[Kharon]

Of Outback wrangling.

The last sentence in short piece by Robyn Ironside (The Australian) - tacked onto the end of P2's follow up post _ HERE _ is possibly the best start point for taking a long, hard, open honest appraisal of the steps taken toward an unnecessary death. A completely avoidable tragedy, the knock on effects and the costs associated.

"Helibrook and Mr Wright have previously indicated they will contest charges brought by NT Worksafe over the crash, alleging reckless conduct for operating unsafe aircraft and interference with flight records over an extended period."

Inside the lawyers brief cases, there should be three separate briefs to prosecute, for any 'blame' associated with these events may be equally shared.

"Salvation: to see each thing for what it is— its nature and its purpose."

To begin, we must start at the end - and trudge our way back to the beginning. Two men and a helicopter set out, ostensibly to collect the eggs of crocodiles. Is this a 'high risk' operation? How could that be quantified? From an 'operational' standpoint, provided all is as it should be, then, the 'risk' is mostly to those actually involved in the doing of it. Here we encounter the very first hole in that famous cheese.


Ref:  Popinjay and Hoody taking the piss on ICAO Annex 13 final report compliance?? &  Timeline of CASA N-OVERSIGHT of TOPEND COWBOYS??

In the beginning, John McCormick, a previous DAS (CASA top dog) declared that only turbine powered machinery must be used for operations which involved a human being being a 'sling load' for helicopter operations. Sound reasoning, and, (NB) - sling load is a separate qualification. Indeed across the planet in many applications sling load humans operate within 'reasonable risk' tolerance, using turbine powered aircraft. So, how was it that piston engine machinery emerged as an acceptable standard for the croc egg collecting business? Who approved that?

Let's say that there was a 'safety case' examined and the 'risk level' was deemed appropriate. It is worth considering some 'sensible' caveats being attached to the operational approvals: for example, a reduced time limit between overhaul; strict adherence to immediate 'fault repair' in short; an enforced and monitored  requirement to ensure that the aircraft was at all times 'fit for purpose'. Clearly this was not the case; it should have been; alas... There appears to have been, whether by accident, design or circumstance a significant difference between aircraft being 100% serviceable and a 'normalised deviance' by carrying known defects into operational work. This, IMO begs questions as to the 'attitude' of the operator and aircrew. There exists a system - Permissible Un Serviceability' (PUS) quite legitimate and essential. Aircraft may safely operate with certain items out of service; these are listed and 'work around' or alternative means of achieving a required function are provided, clearly documented and, importantly, 'approved'. The items out of commission are noted and rectified within a prescribed time frame. This is an essential element for commercial operations, accepted practice, world wide. There appears to be no such system provided to this operation - according to the available reports.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Is there a short answer to that question? I wonder, where was the vaunted oversight  of the CASA operatives? Where was the 'surveillance'? Where was the operational oversight and scrutiny? The whole thing seems to have been overseen by people who have either no idea or little interest in ensuring that the operation was conducted not only 'as scripted'; but that the 'script' was fit for purpose. The simple things for example. Engine time recording - an essential element - particularly for the machinery operated ;'on task'. These light piston engine helicopters are reliable and robust provided they are kept in first class fettle; the harder they are 'worked' particularly in a 'hostile' environment the more attention needs to paid to their 'well being'. The safety 'margins' are not extensive even when handled and maintained properly; acceptable certainly - but they are 'intolerant' of any abuse or neglect. There is a fairly long list of slip shod 'operational' practices and of pilots who went along; possibly to get along. CASA should have been 'all over' this possibility; however, considering the attitude toward the Broome operations, it is not much of a stretch to equate this attitude toward the northern operation. It beggars belief that the fatuous Board and DAS turned up for a 'feel good' visit, full of 'Bonhomie' and largess to sanctify the operational aberrations.  Many questions demanding answers regarding the CASA oversight in the remote corners of this wide brown land; many. All shuffled away in the mists of blame, arse covering and the never ending supply of official bullshit.

“He ought to question them upon everything, and listen to their opinions, and afterwards form his own conclusions.”

No matter, we will always have 'Estimates' - for amusement. There is almost 90 minutes of the 'CASA' episode (if you can stomach it). A masterpiece of circular non answers; the hapless DAS aided and abetted by her tame snake oil salesman; ducking, weaving and obfuscating like Billy-O. All waste, but, the dross is recorded and if ever there is a minister appointed who actually takes some responsibility and is prepared to actually go in to bat for an essential industry, or, have the guts to rein in both horse and cart; then this country will remain a laughing stock heading toward pariah status - in the minds of 'professional' administrators, keepers of the world wide accepted standards. No, they are not perfect - but they are streets ahead of the current amateur lash up.

“I did not attend his funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it.”

Aye well; when this tawdry exhibition of rump covering and excess is over and time (gods willing & weather permitting) I will sit down and strip the Broome and Crock brangle down the bare bones; it deserves to be openly and honestly examined. Little chance of reform or clarity, much less honesty and correction made; but as long as the public purse can withstand the outrageous cost and politicians cling to 'safety' (their own in particular) and the 'public service' industry is kept warm and well fed, I expect it will make but small differ. Nevertheless...........

Yes, yes: I know, back in my box right. That's it; the opening stanza endeth..

Selah....