrees with the ATSB, very strange indeed
Eddie Dean is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 22:14
  #669 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
So why did the regulator and operator permit such an ostensibly poorly-prepared pilot (and copilot) to fly in those circumstances, especially given the substance of the issues apparently discovered during audits before the incident?
Creampuff is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 22:19
  #670 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 495
Are you asking how the holes in the regulatory reason cheese lined up to allow both operator and crew to cause the accident?
Eddie Dean is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 22:24
  #671 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
If you understand the Reason model and the 'Swiss Cheese' metaphor - as I strongly suspect you do - you'll understand why your leading question speaks volumes about your bias.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 22:33
  #672 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 495
Goodness, me biased - never.
But be that as it may, ATSB investigators would not have expected so much interest to be paid to an Airwork accident, it's not a heavy into the mythical smoking hole is it?
The senate should have done more than thrash around in the bathtub, lots of noise and action, no progress. That process got bogged down in personalities, and people at the back of the room.
And I noted no recommendation for compensation.
CASA and ATSB stand in poor light over the Pel AIr report, but I suspect for reasons other than those pursued in the Senate.

I read that one of the Pilots had to take various tests for CASA to keep his ratings, and was able to pass first time, perhaps this means his skill set was as required for an ATPL.

Last edited by Eddie Dean; 31st Jan 2015 at 23:11. Reason: too many definitives
Eddie Dean is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 22:39
  #673 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
The assertion that it was an "Airwork" accident merely begs one of the questions the answer to which goes to the chronic corporate incompetence of the regulator and accident investigator.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 22:44
  #674 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Age: 56
Posts: 356
Tried to pm you creamy, but your mailbox full and rejecting new messages
slats11 is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 22:46
  #675 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 495
....accident merely begs one of the questions the answer to which..
Give me a clue, either the answer or the question please.
Eddie Dean is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 22:52
  #676 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
Who decided that the classification of the operation in which NGA was engaged at the time was "airwork"? Was it a Court? If not, it's just someone's untested opinion.

A competent accident accident investigator would have tested that opinion.

Perhaps an operation involving fare paying passengers and no emergency is charter? Of course, all of this will become clear in 1998, with new, clear and concise classification of operations rules.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 23:00
  #677 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 495
From my limited understanding, the type of operation is in 206 or there abouts. so who wrote the regs? Are they Law? Open to interpretation?
You make a very good point, one that was not pursued by the Senate, this would be one of the reason holes that would have put the aircraft in a higher operational category and perhaps prevent the occurrence

Last edited by Eddie Dean; 31st Jan 2015 at 23:22. Reason: spelling, added Law and interpretation comment, mea culpa creampuff
Eddie Dean is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 23:13
  #678 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
"Limited understanding"?

A search of your posts suggests your ignorance is feigned.

And you edited your post above by adding content, not correcting spelling.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 23:24
  #679 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 495
Not feigned, I have a journeyman's understanding of those regs that relate to me. The changes means a limited knowledge for all of us I suspect.
Eddie Dean is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2015, 23:27
  #680 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 53
Mighty Pissed Off: Take Two...

An old post for some clarification.

I believe that now is the time for all the trolls and moderators to dig deep, some very deep, into their humanity strand of DNA. Understandably some are more evolved than others, very clear from the eyes that's that have seen the absolute evidence of the truth. Heard the voices of survivors and experts, watched the body language, which expresses the inner invisible voice of some that have told untruths. Mainly the leaders of our Aviation Industry. Just watch the Senate. Easy to see the rubbernecking to each other looking for answers or the notice business.
So, the day before my trial, another dig perhaps or curiosity?
I will risk myself to correct and explain so the good people understand that my will is good.
Can I voice...I believe (yes, this is still a democracy) and
Free-Doom of speech is still permitted, I think.
Yet the almighty chase for power, money and a mix of ego dashed with political rescue, has resulted in a pathetic attempt to smother the truth which leads to nil learning which would result in lives saved. This is how we learn. From admitted mistakes.
With all the FOIs, the Audits, the Candians, re-opening, Pollie donations....what more do the authorities need to make change.

The Montreal convention. Challenge it!

History, as we know unravels truth.
Enter the sixth year of this pettifoggery.
Those who believe they are above all due to title, money and whatever it is that drives such cruelty to other humans, well, may the truth lay ahead of you all and a realisation that it's much more noble and respected IF acknowledgment of wrong-doings are corrected early.
The snowball of lies hit the bottom of the hill and smashed apart.

Below is from the senate thread #2184.
Also, a few words regarding Truss thread from I, re: Pollie $, on Nov 14.

Talis Qualis


QUOTE

"Dear PPs

An article in the SMH on 18/08/14 regarding a Pel-Air and me suing.

I found out about the article in Thursday afternoon.
They printed my full name, address, marital sataus and how many children I had.
The only true statement that I remember to the best of my ability are within "quotes"

The rest is unquoted. I did not say any of what they printed.
I have never spoken to the a author, I don't know her.

A clandestine operation.
The aircraft pictured intact. Quick description of events.
The Pissed Off part.
The author and source are literally, all of a sudden attacking me.
My personal details revealed
My alleged blaming of the pilot (he followed the rules and saved our lives, thank you DJ)
Then she bangs on about the MC99 being applicable to us, which it is not.
Finally, walk away with nothing. Pain, struggle financially

How the liars stare into the dark and play
Enjoy it
For now
The light of truth
Reveals
You and You and You and You.......

Media. For as long as my arse points to the ground. I will never speak with you.

Leave me alone.

If any one knows something, please tell me why this would happen
Anyone know this game?


If I have made spelling mistakes, I'm so bloody tired.
Take care,
Ziggy."

How dare they all. All who have taken part in this deceptive mincing of words.
For what I ask?
For what?

Try as you might.
Picked on the wrong chick.
Ziggychick is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.