Introduction To The Investigation Methods â€Myassignmenthelp.Com

Question: Discuss About The Introduction To The Investigation Methods? Answer: Introduction A Beech Super King Air 200 aircraft, departed from Western Australias Perth at 1009 UTC, on September 04th, 2000 on a charter flight to Leonara with seven passengers on board with one pilot (Griffioen, 2009; Klan, 2017). Till 1032, the operations and communications of the aircraft with the pilot all seemed to be normal. Though, after a very short while of the aircraft climbing through the altitude which was assigned, the speech of the pilot became majorly impaired and he was not able to respond to the instructions of the ATS. There was a progressive deterioration of the pilot over the next eight minutes which was revealed through the open microphone transmissions and the pilot became unconscious; and there was also an absence of any sort of sounds of the passenger activity from the aircraft (Australian Transport Safety Bureau, 2014). For the remainder of the flight, no human response of any sort could be detected. After five hours of take off from Western Australias Perth, the aircra ft came in contact with ground near Queenslands Burketown and was completely destroyed with no survivors (International Aviation Safety Association, 2017). The crash resulted in an investigation being conducted into the accident which was referred to as Ghost Flight (Thomas, 2011). The purpose of conducting this investigation was to establish if the accident was caused due to negligence or for any other reasons and to evaluate the reason behind this accident. In the following parts, the investigation conducted in this context has been evaluated whereby the evidence used in this investigation, along with the effectiveness of the conducted investigation has been elucidated. Investigation Legal Context The ATSB, i.e., the Australian Transport Safety Bureau is an operational autonomous multi-modal Bureau which comes within the Commonwealth Department of Transport and Regional Services (Australian Transport Safety Bureau, 2017a). The safety investigations conducted by ATSB are independent of the operator, regulatory or the other external bodies. Through the Director of Air Safety Investigation, in terms of aviation, the ATSB has been given the responsibility for the investigation of accidents, incidents, safety deficiencies and serious accidents which involve the operations of civil aircraft in the nation, and it also participates in the overseas investigations of serious incidents and accidents where the Australian registered aircrafts are involved (Skybrary, 2017). The investigations are not the only thing conducted by the ATSB as it also studies the aviation systems for identification of the underlying factors and the trends which have the possibility of adversely affecting the sa fety (Revolvy, 2017). The basic concern here is for the safety of the commercial air transport and a specific emphasis is made to the fare paying passenger operations (Australian Transport Safety Bureau, 2000). The aviation functions are performed by the ATSB as per the provisions covered under Part 2A of the Air Navigation Act, 1920 (Austlii, 2017). Under section 19CA, of this act, the investigations are conducted with the object of determining the situations which surround the accidents, safety deficiency, serious incident or incident for prevention of occurrences of similar events (Federal Register of Legislation, 2008). This determination results in the formation of the base for the advisory notices, safety recommendations, accident prevention programs, safety studies, research and statistical analysis. The objective of these investigations is not to determine the liability or the blame. Though, the investigation is required to include the factual material having the required weightage for supporting the analysis and the conclusion which has been attained. At times, this material shows the information which reflects on the individuals and the organizations performance and the actions co ntribution in the outcomes of the issue in investigation. This material is used in a balanced manner where a proper explanation is given to what took place and the reasons for the same, in an unbiased and fair way (Australian Transport Safety Bureau, 2017b). Investigation Conducted In this case, the investigation which was conducted showed that the pilot had the proper license and had also gone through the required training. Further, there was nothing to show that the pilot had been medically unfit for operating the flight. The investigation also examined the weather and it was established that there was no hazard presented by the weather regarding the operation of the aircraft and it was on its planned route as well, where throughout, there was no such hazard owing to weather as a factor. The flight path of the aircraft had been consistent with the manner in which the aircraft would have been if controlled by the autopilot where there was no human intervention, once the position DEBRA was passed by the aircraft (Aviation Safety Network, 2017). Once the aircraft had attained the altitude of FL250, which was the assigned altitude, the problems with the pilot in his speech and breathing patters were shown to be constantly changing and there was a presence of cons istent sign with hypoxia; however, an explosive or rapid depressurisation of the aircraft cabin was not likely to have taken place in this instance (Australian Transport Safety Bureau, 2000). When the testing was conducted, it was revealed that Hydrogen Cyanide and Carbon Monoxide were not very likely to have been the factors in occurrence of this accident and there was also an absence of any kind of irritation in the occupants airways which was a proof of the fact that the chances of dire in the cabin was an unlikely affair. The chances of the pilot being incapacitated by being alone, as a result of some medical ailment like heart attack or stroke was also an unlikely possibility as there was an absence of an apparent activity