[Peetwo]

ATSB – Albany – Report.

The ATSB report into the in flight breakup of a C210 is – HERE - . It is brief, but to the point.

"The ATSB found that for reasons that were not established, abnormal operation of the aircraft produced high levels of unusual aerodynamic loading on the right wing that exceeded the strength of the wing and initiated an in-flight break-up and impact with terrain.

"The aircraft did not have a pre-existing structural deficiency or damage that would have contributed to the in-flight break-up and the local meteorological conditions were not conducive to inadvertent aircraft overstress.

"The ATSB found that the presence of methyl amphetamine in the pilot’s system increased the risk of operational misjudgements and aircraft mishandling, and pilot incapacitation. This did not necessarily contribute to the accident.

"The pilot had worked for a number of organisations which had the required risk controls for problematic alcohol and other drug (AOD) use in place. There was no data that indicated a systemic problem with problematic AOD use in Australian aviation.

MAY 16, 2019
AVIATION



Ice blamed for fatal plunge
[/url]
A pilot high on ice has been blamed for the wing failure that sent his plane into a fatal plunge.
By ROBYN IRONSIDE

A pilot who was high on ice flew his light plane in such a way that the right wing broke off, resulting in the aircraft plunging to the ground and killing him.



The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has published its final report on the crash near Albany in Western Australia on October 24, 2017, which claimed the life of local firefighter Sam Ferns.

The 40-year-old, who had relocated to Albany from Victoria, owned the Cessna 210B he was flying and had about 6500 hours of flying experience.

On the morning of the crash, Mr Ferns was planning to fly to Bunbury for training and assessment activities ahead of the upcoming aerial firefighting season.

After takeoff he made a radio transmission outlining his flight plan.

Witnesses observed nothing abnormal as the Cessna did some local flying as Mr Ferns took pictures of coastal scenery, which were sent to a friend.

But about 30 minutes later, 30km northwest of Albany, a loud crack from the aircraft was heard by several people. They described the noise as being like a gunshot or a thunder clap.

Shortly after the aircraft was seen in a nosedive, with the engine roaring. An aerial search later found the wreckage of the Cessna in dense bushland in the Mount Lindesay National Park. The body of the pilot was inside the wreck.

The ATSB report issued on Thursday revealed toxicology tests found a concentration of methylamphetamine in Mr Ferns’ liver that was “sufficiently high enough for the pilot to be significantly affected by the drug”.

“It is possible that the pilot was very markedly affected and there was potential for lethal effects of the drug, most commonly as a result of effects on cardiac function,” said the report.

In the absence of any other explanation for the in-flight breakup of the Cessna, the ATSB concluded that “the aircraft was operated outside of the relevant airspeed or handling limitations to the point of failure of the right wing”.

The report went on to explore the issue of alcohol and drugs on pilot performance, quoting Civil Aviation Safety Authority tests which returned positive results in just 0.09 per cent of cases.

The ATSB could find no history of alcohol or drug abuse in relation to Mr Ferns, apart from a low-level drink driving offence in 2010.

The report said since 2006 there had been just four fatal crashes in Australia in which the pilot was under the influence of drugs or alcohol; two serious incidents where the pilot became unconscious during flight and one accident involving a wire-strike by a drunk pilot.

No safety issues were identified as a result of the investigation but the ATSB said there were opportunities for aviation organisations to collect more data, and to enhance risk controls for problematic alcohol or drug use.

Recently an airline pilot was reported with an addiction to [url=https://www.addictioncenter.com/opiates/oxycodone/symptoms-signs/]Oxycodone.  

“Although oxycodone brings relief for many people suffering from traumatic pain, the dangers of the drug are becoming more clear than ever. Due to the euphoric effects of oxycodone, many people abuse the drug despite the risks. Those who begin abusing oxycodone on a regular basis are likely to develop a dependence on and/or an addiction to the drug. Oxycodone is extremely addictive because it is derived from opiates, making it similar to morphine and heroin.”

