Of the winnowing of Wheat from Chaff.
One of the most difficult (least liked) jobs we have toiling for Aunt Pru is 'winnowing' – fact from fiction, without friction; agenda from base intent; and rumour from reality. All fraught with peril; particularly the 'rumour' elements. Much depends on 'who' told the tale, their 'agenda' and why. Sometimes, it is no more than a third or fourth hand yarn, embellished for effect; or, for a laugh in the Pub. But, every once a while, a part of a puzzle lands on screen, or the phone rings – and one element, a nugget if you will, of information lands which, stand alone is 'something of nothing', noted and tucked away. Then, there is the 'other' type of rumour; the one which steadily gains credibility through 'source' and diversity of provider. These are the interesting ones – of the no smoke without fire type. They are also problematic for many reasons. For example; 'we' were very interested in the back room rumours emanating from the Coulson 737 fire bombing event.
Bloggs - “I think most of us are sitting quietly shaking our heads, unable to speak or type...
True enough; the wise knew to await the report; the 'safety action' speaks volumes:-
Following the accident, Coulson Aviation issued operations bulletin 2023-01 advising their large air tanker pilots operating in Australia that their minimum retardant drop heights and VDROP air speeds had been increased from 150 ft above ground level and 1.25 VS to 200 ft above ground level and 1.35 VS. Their B-737 normal checklist was amended accordingly to reflect their new minimum VDROP air speeds.
That's biggish lump of machinery to be throwing around, low, slow, heavy, close to the deck in hot bumpy weather, smoke etc, etc. Boeing 'book numbers' are very good for 'normal' operations – but I doubt there is section dedicated to 'agricultural' ops. Perhaps in the 'Sim' and 'on paper' it all looks kosher; but the 'safety' advice reflects what many believe to be the core issue. Clearly, someone wrote the ops spec in use at the time into the 'book' and CASA senior inspectors must have approved it as part of the AOC issue. Looks very much, on the surface at least, that some senior folk who thought it all 'hunky-dory got their collective 'hunks and dory's muddled. Or, did they? Rumour #1 says perhaps not. That, alone was worth some homework, all the way back to the beginning. So we began digging and rummaging through the history of the application, operational approval and the event.
It has been impossible to gather anything that even vaguely resembles 'fact' let alone 'provable' evidence. Rumour by the cart load, opinion by the bushel; speculation and gossip enough for a small mountain of the stuff. In short; nothing that could withstand a legal challenge. However; there were a few tales from the woods which were at least consistent, a thread running through tapestry which touched the same points. Whether true or false we have no idea; pure speculation and pub conjecture will not pass any legal litmus test. So, dear reader, I shall leave it up to you to decide if there is indeed 'something rotten in the state of Denmark'. Paraphrased below, nut shell version are the most consistent, most reiterated rumours we were offered. True of False – I have no idea. Handing over....
Item 1:- Senior CASA inspectors were, for the reasons stated in the ATSB safety actions, opposed to the issue of the Coulson AOC - as presented.
Item 2:- These worthies were overruled by Reg Services based on preference being given to an opinion based on personal relationship and faith in that element of the equation.
Item 3:- There allegedly exists a small mountain of internal complaints against Reg Services top dogs; the usual stuff alleged bullying, harassment etc, etc. Along with calls for a major change of the top order.
Item 4:- Apparently, the calls for change are ignored by the top floor. Seems that the protection of certain species is a prerequisite of executive KPI bonus for 'diversity'.
These persistent rumours have no supporting evidence non whatsoever. I could even be just making it all up as I go along. Consistency and diversity of source however make one wonder about smoke and fire.
Aye well, no pleasure taken in it all; leaky buckets are of neither intrinsic or practical value. However, duty done and there's an end to it. FWIW.
Toot toot.....
One of the most difficult (least liked) jobs we have toiling for Aunt Pru is 'winnowing' – fact from fiction, without friction; agenda from base intent; and rumour from reality. All fraught with peril; particularly the 'rumour' elements. Much depends on 'who' told the tale, their 'agenda' and why. Sometimes, it is no more than a third or fourth hand yarn, embellished for effect; or, for a laugh in the Pub. But, every once a while, a part of a puzzle lands on screen, or the phone rings – and one element, a nugget if you will, of information lands which, stand alone is 'something of nothing', noted and tucked away. Then, there is the 'other' type of rumour; the one which steadily gains credibility through 'source' and diversity of provider. These are the interesting ones – of the no smoke without fire type. They are also problematic for many reasons. For example; 'we' were very interested in the back room rumours emanating from the Coulson 737 fire bombing event.
Bloggs - “I think most of us are sitting quietly shaking our heads, unable to speak or type...
True enough; the wise knew to await the report; the 'safety action' speaks volumes:-
Following the accident, Coulson Aviation issued operations bulletin 2023-01 advising their large air tanker pilots operating in Australia that their minimum retardant drop heights and VDROP air speeds had been increased from 150 ft above ground level and 1.25 VS to 200 ft above ground level and 1.35 VS. Their B-737 normal checklist was amended accordingly to reflect their new minimum VDROP air speeds.
That's biggish lump of machinery to be throwing around, low, slow, heavy, close to the deck in hot bumpy weather, smoke etc, etc. Boeing 'book numbers' are very good for 'normal' operations – but I doubt there is section dedicated to 'agricultural' ops. Perhaps in the 'Sim' and 'on paper' it all looks kosher; but the 'safety' advice reflects what many believe to be the core issue. Clearly, someone wrote the ops spec in use at the time into the 'book' and CASA senior inspectors must have approved it as part of the AOC issue. Looks very much, on the surface at least, that some senior folk who thought it all 'hunky-dory got their collective 'hunks and dory's muddled. Or, did they? Rumour #1 says perhaps not. That, alone was worth some homework, all the way back to the beginning. So we began digging and rummaging through the history of the application, operational approval and the event.
It has been impossible to gather anything that even vaguely resembles 'fact' let alone 'provable' evidence. Rumour by the cart load, opinion by the bushel; speculation and gossip enough for a small mountain of the stuff. In short; nothing that could withstand a legal challenge. However; there were a few tales from the woods which were at least consistent, a thread running through tapestry which touched the same points. Whether true or false we have no idea; pure speculation and pub conjecture will not pass any legal litmus test. So, dear reader, I shall leave it up to you to decide if there is indeed 'something rotten in the state of Denmark'. Paraphrased below, nut shell version are the most consistent, most reiterated rumours we were offered. True of False – I have no idea. Handing over....
Item 1:- Senior CASA inspectors were, for the reasons stated in the ATSB safety actions, opposed to the issue of the Coulson AOC - as presented.
Item 2:- These worthies were overruled by Reg Services based on preference being given to an opinion based on personal relationship and faith in that element of the equation.
Item 3:- There allegedly exists a small mountain of internal complaints against Reg Services top dogs; the usual stuff alleged bullying, harassment etc, etc. Along with calls for a major change of the top order.
Item 4:- Apparently, the calls for change are ignored by the top floor. Seems that the protection of certain species is a prerequisite of executive KPI bonus for 'diversity'.
These persistent rumours have no supporting evidence non whatsoever. I could even be just making it all up as I go along. Consistency and diversity of source however make one wonder about smoke and fire.
Aye well, no pleasure taken in it all; leaky buckets are of neither intrinsic or practical value. However, duty done and there's an end to it. FWIW.
Toot toot.....