Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Sunday Brunch Gazette.
#61
Redactions or RED ACTIONS - that is the question?

From the quoted Hansard (above) Senator Fawcett said: "..I accept that. I also accept that so far you have not had a look at the fatigue special audit, because that is still being redacted prior to being distributed..."

On review of the referred to document - 09 CASA_Doc 10_Web - i.e. Ben Cook's Special Audit of Pel-Air FRMS;

(a) I firstly verified Senator Fawcett's statement that the tabling of the audit report was being redacted as the 'created' date/time matches - 15/02/2013 11:15:30 AM;  

(b) this gave me a perfect opportunity to observe the redaction methodology of the Senate RRAT committee compared to the redactions in the other 8 documents received on the 10 October 2012.

This comparison has led me to the conclusion that the other 8 documents were redacted merely to protect the identity of innocent (coalface) parties (e.g. 'ATSB' or 'CASA' Officers) versus executive or middle management identities (e.g. McCormick, Sangston). Whereas the RRAT Secretariat do not discriminate and adhere strictly to privacy and/or FOI Act rules; and

© the copy of the Ben Cook FRMS audit report is also interesting as it has many overlayed highlighted sections (paragraphs and sentences), examples:


[Image: BC-1.jpg]

[Image: BC-2.jpg] 

This highlighting would seem to indicate that this document copy has been reviewed and IMO reflects an investigative process often employed by an individual(s) tasked with extracting evidence/data that maybe relevant to the systemic causal chain of the accident/incident investigation.

This would appear to also match the inferences and concerns highlighted in three of the preceding documents/emails:
Quote:15 Advice from the UK Civil Aviation Authority to CASA providing an assessment of the fatigue scores for the accidental flight (dated 11 December 2009), received 10 October 2012;(PDF 881KB) 

16 Internal ATSB email- reviewer wanting to look more closely at FRMS and re-interview pilots (dated 24 May 2012), received 10 October 2012;(PDF 535KB) 

17 Internal ATSB email- reviewer indicating they can't deviate at this point and they have to work with what they have (dated 24 May 2012), received 10 October 2012;(PDF 360KB) 
  
Does this possibly indicate that the reviewer had only recently been leaked (April-May 2012)the Ben Cook FRMS Special Audit report and this only further heightened his/her concerns on the lack of ATSB investigative coverage on fatigue and the FRMS in the (at that stage) DRAFTED final report... Confused  

As a point of interest on the former ATSB Chief Commissioner Beaker's take on whether fatigue of the flight crew, in particular PIC DJ, was a causal factor to the ditching, it is worth rehashing this part of an 11 November 2012 (indignant) Beaker correspondence to the former Senate RRAT committee Secretary Stephen Palethorpe - reference: Supplementary Submission(PDF 271KB):
Quote:Fatigue

In considering the potential for fatigue to have affected the flight crew's performance,
the investigation considered evidence acquired through interviews with the pilot and
copilot, from the operator's duty records and from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority
(CASA) investigation report. Based on this evidence, a number of the ATSB's human
factors investigators were involved in the examination of whether fatigue was a factor in
the occurrence.

By way of background, fatigue modelling is useful for assessing the probability of crew
fatigue when developing crew rosters but, because of individual differences, it is not
possible to determine an individual's level of fatigue at any point in time based on the
retrospective use of a fatigue modelling tool alone.

The determination of whether fatigue was a factor was made more difficult by the
changing reports over time about the amount of rest obtained by the pilot in command
(PIC) while in Samoa. The ATSB placed more weight on the contemporaneous
recollection by the PIC that he slept for most of the reported 8-hour rest period in the
hotel in Samoa.

On testing, the hypothesis that the PIC was significantly fatigued at the time of receipt of the 0800 SPEC! could not be proven to the level of likelihood used as a standard by the ATSB. The ATSB nevertheless concluded that the flight crew were experiencing some level of fatigue on the flight to Samoa. If the PIC only had 4 hours sleep in Samoa, as was later reported, then it is more likely he was experiencing fatigue on the return flight at a level likely to have had at least some effect on performance. (Pages 14 and 15 of the investigation report refer.)

