Hughes 300 Crash. AAIB Report - Is there something fishy going on
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hughes 300 Crash Report. Is there something fishy going on?
It's now almost three years since Dennis Kenyon's son and two others were sadly killed when a clevis lug on their Hughes 300 failed in flight.
And it's a year since the draft AAIB Report was sent out to the people involved inviting their comments. (People involved are given draft reports in confidence and have 28 days to comment before the final report is made public.)
So what's happened since?
Nothing.
A year later and the final report still hasn't been published
Why? What's the hold-up?
I was told at the time by a very reliable source that the only "interested party" which wouldn't accept the AAIB findings and safety recommendations was the CAA. The AAIB was very critical of failures by the CAA which contributed to the accident, that the CAA didn't like it one little bit and were trying to influence the AAIB to take the criticisms out of the report.
What's going on?
There should be no cover-up where flight safety is concerned.
And it's a year since the draft AAIB Report was sent out to the people involved inviting their comments. (People involved are given draft reports in confidence and have 28 days to comment before the final report is made public.)
So what's happened since?
Nothing.
A year later and the final report still hasn't been published
Why? What's the hold-up?
I was told at the time by a very reliable source that the only "interested party" which wouldn't accept the AAIB findings and safety recommendations was the CAA. The AAIB was very critical of failures by the CAA which contributed to the accident, that the CAA didn't like it one little bit and were trying to influence the AAIB to take the criticisms out of the report.
What's going on?
There should be no cover-up where flight safety is concerned.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: London
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wondering the same thing
I've been wondering the same thing for many months now. Back in January this year I emailed the AAIB and for what it's worth, I got this response ...
Unfortunatelly the investigation into the G-ZAPS accident is still
incomplete. It has been a complex investigation which is nearly
ready for publication but there has been a great deal of legal
activity and legal interest in it. You may be aware of a Crown Court case which centres on this accident and this has had a severe knock-on effect on our work.
We hope to publish our report by April
--
J J Barnett
Principal Inspector of Air Accidents
So ... Crown Court or CAA problem - take your pick? I'll check in with JJ Barnett again and report back ...
Helo
Unfortunatelly the investigation into the G-ZAPS accident is still
incomplete. It has been a complex investigation which is nearly
ready for publication but there has been a great deal of legal
activity and legal interest in it. You may be aware of a Crown Court case which centres on this accident and this has had a severe knock-on effect on our work.
We hope to publish our report by April
--
J J Barnett
Principal Inspector of Air Accidents
So ... Crown Court or CAA problem - take your pick? I'll check in with JJ Barnett again and report back ...
Helo
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crown Court or CAA problem?
Well, it's definitely not the Court holding things up. The trial finished before Easter 2002. The engineer has served the sentence he got for the ANO breaches he'd always admitted, and has been released from prison.
I've been told the engineer and the bereaved families accepted the AAIB findings and safety recommendations and the only interested party which wouldn't accept the AAIB criticisms and safety recommendations were the CAA.
Last I heard, quite recently, was that the CAA were still trying to get criticisms of their systems and procedures removed and the AAIB were sticking to their guns. Good for them. We have to have confidence and faith in the integrity of the AAIB - they help to keep us alive.
Meanwhile, the poor families can't begin to start putting this behind them. They just have to wait, and are forbidden from talking to anyone about what's in the draft report.
As Hoverman says, there should be no cover-up where flight safety is concerned.
Question is what can we do about it?
Any ideas?
Well, it's definitely not the Court holding things up. The trial finished before Easter 2002. The engineer has served the sentence he got for the ANO breaches he'd always admitted, and has been released from prison.
I've been told the engineer and the bereaved families accepted the AAIB findings and safety recommendations and the only interested party which wouldn't accept the AAIB criticisms and safety recommendations were the CAA.
Last I heard, quite recently, was that the CAA were still trying to get criticisms of their systems and procedures removed and the AAIB were sticking to their guns. Good for them. We have to have confidence and faith in the integrity of the AAIB - they help to keep us alive.
Meanwhile, the poor families can't begin to start putting this behind them. They just have to wait, and are forbidden from talking to anyone about what's in the draft report.
As Hoverman says, there should be no cover-up where flight safety is concerned.
Question is what can we do about it?
Any ideas?
