Barry Hempel Inquest
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Biscuit, agreed, a follow up story by Four Corners is a robust idea!
As for tonight's Australian Story could somebody please record it? For the pensioners at the helm of CAsA it is on a little late at 1930. They will have taken their meds, placed their teeth in a glass besides the bathroom sink and gone sleepies! Then again, Australian Story could re-schedule the program for a more convenient time such as 1659 on a Friday afternoon?
As for tonight's Australian Story could somebody please record it? For the pensioners at the helm of CAsA it is on a little late at 1930. They will have taken their meds, placed their teeth in a glass besides the bathroom sink and gone sleepies! Then again, Australian Story could re-schedule the program for a more convenient time such as 1659 on a Friday afternoon?
Last edited by 004wercras; 23rd Jun 2013 at 20:49.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sad
I just finished watching "The Men Who Fell To Earth" Australian Story episode on the ABC. It just brings home just how wide and deep the impact is when a crash like this occurs. So very sad for the partner of the passenger who died, their wider family, Barry's family and everyone he touched too.
When oh when is the "boy's club" nature of our industry going to lift and our regulator really address safety in a more proactive manner. I do appreciate there are many people within CASA doing some very good work and who are being proactive, but you can just see how the cosy relationship amongst so many people involved in this sad tale has facilitated a breakdown in standards and a member of the public with little awareness or understanding has believed things are being managed properly only to suffer loss of life when they're not.
I never flew with Barry but have hired aircraft from him and met him on a few occasions. A larger than life figure that's for sure. But, if the program's points on the anomalies with his medical are accurate, it's quite possible this was a major factor in the crash.
When oh when is the "boy's club" nature of our industry going to lift and our regulator really address safety in a more proactive manner. I do appreciate there are many people within CASA doing some very good work and who are being proactive, but you can just see how the cosy relationship amongst so many people involved in this sad tale has facilitated a breakdown in standards and a member of the public with little awareness or understanding has believed things are being managed properly only to suffer loss of life when they're not.
I never flew with Barry but have hired aircraft from him and met him on a few occasions. A larger than life figure that's for sure. But, if the program's points on the anomalies with his medical are accurate, it's quite possible this was a major factor in the crash.
Bottums Up
But, if the program's points on the anomalies with his medical are accurate, it's quite possible this was a major factor in the crash.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's been around 5 years since I 'bumped' into John Jones, it was a robust conversation, but I must say he is looking more like Tommy Lee Jones these days. More creases on his face than what criss crosses The Skulls vanilla white spotted ass!
On a serious note, of great concern in all this is the rumour that Hempel's doctor/s were also former students. If this is true then me thinks the air just became even more murky. Also of interest is how the Barrymeister could operate so openly right underneath CAsA's flaring nostrils, yet supposedly nobody knew? Nobody ever tipped off CAsA? Hmmmm, me smells pooh. Especially when those hard working CAsA disciples spend many hours in between having coffees and receiving pineapple insertions, trawling Poohtube, Pprune, aviation websites and Fridays aviation section in The Australian, I am certain somebody's internal red flag must have gone up? Nobody noticed anything unusual in cyber land?
Will be very interesting to also see more medical evidence released when the findings are handed down, particularly as to whether Bazza's wrists were broken?
On a serious note, of great concern in all this is the rumour that Hempel's doctor/s were also former students. If this is true then me thinks the air just became even more murky. Also of interest is how the Barrymeister could operate so openly right underneath CAsA's flaring nostrils, yet supposedly nobody knew? Nobody ever tipped off CAsA? Hmmmm, me smells pooh. Especially when those hard working CAsA disciples spend many hours in between having coffees and receiving pineapple insertions, trawling Poohtube, Pprune, aviation websites and Fridays aviation section in The Australian, I am certain somebody's internal red flag must have gone up? Nobody noticed anything unusual in cyber land?
Will be very interesting to also see more medical evidence released when the findings are handed down, particularly as to whether Bazza's wrists were broken?
Last edited by 004wercras; 24th Jun 2013 at 11:22.
I would imagine any bloke in Australia would be delighted if Ms Hare or her sister contacted them 
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA Statement to Australian Story
"24/06/2013
Mr Hempel was not authorised to conduct the flight in question as he was required to hold a commercial pilot licence. CASA cancelled Mr Hempel's commercial pilot licence in November 2007.
CASA had no knowledge and had received no reports or information that Mr Hempel was conducting unauthorised flights after CASA cancelled his commercial pilot licence.
After his licence was cancelled CASA understands Mr Hempel did not conduct commercial flights under Hempel Aviation’s air operator certificate."
