[Peetwo]

#SBG post-editorial dots & dashes??

Ref: https://auntypru.com/sbg-29-03-20-if-you...today-etc/

“and the lawyers have been at it with both hands.”

The boys are on a learning curve and its quite a journey. Will it change anything? Will the likes of SOAR have to reassess the 'suitability', integrity and fitness for purpose of the aircraft they use to train future pilots. I doubt it. Will CASA put the heavy boot of 'safety' down and return RA Oz to its proper design function? Will airworthiness step in before something comes apart in the air – fatigued beyond design intent?

Instructing a person to 'fly' a particular type of LSA is one very acceptable thing. Extending the notion to teach flying to many, using a fleet of LSA is an entirely different matter. Maximum fees for a tick-a-box service, minimum costs for provision of same in a high risk fleet. When used for design purpose,  (light sports and recreational)  LSA such as the Bristell will safely serve for the life of the aircraft, the accident survivabilty quotation seems to be robust. The question mark hangs over whether or not the aircraft can survive  long term the beating served up as a training aircraft, intensively used. Let me explain:-

Charlie buys a LSA and is taught to fly it by an experienced instructor – Off he goes to enjoy his sport and recreational flying, having been made very aware of the limitations and margins the aircraft has. In a normal situation, Charlie will perhaps practice one or even two 'forced landings' leading up to a check flight – low risk exercise – he understands the need for accurate speed control and is practised on type. Young Spotty on the other hand is a student with NDI. Sent Solo and maybe even to practice forced landings- or whatever. Engine fails or, more likely – during practice the aircraft is high and slow – in short, at the critical, minimum speed for landing 30 or 50 feet above the ground – it quits flying about then – crunch. When you have many such students practising similar exercises, in a speed critical, unforgiving, high risk aircraft the mathematical chances of a smash increase. This, even before you consider the fatigue life of an airframe being subjected to rough' handling day in day out. The percentage chances of accident increased, without doubt, the accident rates prove this. 

“K” - The first question being, where was the accident report? I did look long and hard – but nary a sign of that elusive document did I find. It may well be lurking in some festering pile or another –

We may safely identify that particular festering pile – the 'Privacy Act'. The current FOI request from AOPA is (IMO) an odds on bet to be knocked back. 'Enthusiastic' compliance with this 'Act' provides all manner of protection and to legally challenge that, particularly when ministerial support is a foregone conclusion, firmly closes the door on any chance of investigating the 'investigation'. Anyway, the 'book' is open on the AOPA FOI request; no doubt 'K' will set the odds shortly. Grr8 system though – RA Oz in breach of that Act, deemed illegal if they open the books. Wow! How good a defence is that?.

“K” - Much of this comes into the 'certification' of aircraft. An aircraft may be designed and 'certified' for a specific role and that role only. Much depends on whether the aircraft is to be used for 'commercial' purpose or private use or both.

Ah, yes but: “manufacturer” certification is the name of the game, particularly for LSA. Its a game of thrones and once again, the terrifying 'legal' costs involved to nail down a departed manufacturer will serve those avoiding responsibility for certification. Of course CASA is at the bottom of this pile of nonsense, but anyone with a spare million or two could probably win the verdict – which would change absolutely nothing. When next the Monday comes around the same crew will be seen washing their hands at the trough of plenty. 

IMO “K” there is no hope of sanity. Not while the minister appears to be happily held in thrall by the glamour and seductive advertorials which allow self promotion. Hearing 'advice' which will not burst his happy bubble. I wish you well on the quest and I doubt not that you fellahs' will plumb the depths of this 'wrong thing'. But then what? I can't see this current village idiot, posing as a well informed minister, caring about ensuring flight training is properly conducted in aircraft suitable for the purpose. Can you....?

“The powers of Evil can take many forms. Remember that, Sir Henry, when you're at Baskerville Hall. Do as the legend tells and avoid the moor when the forces of darkness are exalted.” 

