Barry Hempel Inquest
Actually, I heard it was for a completely different reason. An alcohol/flying incident, which is why Barry was teetotal after the 80s or so.
I did an instrument rating renewal with Barry around '94 or '95, and also two or three check flights in his Pitts, so that I could hire it privately.
For all that this incident, and the problems leading up to it were terrible, Barry was a fascinating person to meet, a gifted pilot, and he did a great deal of good for the GA industry.
I did an instrument rating renewal with Barry around '94 or '95, and also two or three check flights in his Pitts, so that I could hire it privately.
For all that this incident, and the problems leading up to it were terrible, Barry was a fascinating person to meet, a gifted pilot, and he did a great deal of good for the GA industry.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: on the edge
Posts: 823
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Worrals
Knowledge of outcome biases our judgment about the processes that led up to that outcome.
The outcome: dead pilot and passenger.
Processes leading to the outcome are now tainted with our knowledge of that outcome.
Knowledge of outcome biases our judgment about the processes that led up to that outcome.
The outcome: dead pilot and passenger.
Processes leading to the outcome are now tainted with our knowledge of that outcome.
Just doing a blackie and trolling through old news articles on this crash back in '08 and came across this one:CASA investigating aviation company over fatal crash - ABC Local - Australian Broadcasting Corporation
In particular this paragraph may hold the answers on who investigated??...
Sorry in advance if this was already stated, but it would appear that the QPS may have investigated this accident..."however I cannot confirm or deny...yada,yada..!"
In particular this paragraph may hold the answers on who investigated??...
A spokesman for the the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) says it is not investigating the accident because it is a police matter.
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QPS
yes indeed WitW.
For reasons unknown, QPS investigated alone.
Maybe CASA and ATSB had very good reasons why they should not get involved in the investigation of the crash of an unlicenced aeroplane being flown by an
unlicenced pilot?
not sure what those reasons could have been though????
For reasons unknown, QPS investigated alone.
Maybe CASA and ATSB had very good reasons why they should not get involved in the investigation of the crash of an unlicenced aeroplane being flown by an
unlicenced pilot?not sure what those reasons could have been though????
Perhaps it’s because the ‘only’ people killed were ‘participants’ – you know, the people whom CASA pretends are “informed of the risks of an aviation activity and have explicitly accepted the risks of their involvement in that activity”. 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Code:
"--he did a great deal of good for the GA industry."
Read "A deeper shade of blue" by Tony Kern. Everyone condoned Bud Holland's antics and he was supposedly a good pilot as well!!!
Read "A deeper shade of blue" by Tony Kern. Everyone condoned Bud Holland's antics and he was supposedly a good pilot as well!!!
:Industry CRM Developers - Situational Awareness Management Course Outline
Huge indictment on the US Airforce but a big lesson to be learnt from their mistakes. So hand's up anyone who has experienced their very own Bud Holland doppelganger....I know mine's up??
Question does the QPS have a NSW equivalent of the Aviation Support Branch? Although the NSW branch appears to have only been around since '07 see here:
More assistance for country police investigating aviation crashes - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
...the DI that heads it up John Hurley seems to be unafraid to kick a few heads!
Last edited by Sarcs; 22nd Jun 2012 at 08:31.
There is an innocent person deceased. Totally negates any good he may have done.
I'm not denying the tragedy of the innocent death.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
CASA are internally cringing at this. Some folk had been trying to stop this for years and to that end I must say I support their view on things, it pretty much aligns with the general sentiment here.
Did I just say that?
Back to being serious, while I am critical of CASA at any moment, the folk trying to do a job with hands tied behind their back, are not happy. The hand toeing is not so much CASA being slack but legislative bull**** requiring them to do certain things.
Hempel was just too cunning. Look at the Quadrio case where I personally thing CASA got it all wrong, how did they get that far on really dodgy evidence, yet hempy was able to duck and weave.
One was doing his job, to the limit, the other was a blatant rule breaker but a character who could pull it off.
Believe me when I say CASA have on several occasions been found wanting, but generally do a good job, however the few cockups have resulted in probably innocent folk done over, while dangerous ones slip through.
Problem is too much law, not enough common sense. And that may well be post of the year in that last sentence.