Last edited by Heliport; 11th Nov 2002 at 23:38.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 1,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a very useful resource in these situations:
www.faxyourmp.com
I've used it a couple of times and have actually had a response from my MP.
QDM
www.faxyourmp.com
I've used it a couple of times and have actually had a response from my MP.
QDM
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like the answers are Yes it's very fishy, and Yes the CAA's up to no good.
Why don't you Heli pilots rally round and help Dennis Kenyon by writing a quick letter to the AAIB.
On this sort of thing, I understand a quick letter to MPs does work.
Why don't you Heli pilots rally round and help Dennis Kenyon by writing a quick letter to the AAIB.
On this sort of thing, I understand a quick letter to MPs does work.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: London
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still no reply
Just a quick update to let you all know that I still haven't had a reply to my email of 10 days ago, which I sent on to J J Barnett, the Principal Inspector of Air Accidents.
Will let you know if anything changes ...
Helo
Will let you know if anything changes ...
Helo
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And talking about letters to MP's, I've just seen this thread. Click here.
I know the issue affects us truckdrivers more directly than you free spirits, but worth a read and a quick post all the same.
You need to read to the end.
I know the issue affects us truckdrivers more directly than you free spirits, but worth a read and a quick post all the same.
You need to read to the end.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Delay in the Hughes 300 report
So just what is going on?
If there is a reason why the final report cannot be published then shouldn't the interested parties, and the wider audience in the aviation industry, be told just what that is?
And shouldn't there be some time limit on how long this situation can continue? If there is no date in the near future when we will be able to see the final report, then I think the AAIB should take the bull by the horns and publish the interim report. After all, this issue goes beyond the obvious concerns of the bereaved families, and has much wider implications for the aviation industry.
So for the sake of the grieving parents, who are entitled to a public acknowledgement of just how and why their children came to die in such tragic circumstances, and for those of us who wish to ensure that proper and effective measures are taken so that a similar accident can NEVER happen again, then I believe the AAIB
should publish the report in its existing format, so that we can all analyse the evidence and make up our own minds as to where the problem lies.
Then we can really make our MP's work by ensuring that each and every recommendation in the report is fully implemented, no matter whose responsibility it is.
No parent should ever bury their child. No engineer should ever do what Paul Kenward did. No-one responsible for air safety should rest until they are certain that every possible action has been taken to prevent this terrible tragedy from happening again.
So, whatever, or whoever, is delaying this report, think on, get on, so that the bereaved families can begin to move on.
If there is a reason why the final report cannot be published then shouldn't the interested parties, and the wider audience in the aviation industry, be told just what that is?
And shouldn't there be some time limit on how long this situation can continue? If there is no date in the near future when we will be able to see the final report, then I think the AAIB should take the bull by the horns and publish the interim report. After all, this issue goes beyond the obvious concerns of the bereaved families, and has much wider implications for the aviation industry.
So for the sake of the grieving parents, who are entitled to a public acknowledgement of just how and why their children came to die in such tragic circumstances, and for those of us who wish to ensure that proper and effective measures are taken so that a similar accident can NEVER happen again, then I believe the AAIB
should publish the report in its existing format, so that we can all analyse the evidence and make up our own minds as to where the problem lies.
Then we can really make our MP's work by ensuring that each and every recommendation in the report is fully implemented, no matter whose responsibility it is.
No parent should ever bury their child. No engineer should ever do what Paul Kenward did. No-one responsible for air safety should rest until they are certain that every possible action has been taken to prevent this terrible tragedy from happening again.
So, whatever, or whoever, is delaying this report, think on, get on, so that the bereaved families can begin to move on.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In most respects the CAA looks after our interests as best they can within the boundaries of their Charter and I think you must agree they do a good job. Where they let themselves down very badly is on such sensitive humanitarian grounds They find it almost impossible to admit to mistakes (wishing to be superhuman on all things) and we have no recourse to their actions, other than an uphill struggle by way of MPs and other with influence.
To admit to mistakes is not admitting to liability. Not admitting to mistakes is erring on the criminal. Public bodies are responsible to us.
So dear CAA, come clean and get this sorted asap
To admit to mistakes is not admitting to liability. Not admitting to mistakes is erring on the criminal. Public bodies are responsible to us.