Handing over -.-.  .-.  .-  –..    -.--

"..We may safely identify that particular festering pile – the 'Privacy Act'. The current FOI request from AOPA is (IMO) an odds on bet to be knocked back. 'Enthusiastic' compliance with this 'Act' provides all manner of protection and to legally challenge that, particularly when ministerial support is a foregone conclusion.." 

Hmm..interesting P7?? That kind of gels with some disturbing scuttlebutt of my own, where apparently it is common knowledge that the Hooded Canary's ATSB are also similarly frustrated in their endeavours to obtain RA Oz completed investigation reports. This includes reports where the ATSB have provided technical assistance to RA Oz in the course of an active investigation??

See examples here: https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/inv...2018/aair/

Coming back to the Bristell fatal accident at Clyde north in 2017, I was able to find the RA Oz A&D summary for that accident on page 44 which included an email notification link: 

Fatal Accident involving RAAus member. RAAus accident consultants are assisting police in determining the causal factors that led to the accident. A special Enews was published https://www.vision6.com.au/em/message/email/view.php?id=1318469&u=70000&k=BFZ_zOiIGN9edXzz0Jx9HMNp3FjLiptKwR-IHlhWLWs   

..RAAus accident investigators are working with Police and preparing a written report. At this stage it is too early to speculate as to the cause of the accident however if anything of an immediate safety concern is identified during the course of the investigation we will advise members...

This would indicate to me that the Victorian Coroner is also investigating this accident? Perhaps it would be worth submitting a request to the Coroner for a copy of the RA Oz written report? Especially in light of the fact that there are now two active ATSB investigations, related to that aircraft type and in similar flight path/ flight ops/ etc, which also occurred in the Coroner's jurisdiction: https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/inv...-2018-066/ & https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2019/aair/ao-2019-071/

More dots? Pondering the above and all the strange disconnections got me poking about un-user friendly ATSB occurrence data base to see if a) the  2017 accident was recorded; and b) were there other recorded accidents or serious incidents related to the Bristell as a training aircraft; and c) were they similarly recorded in the RA Oz A&D summary records?

Here is what I have discovered so far - 

1)  https://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/...-3817.xlsx

..During the training flight, the aircraft entered a spin and collided with terrain. The aircraft was substantially damaged. One occupant sustained serious injuries and the other occupant was fatally injured..

Comparing this to the basic RA Oz summary above, one wonders how it is possible for the ATSB to make such a hypothesis given that they weren't a party to this investigation: see - https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/inv...2017/aair/ - WTD?   

Next:  4th entry here - https://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/...23718.xlsx 

 "..During training operations, the engine failed and smoke was observed emanating from the engine. The crew conducted a forced landing resulting in minor damage..."  

This is an interesting one because the ATSB list/categorise (as they should) the occurrence as a 'serious incident' that occurred on the 23/07/18 and yet the RA Oz A&D summary listed the incident as occurring a full week before on the 16/07/18? This was the summary from page 28: 

 During a training flight the instructor and student were conducting a forced landing lesson in the Bankstown training area. As they practiced the first sequence, they were flying at 2100ft and engine started running rough and smoke entered the cockpit. The Instructor and student completed the emergency checklist and choose YKST as their landing spot if engine completely stopped. As they made a mayday call on Sydney centre frequency 124.55 and squawk 7700, the engine suddenly stopped working and propellor stopped. They continued following the forced landing procedure and glided to a safe landing at YKST.

   
Finally (for now) here is the ATSB summary for the October 2018 Bristell accident near Stawell aerodrome: https://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/...51018.xlsx

The aircraft collided with terrain resulting in substantial damage and serious injuries to the pilot and passenger. The investigation is continuing.

For some strange reason there would appear to be no RA Oz A&D summary for this accident; or indeed the 12 December 2019 accident at Moorabbin??

MTF? Yes definitely - P2