A small red dot.
Only a small, local curiosity but it comes up from time to time, usually over a beer whenever the 370 search is mentioned. I’m not even sure they are significant questions, but, they make the old curiosity bump itch – on occasion.
Why was the search passed down the food chain to the ATSB? and why was the discredited Dolan pushed centre stage, into the media spotlight? Why was AMSA side lined?
The AMSA have a peerless reputation and they are considered the experts in SAR. Essentially, (according to the spin) Australia’s 370 role is firmly rooted in the ‘search’ as it is Malaysia’s ‘investigation’. When it comes to the search, it’s fair enough for the media to ask questions of the Australian end; i.e. Dolan, but there is scant attention to, or reporting of the actual ‘investigation’. I can’t say I’ve seen a lot of insightful comment on the Malaysian ‘investigative’ effort; speculation sure, but a marked lack of press ‘investigation’. Speculation and commentary by the cart load, but little independent ‘investigation’ or analysis of that investigation. Unless you count the Hedley ‘non sequitur’ as ‘investigative journalism’.
It’s all passing strange; if Dolan and ATSB are not involved in the ‘investigation’, but simply acting out of role, doing the search heavy lifting, then why were two overseas trips needed; one to Malaysia and one to France? If you continue the V45 ‘line search’ analogy, there is no requirement for a ‘searcher’ to turn up in the forensic laboratory to examine the finds, so WTF was Dolan doing, swanning off to see the ‘finds’ and being 'seen' as embroiled in the ‘investigation’. Any changes made to the search would be as a result of Malaysian investigation, not Australia’s.
It’s also passing strange that despite being ‘under investigation’ ATSB has been allowed such a high media profile, especially given that the ‘man-in-charge’ had to be driven to recover a ‘black-box’ unit from a known wreck, in shallow water after a unique accident. It took a Senate inquiry, a peer review and a ministerial directive to make that happen. The re-opened investigation into that accident is only happening as a direct result of that pressure. The industry is still awaiting the resulting report.
There is a line of argument which says that Dolan was shunted into the job as a last chance. Do well and some of the detritus attached to the reputation could be smoothed off; bugger it up and it’s off to the knackers yard. Given the ‘malleable’, cooperative nature of the beyond all reason methodology, the relatively simple nature of ‘overseeing’ a search and the total lack of any real responsibility, it seems a reasonable call. Only one of several possible reasons for explaining why AMSA (SAR specialist) was nudged out of the spotlight. There are other unresolved arguments about ‘why’, but they, like the above, are pure speculation and as much a mystery as the loss of the aircraft.
Aye, the mystery of messages out and signals in.
Toot toot.
Only a small, local curiosity but it comes up from time to time, usually over a beer whenever the 370 search is mentioned. I’m not even sure they are significant questions, but, they make the old curiosity bump itch – on occasion.
Why was the search passed down the food chain to the ATSB? and why was the discredited Dolan pushed centre stage, into the media spotlight? Why was AMSA side lined?
The AMSA have a peerless reputation and they are considered the experts in SAR. Essentially, (according to the spin) Australia’s 370 role is firmly rooted in the ‘search’ as it is Malaysia’s ‘investigation’. When it comes to the search, it’s fair enough for the media to ask questions of the Australian end; i.e. Dolan, but there is scant attention to, or reporting of the actual ‘investigation’. I can’t say I’ve seen a lot of insightful comment on the Malaysian ‘investigative’ effort; speculation sure, but a marked lack of press ‘investigation’. Speculation and commentary by the cart load, but little independent ‘investigation’ or analysis of that investigation. Unless you count the Hedley ‘non sequitur’ as ‘investigative journalism’.
It’s all passing strange; if Dolan and ATSB are not involved in the ‘investigation’, but simply acting out of role, doing the search heavy lifting, then why were two overseas trips needed; one to Malaysia and one to France? If you continue the V45 ‘line search’ analogy, there is no requirement for a ‘searcher’ to turn up in the forensic laboratory to examine the finds, so WTF was Dolan doing, swanning off to see the ‘finds’ and being 'seen' as embroiled in the ‘investigation’. Any changes made to the search would be as a result of Malaysian investigation, not Australia’s.
It’s also passing strange that despite being ‘under investigation’ ATSB has been allowed such a high media profile, especially given that the ‘man-in-charge’ had to be driven to recover a ‘black-box’ unit from a known wreck, in shallow water after a unique accident. It took a Senate inquiry, a peer review and a ministerial directive to make that happen. The re-opened investigation into that accident is only happening as a direct result of that pressure. The industry is still awaiting the resulting report.
There is a line of argument which says that Dolan was shunted into the job as a last chance. Do well and some of the detritus attached to the reputation could be smoothed off; bugger it up and it’s off to the knackers yard. Given the ‘malleable’, cooperative nature of the beyond all reason methodology, the relatively simple nature of ‘overseeing’ a search and the total lack of any real responsibility, it seems a reasonable call. Only one of several possible reasons for explaining why AMSA (SAR specialist) was nudged out of the spotlight. There are other unresolved arguments about ‘why’, but they, like the above, are pure speculation and as much a mystery as the loss of the aircraft.
Aye, the mystery of messages out and signals in.
Toot toot.