So dear CAA, come clean and get this sorted asap
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree 100% with the main thrust of your excellent post Bloater, except for one small part. I most definately do not agree "they do a good job."
They're not known as the Campaign Against Aviation for nothing.
They're not known as the Campaign Against Aviation for nothing.
Bloater:
The CAA as a bureaucratic dinosaur leaves a lot to be desired. As individuals they come across as fairly decent human beings doing a difficult job
, but as a whole, it is in urgent need of a major overhaul. The CAA (in my opinion) is there to answer to the whim of the big fish (like BA, BAA) et al, I would suggest
On a second note, they are NOT a public body, they answer to the government but they also service private industry and make a profit from them too. They have a chairman who is supposed to be impartial! They are in a very invidious position.
Too many funny hand shakes/old boy networking going on for my liking...and this example emphasises it.
The CAA as a bureaucratic dinosaur leaves a lot to be desired. As individuals they come across as fairly decent human beings doing a difficult job
, but as a whole, it is in urgent need of a major overhaul. The CAA (in my opinion) is there to answer to the whim of the big fish (like BA, BAA) et al, I would suggest On a second note, they are NOT a public body, they answer to the government but they also service private industry and make a profit from them too. They have a chairman who is supposed to be impartial! They are in a very invidious position.
Too many funny hand shakes/old boy networking going on for my liking...and this example emphasises it.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have seen a copy of the draft report which was issued in December 2001.
Under the Regulations, draft reports are provided in confidence. I am not permitted to reveal the contents, nor am I permitted to confirm or deny what has been said in earlier posts on this thread.
In answer to the questions about timetable/time limits, I've paraphrased the relevant regulations to make them a little easier to understand.
Civil Aviation (Investigation of Air Accidents and Incidents) Regulations 1996.
Regulation 12: Report and Representations thereon
If the report is "likely to affect adversely the reputation of any person" the AAIB shall:
* provide a Notice (incl. a copy of the report/safety recommendations) to that person,
* consider any representations which may be made,
* make such changes to the report as it thinks fit after considering of the representations. (In this context, 'person' includes company, body etc.)
Any representations must be in writing and served on the investigating Inspector within 28 days of service of the Notice. However, the Chief Inspector has power to extend the period of 28 days.
NB: Representations may be made about findings and 'adverse comments' as well as safety recommendations which the AAIB proposes to make.
Regulation 13: Publication of Reports
The Chief Inspector must publish the report "in the shortest time possible" and, if possible, within 12 months of the date of the accident or serious incident.
The AAIB has a high workload, and carries out its investigations extremely thoroughly, as anyone who has read a full AAIB report will know. In many cases, it cannot complete an investigation and make appropriate recommendations within 12 months.
Regulation 14: Safety recommendations
The report is sent to the undertakings or national aviation authorities concerned, and they "shall, without delay
take that recommendation into consideration and, where appropriate, act upon it."
However, the aviation authority does not have to implement the AAIB's safety recommendations. It's not unusual for the CAA to decline to implement the AAIB's safety recommendations.
Like others, I've heard rumours, but I don't know the reason for the delay in publishing the final report. If it's any comfort, I have the utmost respect for the AAIB, and have never failed to be impressed by the professionalism, integrity and independence of every investigator with whom I've dealt over the years.
I've often heard it said the AAIB and CAA are 'in each other's pockets' or words to that effect. That is not true. They are not only separate by legislation, but have a totally different ethos. Although the AAIB has a lower profile, the contribution it makes to flight safety in the UK (and elsewhere) is enormous.
The AAIB is under a duty to consider representations, but I'd be extremely surprised if anyone persuaded the AAIB to remove any adverse comments which it considered were valid.
NB: I'm not disagreeing with those who've suggested making some enquiries about when the final report will be published.
Tudor Owen
Under the Regulations, draft reports are provided in confidence. I am not permitted to reveal the contents, nor am I permitted to confirm or deny what has been said in earlier posts on this thread.
In answer to the questions about timetable/time limits, I've paraphrased the relevant regulations to make them a little easier to understand.
Civil Aviation (Investigation of Air Accidents and Incidents) Regulations 1996.
