UK exchange student who survived a light plane crash near Agnes Waters sues CASA.

[bob10]

The engine cut out 18 metres above the beach.

UK exchange student who survived crash that killed backpacker sues Civil Aviation Safety Authority for millions in damages (https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/uk-exchange-student-who-survived-crash-that-killed-backpacker-sues-civil-aviation-safety-authority-for-millions-in-damages/ar-BBZ4mPf?ocid=spartanntp)

[JDNSW]

While I am not a lawyer, suing CASA for the actions of a cowboy charter operator would seem rather unlikely to succeed. It seems to me that the first step would be to prove that the operator was culpable, and then to establish that CASA was culpable for not keeping them in check.

Since, from what I know of the accident, the actual cause of the engine quitting is still unknown, the "culpable" action of the pilot would seem to lie in making a hash of a forced landing - in the circumstances very easy to do - he seems to have attempted a turn with no power at low level, and stalled as a result of increased wing loading resulting in loss of airspeed. Translating that into culpable action on the part of the operator, and from there toCASA, seems to me to be pretty tenuous (even if the operator was an accident waiting to happen!).

[Eevo]

first step would be to prove that the operator was culpable, and then to establish that CASA was culpable for not keeping them in check.

Since, from what I know of the accident, the actual cause of the engine quitting is still unknown, the "culpable" action of the pilot would seem to lie in making a hash of a forced landing - in the circumstances very easy to do - he seems to have attempted a turn with no power at low level, and stalled as a result of increased wing loading resulting in loss of airspeed. Translating that into culpable action on the part of the operator, and from there toCASA, seems to me to be pretty tenuous (even if the operator was an accident waiting to happen!).


casa found them culpable in their report.

engine out at 60feet (18m) means no turning.

[JDNSW]

casa found them culpable in their report.

engine out at 60feet (18m) means no turning.

Finding that "pilot error" has resulted in an accident is a long way from finding the employer of the pilot culpable, and an even longer step to find the regulator culpable. Perhaps worth noting that a similar "chain of responsibility" in the trucking industry required legislation, which I don't believe exists in the aviation area, except where it is established by the ANRs,

To put this in more familiar territory, this would be the equivalent of suing the RMS for injuries that occurred to a passenger when a taxi driver ran a red light. Best of luck with that.

[Hugh Jars]

casa found them culpable in their report.

engine out at 60feet (18m) means no turning.

Yep, engine out at 60’ means your aim point to land is a few hundred metres ahead (assuming he gets over the startle factor and translates his cruise speed into height).

I hope the litigant has deep pockets. CASA, being a gov department, will bankrupt them. Simple.

About 10 years ago, I sought advice re suing DVA over my father’s exposure to radiation in Hiroshima after WW2, and his subsequent health problems (and eventual death). When I was taken through the tactics used, I reluctantly thought better of it...

[101RRS]

About 10 years ago, I sought advice re suing DVA over my father’s exposure to radiation in Hiroshima after WW2, and his subsequent health problems (and eventual death). When I was taken through the tactics used, I reluctantly thought better of it...

Been there, done that - my father died at 61 from liver cancer - he was in the occupation forces and in Horoshima a few weeks after the bomb (as well as overseas war service in the Pacific) and carried around a piece of melted glass he collected in his pocket as a keep sake - lost it about 10 years later. When diagnosed doctors put it down to war service and the piece of radioactive glass.

We sought a war widows pension (gold card) for my mum but firstly occupation service was not considered as war service so not eligible service and secondly, it was not possible to definitely link (to DVA standards) the cancer to military service so the end result was no assistance for my Mum - you just cannot win with them. Now nearly 35 years later my now 92yo mum still gets no assistance form DVA.

As a ex serviceman with nearly 30 years service, I have submitted a couple of claims withh DVA and had no success - with the last one (skin cancer) I was told by the DVA consultant not to even bother putting in a claim as it will be rejected - even though I met all the service and medical requirements - yes DVA is an organisation that seems to actively work against ex and current servicemen rather than helping them.

Garry

[Hugh Jars]

Indeed, Garry. That's terrible for your mother to go through all that, only to be abandoned by DVA. The wives were often the glue that kept post-WW2 families together, and they should have been looked after...

Friends around my age served, and were abandoned by DVA. They really are the enemy of our servicemen and women.

My dad fought in New Guinea for most of WW2, then went to Kure (Hiroshima) and worked in transport with BCOF. I have pictures of him walking around Hiroshima in shorts, singlet and boots. No protection.

During his time there he was trained as a mechanic/driver, so worked on lots of diesel trucks.

When he came home in 1947, he was unwell from gunshot injuries he received earlier in New Guinea (as well as PTSD, etc), and was unable to work for any length of time without spending lengthy stays in hospital. He got a TPI around 1982 but his health slowly deteriorated.

He eventually was diagnosed with Myelodysplasia (a type of leukaemia), and tried to have this attributed to radiation received in Japan. DVA approved a disability as a result of military service, but carefully entered this on his service record as being a result of exposure to benzene in Japan. He disputed that till the day he died.

That makes it virtually impossible to challenge.

