Barry Hempel Inquest

[Desert Flower]

From the Adelaide Advertiser today:

Air watchdog failings


A CORONER has been stunned by the failings of Australia’s aviation watchdog, saying a pilot who killed himself and a passenger should not have been flying.

Queensland coroner John Hutton has found the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) knew 60-year-old pilot Barry Hempel had a history of seizures and safety breaches yet did not ground him.

The veteran aerobatic pilot and his 35-year-old passenger Ian Lovell died when Mr Hempel's plane plunged into the ocean off South Stradbroke Island in October 2008.

Moments before the aircraft crashed, a panicked Mr Lovell could be heard on the plane's transmission system saying: “Oh my god, what are you doing? Put it up ...”

But there was no response from the pilot. The coroner found the pilot had likely suffered an epileptic seizure at the controls, sending the plane hurtling into the sea.

Tragically, Mr Lovell's girlfriend had bought him the joy flight as a birthday gift.

DF.

[Paragraph377]

CASA will never be found to be accountable for any action they take or don't take in any aviation matter. They have blood on their hands over the death of Mr Lovell, but all they get is a list of recommendations, which have already been dispatched to the bottom of the LSG's drawers.
CASA also walked away from Lockhart smelling like roses. Again, untouchable.
If you want to study how the Australian regulator will forever remain untouchable just flick your attention across the ditch to NZ, and familiarise yourself with TE901 and Erebus. The highest levels of ass covering were sought by a Prime Minister and his government, as well as an inept CAA. The outcome? You guessed it - SFA. It is a prime example of what you are up against. CASA was never going to be held to account over the Hempel accident, and neither will they in the future when more accidents occur in which they are a contributing factor. To governments and their departments life is cheap and meaningless.

[Captain Nomad]

So much for privacy laws and medical confidentiality hey? What a great idea - NOT! That proposition would spell the unnecessary demise of many a medical and career along with untold angst to both pilot employees and management...

[DeafStar]

So CASA could gain access to private medical records? Is this not a gross breach of medical ethics?

[halfmanhalfbiscuit]

Worth reading this post I think taken from senate estimates where Senator Xenophon is raising question of bullying allegations the senators have been hearing.
.

http://www.pprune.org/australia-new-...ml#post7870392

[harrowing]

It appears, IMHO, that CASA Avmed is doing a kneejerk reaction, will knock back renewals so easily and then wait until the poor sucker goes through the AAT process, which can sometimes over-ride their decision. That way they can tin plate themselves and be proud of their over stringent standards.
Maybe I am just a little cynical.

[Kharon]

Birds? what birds.

Now, I am intrigued; interested in bird activity, of both the maritime and war variety. I noted in the QPS FCU report (B3 p 153) there was a possibility of bird strike on the Hempel Yak. Just thinking out loud here but if, as CASA protest there was no 'evidence' of seizure and as Hutton remarks no fractures then at least the possibility of bird strike should have been positively ruled out, just by examining the aircraft. Like the autopsy report says, Hempel did not die from sudden onset epilepsy, yet the mystery of no broken bones (aviator astragalus) remains unresolved. There's puzzles a plenty here, for them what likes 'em.

It's a bugger though, when the feathered item cannot be discounted. Simple matter if it was, then – Bird strike, or the avoidance thereof; and everyone goes away replete.

The coroner doggedly sticks to 'medical' issues, probably because without a wreck to examine the chances of things like bird strikes, engine or structural failure etc. cannot be tangibly evaluated. Is this going to finish up like the Pel Air saga or the Marie Celeste?; one of life's wee mysteries, or are we going to stop poncing about and raise one or two of the wrecks laying about in shallow water around our coastline. We have the technology, science and funding to clearly resolve the issues and yet, once again, here I sit wondering – why not??

Aye well: at least Creamies dreaded wet lettuce leaf got an outing..... Now there's a happy Sunday thought....

[Frank Arouet]

On the balance of probability, the standard I believe The Coroner is held to use, the significance of a bird strike, turtle strike, flotsam strike etc would be far outweighed by the obvious medical incapacitation which The Coroner appeared to address.

Had this been a submission to The Coroner, I have no doubt he would have paid it scant regard to it. Depending also on who submitted this theory based on, an assumption of a probability. (what evidence)?

Did any submission seek to put a 'red herring' in place to apportion, move or remove blame on the submitter?

That's not the job of a Coroner by the way.

I do have serious reservations about some of his recommendations.

[Stan van de Wiel]

The many ways of getting screwed!

The coroner doggedly sticks to 'medical' issues, probably because without a wreck to examine the chances of things like bird strikes, engine or structural failure etc. cannot be tangibly evaluated.

To add to Kharon's possible causes, one that hasn't been considered is "locked controls". The attitude of the aircraft as described was not a controlled one. The exclamation by the passenger appears to confirm. Not knowing the intercom system fitted, with the PTT actuated from the rear seat, the pilot may have responded on his intercom but his words would not have transmitted to the world. Hence no reaction.

An engine failure would not have locked control input but an abandoned screwdriver or spanner could easily find its way into a compromising position through vibration or manoeuvres. Over 50 years of flying I have experienced 3 such situations and witnessed one fatal accident in a Harvard warbird. In the Harvard case the screwdriver was found lodged in a control bellcrank. The more pilot input the worse it gets. (In some cases opposite input may dislodge)

If CAsA were professional and respected confidential reporting, all too frequent instances of misplaced tools would be reported for all to learn from. However the Australian regulatory attitude, despite the so called "safety" mandate is one of punishment. What's easier than to blame a medical condition without ruling out obvious alternatives.