""""""""""""""""""""""
To a layman that statement is beyond belief and obviously CASA did not conduct ANY checks. It is almost as bad as the former CEO and Chief Pilot at Hempels saying under oath, at the inquest that they were not aware that Barry was conducting commercial joy flights.
As for other comments on medical above it has become pretty clear, from injuries noted, that Barry was not actually 'gripping' the stick at time of impact.
Mr Hempel was not authorised to conduct the flight in question as he was required to hold a commercial pilot licence. CASA cancelled Mr Hempel's commercial pilot licence in November 2007.
CASA had no knowledge and had received no reports or information that Mr Hempel was conducting unauthorised flights after CASA cancelled his commercial pilot licence.
After his licence was cancelled CASA understands Mr Hempel did not conduct commercial flights under Hempel Aviation’s air operator certificate."
""""""""""""""""""""""
To a layman that statement is beyond belief and obviously CASA did not conduct ANY checks. It is almost as bad as the former CEO and Chief Pilot at Hempels saying under oath, at the inquest that they were not aware that Barry was conducting commercial joy flights.
As for other comments on medical above it has become pretty clear, from injuries noted, that Barry was not actually 'gripping' the stick at time of impact.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: darwin australia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FOD
as anybody who has had anything do with a 52 can vouch it is a awesome performer. easy to fly and is able to conduct the most exiting aerobatics but like most aircraft in this category it must also be treated with the upmost of respect in particular to foreign objects in the cockpit. The 52 is probably the most unfriendly aircraft in the world to loose objects in the cockpit. It has all exposed control push pull tubes and mixers in the rear cockpit that run very close to the floor and the area in the back where the rear elevator horn is located is just perfect for attracting any objects. Extreme caution must also be paid to the rear harness because if the crotch strap is not done up in the harness the buckle will drop down and get jammed in the controls. Because of the nature of the 52 it will be turned upside down regularly and any loose objects will end up anywhere. Being in a group that has operated a 52 for the past 7 years we also have a empty pockets policy however from time to time things have been found.
In my opinion you must at regular intervals remove both the front and back seat get down there with a torch and mirror inspect and then vacuum out the bottom of the fuse.
If we spent all this money on inquests and court time and all the rest of the stuff that goes with it but we could not spend a bit of money to recover the aircraft? At least if we had the aircraft it could be inspected by someone who knows what they are looking at or for and if the location was known and in twenty meters of water surely it could not be that difficult! Are the divers that were sent down familiar with the 52? Who knows what is behind that little panel on the left hand side near the tail
In my opinion you must at regular intervals remove both the front and back seat get down there with a torch and mirror inspect and then vacuum out the bottom of the fuse.
If we spent all this money on inquests and court time and all the rest of the stuff that goes with it but we could not spend a bit of money to recover the aircraft? At least if we had the aircraft it could be inspected by someone who knows what they are looking at or for and if the location was known and in twenty meters of water surely it could not be that difficult! Are the divers that were sent down familiar with the 52? Who knows what is behind that little panel on the left hand side near the tail
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too much work to do if aircraft retrieved?
It just seems our investigators are all too happy to leave these aircraft wrecks and not recover them. This one (appears to be) hardly in a difficult location and surely having it out of the water and in a hangar somewhere for investigators to piece together would likely reveal clues as to the cause? I sometimes wonder if the decision to NOT retrieve aircraft is the easier option as it allows for a level of broad speculation and generalisation as to what's happened that would be less acceptable if they'd pulled it out.
If it was out and people like bizbug182 were called upon to inspect it and offer commentary based on their level of familiarity surely we'd get a lot closer to the truth (or at a minimum be able to rule certain things out)?
If it was out and people like bizbug182 were called upon to inspect it and offer commentary based on their level of familiarity surely we'd get a lot closer to the truth (or at a minimum be able to rule certain things out)?
Bizbug:
It would appear, following the ATSB decision NOT to retrieve the Westwinds flight data recorders, that it is now official ATSB policy to close investigations as quickly as possible on the flimsiest of excuses and blame the pilot.
Technical investigations may bring up conflicting facts that dont fit the ATSB script. That is why the wreck isn't retrieved.
At least if we had the aircraft it could be inspected by someone who knows what they are looking at or for and if the location was known and in twenty meters of water surely it could not be that difficult! Are the divers that were sent down familiar with the 52? Who knows what is behind that little panel on the left hand side near the tail
Technical investigations may bring up conflicting facts that dont fit the ATSB script. That is why the wreck isn't retrieved.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
ATSB do not do anything in depth (pardon the pun) anymore with respect to GA. Their QF32 type reports seem to be well documented, and perhaps they are, I am not qualified to comment, but they appear to be thorough. Perhaps the additional resources of high quality material from Qantas and others with nothing to hide helps achieve this.
