Kenn Borek Antarctic Cause/Speculation Thread

[Doc]

Any pictures yet ?

Hope not. I don't want to see any. What would pictures prove? Please people, exercise enough taste NOT to post pictures.

[B-rad]

I'd actually like to see pictures.

[stallie]

What part of the official SAR releases, and a map don't you believe?

[Doc]

What part of the official SAR releases, and a map don't you believe?

???

[ettw]

Any pictures yet ?

Hope not. I don't want to see any. What would pictures prove? Please people, exercise enough taste NOT to post pictures.

Interesting discussion has been had about this thread around the base here.

It stings because of the personal connection with this accident but trying to be objective about it, I might suggest that we have all seen photos showing swaths of trees knocked down etc in other accidents and generally they don't evoke much comment. Why is this accident different?

ETTW

[costermonger]

This isn't the first time the to post pictures or not post pictures debate has been found around here. I remember seeing it in the thread about the 172 from Waterloo last summer, I think.

I think pictures should be linked to, not posted. If you want to see them, fine, but make it a choice.

[stallie]

Doc, my comment was suggesting that there would likely be little new about the accident gleaned from a picture. The media releases were pretty specific about the location of the wreckage and it correlates with a detailed map.

[godsrcrazy]

Any pictures yet ?

Hope not. I don't want to see any. What would pictures prove? Please people, exercise enough taste NOT to post pictures.

Interesting discussion has been had about this thread around the base here.

It stings because of the personal connection with this accident but trying to be objective about it, I might suggest that we have all seen photos showing swaths of trees knocked down etc in other accidents and generally they don't evoke much comment. Why is this accident different?

ETTW

I agree i hope all those that don't want speculation or pictures posted on this site show the same respect for every other incident/ accident that may happen in the future.

[CID]

Photos are just "facts" that may or many not eventually find their way into the public record. The issue here in my opinion is the tact (or lack thereof) used in the posted question.

It's very difficult to emote when it comes to "reading" the written word but it's very easy to inject some context and emotion when "writing". There are several ways to have posted that question that would have avoided the negativity.

The photos can have value if presented in the proper context but for now there is little reason to have any photos released. They won't change the outcome and we don't know enough about the cause to add any valuable context to them.

I expect photos to eventually be released along with other factual information about this accident.

[The Hammer]

A photo is worth a thousand words and evokes emotion and makes things real!!!!

The recent Arctic Sunwest crash and the photos that were lucky enough to exist turned that report from just writing on a page to a real life situation with real people (for those who didn't know the crew). I dispersed this report to our crews, "mostly kids", who view their job in a light similar to "call of duty or top gun". They have been lucky enough to avoid the personal "close to home" experiences that many of us have. I hate my photos of my coworkers accidents but they helped keep alive when I was inexperienced because I realized "it won't happen to me" didn't work for them and it wouldn't save my ass either.

I use them to "shock" the "top gun" crews when they start making "arrogant" mistakes even though the photos & reports personally bother me.

If accident photos prevent just one accident then they are worth it. IMHO

The "Mayday" TV series, while somewhat "commercialized", (way more real than ice pilots) provides a softer touch but none the less more real approach than just reading the reports. The best show is the "under pressure " accident of Nationair 2120 in Jeddah as we have all been "under the gun" in this industry at some point. It is an excellent educational tool to our crews regardless of their experience levels.

I sympathize with those personally attached to this accident.

PS

Photography and movies made the brutality of war and it's effects on both the soldiers and civilians real to millions who had only read newspapers or heard it by letters prior to them existing. Could anyone possibly imagine the trenches in WWI without having been there by just reading a newspaper?

It educated an entire continent (North America) that has been lucky enough to have never seen brutalities of war that have been invented since the beginning of the 20th century.

It made it "real" and hopefully has assisted in creating better political judgement in this area. I hope.....

[pelmet]

The TSB seems to be quite willing to post pictures of accident sites as seen with this aerobatic plane in Alberta.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tsbcanada/ ... 561502530/

[Diadem]

They disseminate information to the public which may be relevant to the accident investigation; it could be a straight-forward photo of the crash, or it could have additional details such as scales showing prop strikes on trees to demonstrate forward velocity at impact. It remains up to the reader/viewer whether they wish to see these photos, just as it is at their discretion whether to read the report and learn the details of the victims' last few moments. I imagine for many family members that information could be far more devastating than seeing a photo of a crumpled airplane. Either way, the info/photos are available, and it is you, the individual, who must decide whether you wish to ingest that data. If it were any other way, we would be pummeled daily by conspiracy theorists claiming the TSB is withholding info which could be pertinent to the investigation.