or of an action by the other occupants of the aircraft during the flight duration (Australian Transport Safety Bureau, 2000). It was concluded in the investigation that even though there could have been a number of possible reasons for the incapacitation of the passengers and the pilot, the incapacitation was, most likely, a result of the hypobaric hypoxia as a result of the aircraft being partially or wholly unpressurised, along with the fact that the supplemental oxygen was not received on time. As a result of the major and extensive nature of the damages which the aircraft attained, which was due to the impact of the aircraft with the ground, nothing could be salvaged from the aircraft. Further, the lack of recording systems being installed in the aircraft resulted in the non determination of the reasons for which the aircraft was unpressurised or why the passengers and the pilot was unable to get the supply of supplemental oxygen could not be determined by the conducted investigation (Australian Transport Safety Bureau, 2000). Though, the investigation did conclude that an aural warning regarding the hi gh cabin altitude could have prevented the accident, along with setting up of the aural and visual alerts for operating when the cabin pressure altitude went beyond 10,000 ft (Aviation Chief, 2017) Using Evidence in Investigation Background Evidence denotes something which is presented for supporting an assertion that has been made, and can be strong or weak. Something which can directly proof the assertion being true, without raising any counter points is the strong kind of evidence. And something which is just consistent with the assertion that has been made, but is unable to rule other the contradictory assertion is deemed as circumstantial evidence. The evidence in any investigation is a crucial aspect for proving a point which has been made. The investigators of any incident are required to take special care in collecting all the evidence and evaluating them properly. There is a need to protect the evidence from being tampered, being lost, washed away or be contaminated. So, while preparing for any investigation, the investigator has to be prepared beforehand and evaluate every piece of evidence with care (Australian Transport Safety Bureau, 2000). At the scene of the evidence, there are two key points which have to be taken care of, i.e., preservation of evidence and continuity of it. The preservation of evidence relates to making certain that the evidence which is collected, is not lost, degraded, contaminated or alerted. The continuity of evidence relates to being able to establish that a particular evidence item, which had been examined, exhibited or analysed before the court was the same one as was collected from the accident site and that the same has not been changed at all. Evidence is something which can be lost over a period of time due to a number of factors. So, one has to follow the golden rule of always collect the evidence at the earliest possible opportunity. If this is not done, one can risk not getting any evidence at all. There is a key need to protect the evidence from different elements both after and before collection, and secure and store it at the earliest. Particularly when dealing with perishable item, it needs to be put in evidence at the earliest and even refrigerate in needful cases. The key here is to protect the evidence from tampering. The emergency response teams have to take special care, whereby even though their work takes significance over evidence collection, they do not contaminate the evidence in a wilful manner. Case Study The investigation into the Beech super King Air 200 VH-SKC was conducted by ATSB. In conducting this investigation, a lot of factors were taken into consideration and the presented evidence was evaluated to understand what actually went down in this case. And the evidence or the absence of it per se, resulted in the conclusions being drawn for this investigation. It was ensured in this investigation that the evidence was not tampered with and that each piece of evidence was collected with care and in a swift manner. The first point which was investigated upon here was the professional approach of the pilot to flying and whether he had been methodical in using the checklists. In this regard, the witnesses were taken as the evidence who stated that the pilot had been happy and physically fit before he took off for the flight. This led to the investigation concluded that the pilot had been medically fit as there was no evidence to show otherwise or to show that fatigue of pilot resulted in the accident (Australian Transport Safety Bureau, 2000). Another factor which was evaluated in this case was the contents of the aircraft oxygen system. In this regard, the evidence highlighted that the oxygen bottle had been removed from the aircraft back in May 2000 and the same had been tested hydrostatically at the facility where it was pressure of the vessel was tested and where it was refilled. Subsequently, it was installed again in the aircraft. The documents of the aircraft clearly highlighted that the oxygen contents had been properly replenished an entire month before the accident took place. Though, the investigation could not give confirmation to whether the gas which was filled in the oxygen system of the aircraft was as per the specifications of the dry breathing oxygen for aviators. Though, there was also an absence of evidence which could show that the required specification was not met. As per the witnesses, the oxygen pressure gauge, at the date of accident, showed 1,500 lb/in, which was a sufficient amount of oxygen for the passengers and pilot for 33 minutes in case of depressurisation (Australian Transport Safety Bureau, 2000). Another key piece of evidence which was evaluated in this case was weight and balance. In considering this, the personal baggage and the weight of eight occupants was taken into consideration. It was assumed that the occupants remained seated and the centre of gravity was calculated to