[Peetwo]

Chester's growing aviation shame list -

Reference PelAir MKII post:

Update 08.03.17: 07:30 Report & Hoody FOI obfuscation.

Via ABC:

Questions raised about the air safety watchdog's ability to investigate plane crashes

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau is only managing to finalise 30 per cent of its air crash investigations within the recommended time, leaving grieving families in limbo and posing a threat to air safety.
Contains: video, image,

Reference link - On FOI requests & word weasel confections - & quote from BITN thread, in particular No 1) on FOIs:

Ps While on matters of aviation safety and the three stooges (ASA, ATSB & CASA) bearing safety risk mitigation gifts and establishing industry trust quotient 'Olive branches':

1) Could we please have the ASA FOI disclosure log updated? - It is fast approaching two years in arrears...

 2) Could we please have the ATSB investigation page updated with interim statements/reports for all O&O'd active investigations? - Such as VARA ATR 'broken tail' investigation (3rd anniversary) and the PelAir cover-up (2+ year) re-investigation... (Reference: ATSB still taking the Mickey Bliss on ICAO Annex 13 ) 

3) Could we please have the CASA 'Enforcement Manual' updated so that the former sociopathic DAS McCormick is no longer the preface signatory and his 'blackletter' embuggerance dispo is also erased from the preface introduction - Download preface.pdf.

On the 3rd Anniversary of the tragic disappearance of MH370 and on the FOI Act, it would appear that Hoody is not adverse to also O&O'ing FOI requests...

Courtesy of 'that man', via the Oz: 

MH370 files ‘could damage ties’

12:00amEAN HIGGINS

Australian officials refuse to release documents on flight MH370 because it ‘could damage international ties’.

...Three years after Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 disappeared, Australian officials refuse to ­release related documents ­because this could damage international ties, apparently with countries including Malaysia.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has rejected The Australian’s Freedom of Information request for copies of statements from a panel of international experts that it says supports its interpretation of satellite tracking data. The documents are central to the ATSB’s defence of its failed effort to find the plane.

Colin McNamara, the ATSB’s general manager, strategic capability, said disclosure of the documents “would, or could reason­ably be expected to, cause damage to the international relations of the commonwealth”.

While the ATSB says the documents support its “ghost flight” scenario of “unresponsive” pilots, this theory is increasingly challenged by aviation professionals who think a rogue pilot hijacked the aircraft and flew it to the end. Many commercial pilots and crash investigators say the search was doomed because evidence suggests captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah ditched the plane outside the ATSB’s search zone.

As revealed last year, other FOI documents show the ATSB initially claimed it had “consensus” from the panel for its theory that satellite data showed the plane went down un­piloted in a rapid dive, but deleted that line from its website when its investigators warned not all panel members had at that stage agreed.

ATSB chief commissioner Greg Hood and the head of the search strategy, Peter Foley, refused to answer questions from The Australian ahead of the third anniversary, but a spokesman said “the search for MH370 has always been based on the available evidence at the time”....

Why am I not surprised...  After all Hoody was the decision maker that condemned Dominic James to 'pilot career purgatory' in the PelAir cover-up debacle. All based on largely dodgy, cynically manipulated and slanderous hearsay evidence, compiled by McComic's evil lieutenant Wodger. Therefore he already has a checkered history of self-serving amoral shenanigans in a senior bureaucratic executive role...    

TICK...TOCK - Minister NFI Chester, you now own the sins of the past and the sins of the future from the self-serving toxic personalities that currently inhabit the halls of the aviation safety bureaucracy - TICK..TOCK indeed..

Update: To 4D's aviation shame list...

Via the Canberra Times...

Canberra Airport hits out at 'disgraceful', 'grubby' safety claims

• [/url]Doug Dingwall
  [url=http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/by/Doug-Dingwall-gtu7sx]
  

Canberra Airport has slammed what it described as a "disgraceful" and "grubby" campaign it says is using the Essendon Airport crash to cast doubt on its safety.
Airport managing director Stephen Byron said a former pilot, who he did not name, was trying to draw a number of media outlets into reporting safety problems caused by buildings around the airport. 

Aircraft landing at Canberra Airport is at risk of building-induced turbulence, a pilots association has warned.  Photo: Rohan Thomson  

"The attempt is to draw an analogy between the tragic crash at Essendon, and the safety of operations at Canberra Airport, and the insinuation is that buildings at airports are unsafe and that buildings at airports caused the accident at Essendon Airport, and because we too have a shopping centre at Canberra Airport that there is a danger to aircraft here at Canberra Airport," Mr Byron said. 

He said there was no danger to aircraft flying in and out of the airport, that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority reviewed its operations, and that airlines using it weren't concerned about its building locations and safety.

"It's not a furphy, it's just a disgraceful leveraging of a very tragic accident at Essendon to try and impugn the record and reputation and commitment to safety that we have at Canberra Airport."

When The Canberra Times approached the Australian Airline Pilots' Association, it said considerable and unidentified turbulence from nearby buildings may risk damaging aircraft landing at Canberra airport. 

AusALPA, representing pilots on safety and technical matters, did not draw any link between the crash at Essendon and safety at Canberra Airport, nor did it claim building-induced turbulence caused the incident.

Building-generated turbulence could severely limit the performance of aircraft, and the ability to control them at Canberra, it says.

