Long ramble warning.!
Of Ass Hats & Croc eggs.
Well, according to the ABC – HERE – the Jury is released, verdict given, the Judge has ruled and the appeals to yet be lodged. Only one sinner in the dock, a righteous crucifixion ordered. Case closed – well for the public at least as the twenty second 'updates' disappear from the screens replaced by sports news and advertisements. Such is the way of the world, I'd bet good money that the average air traveler has no more idea than the average journalist about the parlous state of genuine 'safety' in this wide brown land. First, it must be understood there is 'legal' safety and 'operational' safety. Simply put; it may be 'legal' to cross on foot a busy highway against the lights after looking left and right etc. But is it operationally 'safe'? Well that depends, don't it. Hit by a truck legally crossing on a 'green' light is a clear cut case; hit by the same truck dashing for the bus across the road, against the lights – well you know the rest.
“Well, God give them wisdom that have it; and those that are fools, let them use their talents.”
So, when the lines between 'operational safety' and 'legally safe' become 'blurred'; a problem exists, then it becomes a court matter. Enter the Croc Clown and his hapless cohorts. #1 in the Dock; #2 a witness, #3 one who knew the tale; and, # 4 one who signed it all off and made it all 'Legally' safe for his outfit. Lets' take a brief look at the man in the dock and his cohorts
“Now, my co-mates and brothers in exile,”
We really should begin with #4. Every single commercial aviation business in Australia is 'accepted' (and /or approved) by CASA, from the A380 en-route to London, to the single engine joy flight along the beach – anything carrying passengers for hire or reward. Then there is commercial 'air-work' : cargo, bush fire suppression, Ambulance, Police, Mustering, Crop Spraying etc, etc. All on CASA's books and, in theory, all kept 'up to the mark'; as writ in 'accepted' manuals and statements. One off 'approved' audit, surveillance and 'spot-checks' are part of that system. It is no understatement to say that those 'checks' are an essential part of any safety culture. Audit sorts out rorts and 'fiddles'. Surveillance a net to trap any errant breaches; and the Audit. A soup to nuts check of 'the way things are. Bravo and often 'helpful' – done right, with a 'good attitude' on both sides of the combat.
“Life is 10 percent what you make it and 90 percent how you take it.”
But then, what happens when the system breaks down? For example - the 'Board' of directors CASA were so 'delighted' with the 'reports' from the NT helicopter operations that they decided to depart Canberra and travel all the way to Arnhem Land to visit the 'You-Tube' legendary 'Croc Jock'. Clearly, the reports back of a squeaky clean, model operation must have been stellar indeed to tempt them out and to make the long journey (at great public expense). Clearly no mention was made pre-departure of the shocking operational scandals in Broome and the 'close' association with the Croce-Jock AOC on loan as and when required by a private pilot operating out of his backyard. Perhaps not; maybe the potential (missed) operational (self initiated) dangers associated with the Croc egg harvesting operation where never mentioned. Well the Board stated they had a lovely time and a ride in a Chopper to top off a splendid day. Meanwhile, behind the scenes, many operational 'safety' opportunities were being either ignored or worse, not noted or even mooted.
“And thus I clothe my naked villainy
With odd old ends stol'n out of holy writ;
And seem a saint, when most I play the devil.
Get to the point shout the BRB; I shall oblige. Both pilot and aircraft are tied to time limits with legally enforceable limits. These limits matter. Was there ever a holistic investigation into the veracity of the quoted figures; if so where are the reports justifying the legality of the the operation? Where is the computer data v the noted data from surveillance? There ain't any from CASA. We could if serious, have an off the record with the maintenance company; or better yet have been present, with an expert engineer, at an inspection. But never before the event was there even the slightest suspicion that engines and air frames were 'over- time'. Tick and Flick audits by those who thought they should be doing 'bigger/ better' things than sodding about with rough operation in the middle of nowhere.
How was the 'pop the clock' edict not noticed? Pilots log books should reflect (give or take) the time entered onto maintenance document by about 6 minutes (0,1+/- hrs). Has there been an examination of 'pilot hours' v maintenance hours logged? Engineers can actually determine if the 'wear' and if the state of an engine reflects the MR time claimed. The 'limits' set matter, particularly to helicopters, in particular to those which are 'ridden hard and put away wet' Then, there is the total fuel bill (bought in) against that used and that placed in cans v fuel burn for the hours operated. All fully available on audit – fuel burnt against hours claimed in operations – easy to sort out.