be within the range of flight as was allowed. After taking into consideration all of the factors, there was no evidence before the ATSB which could show that there was any dangerous good on the aircraft during the time of the flight which could have resulted in the incident. When the records of the maintenance of the aircraft were evaluated, no recurring problems in maintenance were found which could be deemed as a factor in the incident which occurred. The maintenance manual of the manufacturer did not cover a need for performing ongoing functional tests of the barometric switches which had been activated for altering regarding the cabin altitude and about to automatic passenger oxygen systems. The in vestigation could not find any evidence regarding the testing or changing of these switches since the year of 1990. Due to these reasons, the serviceability of these barometric switches could not be determined (Australian Transport Safety Bureau, 2000). The evidence presented for the examination of the landing gear had been consistent with the same being in a retracted position when the collision took place. The investigation also could not find any evidence which could show that something other than the normal operations regarding the flight controls were underway at the time the accident took place. When the engine and the propellers were investigated, the evidence highlighted that there was rotational damage on both the power turbine assemblies and the compressor which highlighted that both of these sections of the free turbine engine were turning when the impact occurred. There was also presence of evidence which showed that there was a pre-existing leak of bleed air at the P3 customer air outlet of each engine through the gaskets. Though, these leaks were deemed as not a factor in the accident. When the damage to engines and propellers were examined, along with the ground scars, the evidence revealed that both the engines were operating at the time of ground impact and were also developing power. Regarding the claims of fire, the statements of the eyewitnesses revealed that there had been no sign of fire till the aircraft had collided with the ground and only after was a fireball visible. Even though the ground fire continued for several hours after the impact, there was no evidence to show that there had been a fire before the impact. These are just a few examples of the evidences which helped the ATSB in their investigation (Australian Transport Safety Bureau, 2000). Effectiveness of the Investigation The key purpose of any investigation is to gather the facts so that the complaint can be resolved and the situation can be clearly explained. This is also important as at a later date, some attorney or jury could scrutinize a particular aspect of the investigation which was conducted. For instance, the very case which is being discussed here could have to be evaluated again if a claim by some person is made in the future stating that they have evidence to prove the actual reason of the accident or any other claim. At that point of time, the effectiveness of the investigation conducted in this case would help in establishing the truth. And it could mean the new claim being proved true or false, in context of the originally conducted investigation (Wood and Sweginnis, 2006). At times, the job of a person or their wellbeing could be dependent on the quality of investigation. For instance, had the investigation of this case not been conducted in a proper manner, it could have stated that it was the fault of the pilot for the plane hitting the ground, whereas the reality is quite different and it was not the fault of the pilot. Hence investigation cannot be conducted in a haphazardly manner or in absence of a clear plan in mind. As the memory of the investigators cannot remember every point established during the investigation, the conduct and documenting of the investigation in a proper manner becomes all the more important (Rodrguez-Prez, 2016). For any investigation to be effective, there is a need to minimize the intimidation of the witnesses, for the investigation teams to be properly formed and duties being divided in them, for establishing a proper time frame of the investigation so that it could be conducted in a time based manner, determining if there is a need to provide a confirmatory memorandum, obtaining all the required documents, planning for the interviews which have to be conducted, preparing both closing and opening comments, preparing set of written questions, taking care when the multiple interviews are conducted, issuing written statements, and taking clear and proper notes (Thompson, 2007). The effectiveness of an investigation also depends upon the continuity of evidence, whereby not only the evidence must be properly preserved, but a chain of custody should be maintained to show that the same has not been altered after it was collected. There is a need to keep unbroken and auditable record for the security of every evidence item. In this chain, it needs to be shown how, where and when the particular evidence was collected and stored; how it was handled; every person who handled it, signed for handling the evidence; and there were no gaps in the records. In case this chance is broken, the evidence loses its value and effectiveness of the investigation is threatened. At the sites of accidents thus, a proper plan is formulated to collect and handle evidence and standard tool kits are used, so that the evidence can be collected in a proper manner. In aircraft related accidents, the primary and secondary scene, both have to be carefully evaluated. In this regard, there is a need to follow SMEAC format, where situation, mission, execution, administration and communications have to be considered. In order for the investigation conducted by ATSB to be effective, it had to take into consideration a number of factors which were related to the accident and the two major factors which were investigated here was the probability of the aircraft being unpressurized for a