Dodgy  - No comment - Angry


MTF...P2 Cool
Reply
#62
I poted these on Victor's blog (primarily for the information of Don Thompson), but for the benefit of a wider audience as well.



ventus45 says:
August 9, 2017 at 10:33 pm

@Don

With regard to the ATSB report (Mark-1) of the Westwind Ditching off Norfolk Island, the original (all 77 pages of it) is no longer available on the ATSB’s web site, but it can still be downloaded from here.
https://aviation-safety.net/database/rec...20091118-0
https://reports.aviation-safety.net/2009...VH-NGA.pdf

I suggest you download it now, and keep a copy for comparison purposes, with the “new report”, when it is released.

Note that ATSB Commisioner (former Qantas Chief Pilot) Captain Cris Manning said in the Australian Senate:
(a) The new report (Mark-2) is 450 pages
(b) It is a different report.
© It is a “significant” report.
(d) It should be released by the end of next month (September 2017).



ventus45 says:
August 9, 2017 at 10:37 pm

@Don

I forgot to mention this.
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/201503/r140...014986.pdf

P2 comment - FYI "V" I can confirm that the DRAFT Final Report is over 500 pages and I am aware of at least one extension of 2 weeks for the DIP process with the original deadline being 31 July 2017.
Reply
#63
Once upon a night time dreary.

[Image: Untitled_Clipping_081317_093941_AM-e1502587682687.jpg]


[Image: 13735949_165802157177158_1282195252_n.jp...MA%3D%3D.2]

Once upon a time, in the distant past, a mate bought a property which had some outbuildings – chook sheds and the like. There was one, which had been nicely made and he had a notion to keep it for storage of those must have, but rarely used things. Alas, the white ants had been through the walls – a classic; you could poke your finger through what looked like ‘good’ timber. The roof was pretty sound though, the rest for the bonfire.  Long story short – we took the roof off – in pieces (he insisted, despite my protests). Then I set about building a brand new shed to the same dimensions and design as the previous. When it came time to replace the top, much of the salvaged timber could not be used – time, effort and money wasted.

{BRB -"The point you fool; get to the point".} The ASA debacle reminds me of that shed, standing, but rotten to the core; the ASA board like the roof, probably serviceable but not worth the effort to save – by the time you have dismantled and stored the used timber, picked the nails and fittings off; you have a pile of stuff where the 'useful' parts are less than that required. Easiest to start from scratch and build with a purpose. It depends on your point of view; but, to my ear the entire board of ASA is denying any responsibility for the One Pie Sky.

"..Let's do the timewarp again..."

[Image: 9d261465a75de85745f50d6484dc835d]
Angus Houston, we have a problem with air traffic control





[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQbIyam_Q4Aqxws176KQlm...8wyjdv4Whg]
The OneSky Great White Elephant - Gift to a nation Rolleyes

All very neat and corporate, no doubt all legal; but what’s the point of having a board if they simply ‘sign off’ on the project without examining the whole, very carefully indeed. This is not a Chook shed they are approving – it is a project of great national interest, public safety, industry efficiency and a great big pile of public money. It begs the question; how can a government monopoly loose a fortune and presents the industry with a less than perfect system continue, as it stands? But what I’d like to know is how can a board sit on it’s collective thumbs and allow the situation we find ourselves in happen – on their watch. It is wrong: plain, pure and simple. Time to rebuild, from the ground up. Privatisation is the only real solution – take a long, hard, look at Canada, the Americans are –

[Image: d3e858531a7de596643febae6f4221b4.jpg]
I actually, foolishly, thought that ATSB could not ever surprise me again. Well this business with the Taswegian Coroner has; did you ever, in all your days hear the like. The megalomaniac running the outfit is under fire from all sides – can’t get the money he needs (wonder why) and Manning is sniffing about the place, looking to move into a nice warm seat; not to mention a Senate committee looking to climb all over any wrong move by the already discredited agency. Bless the Coroner; he is only trying to untangle an aviation fatal accident. He states, quite rightly, that his interest lays within preventing a re occurrence. He wants to close the safety loop; he wants to make a meaningful recommendation – although, fat lot of good that will do him, considering the long, long list of Coronial recommendations which have been dismissed, out of hand, by an arrogant bureaucracy. The same colossal arrogance which dismisses Senate, ASSR and ATSB Safety Recommendations; on the pretext of ‘they know better’. "We are the experts" they claim, above the law.