Then, there are the questionable 'safety' measures approved. Sling load requires an approval after training. Maximum 'drop off' height should be specified and enforced. i.e, Not above 30 feet (survivable height) into a clear area; any engine trouble; winch 'em back in (just hit the 'Up' button). Tracking of aircraft, and 'check-in' calls; i.e. landed @ Mud Lump 1230 – Departed Mud=Lump 1340 next check in 1445. Logged and noted at HO. Even a simple measure like Spider Tracks or similar so 'someone' knew where the crews are and when they may be expected at the next nest.
Enter the Croc Clown and his four hapless assistants. #1 in the Dock; #2 a witness, #3 one who knew the tale; and, # 4 one who signed it all off and made it all 'Legally' safe for his outfit.
Aye: #1 in the Dock and IMO lucky to have escaped. Yet a modicum of sympathy is to be afforded; he got away with what were normalized deviance's, which should have been picked up during 'proper' surveillance and audit and corrected through 'advice' and 'enforcement'. In short “knock it off or else”.
#2 The witness – a crippled pilot. The 'survivor' a man who paid a hellish price for 'following along the road to perdition'. Two options party hard and play along or, walk away and find a job with an outfit that played the game 'properly'. Young, impressionable, easily manipulated rather than 'educated' in the 'right way' to tackle potentially 'dangerous' operations. “ No wukkas mate; she'll be right”. Alas.
#3 The engineering company. I've spent decades working with these clever folk. They 'know' when a system time limit is being artificially 'extended'. But business is business and they always fall well short of knowingly breaching a requirement, or of turning a blind eye to a 'dangerous' fault or part. They neither can nor will allow a dangerous aircraft out of the hanger. Operational practice is not within their remit. But 'they know'.
“If you are distressed by anything external, the pain is not due to the thing itself, but to your estimate of it; and this you have the power to revoke at any moment.”
The overt, inherent dangers within this 'croc egg collection' lark, boiled down are few, very few, provided it is done 'correctly'. Winch down the collector, wait for the recall, haul him up and onto the next. Conducted within the constraints of 'sound' operational practice; it is a straightforward 'day at the office' – until stretched and pulled out of the 'normal' envelope. Then, Spades are trumps and the Devil takes those caught out. Properly over sighted, by CASA, this event never, not ever should have happened. Blame who you like for it; but I know where my dollar bet will be placed.
Sorry for the long ramble; but I now have both port wing and starboard oleo fully operational (MR issued: boredom endeth). Time methinks to whistle up the dogs (and cat) and head out into a beautiful summer's evening, though the orchard and into the 'wild woods'. Crutches destroyed with a vengeance.
Selah.
Of Ass Hats & Croc eggs.
Well, according to the ABC – HERE – the Jury is released, verdict given, the Judge has ruled and the appeals to yet be lodged. Only one sinner in the dock, a righteous crucifixion ordered. Case closed – well for the public at least as the twenty second 'updates' disappear from the screens replaced by sports news and advertisements. Such is the way of the world, I'd bet good money that the average air traveler has no more idea than the average journalist about the parlous state of genuine 'safety' in this wide brown land. First, it must be understood there is 'legal' safety and 'operational' safety. Simply put; it may be 'legal' to cross on foot a busy highway against the lights after looking left and right etc. But is it operationally 'safe'? Well that depends, don't it. Hit by a truck legally crossing on a 'green' light is a clear cut case; hit by the same truck dashing for the bus across the road, against the lights – well you know the rest.
“Well, God give them wisdom that have it; and those that are fools, let them use their talents.”
So, when the lines between 'operational safety' and 'legally safe' become 'blurred'; a problem exists, then it becomes a court matter. Enter the Croc Clown and his hapless cohorts. #1 in the Dock; #2 a witness, #3 one who knew the tale; and, # 4 one who signed it all off and made it all 'Legally' safe for his outfit. Lets' take a brief look at the man in the dock and his cohorts
“Now, my co-mates and brothers in exile,”
We really should begin with #4. Every single commercial aviation business in Australia is 'accepted' (and /or approved) by CASA, from the A380 en-route to London, to the single engine joy flight along the beach – anything carrying passengers for hire or reward. Then there is commercial 'air-work' : cargo, bush fire suppression, Ambulance, Police, Mustering, Crop Spraying etc, etc. All on CASA's books and, in theory, all kept 'up to the mark'; as writ in 'accepted' manuals and statements. One off 'approved' audit, surveillance and 'spot-checks' are part of that system. It is no understatement to say that those 'checks' are an essential part of any safety culture. Audit sorts out rorts and 'fiddles'. Surveillance a net to trap any errant breaches; and the Audit. A soup to nuts check of 'the way things are. Bravo and often 'helpful' – done right, with a 'good attitude' on both sides of the combat.
“Life is 10 percent what you make it and 90 percent how you take it.”
