Rescue 116 Crash at Blackrock, Co Mayo(Mod note in post 1)

irishgeo · 13-03-2021 09:14AM

plodder wrote: »

The review was ordered by the Minister at the time. I don't think either of those bodies have any role in it at all.

he was only following the law because a party who got the final report requested a review.

plodder · 13-03-2021 09:25AM

irishgeo wrote: »

he was only following the law because a party who got the final report requested a review.

Yes, but he didn't have to grant the review. First time one has ever been granted afaik.

sparrowcar · 13-03-2021 09:55AM

plodder wrote: »

The review was ordered by the Minister at the time. I don't think either of those bodies have any role in it at all.

A wouldn't have thought a review would be warranted if there was faith in the initial report.

Negative_G · 13-03-2021 10:13AM

Roger_007 wrote: »

I think it’s very unfair on the relatives of the deceased that this report is delayed for so long. I do not know who requested the review, or if more than one party requested it, but surely it is better if these kind of reports are published sooner rather than later to enable the families of the deceased to move on with their lives and put this tragic event behind them.

Certain entities will do anything to delay this report.

Especially when there's a €500million + contract to be awarded, just over the horizon.

skallywag · 13-03-2021 02:15PM

smurfjed wrote: »

And to allow them to sue if just cause exists.

Sue who exactly? Or is this just a kneejerk Irish answer?

I find your comment very unhelpful.

smurfjed · 13-03-2021 02:33PM

Or is this just a kneejerk Irish answer?

Nope it’s a knee jerk aviation answer.

A recent precedent from the helicopter world.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51618161

And an Irish one
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/tragic-cadet-vindicated-as-he-is-cleared-over-air-corps-crash-30048896.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-16991291

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/parents-of-boy-killed-in-2018-air-crash-sue-for-psychiatric-shock-and-loss-1.4378028

Is that more helpful for you?

AlekSmart · 13-03-2021 04:10PM

plodder wrote: »

Yes, but he didn't have to grant the review. First time one has ever been granted afaik.

Given that the report has been compiled by a Public Body,and involves issues of Public Safety,I find it odd that a "Review" is even catered for.

It appears to create a doubt around the profiency of the AAIB itself,and prehaps the greater Irish Transport Administration sector itself.

That said,I would suggest that the list of "Interested Parties" mentioned should actually be Public from the outset.

Allowing for a situation whereby a single individual/entity can effectively delay proceedings,apparently indefinitely,does not inspire confidence in the Authorities concerned.

13-03-2021 04:32PM

AlekSmart wrote: »

Given that the report has been compiled by a Public Body,and involves issues of Public Safety,I find it odd that a "Review" is even catered for.

It appears to create a doubt around the profiency of the AAIB itself,and prehaps the greater Irish Transport Administration sector itself.

That said,I would suggest that the list of "Interested Parties" mentioned should actually be Public from the outset.

Allowing for a situation whereby a single individual/entity can effectively delay proceedings,apparently indefinitely,does not inspire confidence in the Authorities concerned.

Presuming you mean AAIU there. Indeed I would love to know what exactly has been implemented to help ensure a similar accident doesn't happen in the future here.

skallywag · 13-03-2021 04:47PM

smurfjed wrote: »

Is that more helpful for you?

No. It certainly is not.

I frankly cannot see how who-sues-who is in anyway relevant to the discussion, considering that the report has not even been released.

If one of the crew members turns out to have made a decision(s) which strongly contributed to the accident, would you also also think that the families of the other crew members should be suing them?

Roger_007 · 13-03-2021 05:02PM

AlekSmart wrote: »

Given that the report has been compiled by a Public Body,and involves issues of Public Safety,I find it odd that a "Review" is even catered for.

It appears to create a doubt around the profiency of the AAIB itself,and prehaps the greater Irish Transport Administration sector itself.

That said,I would suggest that the list of "Interested Parties" mentioned should actually be Public from the outset.

