Originally Posted by
Hipper
3. I've read the interim AAIB report and it says that 'at 1958 hrs, the controller asked the pilot to check if the aircraft’s altimeter pressure setting was correctly set to 1013 hPa, because the information on the radar indicated FL53. The pilot acknowledged and, shortly afterwards, the aircraft climbed to FL55'. I also notice wayward height movements of the aircraft as seen by radar in the last three minutes of flight.
If flying into foul weather can the pressure as seen by the aircraft vary enough to give wrong readings?
The reminder to the pilot to set 1013 could be seen as fairly sloppy cockpit procedures. When cleared to climb to a Flight Level a pilot would normally change the altimeter to 1013. The instruction "climb to flight level five five" has a full meaning of " Climb to five thousand five hundred feet with your altimeter set to 1013 mbs at a minimum rate of five hundred feet per minute and then maintain that level until cleared otherwise". Most ATC speak has official meanings far beyond the words spoken.
Originally Posted by
Mike Flynn
Clearly the legal responsibility for the aircraft extend beyond just the pilot who happened to be flying it at the time of the accident.
Actually, probably not. As there was no Air Operators Certificate in force (nor could there be) and as a result no responsible officers, under British law the commander of the aircraft makes the decisions and takes the responsibility. A licenced engineer takes responsibility for the serviceability of the aircraft, but it is up to the commander to confirm this.
Aircraft commanders have awesome authority, but equally awesome responsibilities.
Probably the same in France and who knows with the Americans.