Inquest begins into Fox Glacier deaths

Mon, 13 Aug 2012 5:17a.m.

Rate:

0 ratings

Family members of the deceased have laid the blame on the company that hosted the flight and lax aviation regulations.

Read the full story »

Others are watching

The orca is known as 'Koru' for his unique dorsal (Robert M. Lehmann - Orca Research Trust)

VIDEO: Stranded orca rescued from sandbank

Bear runs through LA suburb

The Illusionists weave magic in Auckland

In the clip, the driver is seen crashing into multiple vehicles at the intersection before finally driving through a barrier and head first into a large pit

Bad day for Chinese scooter driver

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide

Name

(Won't be published)

Your comment

Comments

14/08/2012 8:18:44 a.m.

Martin wrote:

Jim is correct though I was just covering one aspect of many prevention measures from an aviation accident. As an investigator there are usually many root causes that can be be linked to an accident. Safety and prevention means just that. Safety of aviation operations and prevention of them happening again. Yes it is the pilots responsibility overall for the operation and piloting of the aircraft but there are also measures to assist in his operation and the safest possible aircraft condition. The CAA has some responsibility in ensuring they have the qualified personnel to sign off on aircraft modifications for no specified operations. There are too many aspects of an aviation accident to discuss in this forum. I was just offering one aspect only missing from the TAIC report, however, it is only an interim report and further investigation may highlight my two comments towards safety and prevention. There is also as above the coroners report of course. It may ultimately be pilot error but if the aircraft was certified incorrectly from its modifications he may be totally innocent. Never just spit out the old pilot error without knowing the full story.

13/08/2012 9:34:33 p.m.

Jim wrote:

In regards to Martins comment, no matter what aircraft operation(s) it is the pilots responsibility ultimately to ensure that the aircraft is always operated within the rules regarding CoG etc as stated in the CARs.Regarding a Bulkhead you may find that difficult to introuce as aircraft have a CoG "envelope" which is an area in the airaft to which its total "moment" of weight can be centered on, however I beleive restraints would be suitable in helping prevent an aftward movement of weight in an aircraft which pitches up excessively sending the CoG past its aft limit. A thing to note is that now regulations have caught up with operators and should help to prevent anything like this happening again.

13/08/2012 11:52:56 a.m.

Martin wrote:

The TAIC report examines various issues with one area in regard of modification of the FU24-954 for parachute operations. One area is installation of a bulkhead restricting of passengers (Skydivers) from moving rearward past the G of G. Also this type of operation there is no reason the skydiver and equipment can not be weighed for the C of G calculation. No issue for those embarased about their weight as it includes equipment. This should be a standard regulation for all parachute operations.

13/08/2012 11:25:52 a.m.

Annw Wentzel wrote:

What a tragic loss. Cndolences to all family and friends