Did I just say that?
Back to being serious, while I am critical of CASA at any moment, the folk trying to do a job with hands tied behind their back, are not happy. The hand toeing is not so much CASA being slack but legislative bull**** requiring them to do certain things.
Hempel was just too cunning. Look at the Quadrio case where I personally thing CASA got it all wrong, how did they get that far on really dodgy evidence, yet hempy was able to duck and weave.
One was doing his job, to the limit, the other was a blatant rule breaker but a character who could pull it off.
Believe me when I say CASA have on several occasions been found wanting, but generally do a good job, however the few cockups have resulted in probably innocent folk done over, while dangerous ones slip through.
Problem is too much law, not enough common sense. And that may well be post of the year in that last sentence.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Casa accident liaison and investigation
Didn't casa set up some accident investigation group around 2008. Remember some article on the group that were being trained in the US or Cranfield UK. Probably the directors newsletter. What was the purpose - surely to investigate?
Found the reference in the annual report
Civil Aviation Safety Authority - Stakeholder liaison
Found the reference in the annual report
Civil Aviation Safety Authority - Stakeholder liaison
Complementing activities under the MoU, in 2008–09 CASA established an Accident Liaison and Investigation Unit to manage the agencies’ day-to-day interaction. The unit provides a contact point for the ATSB, reviews all ATSB occurrence reports and prepares responses to ATSB recommendations, and identifies opportunities for aviation safety improvement.
CASA has also established an Accident Investigation Report Review Committee, chaired by the Deputy Director of Aviation Safety, to review and agree on the method of implementation of any formal recommendations from the ATSB.
CASA has also established an Accident Investigation Report Review Committee, chaired by the Deputy Director of Aviation Safety, to review and agree on the method of implementation of any formal recommendations from the ATSB.
HMHB mate good snapshot...I'm envious of your long term memory!! This bit explains a lot:
....has there ever been a more self-saving 'hogger' of the trough...his stature speaks for itself!
This bit explains a lot:
CASA has also established an Accident Investigation Report Review Committee, chaired by the Deputy Director of Aviation Safety, to review and agree on the method of implementation of any formal recommendations from the ATSB.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sackcloth and Ashes.
Jabba - Back to being serious, while I am critical of CASA at any moment, the folk trying to do a job with hands tied behind their back, are not happy. The hand tying is not so much CASA being slack but legislative bull**** requiring them to do certain things. (My bold).
Jabba - Believe me when I say CASA have on several occasions been found wanting, but generally do a good job, however the few cockups have resulted in probably innocent folk done over, while dangerous ones slip through. (My bold).
"They" are corporately, collectively and individually the most dangerous threat to aviation in Australia. Proof ?– all there in public documents. Look at the data – ATSB muzzled on a short leash, ASA straining at the seams, AAT, Courts and Coroners 'spivved' and spun out of any semblance probity, Senate treated with open disdain.
There is no need to even research for data – I could name at least six honest, ordinary, competent, physically fit pilots on the ground today because of CASA administrative bastardry, persecution and mendacity who could have conducted a routine joy flight operation safely. Not for this passenger though, no siree bub...
If it was fate that decided the time of death for the pair, we cannot change that. But if it was not – then there are no excuses for CASA; none that are worth hearing anyway.
Sorry Jabba, reasonable as it seems, the sack cloth and ashes defence won't work. It would be nice to believe the Coroner and the QPS can come up with the right answers; the comparison between the "truth" and nothing but the truth will be interesting, to say the least.
Selah – steam off.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: on the edge
Posts: 823
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jaba:
As you may be aware, Barry had some very good legal firepower.
Every decision by an AWI or FOI has to be approved by CASA legal department. And there is the rub.
....the folk trying to do a job with hands tied behind their back, are not happy. The hand toeing is not so much CASA being slack but legislative bull**** requiring them to do certain things.
Hempel was just too cunning.
Hempel was just too cunning.
Every decision by an AWI or FOI has to be approved by CASA legal department. And there is the rub.
CASA in 2012 suffers the same problem as the various Police services in our nation. Years of political knee-jerks have caused them to be so isolated from the community they serve, that they are completely out of touch.
