A curiosity twiddle.
Having a chat with a mate recently who mentioned a 'fatal' accident of an RA Oz aircraft and the lack of any details of the accident being available. “Early days perhaps” I opined: after a short grumble about RA 'accident' reporting from old mate, the topic changed and I almost forgot the conversation; almost. Curiosity remains a curse.
The link _ HERE__ takes you to a RA page which defines the system and process of an investigation by the RA team of 'investigators' a.ka. 'Accident Consultants'.
“Accident Consultants (ACs) are typically RAAus employees who are requested to assist at accident sites by the Head of Flight Operations (HFO). The HFO is responsible for the coordination of responses by RAAus in the event of a fatal or serious accident.”
So far so good; but if you read on, the ;language' used is decidedly 'slippery' – on a quick read through the impression left is one of sound practice, but a careful read through – Process and Procedures – defines a nebulous, home spun system which seems to do the job but (IMO) lacks the 'essentials'. It also seems to remove ATSB obligations related to any fatal event. Then there is a question left hanging about the 'qualifications' needed to become an 'accident consultant'. The NTSB version is probably the gold standard - _ HERE _. ATSB do not appear to publish their requirements – HERE. Worth taking a quick scamper through the RMIT version and a decade old ICAO Agenda item. (Dull stuff but pertinent). But, I digress.
The item which sparked a twiddle was the lack of data related to fatal accident being published by RAA.
AOPA - “RAAus, according to a communication from CASA, have refused the regulator permission to publish any of its accident investigation reports, denying manufactures of RAAus registerable aircraft access”. [/color]
AOPA "Accident Reports for aircraft registered with RA-Aus are not published for the public nor are they supplied to the manufacturers. These reports are sealed by the RAAus under strict confidentiality never to be seen by their members, and in many cases, their own Board of Directors, with the industry denied the opportunity to learn from past mistakes.
AOPA - Approached for a copy of the RAAus accident report for the Bristell accident at Clyde in Victoria, CASA has indicated that consent is required from RA-Aus to access the report and that consent has been denied by the RA-Aus. This stunning refusal now raises the question as to who is regulating whom? And, just how committed CASA and RAAus are to their so-called ‘Safety Month’ or ‘Safe Skies for All’ slogans.
Now, we all know AOPA has a drum to bang; but, remove the by-play and boil the rhetoric down and the remains are not really palatable are they? When insurance company lawyers, interested party lawyers, relatives lawyers and the Coroner meet, the details of any fatal accident must be examined; the 'blame game' is a battlefield and the expenses off the clock. Not to mention a glaring holes in the overall 'safety culture' and pilot training/ testing regime, aircraft limitations and suitability for task at hand.
I reckon its the veil of secrecy which troubles most. Accidents happen, the target should be prevention of repeat performance. To do this all the 'facts' must be available to the industry. Sealed investigation results which require a team of lawyers to pry open is counterproductive to the overall 'health and safety' of not only aircrew, but to those unfortunate enough to be potentially victim to similar circumstances.
There; ramble over, but to the safety oriented mind, the question WTD are RAA playing at begs a detailed answer to what is, IMO an unjustifiable stance of accident reporting. These reports need to be made fully and freely available to the aviation community – just like the NTSB or the ATSB are obliged to do.
Toot – toot.
P2 OBS??
- Via AOPA Oz FB 12 August
Having a chat with a mate recently who mentioned a 'fatal' accident of an RA Oz aircraft and the lack of any details of the accident being available. “Early days perhaps” I opined: after a short grumble about RA 'accident' reporting from old mate, the topic changed and I almost forgot the conversation; almost. Curiosity remains a curse.
The link _ HERE__ takes you to a RA page which defines the system and process of an investigation by the RA team of 'investigators' a.ka. 'Accident Consultants'.
“Accident Consultants (ACs) are typically RAAus employees who are requested to assist at accident sites by the Head of Flight Operations (HFO). The HFO is responsible for the coordination of responses by RAAus in the event of a fatal or serious accident.”