I did a light- quick & nasty – search on the net to try and get an idea of what ‘aviation’ may face – statistics and facts – which, to one not familiar with the size and scope of the problem was quite alarming. I have friends who have struggled through ‘addiction’ with their children and seen the damage done – to all. It never occurred for minute that there may be problem among the pilot fraternity, yet the research indicates the use of ‘drug’ s in not restricted to anyone particular group of society. “Booze’ has always been a pilots mate and occasional enemy – the DAMP system of random checks seems to be effective enough; I myself moan and groan – but, alas it is a necessary evil. Mind you, the chances of getting caught out on the road to the airport are greater – particularly during the holiday period, when the local Bobbies are on the roads, rather than at the family BBQ.

But, I am familiar with the effects of ‘Booze’ and can object to working with someone clearly ‘suffering’; although I’ve never had to do it. But, being older and never exposed to ‘drug related’ symptoms, how am I to know what’s what? There is a strong defence mechanism – the DAME being the first brick in the wall; DAMP the second and of course your own native common sense.

But I wonder – is there a case for a screen test at every medical? It’s a hellish problem for Avmed – the whole world up in arms, cussing and spitting; damning CASA for being a tyrant etc. However, you can’t fly if you are unwell, you can’t fly three sheets to the wind and legless – so why should the potential for drug use escape the list? Blood testing is part of every medical, so why not extend it to an extra test – to be sure, to be sure. The other sider of the coin is the Avmed induced paranoia of loss of licence for having a wart on your Willy. Right -

Coat - Tin hat – Taxi!

P2 addition: Here is a link for the AAT dismissal decision for Whitehall v CASA. 

BACKGROUND

1. The issue in this matter is whether Mr Nathaniel Whitehall, the applicant, meets the medical standard for the issue of a Class 1 medical certificate to enable him to fly as a pilot on a commercial passenger aircraft. If he does not, the issue is whether the extent to which he fails to meet those standards is likely to endanger the safety of air navigation and whether any conditions could be imposed upon a medical certificate which would ameliorate any threat posed to air safety.
   
2. The applicant sought review of two decisions of the  Civil Aviation Safety Authority  (CASA), the respondent in these proceedings:
   • (a) the decision (Class 2 decision) by a delegate of the respondent dated 14 December 2017 to suspend the applicant’s Class 2 medical certificate pursuant to reg 67.240 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (the CASR). This is the subject of proceedings 2018/0199.
     
   • (b) the decision (Class 1 decision) by a delegate of the respondent dated 29 January 2018 to refuse to issue the applicant with a Class 1 medical certificate pursuant to reg 67.180(7) of the CASR. This is the subject of proceedings 2018/0474.
     
3. The application to review the Class 2 decision was dismissed by consent because the license that would have resulted from it had expired by the effluxion of time. The issues in relation to each license were in any event the same. That leaves only the Class 1 decision for review.
   
   

---

CONCLUSION

105.In order to obtain the Class 1 licence, the applicant has to meet the criteria set out in para 10 above. He has failed to do so. He has a medically significant condition that is safety relevant because it reduces his ability “to exercise a privilege conferred or to be conferred or to perform a duty imposed or to be imposed by a licence that he or she holds or has applied for”. We are satisfied, accepting the evidence of all of the doctors but in particular Dr Atherton, that he has a severe opioid dependence and moderately severe benzodiazepine dependence. We accept the evidence that the rate of relapse from both disorders is extremely high.
106.We are satisfied that he used and possibly continues to use over the counter or prescribed medication that causes him to experience side effects likely to affect him to an extent that is safety relevant. Given our hesitation in accepting his evidence we are not satisfied his addiction has ceased.
107.We are satisfied that he engaged in problematic use of substances within the meaning given by s 1.1 of Annexure 1, Personnel Licensing, to the Convention on International Civil Aviation. The evidence indicates that there is a likelihood that he still engages in such problematic use.
108.We are satisfied that there is a personal history, problematic use of opioids and benzodiazepines and that his abstinence from problematic use of them has not been certified by an appropriate specialist medical practitioner and he has not provided evidence that he has undertaken or successfully completed an appropriate course of therapy.

The Tribunal affirms the reviewable decision dated 29 January 2018 in application 2018/0474.

I certify that the preceding 108 (one hundred and eight) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for the decision herein of Deputy President Ian Hanger AM QC, and Member Dr Stephen Lewinsky