[Diadem]

The CVR didn't record the accident flight: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/s ... order.html

[PilotDAR]

Pictures....

Pictures can have merit - when they are just pictures of bent metal. However, my feeling is that short of a compelling reason, the privacy and respect of a person's resting place, even not final, is of a higher importance than pictures made public for "interest sake".

I will only wish to see photos following recovery of the victims, and even then, it's a small interest for me at most...

[midwingcrisis]

http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/1131859 ... twin-otter



Transportation Safety Board investigates fatal accident in Antarctica involving Kenn Borek Air Ltd. Twin Otter

GATINEAU, QC, March 19, 2013 /CNW/ - The Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) will conduct a full and independent investigation into the fatal January 2013 crash of a de Havilland DHC-6 Twin Otter operated by Kenn Borek Air Ltd. in Antarctica. The crew of three lost their lives in the accident.

On 23 January 2013, the Twin Otter was on a repositioning flight from South Pole Station, Antarctica, to Terra Nova Bay, Antarctica, with a crew of three on board. There had been no radio communication from the aircraft and the flight was considered overdue. An emergency locator transmitter signal was received and search and rescue (SAR) was initiated. Extreme weather conditions hampered the SAR operation, preventing access to the site for two days. Once on site, the SAR team reported the aircraft's crew did not survive. Adverse weather conditions, the effects of high altitude, unstable snow conditions and the state of the aircraft prevented the recovery of their bodies.

The TSB is conducting this investigation because the crew was Canadian, the aircraft was registered and manufactured in Canada, and there may be significant safety findings. "Everything we know at this stage points to a controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) accident, which is an issue on the TSB's Watchlist," said Mark Clitsome, Director of Air Investigations.

The TSB has examined the aircraft's cockpit voice recorder (CVR). However, it did not record the accident flight. Investigators will continue to gather and analyze information to determine the causes and contributing factors of the accident.

TSB investigators are liaising with the New Zealand Transport Accident Investigation Commission, which has been assisting the TSB from the outset. The TSB will assess which components need to be recovered from the wreckage to help determine what happened, and will develop a plan to recover them when the weather permits.

The findings will be made public in a report at the conclusion of the investigation.

Collisions with land and water are a TSB Watchlist issue. Watch the video!

The TSB is an independent agency that investigates marine, pipeline, railway and aviation transportation occurrences. Its sole aim is the advancement of transportation safety. It is not the function of the Board to assign fault or determine civil or criminal liability.

SOURCE: Transportation Safety Board of Canada
For further information:

Transportation Safety Board of Canada
Media Relations
819-994-8053

[Meatservo]

I just watched the short news segment on the subject of the non-functioning CVR in the Twin Otter.. It was reported that the CVR was not working, and the pilots should have checked it before flight. "No one knows why this vital check was not completed by the crew".

I suppose I am making a few assumptions, but the "vital"ness of the CVR check is rather an academic consideration compared to all the other "vital" actions required to fly a plane in Antarctica, no? I mean, maybe it's part of your walk-around, but honestly, are there any twin otter pilots who can comment on what they would do if they were parked somewhere on the ice in Antarctica, about to fly just-picked-up passengers to their base, and one of the pilots happens to press the "test" button on the CVR head and finds that it is not working?

I think this report might contain a little reporter-generated hyperbole. No-one might know for sure why this "vital" check was ignored by the crew, but I for one feel like I have a pretty good idea why.

[Diadem]

I just watched the short news segment on the subject of the non-functioning CVR in the Twin Otter.. It was reported that the CVR was not working, and the pilots should have checked it before flight. "No one knows why this vital check was not completed by the crew".

I suppose I am making a few assumptions, but the "vital"ness of the CVR check is rather an academic consideration compared to all the other "vital" actions required to fly a plane in Antarctica, no? I mean, maybe it's part of your walk-around, but honestly, are there any twin otter pilots who can comment on what they would do if they were parked somewhere on the ice in Antarctica, about to fly just-picked-up passengers to their base, and one of the pilots happens to press the "test" button on the CVR head and finds that it is not working?

I think this report might contain a little reporter-generated hyperbole. No-one might know for sure why this "vital" check was ignored by the crew, but I for one feel like I have a pretty good idea why.

I don't know the details of how CVRs work or whether they can be tested simply by pressing a button, but at my company the check is done once a year, and requires a test flight. The crew reads off a script in proximity to each mic in order to test functionality, which is determined by maintenance personnel after removing the CVR to retrieve the data from the test flight. Does the media now expect that we will perform this test before each flight? Absurd and ridiculous.