Hemel with his medical history should nt have been flying. An experienced Victorian pilot who suffered a similar encounter with a hangar door has a lifetime ban from flying, yet he declared all and was cleared by several local and o/s experts in the field, but naturally CAsA AvMed know better. The ex pilot is allowed to fly with a safety pilot however in the event of a seizure would the 5ft 45kg safety pilot be able to remove the patient from the controls. But this is LEGAL.

Not that the loss of even one life is not important ! But when the instances of pilot incapacitation resulting in a fatality are compared to fatalities as a result of a pilot's attitude perhaps this is where attention should be focused. Hempel's was an Attitude problem (no pun intended) S.W.

Empty skies are safe skies!

[BPH63]

Deafstar -" So CASA could gain access to private medical records? Is this not a gross breach of medical ethics?"

Maybe you should read the declaration (and permissions) you sign at your renewals. It may be enlightening.

[T28D]

At any time CASA can demand ALL your medical records from DAME , GP, ALL Specialists, all Xrays and ALL tests for all time.

I have had it happen to me and it wasn't a pleasant experience.

To not give them what they want is a strict liability offence and your medical goes up in smoke until you are cleared again.

[LeadSled]

Hempel should not have been flying, full stop.

What always exercises my mind is the "real reason" he was still flying, despite his appalling record over so many years.

Given the usual (for many years) CASA approach --- coming down like a ton of bricks on anybody "they" don't like, who was flying top cover for Hempel.

I know of one now retired FOI who spent years trying to put Barry out of business, (and this FOI is not somebody I would eulogizes - he had his faults in spades) but the "file"was always handled further up the food chain, and Hempel always survived to "fly another day". Even after the attempt to smash the hangar door down with his head, when he was "recovering", he was still flying, something that was hardly a well kept secret.

Once again, we have a system where CASA has not enforced the already draconian rules at their disposal --- in a select case, but will undoubtedly take up the Coroner's recommendations for even more draconian rules.

Quite apart from any CASA involvement, Hempel was a disgrace to aviation, he set an appalling example to the impressionable, but there is the unfortunate trait of Australians to romanticise the Ned Kellys of this world --- and people like Hempel.

Tootle pip!!

[Dangly Bits]

Did I read this correctly?

Bazza's wife calls the ambo's because he had an epileptic fit. The ambo's call his DAME because he wants to go flying. His DAME says let him go, then later gives Bazza a script for an anti-epilepsy drug and doesn't inform CASA?
Later on he hands his file over to poor old Dr Maxwell and doesn't tell him about the drugs or fits?

Is that right? Did I miss something here?

[Dog One]

One wonders that CASA must be blind as well as deaf. The aircraft was flying from a controlled airport, it would have been very easy to figure out who was flying the aircraft and stopped this operation and saved a life. Some one is CASA is responsible and should be taken to task for allowing this to happen.

[Frank Arouet]

the "real reason" he was still flying

Because he could.

And that is the problem.... There is a word for it.

[DeafStar]

Good thing my GP told me he wouldn't give em anything. Not that I have to worry but I really don't like AVMED at CASA knowing I get the odd headache.

[Kharon]

"First principles, Clarice".

"First principles, Clarice. Read Marcus Aurelius. Of each particular thing ask: what is it in itself? What is its nature?"

There are at least two relatively sane (or they were when their troubles started) pilots who, for various reasons are not operating in their normal capacity: Dom James and John Quadrio. Neither of these chaps had anything but a clean record from day one, but DJ is still slugging away, trying to exercise the privileges of a legitimate ATPL against a foot high stack of manufactured administrative embuggerance. JQ is still grounded, based against the flimsiest of evidence, which, if rumour is true, can and will be destroyed. DJ has had his Senate days; JQ should, if there is any justice in the world. Yet Hempel, with a rap sheet the length of the New Testament, sails serenely off into the aerobatic sunset despite the best efforts of some good men. I, for one would like to know why.

It won't happen, but there is a good case under sections 50 and 50A of the Qld Coroners Act for this whole mess to be re opened. The best argument for this I have seen was written (or signed at least) by non other than Harvey, (there is whiff of voodoo therein) entitled Written Submission of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority. Now why CASA should present a document which brilliantly points out the many shortcomings, holes and limitations of the Coroner's findings is beyond my humble powers.

Probably, I should not even have read this remarkable document; but I have (Willyleaks). The document explains, for me at least, why the retrieval of the aircraft was steadfastly denied. Without the aircraft the possible causes for the accident cannot be 'properly' and forensically eliminated. This leaves a sizeable element of doubt, a very handy thing in a situation where the 'rules of evidence' apply. Should the aircraft have been retrieved, then many of the answers would have been provided, leaving a much shorter list of probable cause. Holmes, as usual says it much more succinctly than I can.

"How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?".

[Radix]

.............

[Fantome]

that's a bit simplistic

[Up-into-the-air]

Careful look pleaase

1. No AOC?

2. No licence

3. No fly!

Why did the ASA tower approval occur?

Why did casa not know?

Who was running top cover for the operation?

Just a couple of saturday questions

Maybe the senators need a couple of quick questions of FF