Citation owner of VH-MYE in court today 18th August
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From today's report...
“Really, he’s to an extent brought this upon himself because he’s got this view that can’t be shifted by any logic.
“When your Honour looks at it in detail, we say we’ve established that that just can’t be right, and that the system worked properly … and that he just made some mistakes that day.”
https://www.theage.com.au/national/v...03-p55rzx.html
“Really, he’s to an extent brought this upon himself because he’s got this view that can’t be shifted by any logic.
“When your Honour looks at it in detail, we say we’ve established that that just can’t be right, and that the system worked properly … and that he just made some mistakes that day.”
https://www.theage.com.au/national/v...03-p55rzx.html
I suspect Textron are buying the aircraft back off him so that he will now go away! Sounds like he had finger trouble and he won't accept that he was his own worst enemy, not the aircraft or Textron. Why are rich people such assh*les all the time?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Port Moresby - The beer is cold at the Aviat and Car Clubs
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
9 Posts
Textron don't have to buy the aircraft back; there is no need to do so. Just sell the aircraft and move on; there is nothing wrong with it.
All Cessna, Rockwell Collins have to do is call for Norbury's training records from Flight Safety, speak to people whom knew the man back in those days.
Put the Aus Jet CP 'Chop' into the witness box.
Bring in CASA to find out whom upgraded his licence to fly single pilot in Australia
He is not even a "B' list social celebrity !
All Cessna, Rockwell Collins have to do is call for Norbury's training records from Flight Safety, speak to people whom knew the man back in those days.
Put the Aus Jet CP 'Chop' into the witness box.
Bring in CASA to find out whom upgraded his licence to fly single pilot in Australia
He is not even a "B' list social celebrity !
From today's report...
“Really, he’s to an extent brought this upon himself because he’s got this view that can’t be shifted by any logic.
“When your Honour looks at it in detail, we say we’ve established that that just can’t be right, and that the system worked properly … and that he just made some mistakes that day.”
https://www.theage.com.au/national/v...03-p55rzx.html
“Really, he’s to an extent brought this upon himself because he’s got this view that can’t be shifted by any logic.
“When your Honour looks at it in detail, we say we’ve established that that just can’t be right, and that the system worked properly … and that he just made some mistakes that day.”
https://www.theage.com.au/national/v...03-p55rzx.html
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I still don't get it. If he was in the cruise, at altitude, and the autopilot went haywire initiating uncommanded turns and he was forced to recover the situation, (assuming he didn't make the whole story up), why is it due to him stuffing things up somehow..? I don't know the bloke but plenty on here are quick to hang it on him as being somehow substandard. That may well be true (or not) but it still doesn't explain what happened. Or why the defence said 'he should have been hand flying it'. In the cruise..? Really..?
Or did he make the whole thing up to cover up something he did wrong..? Seems like a lot of effort and expense to go through just to save face with his son and his friend who were the only other witnesses to the event..!
Or did he make the whole thing up to cover up something he did wrong..? Seems like a lot of effort and expense to go through just to save face with his son and his friend who were the only other witnesses to the event..!
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: Mesopotamos
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was all about protecting reputation and the legal settlement saved both bacons, perhaps a compromise on both sides was reached, we'll never know . As someone suggested earlier, it was high time to move on, perhaps overdue but at least this amateur hour nonsense is now over and all noses are still intact.
I still don't get it. If he was in the cruise, at altitude, and the autopilot went haywire initiating uncommanded turns and he was forced to recover the situation, (assuming he didn't make the whole story up), why is it due to him stuffing things up somehow..? I don't know the bloke but plenty on here are quick to hang it on him as being somehow substandard. That may well be true (or not) but it still doesn't explain what happened. Or why the defence said 'he should have been hand flying it'. In the cruise..? Really..?
Or did he make the whole thing up to cover up something he did wrong..? Seems like a lot of effort and expense to go through just to save face with his son and his friend who were the only other witnesses to the event..!
Or did he make the whole thing up to cover up something he did wrong..? Seems like a lot of effort and expense to go through just to save face with his son and his friend who were the only other witnesses to the event..!
Avoid imitations
2,000 FPS = 1363 mph.
No wonder he’s upset..... to recover from that descent rate was a remarkable feat, even to keep the wings on. The “g” loading must have been impressive.
I presume the journalist didn’t have a physics qualification.
No wonder he’s upset..... to recover from that descent rate was a remarkable feat, even to keep the wings on. The “g” loading must have been impressive.
I presume the journalist didn’t have a physics qualification.
I will happily purchase that apparently 'tainted' aircraft from Textron at a big discount in return for not suing them for perceived design issues!
The GA manufacturing industry was decimated in the 80's by litigious f-wits out to make a quick buck.
Not saying this case is similar but sincerely hope we don't go the same way in Australia.
The GA manufacturing industry was decimated in the 80's by litigious f-wits out to make a quick buck.
Not saying this case is similar but sincerely hope we don't go the same way in Australia.
Given the story he has put up if he can't point to an submitted incident report it didn't happen. Bolding mine.
An example of a RRM may include (AIP ENR 1.14):
Mandatory reporting – routinely reportable matters (RRM)
RRMs do not require immediate reporting. RRMs are occurrences that have, or could have, affected safety, but the outcome was not serious. RRMs would involve non-serious injuries, minor aircraft damage or structural failure that does not significantly affect structural integrity, performance or flight characteristics and does not require major repair or replacement of affected components. Under the TSI Act, responsible person must report RRMs within 72 hours of becoming aware of them.An example of a RRM may include (AIP ENR 1.14):
- an injury, other than a serious injury, to a person on board the aircraft
- a flight crew member becoming incapacitated while operating the aircraft
- an airprox
- an occurrence that results in difficulty controlling the aircraft, including any of the following:
- an aircraft system failure
- a weather phenomenon
- operation outside the aircraft’s approved flight envelope
- fuel exhaustion
- the aircraft’s supply of useable fuel becoming so low (whether or not as a result of fuel starvation) that the safety of the aircraft is compromised
- a collision with an animal, or a bird, on a certified aerodrome.
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Welive in a very litigators world where we will never know the truth here!
There would have to be a lot more to this story but it has at least been entertaining -)
The ATSB investigated an incident on a Kingair over Mt Hotham where both engines had a chip detector indication. Eventually the investigation was discontinued as the CDI were the result of pilot tomfoolery and not a result of engine malfunction.
Office Update!
Unless you're a Moderator with a particular objection to the post I will contribute whatever I want! My point was and is that the reason for the alleged behaviour of the Citation may have been that the pilot was not entirely focused on the job at hand. When it all turned pear shaped he has tried to blame the aircraft and sought to get some form of compensation. One reason the pilot of ITE (thanks for the rego) was found out was a discrepancy between his timeline and the fuel receipts.
Unless you're a Moderator with a particular objection to the post I will contribute whatever I want! My point was and is that the reason for the alleged behaviour of the Citation may have been that the pilot was not entirely focused on the job at hand. When it all turned pear shaped he has tried to blame the aircraft and sought to get some form of compensation. One reason the pilot of ITE (thanks for the rego) was found out was a discrepancy between his timeline and the fuel receipts.
It took "15 hair raising minutes" to get the aircraft under control is a real worry.
Jeez Office: You seem to be hanging on a bit tight.
Well said, LL.
Well said, LL.