Bring an investigation to a piston GA accident.....and there appears to be a huge gap. Some would argue that the RPT segment is where the resources need to go, well if so, stop doing anything GA, because nothing (no report) is better than sloppy, incorrect or completely cocked up (perhaps even corrupted) reports being published that the industry and public swallow as being truthful and accurate.
As for the regulator, we have pilots, LAME's and others being bullied, crucified or whatever else for flying when they were not, using battery chargers without a label, oil storage without a sign saying "oil store"....you name the absurdities, yet this case where a high profile person who had been banned from doing a significant amount of what he used to do, was able to still do it without any clue at all in the CASA!
It is akin to David Attenborough studying some small lizard while an elephant crushes the film crews camera bag....and he does not notice despite film crew and bag right in front of him behind the camera man!
It just don't make sense!
Maybe the crash was all Ian Lovell's fault, and it could well have been, very plausible, but with ATSB failure and CASA failure, what on earth's chance have we got of ever getting the truth. I am afraid to say this but to be honest, we are wasting more time and money to gain nothing. And putting the family of Samantha and Ian through hell and back.
I admire their strength and tenacity, Shane's also, but I fear it is all in vain.
Bring an investigation to a piston GA accident.....and there appears to be a huge gap. Some would argue that the RPT segment is where the resources need to go, well if so, stop doing anything GA, because nothing (no report) is better than sloppy, incorrect or completely cocked up (perhaps even corrupted) reports being published that the industry and public swallow as being truthful and accurate.
As for the regulator, we have pilots, LAME's and others being bullied, crucified or whatever else for flying when they were not, using battery chargers without a label, oil storage without a sign saying "oil store"....you name the absurdities, yet this case where a high profile person who had been banned from doing a significant amount of what he used to do, was able to still do it without any clue at all in the CASA!
It is akin to David Attenborough studying some small lizard while an elephant crushes the film crews camera bag....and he does not notice despite film crew and bag right in front of him behind the camera man!
It just don't make sense!
Maybe the crash was all Ian Lovell's fault, and it could well have been, very plausible, but with ATSB failure and CASA failure, what on earth's chance have we got of ever getting the truth. I am afraid to say this but to be honest, we are wasting more time and money to gain nothing. And putting the family of Samantha and Ian through hell and back.
I admire their strength and tenacity, Shane's also, but I fear it is all in vain.
Whether or not there were issues with the aircraft, to my understanding, from the claims made on Australian Story, Barry Hempel should not have been flying with a fare paying passenger.
To achieve this (providing a commercial operation), Barry Hempel did not act alone. I understand someone else held the AOC he operated under, and someone else was named last night as Chief Pilot at the time. There may have been someone else (receptionist?) who took bookings / money.
Surely others within the organisation knew? At the very least, surely the CP knew the status of one of his pilot's medical / CPL / recency / F&D?
It will be interesting to see if charges are eventually laid against others in the business, seeing as charges have already reportedly been laid against the DAMEs who signed off as his medical.
To achieve this (providing a commercial operation), Barry Hempel did not act alone. I understand someone else held the AOC he operated under, and someone else was named last night as Chief Pilot at the time. There may have been someone else (receptionist?) who took bookings / money.
Surely others within the organisation knew? At the very least, surely the CP knew the status of one of his pilot's medical / CPL / recency / F&D?
It will be interesting to see if charges are eventually laid against others in the business, seeing as charges have already reportedly been laid against the DAMEs who signed off as his medical.
'BH' was on a pedestal,we put him there as in society the aviation industry, he did fall from the sky but he also fell from that pedestal under pressure he put on himself. Sadly though he took not only his own life & that of a trusting passenger but he took the normal lives of many others as well.
Samantha has or is grieving twice, once for the actual death of her mate the other for having to live with the deception of some. I can't believe that CASA had no knowledge of BH conducting Commercial flights (or 'Adventure flights' which at the end of the day amounts to the same thing, duty of explaining the risks), that's almost inconceivable for a regulator in such a small industry!
I feel for those that get caught up in misadventures of those that cannot accept/control their ill feelings towards what's been dealt to them. 'BH' was not a saint, he was only kidding himself:-(
In the end BH was just the bullet in a gun held/fired by other person/s
Maybe some out there will remember this event so as to sway them not to do something similar.
Aviation is full of sad stories but what's even more sadder is that humans never learn
Wmk2
Samantha has or is grieving twice, once for the actual death of her mate the other for having to live with the deception of some. I can't believe that CASA had no knowledge of BH conducting Commercial flights (or 'Adventure flights' which at the end of the day amounts to the same thing, duty of explaining the risks), that's almost inconceivable for a regulator in such a small industry!