Allowing for a situation whereby a single individual/entity can effectively delay proceedings,apparently indefinitely,does not inspire confidence in the Authorities concerned.

I would agree that by conceding to a request for a review, which is a very rare occurrence, that the competence of the AAIU is being questioned.
The AAIU report should only contain findings of fact and recommendations if warranted. It does not contain matters of opinion. Therefore it would seem that someone doesn’t like one or more of the facts. This should not be a reason not to publish the report or order a review.
The preliminary report gave us detailed facts about the control inputs and movements of the aircraft in the final stages of its flight. What the final report has to do is to reveal what decisions were taken by the flight crew and what criteria/information those decisions were based on. The CVR will have contained all the relevant information on that.
It is very difficult, therefore, to imagine what there could be to review unless someone thinks that the AAIU have got some of their facts wrong which, if true, would have serious consequences for the credibility and reputation of the AAIU.

13-03-2021 05:47PM

Roger_007 wrote: »

I would agree that by conceding to a request for a review, which is a very rare occurrence, that the competence of the AAIU is being questioned.
The AAIU report should only contain findings of fact and recommendations if warranted. It does not contain matters of opinion. Therefore it would seem that someone doesn’t like one or more of the facts. This should not be a reason not to publish the report or order a review.
The preliminary report gave us detailed facts about the control inputs and movements of the aircraft in the final stages of its flight. What the final report has to do is to reveal what decisions were taken by the flight crew and what criteria/information those decisions were based on. The CVR will have contained all the relevant information on that.
It is very difficult, therefore, to imagine what there could be to review unless someone thinks that the AAIU have got some of their facts wrong which, if true, would have serious consequences for the credibility and reputation of the AAIU.

I would agree that the report should be published, and then findings contested if a party finds treason to do so. It should be transparent.

faoiarvok · 13-03-2021 06:19PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I would love to know what exactly has been implemented to help ensure a similar accident doesn't happen in the future here.

The AAIU considers one Safety Recommendation made in the Interim Report closed, which I’m guessing means satisfactorily completed, and another still open.

http://www.aaiu.ie/node/1069

smurfjed · 13-03-2021 06:41PM

I frankly cannot see how who-sues-who is in anyway relevant to the discussion

if any party wishes to contest the report, or attribute blame, it will end up in a court of law.

Stovepipe · 13-03-2021 11:23PM

It has always been the case that any party in an accident can contest any accident report. That's why the draft report is circulated to the interested parties in the first place.An aggrieved party can be heard, if they don't like what's in the report. All AAIU reports specifically avoid attributing blame and such reports are not liked by our Learned Friends, who like to have a clear path to pointing the finger. My suspicion is that a party has found something in the report that might lead people to believe that that party were negligent in an aspect of their duty. It must be of sufficient gravity that the Minister feels the need to have a Review.

Psychlops · 13-03-2021 11:49PM

11:03PM tonight she lifted from Dublin & never returned, RIP RESCUE116, EI-ICR, "Banrion Na Speire/Queen Of the Skies".

14-03-2021 08:42AM

faoiarvok wrote: »

The AAIU considers one Safety Recommendation made in the Interim Report closed, which I’m guessing means satisfactorily completed, and another still open.

http://www.aaiu.ie/node/1069

Thanks, I had missed reading that. All I can think is that their operations must be relatively curtailed until the technical issues are sorted out in a process that reminds me somewhat of the 737 Max issue.

HTCOne · 14-03-2021 07:50PM

sparrowcar wrote: »

Can't imagine a delay this long would happen or be tolerated in other developed countries. It doesn't paint the AAIU or IAA in good light at all.

Just curious why you think it paints the IAA in a bad light?

sparrowcar · 14-03-2021 08:41PM

HTCOne wrote: »

Just curious why you think it paints the IAA in a bad light?

The IAA’s role in relation to terrain and obstacle data provided in databases for search and rescue helicopters was piss poor and widely reported as a possible contributing factor in the crash.

