A question for those with extensive experience on type: During a ‘normal’ pre-flight inspection, is the rudder trim set to full deflection in one direction to facilitate an inspection of some component, or to confirm the operation of some indicator?
I suppose this is just another way of asking OA’s question: In what circumstances was the rudder trim set to full left in the first place?
I realise that’s not an excuse for missing the trim setting before taking off - if there was an indication that it was not set where it should have been - but the ATSB would have us believe that someone took it upon themselves to board the aircraft and set the rudder trim full left before the flight. Who and why? Or that it was set there at the end of the previous flight. Who and why?
It used to be that all of the holes in the Swiss cheese were considered important. I assume these days that if a pilot takes off with mis-rigged ailerons the cause of the accident will be the pilot’s failure to confirm the controls were operating in the correct sense before take off, and the reason for the mis-rigging an irrelevant bagatelle. (And before you have an attack of the vapours, connedrod: I do realise the accident aircraft in this case had been flown numerous times post-maintenance.)
The fact is that if the ATSB’s theory is correct and the final hole in the pieces of the Swiss cheese is the pilot’s failure to set the rudder trim to the correct position, it inexorably follows that the previous hole was the trim being set to full deflection before the flight. Be good to know who and why. The subsequent litigation will do this job for ATSB.
And the gist of discussions on first world aviation discussion boards is why the aircraft wasn’t controllable and performing better if both engines were delivering full power, despite the rudder trim position and the undercarriage being down.