major part during its claim and cruise; and the incapacitation of the passengers and the pilot, most probably as a result of hypobaric hypoxia resulted from the high cabin altitude and not getting the supplemental oxygen (FSF Editorial Staff, 2002). Before the investigation could be concluded, the ASTB took into consideration a range of factors which included the history of the flight; the information related to the aircraft in terms of radios, climb performance, fuel system, warning system, pressure hull, etc.; the wreckage and impact information including flight controls, oxygen system, etc.; the communications; air traffic services; meteorological information; and flight recorders among the other things (Australia n Transport Safety Bureau, 2000). All these factors were carefully analysed before the investigation was concluded. This much pain and this much effort was put into the investigation so that it could be deemed as effective. Conclusion To conclude the discussion carried on in the preceding parts, one thing is very clear that the chartered Beechcraft 200 Super King Air crash of 2000 was a shocking event for the nation, which remains as a very intriguing case due to the lack of clarity in the actual reason for the crash. Even though the ATSB conducted a thorough investigation into the matter, till date, the exact cause of the crash remains unknown and only on the basis of probability, the reason for this crash has been stated as being the incapacitation of the passengers and the pilot owing to hypoxia. However, even for coming to this conclusion, the ATSB had to evaluate and investigate upon each and every factor which was related to the aircraft and the accident, wherein factors like the capacity of the engine, the weight of the aircraft, the weather conditions and the availability of oxygen supply were inspected. All this was done so that proper evidence could be used for conducting this investigation. It is crucia l that the investigation is effective and for these purposes, certain basic elements are required, which were properly undertaken in this investigation. The investigation conducted in this case is an effective proof that even when the exact cause of the accident is unknown, an effective investigation can help in establishing the most probable cause and ruling out the causes which could have a negated impact on a person. References Austlii. (2017) Air Navigation Act 1920. [Online] Austlii. Available from: https://posh.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdb/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ana1920148/ [Accessed on: 11/09/17] Australian Transport Safety Bureau. (2000) Pilot and Passenger Incapacitation. [Online] Australian Government. Available from: https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/24344/aair200003771_001.pdf [Accessed on: 11/09/17] Australian Transport Safety Bureau. (2014) Aviation safety investigations reports. [Online] Australian Government. Available from: https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2000/AAIR/aair200003771.aspx [Accessed on: 11/09/17] Australian Transport Safety Bureau. (2017a) The Hazard Posed to Aircraft by Birds. [Online] Australian Government. Available from: https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/43383/Hazard_aircraft_by_birds.pdf [Accessed on: 11/09/17] Australian Transport Safety Bureau. (2017b) Overview of the ATSB. [Online] Australian Government. Available from: https://www.atsb.gov.au/about_atsb/overview/ [Accessed on: 11/09/17] Aviation Chief. (2017) Beechcraft King Air VH-SKC. [Online] Aviation Chief. Available from: https://www.aviationchief.com/beechcraft-king-air-vh-skc.html [Accessed on: 11/09/17] Aviation Safety Network. (2017) Accident description. [Online] Aviation Safety Network. Available from: https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20000904-0 [Accessed on: 11/09/17] Federal Register of Legislation. (2008) Air Navigation Act 1920. [Online] Australian Government. Available from: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2009C00136 [Accessed on: 11/09/17] FSF Editorial Staff. (2002) Pilot Incapacitation by Hypoxia Cited in Fatal Five-hour Flight of Beech King Air. Flight Safety Foundation, 53(10), pp. 1. Griffioen, H. (2009) Air Crash Investigations: The Crash of Helios Airways Flight 522. North Carolina: Lulu Publishing Services. International Aviation Safety Association. (2017) Investigation Reports of Abiding Interest. [Online] International Aviation Safety Association. Available from: https://www.iasa-intl.com/folders/belfast/180803.html [Accessed on: 11/09/17] Klan, A. (2007) Why Beechcrafts Super King Air features so often in deadly crashes. [Online] The Australian. Available from: https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/why-beechcrafts-workhorse-features-so-often-in-deadly-crashes/news-story/171968fb645e3da78524f6dff41ea60b [Accessed on: 11/09/17] Revolvy. (2017) 2000 Australia Beechcraft King Air crash. [Online] Revolvy. Available from: https://www.revolvy.com/main/index.php?s=2000%20Australia%20Beechcraft%20King%20Air%20crash [Accessed on: 11/09/17] Rodrguez-Prez, J. (2016) Handbook of Investigation and Effective CAPA Systems. 2nd ed. United States of America: American Society of Quality, Quality Press. Skybrary. (2017) Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB). [Online] Skybrary. Available from: https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Australian_Transport_Safety_Bureau_(ATSB) [Accessed on: 11/09/17] Thomas, G. (2011) No sound from pilot as ghost flight kept going. [Online] The West Australian. Available from: https://thewest.com.au/news/australia/no-sound-from-pilot-as-ghost-flight-kept-going-ng-ya-164865 [Accessed on: 11/09/17] Thompson, J. (2007) How to Conduct an Effective Investigation. [Online] CIO. Available from: https://www.cio.com/article/2438806/risk-management/how-to-conduct-an-effective-investigation.html [Accessed on: 11/09/17] Wood, R.H., and Sweginnis, R.W. (2006) Aircraft Accident Investigation. Casper, WY: Endeavor Books.