[ogc]

I just watched the short news segment on the subject of the non-functioning CVR in the Twin Otter.. It was reported that the CVR was not working, and the pilots should have checked it before flight. "No one knows why this vital check was not completed by the crew".

I suppose I am making a few assumptions, but the "vital"ness of the CVR check is rather an academic consideration compared to all the other "vital" actions required to fly a plane in Antarctica, no? I mean, maybe it's part of your walk-around, but honestly, are there any twin otter pilots who can comment on what they would do if they were parked somewhere on the ice in Antarctica, about to fly just-picked-up passengers to their base, and one of the pilots happens to press the "test" button on the CVR head and finds that it is not working?

I think this report might contain a little reporter-generated hyperbole. No-one might know for sure why this "vital" check was ignored by the crew, but I for one feel like I have a pretty good idea why.

I don't know the details of how CVRs work or whether they can be tested simply by pressing a button, but at my company the check is done once a year, and requires a test flight. The crew reads off a script in proximity to each mic in order to test functionality, which is determined by maintenance personnel after removing the CVR to retrieve the data from the test flight. Does the media now expect that we will perform this test before each flight? Absurd and ridiculous.

Some CVR's have a test button that runs a system test and should show that its in working order... that says nothing for the integrity of the microphone etc, just that the little computer says its all okay.

And to answer the other question about what would a crew do if they found it wasn't working.... I know with most operations its a simple answer... MEL.

[Meatservo]

Well, that's just what I was getting at. I know what I would do, in the event I even bothered to press the little "test" button during my cockpit checks, and observed it was not working. I would probably say "meh" and get on with the day. Maybe mention it to the engineer later. Do they pack extra CVRs when they go to Antarctica?

[old_man]

Well, that's just what I was getting at. I know what I would do, in the event I even bothered to press the little "test" button during my cockpit checks, and observed it was not working. I would probably say "meh" and get on with the day. Maybe mention it to the engineer later. Do they pack extra CVRs when they go to Antarctica?

In larger more complex airplanes there can be all sorts of little 'test' buttons that need to be pushed according to the flight manual. Not bothering to press them or ignoring the result, in my opinion, is not a good practice. Do the preflight the way you are suppose to and if a piece of equipment is found to be not functioning then, like previously stated, look it up in the MEL to see if the flight can proceed without that piece of equipment. Just my 0.02 and yes I know a twotter will take off perfectly fine without a CVR but that's not the point I was trying to get at.

[Beefitarian]

Do all twin otters have CVRs?

[Redneck_pilot86]

Is the CVR not only required to be working for work that falls into 704, ie 10+ passengers? And would a twin otter flying with only three people on board not be considered 703 at most, and therefore not require a CVR at all?

[switchflicker]

(2) Subject to section 605.34, no person shall conduct a take-off in a multi-engined turbine-powered aircraft that is configured for six or more passenger seats and for which two pilots are required by the aircraft type certificate or by the subpart under which the aircraft is operated, unless the aircraft is equipped with a cockpit voice recorder that conforms to section 551.101 of Chapter 551 of the Airworthiness Manual and section 625.33 of Standard 625 — Aircraft Equipment and Maintenance of the General Operating and Flight Rules Standards.
(amended 2003/09/01; previous version)

The Twin Otter requires only one pilot by type certificate, but maybe two by operating rules. I don't know what rules they were flying under. In any event, for this ferry flight, I'm sure it was not configured (Note it doesn't say certificated) for six or more passengers.

So I don't think the CVR was a requirement at all.

Sw

[co-joe]

If that day was completely without 704 legs, then no the CVR wouldn't have been required, but I'm sure KBA is wishing it had been functioning, as are all of us.

I have still been looking for pictures of Mt Elizabeth. Can anyone who has seen her help? When I google search I get pictures of mountains none of which look the same to me. It could be some from one angle or another. One is from a post card that loioks to have been through a rough travel. There is a recent unfortunate news story from india involving Mt Elizabeth Hospital that keeps scewing my search results...

The only one I've found so far that actually says Mt Elizabeth in the title is this picture of a postcard. I'm not sure what the white thing is. A flash reflection maybe?


Digital Journal has this one:


I get the feeling nobody has a picture they know to be of her, but to give some feel of the size of the mountains on that mysterious white area of the globe most of us have never seen, they insert a photo of antarctic mountain ranges.

[pelmet]

"Everything we know at this stage points to a controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) accident, which is an issue on the TSB's Watchlist"