But I'll take your point about them being independent "ish" to the AAIU.

HTCOne · 14-03-2021 08:48PM

sparrowcar wrote: »

The IAA’s role in relation to terrain and obstacle data provided in databases for search and rescue helicopters was piss poor and widely reported as a possible contributing factor in the crash.

But I'll take your point about them being independent "ish" to the AAIU.

Not disputing any contributory factors in the accident (who am I to do that), but I don’t see how the review process underway has anything to do with the IAA, who are in fact totally independent of the AAIU, as they are from the DAA or any other State enterprise.

sparrowcar · 14-03-2021 08:56PM

HTCOne wrote: »

Not disputing any contributory factors in the accident (who am I to do that), but I don’t see how the review process underway has anything to do with the IAA, who are in fact totally independent of the AAIU, as they are from the DAA or any other State enterprise.

Fair point.

dog_pig · 18-03-2021 05:20PM

Does anyone know when the aircrew would have transitioned from the S61-N to the S-92? I know it would have been post January 2012.

skallywag · 19-03-2021 07:22PM

Well they flew 61s prior to 2012 as you say, but I have no idea when that particular crew would have trained and been passed on the 92.

It seems the report has had two different objections, one from CHC and another from the family of one crew member.

donvito99 · 27-03-2021 05:24PM

How is it that any party is entitled to interfere in the AAIU's reporting? Is there not a Chicago Convention requirement of impartiality?

dog_pig · 27-03-2021 06:19PM

skallywag wrote: »

It seems the report has had two different objections, one from CHC and another from the family of one crew member.

I didn't realise that this was the case. Has this been reported anywhere?

smurfjed · 28-03-2021 03:45PM

I keep getting update emails about this thread but when I come online these posts have disappeared, what’s happening ???

L1011 · 28-03-2021 04:48PM

Only two posts have been deleted in 2021, one by the poster and one by me as it was a thread-banned user who will never be returning.

jmayo · 31-03-2021 05:05PM

Anyone see the comments by ECA chief Otjan de Bruijn about the way this report has been delayed ?

Captain Otjan de Bruijn, president of the European Cockpit Association (ECA), also questioned why Ireland had adopted a “rare procedure” where an aviation accident investigation can be re-examined before publication.

We are not aware of any other similar cases across Europe of a re-examination of the technical work of an independent technically qualified organisation by a body with limited expertise(none) in aviation accident investigations.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rescue-116-helicopter-crash-european-pilots-call-for-report-to-be-published-without-delay-xxrb5qqpn

Storm 10 · 31-03-2021 05:31PM

jmayo wrote: »

Anyone see the comments by ECA chief Otjan de Bruijn about the way this report has been delayed ?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rescue-116-helicopter-crash-european-pilots-call-for-report-to-be-published-without-delay-xxrb5qqpn

Can't read that full report the link is premium so must be registered and pay to read the newspaper

jmayo · 31-03-2021 06:03PM

Storm 10 wrote: »

Can't read that full report the link is premium so must be registered and pay to read the newspaper

Here is another link to story and comments.

https://afloat.ie/safety/coastguard/item/49839-european-cockpit-association-aalarmed-at-delay-in-publishing-rescue-116-final-report

Roger_007 · 31-03-2021 06:04PM

jmayo wrote: »

Anyone see the comments by ECA chief Otjan de Bruijn about the way this report has been delayed ?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rescue-116-helicopter-crash-european-pilots-call-for-report-to-be-published-without-delay-xxrb5qqpn

I’m afraid we are setting an unfortunate precedent. The report should have been published and then anyone who has any issue could take it up from there. We are now in a situation where someone can prevent publication of an official accident report simply by objecting to some of its contents. What is to stop anyone from objecting to whatever the review comes up with. This could go on for years with consequent damage to the reputation of the AAIU.

Rescue 116 Crash at Blackrock, Co Mayo(Mod note in post 1)

Comments