[Image: quote-it-is-only-prudent-never-to-place-...-49851.jpg]

But if this is so:- Why now do we have the drone bunfight?  WTD – Our ‘experts’ dragged in some student who was researching ‘drones’ as a part of a doctorate – paid him to do so and restricted the terms of reference to a very narrow study. From this epistle, they drafted a regulation which suited their shiftless, lazy, no responsibility but all control ethos. Now we have the Senate doing the CASA 'experts' jobs - again; and taking the drone question apart. Please tell me why we have all these highly paid ‘expert’, far seeing, masterful visionaries, when they must rely on ‘other’ independent experts’ to do their jobs for ‘em. Speaking of which – Darren 6D has opened his trap and changed feet  - again. I love the quote where he ‘welcomes’ the latest round of flatulence – in the form of yet another, expensive 'opinion' only, time buying discussion paper.

[Image: Darren_Chester_GA8_280E8B20-D5CA-11E5-B2...62CCED.jpg]

“Federal Minister for Infrastructure and Transport Darren Chester has welcomed the release of a discussion paper focusing on the regulation of remotely piloted aircraft (RPA)—or drone—operations and air safety.” BOLLOCKS; he should be kicking seven bells out of ‘em for dragging their arses, buggering up and playing at silly buggers with a potential risk. Experts!  - my left sock has more foresight.


[Image: mancurtain.jpg]

  - L. Frank Baum


Silly question of the week goes to the indefatigable Xenophon - “How can the Government continue to ignore the peak body representing 5000 commercial aircraft pilots?





That’s an easy one Nick (won't take it on notice) – it’s what has always been done. Don't y'know - Pilots are thick headed, dangerous types with criminal tendencies who know far less about aircraft, safety and the practicalities of managing safety than the CASA anointed experts. Set some time aside Nick, have a coffee with some of the clowns masquerading as experts; honestly, it would break your poor heart to hear and see some of the purblind stupidity they have inflicted on this benighted industry. We can provide over 50 examples from this year alone, 200 from last year and as many again from the year before. You see dear Senator, you are basically honest and intelligent; and, therefore have trouble believing the tales of venal incompetence are true. Real experts become Captains, Chief pilots, run Check and Training systems; write policy into manuals and make it stick; they do not ponce about in offices pretending to be experts; they simply are.

[Image: aviation-safety.jpg]

Here’s a challenge from Aunty Pru; accept submissions on Flight Operations Inspectors aberrations and stupidity; set aside one afternoon for the committee to hear those submissions and interview those who wrote ‘em. Do it in camera – man; it will rock you.

No doubt P2 will supply the graffiti  - “truth, you can’t handle the truth”. I forget who said it; but it is germane to Australia’s greatest aviation disaster – Darren Chester – Miniscule for Aviation






[Image: Johnny_and_sal.jpg]

6D Chester & Wingnut Carmody

Aye well – sound and fury; again. The well trodden paths around the same old mulberry bush; but it will, soon or late, have to stop, before the questions unanswered become a reality which will bring down a blind government.

**


That’s it – early start tomorrow – time to light the fire: I’ve done my duty to the tools as the band-aids attest, 16 chisels and four plane blades all surgically sharp, nick free, oiled and put away tidy. Exeunt; stage right - "K"  lights the oil lamps, ambles over to an ancient fridge, pulls a pint of amber heaven, eases into the deep, comfy luxury of old leather, puts up feet and waits quietly for P7 coming home, with new tales of the wide world.  AAaaahhhh !

[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR92yAYoiPtYcRO2Rg9FWj...6khYiKyl1Q]

Yet, amidst the changing visions of life, his principles remained unshaken, his benevolence unchilled; and he retired from the multitude 'more in PITY than in anger,' to scenes of simple nature, to the pure delights of literature, and to the exercise of domestic virtues.

Selah.

Well done P2 - Choc Frog - Google only valid after completing the puzzles. Bravo for no cheating. (Big, huge smile). Toot toot.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)