[Peetwo]

ATSB still taking the Mickey Bliss on ICAO Annex 13...

Air safety watchdog 'clearly failing': Two-thirds of investigations not completed in required time
7.30
By Lauren Day

Updated about an hour agoTue 7 Mar 2017, 4:55pm

The body that investigates air safety incidents is struggling with a massive backlog and is only completing one in three investigations inside the targeted 12-month timeframe.

Key points:

• ATSB aims to complete 90 per cent of investigations within 12 months
  
• It is only completing 29 per cent of investigations in that time
  
• Neil Hansford believes the ATSB has been hampered by the search for MH370
  
  

In contemplating the unacceptable time delays with a large percentage of ATSB investigations it is worth referring to Chapter 3.69 of the Senate Pel-Air cover-up report:

Time taken to produce the ATSB report

3.69      The ATSB's statement of intent, available online, includes an undertaking to conduct investigations in a timely manner and 'aim to issue final reports on investigations within one year from commencement.'[45]

3.70      The aspirational goal certainly did not translate into reality in this instance. Instead, the ATSB's report on the ditching of VH-NGA took nearly three years to complete. The committee is not aware of any suggestions that this was a reasonable, or indeed helpful, timeframe within which to produce a report meant to allow the industry to learn lessons from this accident.

3.71      On the contrary, witnesses called the three year timeframe unreasonable and described it as being 'outside the performance expectations set by the ATSB and other international agencies.'[46]

3.72      ATSB Chief Commissioner Dolan admitted that the time taken to produce the report was unsatisfactory:

I should say up front that there are two areas where we think we could have done better with this investigation and report. The first and obvious one is that it took us far too long by anyone's standards, including our own, to get to a completion of the investigation. There are reasons for that, which I would be happy to discuss, but they do not excuse the three-year time frame for the report.[47]

3.73      Mr Dolan's explanation for the time taken to produce the report essentially revolved around resource allocation and prioritisation:

When, nearly 3½ years ago, I joined the newly independent ATSB as chief commissioner, we had over 100 aviation investigations on hand, including four that we classified as level 2—so substantial investigations requiring major and continuing use of our resources. We were averaging about 18 months for the completion of investigations, with some serious outliers in that. We had more work on hand than we knew how to deal with, and we would normally expect in any given year to get one of those level 2 investigations. So we had a lot more work than we were used to. That led to delays in a range of reports and, as new investigations came in, the shifting of resources to different priorities as they arose. It is clear that, in managing that allocation of resources to always-shifting priorities, we did not give enough attention to getting to an expeditious conclusion of this Norfolk Island report. However, that is the context in which that happened.[48]

3.74      The committee understands that strategic guidance from the minister leads the ATSB to prioritise investigations into what are referred to as 'fare-paying passenger operations'.[49] These generally exclude the type of flight VH‑NGA was undertaking at the time of the accident, which is categorised as aerial work. The Australian and International Pilots Association (AIPA) suggested that the non-fatal nature of this accident suggests that its investigation was not accorded a high level of priority.[50]

3.75      Like AIPA, the committee understands that the ATSB, like most organisations, has to prioritise its workload.

3.76      When the committee asked whether the ATSB had considered outsourcing any of its work, or insourcing extra capacity to expedite the production of reports, Mr Dolan replied in the negative:

Our resources are largely tied up in maintaining our existing investigative capability, who are permanent staff of the organisation. We have a longstanding view that in almost all circumstances it is better to have, if possible, the range of expertise available to us on a permanent basis and therefore immediately available than to rely on potentially risky external outsourcers.[51]

3.77      The committee confirmed with Mr Dolan that this was the case even when the ATSB budget was underspent and its workload was clearly excessive:

Senator FAWCETT:  I am not talking about normal [ATSB] operations. I am talking about a situation where you have a budget underspend and a clear excess of work.

Was it [outsourcing or insourcing] even considered? That is all I am asking.

Mr Dolan:  In that small underspend, no, we did not consider it.[52]

Committee view

3.78      The committee does not believe that an adequate explanation for the delay has been provided.

3.79      Given that the ATSB could not, or certainly should not, have known that it was only going to identify two relatively minor safety issues at the onset of its      three-year investigation, the delay itself had the potential to risk lives by not alerting the industry to the causes of this accident in a timely fashion.

3.80      The committee considers the fact that it took the ATSB close to three years to produce its investigation report following the November 2009 ditching of VH-NGA unreasonable. The committee also believes that the ATSB made a significant oversight by not considering external assistance despite a budget surplus of $0.3 million in 2009-10.[53]

3.81      Furthermore, the quality and complexity of the final report once it was produced—as will be discussed in later chapters of this report—certainly would not appear to readily justify a three-year timeframe. This being the case, the committee is firmly of the view that the stated aim of producing reports within one year of an incident or accident is attainable and should be met in all but the most extraordinary and justifiable of circumstances. During the course of its investigation, if it becomes apparent to the ATSB that it will not meet its one year timeframe, the ATSB should release an interim report, as required by ICAO, which would include a public timing update to ensure that the aviation industry is kept informed of progress and expected timing.

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..


MTF...P2