So far so good; but if you read on, the ;language' used is decidedly 'slippery' – on a quick read through the impression left is one of sound practice, but a careful read through – Process and Procedures – defines a nebulous, home spun system which seems to do the job but (IMO) lacks the 'essentials'. It also seems to remove ATSB obligations related to any fatal event. Then there is a question left hanging about the 'qualifications' needed to become an 'accident consultant'. The NTSB version is probably the gold standard - _ HERE _. ATSB do not appear to publish their requirements – HERE. Worth taking a quick scamper through the RMIT version and a decade old ICAO Agenda item. (Dull stuff but pertinent). But, I digress.
The item which sparked a twiddle was the lack of data related to fatal accident being published by RAA.
AOPA - “RAAus, according to a communication from CASA, have refused the regulator permission to publish any of its accident investigation reports, denying manufactures of RAAus registerable aircraft access”. [/color]
AOPA "Accident Reports for aircraft registered with RA-Aus are not published for the public nor are they supplied to the manufacturers. These reports are sealed by the RAAus under strict confidentiality never to be seen by their members, and in many cases, their own Board of Directors, with the industry denied the opportunity to learn from past mistakes.
AOPA - Approached for a copy of the RAAus accident report for the Bristell accident at Clyde in Victoria, CASA has indicated that consent is required from RA-Aus to access the report and that consent has been denied by the RA-Aus. This stunning refusal now raises the question as to who is regulating whom? And, just how committed CASA and RAAus are to their so-called ‘Safety Month’ or ‘Safe Skies for All’ slogans.
Now, we all know AOPA has a drum to bang; but, remove the by-play and boil the rhetoric down and the remains are not really palatable are they? When insurance company lawyers, interested party lawyers, relatives lawyers and the Coroner meet, the details of any fatal accident must be examined; the 'blame game' is a battlefield and the expenses off the clock. Not to mention a glaring holes in the overall 'safety culture' and pilot training/ testing regime, aircraft limitations and suitability for task at hand.
I reckon its the veil of secrecy which troubles most. Accidents happen, the target should be prevention of repeat performance. To do this all the 'facts' must be available to the industry. Sealed investigation results which require a team of lawyers to pry open is counterproductive to the overall 'health and safety' of not only aircrew, but to those unfortunate enough to be potentially victim to similar circumstances.
There; ramble over, but to the safety oriented mind, the question WTD are RAA playing at begs a detailed answer to what is, IMO an unjustifiable stance of accident reporting. These reports need to be made fully and freely available to the aviation community – just like the NTSB or the ATSB are obliged to do.
Toot – toot.
P2 OBS??
- Via AOPA Oz FB 12 August Quote:Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association Australia
RAAUS ADVOCATES FOR FATAL RECREATIONAL ACCIDENTS TO BE INVESTIGATED BY ATSB, AFFIRMING AOPA AUSTRALIA POLICY
The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia (AOPA Australia) extends it's full support and endorsement with respect to a call from the Recreational Aviation Australia Limited (RAAus) for all fatal recreational aircraft accidents to be investigated by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB).
"During the past three years, AOPA Australia has actively campaigned for fatal recreational aircraft accidents to be independently investigated by the ATSB, citing a range of genuine concerns for both the industry and the RAAus organisation itself", Benjamin Morgan, CEO AOPA Australia.
"Our efforts have included multiple written submissions to the Minister and Government, written submissions to the CASA Board of Directors and in-person testimony presented before Senate RRAT hearings." he said.
In a communication to RAAus members this week, Chairman Michael Monck and Chief Executive Matthew Bouttell confirm that they have appealed to the new Minister for the ATSB to be resourced adequately to enable them to perform investigations into fatal accidents within the Sport Aviation sector.
"We firmly believe that the Government has a role to play in understanding why an accident that led to the loss of an Australian life, irrespective of the registration letters or numbers on the aircraft, so safety improvements can be made." they said.