Were the 6-hour 72 steps transcripts starting at 18:57 CDT part of a covert plan to blowup the Deepwater Horizon?
In BP's Post Blowout Blueprint 3 Hours Before Incident Confirms Inside Job, investigated by GL and a few others (me included), the first 4 (A to D) itemised transcripts appeared to have accidentally been included or in the haste not deleted from the 99 pages of USCG, District 8, SAR Message Traffic contained in USCG/MMS Joint Investigation into the DWH accident bundle of documents. Come to think of it, if items A to D were deleted, then all the subsequent itemized transcripts would have to be renumbered (a tedious task) or left missing. Then some smart ass would ask the obvious question ...”what happened to items A to D?”
A 66-page pdf version can be downloaded at http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/3176/uscg-logs.pdf
Initially items A-D was thought to be part of the SAR (search & Rescue) operations until someone checked the details (contents) and time. It is important to note that events on the ground differed from the scripted plot on details that could not be planned ahead. While the time of requested assistance, aircraft from A/S NOLA and ATC MOBILE were the same, the number of POB (personnel onboard), rescued from water, the ETA of USCG at the site etc could not be anticipated.
According to New York Times, the earlier (by 3 hours) explosion on the rig was to be investigated. Now 2 years later, it has all been forgotten.
The Coast Guard says a crew member from an oil platform that sank off Louisiana reported an initial explosion three hours before the rig went up in flames in a second, larger explosion. Coast Guard Senior Chief Petty Officer Mike O'Berry says the first blast was reported at 7 p.m. CDT Tuesday.
According to BP's official time line, between 18:35 to 19:55 CDT:
Discussion ensued about pressure anomalies and negative-pressure test procedure. Seawater pumped into the kill line to confirm it was full. Opened kill line and bled 0.2 bbl to mini trip tank; flow stopped. Kill line opened and monitored for 30 minutes with no flow. At19:55:00 hours, the negative-pressure test was concluded and considered a good test.
There could not be an explosion at 18:57 CDT. If there was one, BP would have to issue a stop work order. If it was minor incident, why would there be an order to "abandon rig"? It could not be a safety drill. No safety drill would contact D8 to launch an all out search and rescue operation (SAR). In any case a safety drill does not anticipate the aircraft to be delayed by equipment malfunction. If a malfunction was anticipated, they would have been repaired at the earliest point of suspected breakdown. Besides no safety drill would stretch to 6 hours, not at the most critical time of abandoning the well.
Thus, if item AS at 210413Z (2313 CDT April 20) is an accurate record of MH65C 6576 launch and malfunction equipment as with the rest, then the transcripts (en-block) from A to BT must be a true and correct record of events. Then items A to D (from 18:57 to 22:00 CDT on April 20) of the same itemised series must be true as well and not some fictitious events as some had postulate them to be. The trouble is, the blowout occurred only at 21:45 CDT and mayday sent out at 21:53 CDT. D8 was on record of having received the distress call at 22:04 CDT. So what gives?
Could the initial CIC brief at 18:57 CDT (3 hours before the explosion) be discussing the DSC distress call from the Deepwater Horizon reporting an explosion of unknown cause and “07 POB recovered safely onto the 285ft workboat (M/V D Bankston)” 3 hours before it actually happened?
Could the “Response Resource requested” at 22:00 CDT (D) be forwarded to D8, four full minutes before the distress call was received at 22:04? Could “....blanked out#3...” be briefed on the incident 2 hours 15 minutes before the blowout actually happened at 21:45? Could “...blanked out#1...” and “...blanked out#2...” be briefed with the question “was the rig underway or at anchor when the explosion occurred ?” at 19:18, 2 hours 27 minutes before the blowout?
The giveaway was statement “THE RIG COMPANY IS TRANSOCEAN; D8 IS TRYING TO GET MORE INFORMATION FROM THEM”. Whoever were discussing this between DWH and the shore (to be caught on radio communication or satellite phone?), were obvious trying to prepare a message implying Transocean was caught totally unaware of the explosion. Sort of to create an alibi. So there was no “real” explosion at 18:57 but only a discussion of what D8 should be receiving and responding to a planned explosion in 3 hours time. And they knew the blowout would occur in about 3 hours since Transocean had field-tested the “seawater triggering technique” to perfection in the North Sea just 4 months before the Macondo Blowout.
Transocean blowout in the North Sea 4 months before, closely resembled the Macondo Blowout. Makes one wonder whether they were practicing a blowout or preventing one.
Next. Anyone who has worked in the offshore industry can tell you, Transocean and BP would be the first to be informed of any accident with their direct line of reporting (an essential requirement in offshore regulations). No wonder BK wrote:
If D8 was notified at 22:04 CDT, why were BP and Transocean still in the dark about the “Accident” on their own rig more than 12 minutes after the mayday call was sent out? Surely offshore regulations in the US cannot be less stringent than 3rd world countries. Were BP and Transocean really sleeping on the job or were they in cahoot in a contrived plot to blow up DWH? Does the phrase “crude corruption and oily business” come to mind?