|
|
Post by Bruce on May 22, 2006 8:37:40 GMT 12
Special Investigations TV One 8pm Monday night (22 May)
the following e-mail has been received from our SAA webmaster:
"I have been told that Monday nights episode of "Special Investigators" will be covering the investigation into Lindsay Dunlop's Fatal accident.
To the best of our knowledge the item does not contain any input from SAANZ. We have no idea what comments, if any it contains about Lindsay, the aircraft design or the home-built aircraft scene in New Zealand.
We are hopeful that it will be a balanced and informative documentary covering the air accident investigation process. (Yeah right!)"
Previous episodes of this programme have been quite good, but can the media resist over dramatising accidents involving "home made planes"? Should be an interesting watch.....
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on May 22, 2006 10:34:03 GMT 12
Can you please elaborate on the crash? What type, when, etc?
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on May 22, 2006 10:49:18 GMT 12
the crash concerned is well known among SAA people, Lindsay Dunlop, a longtime stalwart of the Bay of Plenty chapter crashed in 2004 off the BOP coast north of Tauranga. Aircraft with a Zenith CH200 homebuilt. Without giving away too much, the accident investigation concentrated on a modification to the nosewheel steering mechanism that somehow restricted rudder travel. As a kneejerk reaction the Civil Aviation Authority threatened to restrict the ability of builders to make minor modifications during the construction of thier aircraft. Fortunately common sense prevailed and SAANZ have instituted a mentoring programme instead, which has been very sucessful.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on May 22, 2006 10:58:22 GMT 12
TV One link: tvnz.co.nz/view/page/488120/663498Sounds like the expected TV over kill: "This major investigation puts the safety culture of homebuilt airplanes under scrutiny, and raises questions about the stringency of the certification process that may have serious implications for the safety of our skies." we shall see.... |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on May 22, 2006 20:29:53 GMT 12
I've just watched this show. It's a very sad case. I think the docoumentary makers have done the show respectfully and haven't hyped it up like you feared Bruce. At least, I think any comments included were fair enough. It's all well explained for the layman too.
I have to say how stunned I am to see how rusty the remains were after just a short time in the ocean in those scenes filmed around a year later. I suspect it could be more the way the remains were stored later that have caused this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on May 22, 2006 20:44:33 GMT 12
Yeah the programme did pretty well, a good well balanced approach. I was surprised by the condition of the steel parts as well, but that is a tendency of 4130 chrome Moly steel - it definitely doesnt like salt water. the wreckage doesnt appear to have had any corrosion inhibiting carried out before storage.
I have to agree with the comments about homebuilders being reluctant to report defect incidents to the CAA, its an attitude that needs to change. Unfortunately a lot of homebuilders have been conditioned by experiences of years past to view CAA as buerocrats waiting to stamp out any individual freedoms of recreational aviators. After all why should they help the very people who ground elderly pilots and "spoil the fun". In the past, this viewpoint could have been justified, but nowdays CAA are very helpful and supportive. Having come from the aviation industry and working very closely with CAA (including the CityJet fiasco, when we really deserved CAA wrath) I find the "dont tell CAA" attitude a major concern. I would encourage anyone hearing comments that reflect that attitude to challenge the person - it does the recreational aircraft movement a great deal of harm.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on May 22, 2006 21:09:10 GMT 12
Is the ICARUS safety reporting system that was introduced in the 1990's so people with concerns could make reports about the company they worked for or people they knew confidentially still operating? It was promoted heavily in Wings magazine in the 1990's but I never had any need because the RNZAF's methods of checking were second to none, as was their methods for solving issues too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on May 22, 2006 22:22:01 GMT 12
the government pulled funding to Icarus and for neurality reasons industry sponsorship was not considered apropriate so it folded after only a couple of years. The CAA compulsory system is O.K. but many in the industry (including myself, as I have been in the midst of bad practices, and I even took part - and I'm not proud of it) believe that confidential reporting is necessary to really get the support of the majority of the aviation industry. despite this, it doesnt look likely that Icarus will make a comeback.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on May 22, 2006 23:14:06 GMT 12
Crazy. How hard is it to fund such a vital service? It cannot have been that expensive, surely.
People will no doubt die because of this withdrawl of Govt funds, like many other vital services the Government suddenly whom decides no longer needs money to keep going, so they can give it to their more PC, less worthy causes instead.
|
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on May 23, 2006 9:38:22 GMT 12
No Dave; giving money to Indonesia is MUCH MORE important than anything else.
(If there's anymore of your anti-PC outbursts, you will have to be sent to Helengrad for reprogramming!) ;D
I think that confidential reporting systems are necessary, and I'm sure the money to fund something such as ICARUS could be found, if the Govt was really interested.
|
|