But then, what happens when the system breaks down? For example - the 'Board' of directors CASA were so 'delighted' with the 'reports' from the NT helicopter operations that they decided to depart Canberra and travel all the way to Arnhem Land to visit the 'You-Tube' legendary 'Croc Jock'. Clearly, the reports back of a squeaky clean, model operation must have been stellar indeed to tempt them out and to make the long journey (at great public expense). Clearly no mention was made pre-departure of the shocking operational scandals in Broome and the 'close' association with the Croce-Jock AOC on loan as and when required by a private pilot operating out of his backyard. Perhaps not; maybe the potential (missed) operational (self initiated) dangers associated with the Croc egg harvesting operation where never mentioned. Well the Board stated they had a lovely time and a ride in a Chopper to top off a splendid day. Meanwhile, behind the scenes, many operational 'safety' opportunities were being either ignored or worse, not noted or even mooted.
“And thus I clothe my naked villainy
With odd old ends stol'n out of holy writ;
And seem a saint, when most I play the devil.
Get to the point shout the BRB; I shall oblige. Both pilot and aircraft are tied to time limits with legally enforceable limits. These limits matter. Was there ever a holistic investigation into the veracity of the quoted figures; if so where are the reports justifying the legality of the the operation? Where is the computer data v the noted data from surveillance? There ain't any from CASA. We could if serious, have an off the record with the maintenance company; or better yet have been present, with an expert engineer, at an inspection. But never before the event was there even the slightest suspicion that engines and air frames were 'over- time'. Tick and Flick audits by those who thought they should be doing 'bigger/ better' things than sodding about with rough operation in the middle of nowhere.
How was the 'pop the clock' edict not noticed? Pilots log books should reflect (give or take) the time entered onto maintenance document by about 6 minutes (0,1+/- hrs). Has there been an examination of 'pilot hours' v maintenance hours logged? Engineers can actually determine if the 'wear' and if the state of an engine reflects the MR time claimed. The 'limits' set matter, particularly to helicopters, in particular to those which are 'ridden hard and put away wet' Then, there is the total fuel bill (bought in) against that used and that placed in cans v fuel burn for the hours operated. All fully available on audit – fuel burnt against hours claimed in operations – easy to sort out.
Then, there are the questionable 'safety' measures approved. Sling load requires an approval after training. Maximum 'drop off' height should be specified and enforced. i.e, Not above 30 feet (survivable height) into a clear area; any engine trouble; winch 'em back in (just hit the 'Up' button). Tracking of aircraft, and 'check-in' calls; i.e. landed @ Mud Lump 1230 – Departed Mud=Lump 1340 next check in 1445. Logged and noted at HO. Even a simple measure like Spider Tracks or similar so 'someone' knew where the crews are and when they may be expected at the next nest.
Enter the Croc Clown and his four hapless assistants. #1 in the Dock; #2 a witness, #3 one who knew the tale; and, # 4 one who signed it all off and made it all 'Legally' safe for his outfit.
Aye: #1 in the Dock and IMO lucky to have escaped. Yet a modicum of sympathy is to be afforded; he got away with what were normalized deviance's, which should have been picked up during 'proper' surveillance and audit and corrected through 'advice' and 'enforcement'. In short “knock it off or else”.
#2 The witness – a crippled pilot. The 'survivor' a man who paid a hellish price for 'following along the road to perdition'. Two options party hard and play along or, walk away and find a job with an outfit that played the game 'properly'. Young, impressionable, easily manipulated rather than 'educated' in the 'right way' to tackle potentially 'dangerous' operations. “ No wukkas mate; she'll be right”. Alas.
#3 The engineering company. I've spent decades working with these clever folk. They 'know' when a system time limit is being artificially 'extended'. But business is business and they always fall well short of knowingly breaching a requirement, or of turning a blind eye to a 'dangerous' fault or part. They neither can nor will allow a dangerous aircraft out of the hanger. Operational practice is not within their remit. But 'they know'.
“If you are distressed by anything external, the pain is not due to the thing itself, but to your estimate of it; and this you have the power to revoke at any moment.”
The overt, inherent dangers within this 'croc egg collection' lark, boiled down are few, very few, provided it is done 'correctly'. Winch down the collector, wait for the recall, haul him up and onto the next. Conducted within the constraints of 'sound' operational practice; it is a straightforward 'day at the office' – until stretched and pulled out of the 'normal' envelope. Then, Spades are trumps and the Devil takes those caught out. Properly over sighted, by CASA, this event never, not ever should have happened. Blame who you like for it; but I know where my dollar bet will be placed.
Sorry for the long ramble; but I now have both port wing and starboard oleo fully operational (MR issued: boredom endeth). Time methinks to whistle up the dogs (and cat) and head out into a beautiful summer's evening, though the orchard and into the 'wild woods'. Crutches destroyed with a vengeance.
Selah.