Regulation 12: Report and Representations thereon
If the report is "likely to affect adversely the reputation of any person" the AAIB shall:
* provide a Notice (incl. a copy of the report/safety recommendations) to that person,
* consider any representations which may be made,
* make such changes to the report as it thinks fit after considering of the representations. (In this context, 'person' includes company, body etc.)
Any representations must be in writing and served on the investigating Inspector within 28 days of service of the Notice. However, the Chief Inspector has power to extend the period of 28 days.
NB: Representations may be made about findings and 'adverse comments' as well as safety recommendations which the AAIB proposes to make.
Regulation 13: Publication of Reports
The Chief Inspector must publish the report "in the shortest time possible" and, if possible, within 12 months of the date of the accident or serious incident.
The AAIB has a high workload, and carries out its investigations extremely thoroughly, as anyone who has read a full AAIB report will know. In many cases, it cannot complete an investigation and make appropriate recommendations within 12 months.
Regulation 14: Safety recommendations
The report is sent to the undertakings or national aviation authorities concerned, and they "shall, without delay
take that recommendation into consideration and, where appropriate, act upon it."
However, the aviation authority does not have to implement the AAIB's safety recommendations. It's not unusual for the CAA to decline to implement the AAIB's safety recommendations.
Like others, I've heard rumours, but I don't know the reason for the delay in publishing the final report. If it's any comfort, I have the utmost respect for the AAIB, and have never failed to be impressed by the professionalism, integrity and independence of every investigator with whom I've dealt over the years.
I've often heard it said the AAIB and CAA are 'in each other's pockets' or words to that effect. That is not true. They are not only separate by legislation, but have a totally different ethos. Although the AAIB has a lower profile, the contribution it makes to flight safety in the UK (and elsewhere) is enormous.
The AAIB is under a duty to consider representations, but I'd be extremely surprised if anyone persuaded the AAIB to remove any adverse comments which it considered were valid.
NB: I'm not disagreeing with those who've suggested making some enquiries about when the final report will be published.
Tudor Owen
Last edited by Flying Lawyer; 21st Nov 2002 at 14:13.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't it unbelievable that the CAA can ignore AAIB safety recommendations?
But, it means the CAA can't be worried about safety recommendations because they can just decide not to implement them.
So, they must want "adverse" comments about their procedures removed.
Isn't the answer for us to email the AAIB?
I've just sent mine. If anyone wants to copy it, feel free.
AAIB email address is: [email protected]
C'mon chaps. It will only take a few minutes of your time and it's a chance to help one of our own, Dennis Kenyon who lost his son.
But, it means the CAA can't be worried about safety recommendations because they can just decide not to implement them.
So, they must want "adverse" comments about their procedures removed.
Isn't the answer for us to email the AAIB?
I've just sent mine. If anyone wants to copy it, feel free.
To the Principal Inspector of Air Accidents
AAIB
Re Crash of Hughes 269 G-ZAPS, March 2000
Please could you tell me why the Report into the above accident has not yet been published when the draft report was issued for representations by interested parties almost a year ago?
AAIB
Re Crash of Hughes 269 G-ZAPS, March 2000
Please could you tell me why the Report into the above accident has not yet been published when the draft report was issued for representations by interested parties almost a year ago?
C'mon chaps. It will only take a few minutes of your time and it's a chance to help one of our own, Dennis Kenyon who lost his son.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: London
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Try this email address ...
The Principal Inspector is Jeremy Barnett. His email address is ...
[email protected]
... and he still hasn't replied to my email of the November 8th.
Could be on holiday, I suppose, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt at the moment.
Helo
[email protected]
... and he still hasn't replied to my email of the November 8th.
Could be on holiday, I suppose, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt at the moment.
Helo
Firstly a disclaimer, I know nothing of the accident in question, I don't work for AAIB or CAA, and have not met any of the people affected by this tragic accident.
However, I work closely with CAA and AAIB, and have participated in half a dozen accident investigations.
It isn't unusual for AAIB to take several years to put out a report if they are still unsure that they have really got to the bottom of the accident. Another example is the PA28R that broke up in the air about 2 years ago, killing 4 people. In high profile cases, it is common for an interim report to be issue (such as was the case with the Hunsden F2a fatality about 4 years ago, that was about 2 years before the full report was published).