As we all know, years ago many a youngster would commit a misdemeanor which never got to court but was resolved by a kick in the backside from the local Police sergeant, and a stern talking-to. There ended many a potential career of crime, as the words of wisdom (and sore behind) were not forgotten.
Likewise DCA/CAA/DOT in years gone by. Because their personnel were out and about (flying the Bonanza/310/Aero Commander or whatever) they saw and heard a lot that was going on in the industry, and, where warranted, offered suggestions to curb errant behavior. This was generally appreciated by industry, and everyone got along just fine. Note that this was not just in flying ops, but airworthiness too. Add to that the absolute gems that were drawn from articles in the Aviation Safety Digest.
Nowadays CASA are considered by many to be the "Fear of Flying" club, and all "advice" is promulgated through publications that seem more focused on advertising, and articles that may as well be written by schoolkids. Result - the gulf between industry and regulator grows deeper and wider, as does the fear and suspicion.
Our legislators in Canberra continue to express shock and outrage whenever an avoidable/predictable tragedy occurs, and resolve to "give CASA increased powers" (read remove them even further from reality). The only part of CASA that seems to be growing is the Legal Services Division, and for all the wrong reasons.
Meanwhile our 20+ year "transition" to a "new regulatory framework" drags on, with the result that only the LSD understand it.
For once I have to admit that this is something the Kiwis got right. Their regs (and to a degree their regulator) have a far more practical approach.
In summary, this problem didn't need someone to be creating a file on Barry, or writing letters or emails. It needed someone to march into his business, line up Barry and the post-holders and state "Barry we know you have a long history as a pilot, but regrettably your inability to satisfy the CASA class one medical standard means that your commercial flying days are over, and you (turns to Chief Pilot) will ensure Barry obeys this, and you (turns to manager/CEO) will ensure that commercial operations are conducted only by appropriately licenced persons".
It would have all taken less than 30 minutes.
As we all know, years ago many a youngster would commit a misdemeanor which never got to court but was resolved by a kick in the backside from the local Police sergeant, and a stern talking-to. There ended many a potential career of crime, as the words of wisdom (and sore behind) were not forgotten.
Likewise DCA/CAA/DOT in years gone by. Because their personnel were out and about (flying the Bonanza/310/Aero Commander or whatever) they saw and heard a lot that was going on in the industry, and, where warranted, offered suggestions to curb errant behavior. This was generally appreciated by industry, and everyone got along just fine. Note that this was not just in flying ops, but airworthiness too. Add to that the absolute gems that were drawn from articles in the Aviation Safety Digest.
Nowadays CASA are considered by many to be the "Fear of Flying" club, and all "advice" is promulgated through publications that seem more focused on advertising, and articles that may as well be written by schoolkids. Result - the gulf between industry and regulator grows deeper and wider, as does the fear and suspicion.
Our legislators in Canberra continue to express shock and outrage whenever an avoidable/predictable tragedy occurs, and resolve to "give CASA increased powers" (read remove them even further from reality). The only part of CASA that seems to be growing is the Legal Services Division, and for all the wrong reasons.
Meanwhile our 20+ year "transition" to a "new regulatory framework" drags on, with the result that only the LSD understand it.
For once I have to admit that this is something the Kiwis got right. Their regs (and to a degree their regulator) have a far more practical approach.
In summary, this problem didn't need someone to be creating a file on Barry, or writing letters or emails. It needed someone to march into his business, line up Barry and the post-holders and state "Barry we know you have a long history as a pilot, but regrettably your inability to satisfy the CASA class one medical standard means that your commercial flying days are over, and you (turns to Chief Pilot) will ensure Barry obeys this, and you (turns to manager/CEO) will ensure that commercial operations are conducted only by appropriately licenced persons".
It would have all taken less than 30 minutes.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: ChCh NZ
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For once I have to admit that this is something the Kiwis got right. Their regs (and to a degree their regulator) have a far more practical approach.
Many here will work under both regimes, some as engineers and pilots... the difference really is chalk and cheese stuff, - to me at least.
The NZ system is user friendly and workable, possibly the best I have seen it in 40 years.
Both countries still have their share of 'personalities' but I am equally sure the regulators seem to be taking different approaches to the industry.