CASA are experts at arse-covering. IMO it's extremely unlikely a lawsuit will be successful. That would set a precedent.

The question I ask is why did they not go the operator? Have they conveniently gone belly-up?

[4bee]

If it is anything like I encountered about 25 years ago, I was advised to visit the 'Soche' to try & get some financial monetary relief for a buggered spine so had no income at all.

Woman behind the counter stated "Blah blah blah.. we can't give our money away" . I was reaching for her scrawny throat with both hands when 'er indoors pulled me away.[biggrin] [tonguewink]

Bastards never paid a cent.

DVA often spout on about looking after Veterans but that all sounds like ballcocks.

[JDNSW]

Just to add to this discussion. My sister (who died in December) faced this about eighteen years ago when her husband died. She was successful in getting her husbands death attributed to his war service in New Guinea (issuing of cigarettes), and got a War Widows Pension. I attribute her success in this to the efforts of Legacy.

[Saitch]

Well, now for something completely different.
My father was in New Guinea during WWII and after retirement, was a Gold Card recipient. Up until and after his death three years ago and my mother's death a year later, I had a lot of dealings with DVA and found them the most understanding government department I've ever dealt with. I had both parents' Health Directives and EPOAs.

I never had an issue with DVA and when Dad's health started to decline, they even clued me up on entitlements which I had, more often than not, overlooked or misinterpreted.

They helped turn what could have been difficult times for my siblings and I, into relatively easy procedures.


Back to topic. If they happen to succeed with CASA in court wouldn't that be opening a big can 'o' worms?

[JDNSW]

Generally described as "a lawyer's picnic"!

[101RRS]

She was successful in getting her husbands death attributed to his war service in New Guinea (issuing of cigarettes), and got a War Widows Pension. I attribute her success in this to the efforts of Legacy.

Yes if you smoked and served you were automatically entitled to just about everything and my father started smoking due to free smokes during the war but gave up soon after he left the service - if he had continued smoking we would have got everything from DVA - no questions asked but as he had ceased smoking in the early 50s those rules did not apply.

My mum used Legacy and they are a great organisation but were not successful, we subsequently found out that we should have used the specialist consultants from the RSL as they are better able to work the system.

Garry

[101RRS]

The only way that this claim can succeed against CASA is if it can be shown that CASA had previously found issues with the operator and failed to act or that CASA'a rules for flight operation were not correct and that the pilot followed those rules.

I am a commercial pilot but have not exercised the licence in over 30 years but in all my civil training (and as military aircrew) we were always taught to land straight ahead, with only minimal diversions to avoid obstructions, trade speed for height as appropriate - no sudden movements and minimal angle of bank.

On the basis of the story as published - I see nothing wrong with CASA's rules, maybe they needed to act before hand but it is not clear, the pilot seemed to have done the wrong thing but I was not there, so there may have been good reasons for his actions.

Any claims should be against the pilot and the company and tested in court but I dont think CASA has a case to answer.

Garry

[JDNSW]

Pretty much how I see it. Thinking back, I seem to remember a case where a plane going from Pt Augusta to Adelaide came down, and there was an attempt to blame CASA (or its predecessor). But I also seem to remember that as an RPT flight, where the responsibility of everyone is much greater.

[Hugh Jars]

That may have been Whyalla Airlines. I did a Chieftain endorsement with them in 1994.
The subsequent prang a few years later was only a matter of time.

[JDNSW]

Yes, that's the one! I'm sure that there was an attempt to blame the regulator for allowing them to operate, but I don't remember whether the regulator was sued or not.

[4bee]

Blimey! Was that the prang that dropped them into the drink in the Gulf with the loss of quite a few lives?

Seemed to take ages to locate the wreckage I recall.

Both engines seized???????????

[JDNSW]

Bit more complicated than that. Whyalla Airlines Flight 904 - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whyalla_Airlines_Flight_904)

One engine failed with a broken crankshaft, the other failed later, perhaps due to the increased power setting to maintain height on one engine.

The ATSB had a strained relation with the coroner, and this and several other engine failures led to Airworthiness directives on that model engine, and some were recalled for defective crankshafts. The major result was the requirement for lifejackets to be extended.

[4bee]

I seem to recall reading an account of one bloke who headed for shore in the dark & apparently only just made it to land. I'm pretty sure it was this event but I will stand corrected. From memory it was to the Eastern shore?????



EDIT. SCRUB THIS, GOOGLE TELLS ME THERE WERE NO SURVIVORS. Must have been another similar Accident.

[Eevo]

CASA asleep at the yoke... never has that happened before...

[Hugh Jars]

Blimey! Was that the prang that dropped them into the drink in the Gulf with the loss of quite a few lives?

Seemed to take ages to locate the wreckage I recall.

Both engines seized???????????

Yes, that was the one. I think he was making his pilots use unapproved dodgy mixture control techniques, which screwed the engines...

[BradC]

some were recalled for defective crankshafts.

Can we get CASA in on the TDV6? Sounds like they might get a result.

[JDNSW]

I don't think the recall had anything to do with CASA (or its predecessor) - the recall occurred before their report, but did not rate a mention in the report. It was the result of a number of other engine failures. At least some of which presumably showed manufacturing defects.