"In the most severe of cases, an aircraft may be seriously damaged on landing, or run off the side of the runway," AusALPA safety and technical officer Marcus Diamond said. 
Turbulence caused by nearby development affected one runway, RW 35, in strong westerly and north-westerly winds, Mr Diamond said.

Canberra Airport said it rejected suggestions that the airport was unsafe.

"Numerous studies over the past 20 years and our safety record have reinforced that assertion," a spokeswoman said.
 
Wind expert reports showed it complied with national safeguarding guideline requirements, she said.

AusALPA has called for efforts to map pre-existing turbulence and windshear - a change in winds experienced by an aircraft - for risk mitigation and avoidance strategies.
A spokeswoman for Infrastructure Minister Darren Chester said approvals for major developments on airport sites must be made after considering advice from CASA and Airservices Australia.

"In providing such views, CASA and Airservices assess the safety and operational impact of any major developments, including their proximity to airside infrastructure such as runways," she said.

Canberra Aero Club director Tony Smart in February said open, undeveloped fields surrounding Canberra Airport gave pilots enough space to land if something went wrong, helping to avoid a tragedy like the crash in Essendon. 

While Brindabella Business Park neighboured Canberra Airport, it sat off the middle of the main north-south runway, out of the paths of aircraft, Mr Smart said.

The National Airports Safeguarding Advisory Group is updating the national airports safeguarding guideline managing the risk of building-generated windshear and turbulence at airports, and is reviewing submissions.

Now this story may well be all a 'storm in a teacup' but I note a couple of obviously ill-informed 'bollocks' comments that IMO need to be highlighted... :

"..He said there was no danger to aircraft flying in and out of the airport, that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority reviewed its operations, and that airlines using it weren't concerned about its building locations and safety...

Hmm...why does "CASA" reviewing the ops at the Canberra Airport not give me a warm & fuzzy feeling of surety of proactive safety risk mitigation: references - Short diversion.

 
...A spokeswoman for Infrastructure Minister Darren Chester said approvals for major developments on airport sites must be made after considering advice from CASA and Airservices Australia.

"In providing such views, CASA and Airservices assess the safety and operational impact of any major developments, including their proximity to airside infrastructure such as runways," she said..."

Err...begging your pardon Ma'am but not according to miniscule 4D's CASA Acting DAS Comardy and his faithful but dour  ‘Shifty Hans Tied’ :

..Back on track, we may begin with the ‘Shifty Hans Tied’ (hall of shame) interview:- Steam On.

Tiede: “In the case of this accident, a public safety zone protected area would not have played a part in the role of the accident. The aircraft did not enter what we would understand to be a public safety zone area.”

How neat is this?  “In the case of this accident” The discussion reduced from an Australia wide serious safety matter for the public to one isolated case, for which, as yet, we have no facts. Carmody pounces on it – “still under investigation” and the whole thing disappears in a puff of smoke. Now the questions are tied to the apron strings of a single accident and the ATSB investigations. Time and impetus lost in the black holes of departmental systematic prevarication, obfuscation and dilution. Made into a non event which cannot be sheeted back to any ineptitude or fault of anyone. RIP; case closed.  

Or, if you prefer to back up the smoke with mirrors, a belt and braces approach to killing a subject, you say - “a public safety zone protected area would not have played a part in the role of the accident”. Then mess about with semantics of what, exactly a PSZ is. Now we have word weasel and legal eagle speak in the mix; just to keep the Senators party line as far away from any real exploratory work as possible

The answers are too simple to be spoken out loud: in polite company, but with dispensation from AP, in plain Anglo Saxon  “the fucking buildings are too close to the fucking runways – and you let that happen”. There, I feel better now.

Senator XENOPHON: You are there to determine the safety of those that use aircraft, and you do not say CASA has a role to say, 'This ought to be an appropriate buffer zone, or an appropriate public safety zone,' so that if a plane does lose engine power it has the maximum chance of landing safely, rather than having a building in the way?

Mr Tiede: That is correct.

There, in a nutshell, supported by the rest of the CASA script is the problem. Well, that and creatures who lurk in corridors ever ready to abrogate any and all responsibility for the safety of anything, except their own.

  
Finally the understated but obvious statement from M&M's department..

"..The National Airports Safeguarding Advisory Group is updating the national airports safeguarding guideline managing the risk of building-generated windshear and turbulence at airports, and is reviewing submissions..."

'Reviewing submissions'? How long have Murky's mob been reviewing submissions now?
Reference:

Aircraft - as garden ornaments.

About here; you must do a little work yourself; not too much, but listen again to tape 1, the last few moments from where NX plays the Fawcett trump card (07:40). Watch MM’s face and hear the bugle of the rescue party a little later, MM to the rescue. Then roll straight into CASA II and listen to the rescue mission. This is why it is said that MM is so good at his job, he can see what’s coming and like the cavalry, comes to the rescue. As the video progresses, you can see that it has not been a fully successful rescue, but he managed to buy some precious time to circle the wagons. But now the NASAG trap is sprung; more digging required. You shall see boys and girls, how quickly Carmody ‘gets it’ and supports the MM story line. The ruse very nearly works; MM did a good job pulling the Carmody wedding tackle out of the fire; but these Senators cannot be bamboozled, their advice is rock solid industry expertise...

 MTF? - Definitely, as it would seem that lately there are daily additions to miniscule Chester's aviation shit & shame list...P2