Somewhere, over the Bullshit, Pigs may fly.
1.12 As part of its report into the 2017 crash, the ATSB considered the safety record of CSFs more broadly, including those conducted on behalf of Angel Flight. The ATSB found that CSFs had more occurrences,6 accidents and fatal accidents per flight than other private operations, and that the fatal accident rate was more than seven times higher than other private flights.7 With regard to Angel Flight,
Hood - Chief Commissioner of the ATSB, concluded that:
By any measure, there is a different and elevated risk for community service flights operated by Angel Flight Australia compared to other private flying operations and commercial air transport.8
Well, there’s a great big statistical surprise. I mean WoW! Angel Flight do a lot more hours – per annum – than almost any ‘private’ pilot/ aircraft owner’ does. It seems fair and reasonable to conclude that if AF fly more - the number of “occurrences” – carefully not listed – would increase as a factor of more hours spent airborne. An aircraft and pilot which flies say 4 times a month, is a lot more exposed to an ‘occurrence’ than a pilot who only flies four times a year – In a rent-a-wreck, to impress the latest squeeze, with a quick junket around the training area. AF pilots operate in the real world of real aviation; weather, schedule and other folk to consider – of course they are more exposed. It could be taken as a gaining of experience – just as it is for new start commercial pilots, who make every Duck up known to senior pilots and even manage to invent some new ones. I’d say any pilot body being exposed to real conditions would make mistakes – it is the mistakes and the exposure and the learning from such which separate real pilots from the hanger Queens. Senior Qantas captains know this, for once upon a time, they too, were wide eyed innocent children, flogging about the bush, making every mistake known to aviation kind – but they learned their craft and were much improved by that learning.
1.17 Mr Hood confirmed to the committee that with regard to its processes, the ATSB takes:...a no-blame approach to investigations and we focus on systemic safety factors, not on the one-off actions of individuals. We seek to understand what regulatory and organisational risk controls could be put in place to reduce the chance of future incidents and accidents.
No, no blame, not at all – except Hood and his Catamites decide to ‘blame’ the AF system. As if Marj Pagani was the Madam Lash of aviation; “do this flight -- or else”. What a load of hooey. Marj would be the first to say – don’t go if you doubt you can do it. Why – well it’s simply good business practice – if nothing else. Folk in the bush do not tolerate faery stories; they need to get to treatment. They are well used to delay and understand, better than city folk, what bad weather; or a breakdown means. They can deal with it, resourceful and connected they can, with prior warning find an alternative way to travel – so can Marj. Reputation for reliability is all – on the land. “We seek to understand” say’s Hood. I say BOLLOCKS.
I’m not going to get into the Godley game. Using bullshit to baffle brains is beneath contempt. The Senate amateurs may have been ‘Hoodwinked’ by this barrage of cleverly concocted ‘numbers’ – afraid to challenge an ‘expert’. But the ‘expert’ statisticians ain’t. All this baffled, bewildered and inept committee need to do is whistle up an ‘independent’ (or two) statisticians and get an alternate ‘expert’ opinion; to be sure - to be sure. It is that bloody simple.
There are many who would like to know exactly what this committee is up to. Where’s the fire and brimstone Sterle brings to his own pet hobby horse of Road Transport? Would he tolerate this level of pure Pony-Pooh for ‘his’ darling truck drivers. Not in a million. What a fraud; what a disappointment and what a load of old cobblers.
Bugger it – enough. I shall drown the unbelievable; have an Ale with the disappointment, toast the destruction of faith in the RRAT; and flush away the disgust along with the output from the input.
Not good enough Senators; nowhere near acceptable. How’d you like it if I flew my aircraft in the same careless, expeditious, half-assed, inept manner?
“Quickly Bar-keep; lest I vomit from the stench emanating from the pile of garbage I’ve just waded through – I thank you – good man.”
![[Image: D05ZtSnWoAAfBWZ.jpg]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D05ZtSnWoAAfBWZ.jpg)
1.12 As part of its report into the 2017 crash, the ATSB considered the safety record of CSFs more broadly, including those conducted on behalf of Angel Flight. The ATSB found that CSFs had more occurrences,6 accidents and fatal accidents per flight than other private operations, and that the fatal accident rate was more than seven times higher than other private flights.7 With regard to Angel Flight,
Hood - Chief Commissioner of the ATSB, concluded that:
By any measure, there is a different and elevated risk for community service flights operated by Angel Flight Australia compared to other private flying operations and commercial air transport.8
Well, there’s a great big statistical surprise. I mean WoW! Angel Flight do a lot more hours – per annum – than almost any ‘private’ pilot/ aircraft owner’ does. It seems fair and reasonable to conclude that if AF fly more - the number of “occurrences” – carefully not listed – would increase as a factor of more hours spent airborne. An aircraft and pilot which flies say 4 times a month, is a lot more exposed to an ‘occurrence’ than a pilot who only flies four times a year – In a rent-a-wreck, to impress the latest squeeze, with a quick junket around the training area. AF pilots operate in the real world of real aviation; weather, schedule and other folk to consider – of course they are more exposed. It could be taken as a gaining of experience – just as it is for new start commercial pilots, who make every Duck up known to senior pilots and even manage to invent some new ones. I’d say any pilot body being exposed to real conditions would make mistakes – it is the mistakes and the exposure and the learning from such which separate real pilots from the hanger Queens. Senior Qantas captains know this, for once upon a time, they too, were wide eyed innocent children, flogging about the bush, making every mistake known to aviation kind – but they learned their craft and were much improved by that learning.
1.17 Mr Hood confirmed to the committee that with regard to its processes, the ATSB takes:...a no-blame approach to investigations and we focus on systemic safety factors, not on the one-off actions of individuals. We seek to understand what regulatory and organisational risk controls could be put in place to reduce the chance of future incidents and accidents.
No, no blame, not at all – except Hood and his Catamites decide to ‘blame’ the AF system. As if Marj Pagani was the Madam Lash of aviation; “do this flight -- or else”. What a load of hooey. Marj would be the first to say – don’t go if you doubt you can do it. Why – well it’s simply good business practice – if nothing else. Folk in the bush do not tolerate faery stories; they need to get to treatment. They are well used to delay and understand, better than city folk, what bad weather; or a breakdown means. They can deal with it, resourceful and connected they can, with prior warning find an alternative way to travel – so can Marj. Reputation for reliability is all – on the land. “We seek to understand” say’s Hood. I say BOLLOCKS.
I’m not going to get into the Godley game. Using bullshit to baffle brains is beneath contempt. The Senate amateurs may have been ‘Hoodwinked’ by this barrage of cleverly concocted ‘numbers’ – afraid to challenge an ‘expert’. But the ‘expert’ statisticians ain’t. All this baffled, bewildered and inept committee need to do is whistle up an ‘independent’ (or two) statisticians and get an alternate ‘expert’ opinion; to be sure - to be sure. It is that bloody simple.
There are many who would like to know exactly what this committee is up to. Where’s the fire and brimstone Sterle brings to his own pet hobby horse of Road Transport? Would he tolerate this level of pure Pony-Pooh for ‘his’ darling truck drivers. Not in a million. What a fraud; what a disappointment and what a load of old cobblers.
Bugger it – enough. I shall drown the unbelievable; have an Ale with the disappointment, toast the destruction of faith in the RRAT; and flush away the disgust along with the output from the input.
Not good enough Senators; nowhere near acceptable. How’d you like it if I flew my aircraft in the same careless, expeditious, half-assed, inept manner?
“Quickly Bar-keep; lest I vomit from the stench emanating from the pile of garbage I’ve just waded through – I thank you – good man.”