With regard to the CAA; the two organisations are jealously independent of each other. In fact I know of CAA surveyors who are quite bitter about recommendations that have been made by AAIB. As to ignoring AAIB recommendations, everybody has that privilege, but few should do so without ensuring that they are on INCREDIBLY safe ground. This applies to the CAA as much as it does to anybody else.
I think that people are right to nudge AAIB - they are very able people but still human and this may simply be an oversight, but if you get a firm holding answer, my feeling is that there will be a very good reason. It is likely that as well as Flying Lawyer, the affected family will have seen a draft of the report, and (please be careful chaps) it may possibly be concerns on their part that have delayed the final publication.
G
However, I work closely with CAA and AAIB, and have participated in half a dozen accident investigations.
It isn't unusual for AAIB to take several years to put out a report if they are still unsure that they have really got to the bottom of the accident. Another example is the PA28R that broke up in the air about 2 years ago, killing 4 people. In high profile cases, it is common for an interim report to be issue (such as was the case with the Hunsden F2a fatality about 4 years ago, that was about 2 years before the full report was published).
With regard to the CAA; the two organisations are jealously independent of each other. In fact I know of CAA surveyors who are quite bitter about recommendations that have been made by AAIB. As to ignoring AAIB recommendations, everybody has that privilege, but few should do so without ensuring that they are on INCREDIBLY safe ground. This applies to the CAA as much as it does to anybody else.
I think that people are right to nudge AAIB - they are very able people but still human and this may simply be an oversight, but if you get a firm holding answer, my feeling is that there will be a very good reason. It is likely that as well as Flying Lawyer, the affected family will have seen a draft of the report, and (please be careful chaps) it may possibly be concerns on their part that have delayed the final publication.
G
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Genghis
It's the families of the deceased who are anxious to have the report published as soon as possible to prevent the same thing happening to anybody else. They are not responsible for the delay.
Although I agree with the comments you've made about AAIB investigations in general, in this case the AAIB had no difficulty at all in 'getting to the bottom of the accident', mainly because the engineer responsible went to them and told them the whole story of what had happened.
The draft report wasn't an interim, it was a draft of the final report the AAIB proposed to publish, including their safety recommendations.
I won't reveal my sources, but they are reliable.
It's the families of the deceased who are anxious to have the report published as soon as possible to prevent the same thing happening to anybody else. They are not responsible for the delay.
Although I agree with the comments you've made about AAIB investigations in general, in this case the AAIB had no difficulty at all in 'getting to the bottom of the accident', mainly because the engineer responsible went to them and told them the whole story of what had happened.
The draft report wasn't an interim, it was a draft of the final report the AAIB proposed to publish, including their safety recommendations.
I won't reveal my sources, but they are reliable.
I wouldn't wish to doubt you Heliport, my point was primarily a general one. It is important in any accident to get the report out as quickly as is commensurate with thoroughness. It does sometimes occur that new facts appear late in the day, although in such a case one hopes that the Inspector responsible would have informed the family what and why. In my experience they don't generally fail to do so, although they may not inform the rest of the world.
G
G
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Genghis
I agree the AAIB would tell the families of the deceased if there were any new facts which had emerged late.
I think we can rule that possibility out. They hadn't been told anything like that when I started this thread. I don't know if there's been any new facts discovered since then, but it seems very unlikely. The investigation was concluded over a year ago.
The engineer accepted all the criticisms of him - he gave them the information.
The pilot did nothing wrong.
The manufacturer did nothing wrong.
That's why my money is still on the CAA trying to have things which show them in a bad light taken out.
I agree the AAIB would tell the families of the deceased if there were any new facts which had emerged late.
I think we can rule that possibility out. They hadn't been told anything like that when I started this thread. I don't know if there's been any new facts discovered since then, but it seems very unlikely. The investigation was concluded over a year ago.
The engineer accepted all the criticisms of him - he gave them the information.
The pilot did nothing wrong.
The manufacturer did nothing wrong.
That's why my money is still on the CAA trying to have things which show them in a bad light taken out.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hughes 300 Crash Report
Thanks for the email addresses. I've just sent a message through to Mr Barnet.
I would urge others to follow this course of action. Perhaps this will help the AAIB in their quest to bring this report to its final conclusion.
I would urge others to follow this course of action. Perhaps this will help the AAIB in their quest to bring this report to its final conclusion.