Mount Hotham - revisited.
'We' got lucky and managed to contact some fairly well qualified folk, who spared the time to entertain our bumbling questions. A sincere thank you to those for their unstinting help and the time gifted.
I'll keep it short: curiosity about 'Coroners' and autopsy was satisfied; the most interesting from our PoV was what can and cannot be determined from autopsy. I'll spare the grisly details, but much depends on the 'state' of the body provided; for example, with major trauma to the head there's not too much left of use to the analysis; however the organs contained within the body have a much better chance of telling the story. Endit...
Back to the Essendon event and the reason we bothered busy folks. There are many cases where a heart attack has been passed off as nothing more than heartburn; other serious events have been passed off as related to 'other' causes. Many reasons for doing this – particularly when a Class 1 medical examination has been passed within the preceding half year. So, one of our questions was – is it possible to be undergoing some kind of performance affecting 'event' and be unaware? “Yes” was the collective answer.
Anyway – long story short; our wise owls all agreed the the Mount Hotham incident was a key element in the Essendon event. What occurred at Hotham was a 'passing strange' event. An experienced pilot, in a familiar aircraft, conducting a routine instrument approach got into a serious tangle. I can't for the moment put my hand on the graphic (P2?) , but the flight path and conduct of the operation was 'peculiar' to say the least. Automation and equipment abnormality may have been in the mix; but, there were several other 'safer' ways of sorting things out available, other than the options taken.
Despite the glib, IMO erroneous opinion of the ATSB PR department; there are parallels with the Essendon event – there were (again) other 'safer' options available to the pilot, yet of all the choices available; the decision to continue the take off was, on balance, with 20/20 hindsight, the least viable. Why?
It seems that there is little chance of useful information being gathered from the brain; there is a good chance that the rest may provide some answers. It seems that there are many things which can and do affect decision making and performance.
If Max had a medical event which affected his performance then it would be unfair to lay all the blame at his feet. Equally, CASA in issuing a medical certificate cannot be held to account, the boxes were ticked, medical issued – end of..
So we are left with two separate incidents which question the performance of an experienced, capable pilot. One, a narrowly escaped mid-air collision or ground strike; the next not so lucky.
FWIW there seems to be only two questions demanding answers; 1 what caused two serious departures from 'routine' operation; and, 2 Why is that abomination at Essendon still standing?
There, curiosity bump scratched – but to quote the infamous John McCormack – it is all “passing strange”.
She gave me for my pains a world of sighs.
She swore, in faith, ’twas strange, ’twas passing strange,
'Twas pitiful, ’twas wondrous pitiful.
Toot – toot..????
'We' got lucky and managed to contact some fairly well qualified folk, who spared the time to entertain our bumbling questions. A sincere thank you to those for their unstinting help and the time gifted.
I'll keep it short: curiosity about 'Coroners' and autopsy was satisfied; the most interesting from our PoV was what can and cannot be determined from autopsy. I'll spare the grisly details, but much depends on the 'state' of the body provided; for example, with major trauma to the head there's not too much left of use to the analysis; however the organs contained within the body have a much better chance of telling the story. Endit...
Back to the Essendon event and the reason we bothered busy folks. There are many cases where a heart attack has been passed off as nothing more than heartburn; other serious events have been passed off as related to 'other' causes. Many reasons for doing this – particularly when a Class 1 medical examination has been passed within the preceding half year. So, one of our questions was – is it possible to be undergoing some kind of performance affecting 'event' and be unaware? “Yes” was the collective answer.
Anyway – long story short; our wise owls all agreed the the Mount Hotham incident was a key element in the Essendon event. What occurred at Hotham was a 'passing strange' event. An experienced pilot, in a familiar aircraft, conducting a routine instrument approach got into a serious tangle. I can't for the moment put my hand on the graphic (P2?) , but the flight path and conduct of the operation was 'peculiar' to say the least. Automation and equipment abnormality may have been in the mix; but, there were several other 'safer' ways of sorting things out available, other than the options taken.
Despite the glib, IMO erroneous opinion of the ATSB PR department; there are parallels with the Essendon event – there were (again) other 'safer' options available to the pilot, yet of all the choices available; the decision to continue the take off was, on balance, with 20/20 hindsight, the least viable. Why?
It seems that there is little chance of useful information being gathered from the brain; there is a good chance that the rest may provide some answers. It seems that there are many things which can and do affect decision making and performance.
If Max had a medical event which affected his performance then it would be unfair to lay all the blame at his feet. Equally, CASA in issuing a medical certificate cannot be held to account, the boxes were ticked, medical issued – end of..
So we are left with two separate incidents which question the performance of an experienced, capable pilot. One, a narrowly escaped mid-air collision or ground strike; the next not so lucky.
FWIW there seems to be only two questions demanding answers; 1 what caused two serious departures from 'routine' operation; and, 2 Why is that abomination at Essendon still standing?
There, curiosity bump scratched – but to quote the infamous John McCormack – it is all “passing strange”.
She gave me for my pains a world of sighs.
She swore, in faith, ’twas strange, ’twas passing strange,
'Twas pitiful, ’twas wondrous pitiful.
Toot – toot..????