No Greg: no. It just wont do.
Hood –“Consistent with international standards, the ATSB does not publish all the documents forming part of the investigation or report.
Why ever not? When an accident occurs; or even an ‘incident’ the community are entitled to know exactly; as best as may be determined, the what, why and wherefore – all of it. They pay, and pay handsomely to have all the facts; warts and all, made available. The ‘aviation industry’ needs the facts (all of 'em) to develop proper procedures and policy to prevent a reoccurrence. The ATSB CANNOT do this. Can Hood tell us, how, within the last decade any ATSB report has assisted preventing a reoccurrence. Industry can; they have worked, hard, to eliminate those risks; not the ATSB. Industry takes the meagre, PC offerings of the ATSB and turns them into ‘law’; through policy and procedure development; ATSB do not. In fact once the diluted official ‘report’ is eventually released; how often do the ATSB do a review of operational policy, procedure or SOP to ensure that their ‘advice’ is being correctly applied. NEVER is the short answer. ATSB has become a parasite; feeding off the carcases left strewn after the event. Bullshit Hoody; the entire IOS and BRB call Bullshit of the first water .
Hood – “This is to ensure cooperation and the future free flow of information to safety investigations.”
Why ever would “future cooperation” between honest accident investigators be compromised? The sole purpose of any investigation is to provide, without fear or favour; honest answers to the questions posed. Surely; prevention of repeated events is the purpose of ‘accident investigation’. People are killed and the public are at risk – take Essendon the latest in a long queue. Please explain, exactly how the NTSB and FAA input may ‘compromise’ what and why? Everyone wants to know how the accident happened; everyone wants to learn from it. If the USA contingent use all the information gleaned to prevent this ever happening again; why would that ‘compromise’ any ducking thing.
Hood – “However, while not all documents from a safety investigation are released, the results of the investigation are published.”
Which is fine; provided the investigation is open, above board and the ‘documents’ are available for scrutiny by those who paid for them. A fatal accident carries certain legal requirements; any suspicion of ‘unlawful interference’ has a whole raft of ‘legal’ requirements. It may well do to publish ‘a report’; like Pel-Air – provided no one ‘tests’ that report. How then, is the veracity or value of ‘a report’ to be tested – if all the ‘documents’ are not made available to the community at large? Not the stuff of national security now is it? The Coal loader ain’t; the ATR ain’t; Melbourne’s many ‘aberrations’ ain’t and Mildura most certainly ain’t. So? What’s the point of ‘hiding’ any or all information relating to a fatal accident?
Hood - "The ATSB’s work in the search for MH370 has always been characterised by a willingness to listen to new ideas, and to apply all the known facts to lead the underwater search."
May I remind you; that residing for five years, in warm, clear, shallow water; at a known location; just below free diving depth a CVR languished in the hull of an aircraft. It took a Senate inquiry and cost millions of dollars to ‘force’ ATSB to duck down through a few feet of salt water to begrudgingly retrieve the same item. Face it, ATSB know sweet Fanny Adams and care less about ‘salt water’ operations.
I call BOLLOCKS; if there is nothing to hide, then why not release the data? It there is something to hide, then lets have an inquiry into what it is. 239 people missing, presumed dead and Hood wants to play word games.
Words -For those who understand; no more words need to be spoken. For those who do not – a translation. I can do no more this night.
Toot – Well, duck that for a game of silly buggers –toot.
Hood –“Consistent with international standards, the ATSB does not publish all the documents forming part of the investigation or report.
Why ever not? When an accident occurs; or even an ‘incident’ the community are entitled to know exactly; as best as may be determined, the what, why and wherefore – all of it. They pay, and pay handsomely to have all the facts; warts and all, made available. The ‘aviation industry’ needs the facts (all of 'em) to develop proper procedures and policy to prevent a reoccurrence. The ATSB CANNOT do this. Can Hood tell us, how, within the last decade any ATSB report has assisted preventing a reoccurrence. Industry can; they have worked, hard, to eliminate those risks; not the ATSB. Industry takes the meagre, PC offerings of the ATSB and turns them into ‘law’; through policy and procedure development; ATSB do not. In fact once the diluted official ‘report’ is eventually released; how often do the ATSB do a review of operational policy, procedure or SOP to ensure that their ‘advice’ is being correctly applied. NEVER is the short answer. ATSB has become a parasite; feeding off the carcases left strewn after the event. Bullshit Hoody; the entire IOS and BRB call Bullshit of the first water .
Hood – “This is to ensure cooperation and the future free flow of information to safety investigations.”
Why ever would “future cooperation” between honest accident investigators be compromised? The sole purpose of any investigation is to provide, without fear or favour; honest answers to the questions posed. Surely; prevention of repeated events is the purpose of ‘accident investigation’. People are killed and the public are at risk – take Essendon the latest in a long queue. Please explain, exactly how the NTSB and FAA input may ‘compromise’ what and why? Everyone wants to know how the accident happened; everyone wants to learn from it. If the USA contingent use all the information gleaned to prevent this ever happening again; why would that ‘compromise’ any ducking thing.
Hood – “However, while not all documents from a safety investigation are released, the results of the investigation are published.”
Which is fine; provided the investigation is open, above board and the ‘documents’ are available for scrutiny by those who paid for them. A fatal accident carries certain legal requirements; any suspicion of ‘unlawful interference’ has a whole raft of ‘legal’ requirements. It may well do to publish ‘a report’; like Pel-Air – provided no one ‘tests’ that report. How then, is the veracity or value of ‘a report’ to be tested – if all the ‘documents’ are not made available to the community at large? Not the stuff of national security now is it? The Coal loader ain’t; the ATR ain’t; Melbourne’s many ‘aberrations’ ain’t and Mildura most certainly ain’t. So? What’s the point of ‘hiding’ any or all information relating to a fatal accident?
Hood - "The ATSB’s work in the search for MH370 has always been characterised by a willingness to listen to new ideas, and to apply all the known facts to lead the underwater search."
May I remind you; that residing for five years, in warm, clear, shallow water; at a known location; just below free diving depth a CVR languished in the hull of an aircraft. It took a Senate inquiry and cost millions of dollars to ‘force’ ATSB to duck down through a few feet of salt water to begrudgingly retrieve the same item. Face it, ATSB know sweet Fanny Adams and care less about ‘salt water’ operations.
I call BOLLOCKS; if there is nothing to hide, then why not release the data? It there is something to hide, then lets have an inquiry into what it is. 239 people missing, presumed dead and Hood wants to play word games.
Words -For those who understand; no more words need to be spoken. For those who do not – a translation. I can do no more this night.
Toot – Well, duck that for a game of silly buggers –toot.