"She swore, in faith 'twas strange, 'twas passing strange;
'Twas pitiful. 'twas wondrous pitiful,"
"The ATSB has applied considerable effort to understanding the application and function of those aerodrome design requirements from the 1970s to the present in the context of changes at Essendon Fields Airport. It has taken the investigation time to overcome the challenges of limited information available from historical periods to provide context to the investigation."
You have to wonder though; don't ya? I would have thought that this matter would end up on the desk of 'serious' investigators, someone like the AG's Integrity/ Anti corruption outfit. They have the expertise to burrow through the twists and turns involved in not only getting the DFO built, the impact on 'side' safety zones and the manipulation runway width etc...The ATSB do not have this level of 'investigative' skills or the horse power to have awkward questions answered and even less in the way of teeth to drag out the answers.
That aside, the ATSB's glib, high speed investigation of all the circumstances attending this accident was less than satisfactory. Pilot error - end of story. What is not clear is the 'how and the why' of the tale. Medical data - tick & flick; past performance - tick and flick; Mayday call-outs - tick and flick. The lack-lustre High Viz Hood steered the investigation through its sorry progress; methinks there are question there that could stand some serious answers. Old mate Popinjay has the wheel now, the current lame excuses are little more than a puff piece to excuse and obfuscate the core matter - and to provide another excuse for delaying tactics. Aye well, the irrepressible urge to see his name in lights has been satisfied - for a short while at least.
"The basis of this requirement was that there was no record on how the 180 m runway 08/26 strip width had originated, nor were there records as to the previous standard under which that measurement was authorised. The 180 m runway strip width was not authorised under the 2015 version of the standards, which required a 300 m strip width (150 m either side of the runway centreline)..."
We know this - what we do not know is who shagged who, who paid for it and what did it cost?
This matter is a question for the AG and the Federal police - the ATSB need to call up the dogs, admit the investigation is beyond their capacity and remit and return to providing sugar frosted top cover for their ministers and masters. Or, better yet, bend their minds to regaining their once stellar international reputation; they can find it in the rubbish bin behind the hanger.
Toot - toot...
'Twas pitiful. 'twas wondrous pitiful,"
"The ATSB has applied considerable effort to understanding the application and function of those aerodrome design requirements from the 1970s to the present in the context of changes at Essendon Fields Airport. It has taken the investigation time to overcome the challenges of limited information available from historical periods to provide context to the investigation."
You have to wonder though; don't ya? I would have thought that this matter would end up on the desk of 'serious' investigators, someone like the AG's Integrity/ Anti corruption outfit. They have the expertise to burrow through the twists and turns involved in not only getting the DFO built, the impact on 'side' safety zones and the manipulation runway width etc...The ATSB do not have this level of 'investigative' skills or the horse power to have awkward questions answered and even less in the way of teeth to drag out the answers.
That aside, the ATSB's glib, high speed investigation of all the circumstances attending this accident was less than satisfactory. Pilot error - end of story. What is not clear is the 'how and the why' of the tale. Medical data - tick & flick; past performance - tick and flick; Mayday call-outs - tick and flick. The lack-lustre High Viz Hood steered the investigation through its sorry progress; methinks there are question there that could stand some serious answers. Old mate Popinjay has the wheel now, the current lame excuses are little more than a puff piece to excuse and obfuscate the core matter - and to provide another excuse for delaying tactics. Aye well, the irrepressible urge to see his name in lights has been satisfied - for a short while at least.
"The basis of this requirement was that there was no record on how the 180 m runway 08/26 strip width had originated, nor were there records as to the previous standard under which that measurement was authorised. The 180 m runway strip width was not authorised under the 2015 version of the standards, which required a 300 m strip width (150 m either side of the runway centreline)..."
We know this - what we do not know is who shagged who, who paid for it and what did it cost?
This matter is a question for the AG and the Federal police - the ATSB need to call up the dogs, admit the investigation is beyond their capacity and remit and return to providing sugar frosted top cover for their ministers and masters. Or, better yet, bend their minds to regaining their once stellar international reputation; they can find it in the rubbish bin behind the hanger.
Toot - toot...