I feel for those that get caught up in misadventures of those that cannot accept/control their ill feelings towards what's been dealt to them. 'BH' was not a saint, he was only kidding himself:-(
In the end BH was just the bullet in a gun held/fired by other person/s
Maybe some out there will remember this event so as to sway them not to do something similar.
Aviation is full of sad stories but what's even more sadder is that humans never learn
Wmk2
Last edited by Wally Mk2; 25th Jun 2013 at 08:27.
What concerned me about the "Australian Story" report is the statement that the aircraft now serves as a "dive wreck". Another good reason for bringing it up.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's passing strange that words are published complaining about 'damage' done to the stellar reputation of the authority by robust criticism from industry, but the adverse comments from the Senate, lower house, Journalists and now the ABC for second time, don't get whined on about or blamed for upsetting the public image. Non of this is CASA's fault, they didn't damage their reputation, play fast and loose with ATSB and QPD or perhaps dally with QBE: nope it's us the ills of society that have damaged the pristine, hitherto unsullied good name.
The story on the ABC last night at least showed some of the public a small part of the ills our society endures and how quickly an industry name can be tarnished.
Games over – Taxi???, don't worry about the receipts.....
The story on the ABC last night at least showed some of the public a small part of the ills our society endures and how quickly an industry name can be tarnished.
Games over – Taxi???, don't worry about the receipts.....
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Sydney NSW
Age: 76
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whether or not there were issues with the aircraft, to my understanding, from the claims made on Australian Story, Barry Hempel should not have been flying with a fare paying passenger.
To achieve this (providing a commercial operation), Barry Hempel did not act alone. I understand someone else held the AOC he operated under, and someone else was named last night as Chief Pilot at the time. There may have been someone else (receptionist?) who took bookings / money.
Surely others within the organisation knew? At the very least, surely the CP knew the status of one of his pilot's medical / CPL / recency / F&D?
To achieve this (providing a commercial operation), Barry Hempel did not act alone. I understand someone else held the AOC he operated under, and someone else was named last night as Chief Pilot at the time. There may have been someone else (receptionist?) who took bookings / money.
Surely others within the organisation knew? At the very least, surely the CP knew the status of one of his pilot's medical / CPL / recency / F&D?
In fact, the Yak could not legally do a 'joy flight', although it might well have been authorised for 'adventure' flights. If it was so authorised, an AOC was NOT necessary, it was NOT a 'commercial operation' and NO Chief Pilot was required either. However, an authorisation from Warbirds should have been provided based on a declaration about who would be doing the flights and who would take responsibility and how.
Also, one of the regulated safeguards for 'adventure flights' is that the passenger must be warned about the risks before paying for the flight.
Wonder if any of that stuff happened?
What a strange world we now live in, having to warn of the risks.
"If we crash - we might die. I haven't yet, and I've flown xx thousand hours!"
Does that really need saying, and if so, is it really going to sway a customer?
"If we crash - we might die. I haven't yet, and I've flown xx thousand hours!"
Does that really need saying, and if so, is it really going to sway a customer?
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Sydney NSW
Age: 76
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite agree RG, nevertheless, the regulations require the following for aircraft like the Yak:
That sort of warning might (or might not) cause a passenger to think twice. Most people who fly in warbirds (myself included) are just happy to get the opportunity to go up - bugger the risks - but they would be enthusiasts, not Joe Public. Hence the CASA requirement for the information to be provided to a potential passenger.
For an aircraft that has been certificated under CASR 21.189 in the LIMITED category, each passenger must be told that:
• the design, manufacture, and airworthiness of the aircraft are not required to meet any standards recognised by CASA, and
• CASA does not require the aircraft to be operated to the same degree of safety as an aircraft on a commercial passenger flight; and
• persons fly in the aircraft at their own risk
The operator or the pilot in command must ensure that each person carried is told about the matters mentioned above before boarding the aircraft, and if the passenger is being carried on an 'adventure' flight, then before the passenger pays for the flight.
• the design, manufacture, and airworthiness of the aircraft are not required to meet any standards recognised by CASA, and
• CASA does not require the aircraft to be operated to the same degree of safety as an aircraft on a commercial passenger flight; and
• persons fly in the aircraft at their own risk
The operator or the pilot in command must ensure that each person carried is told about the matters mentioned above before boarding the aircraft, and if the passenger is being carried on an 'adventure' flight, then before the passenger pays for the flight.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Was that the case back in 2008? Did AWAL have the system in place then, as is required now? And was it optional then? It s now a requirement, prior it was CASA controlled, or at some time prior.
I am curious to learn as I have no prior knowledge of the AWAL managed era.
I am curious to learn as I have no prior knowledge of the AWAL managed era.
Last edited by Jabawocky; 25th Jun 2013 at 11:32.