CVR - wait for final report - but . . .
SLF (expanding into aviation law)
Isn't there a case in this exact kind of situation for the full CVR output to be made available to an authorized and official inquiry group to vet for some public disclosure? -- and for this to happen much quicker than the routine process of a full AAIB review and report?
Reason for advocating faster process in this situation has two parts. First is the fact that the globally widespread standing-down of civil aviation holds at least some prospect of decrease in overall performance attributes of returning pilots. Not all, and not necessarily serious where it does occur, but the situation is truly uncharted territory (isn't it?) and so a measure of urgency appears justified, despite the standard rule of waiting upon the final report. Second, whatever the truth turns out to be about why this accident occurred, the fact is that, today, it presents unknowns beyond the stock or catalog of occurrences with tragic results. I mean, probably dozens of very highly qualified aviators have weighed in on-thread about how the badly unstabilized approach, and how many if not mostly all of the two pilots' actions (or omissions of actions), just don't make any sense. (I'll rely on this second factor alone if the first one is too ill-informed.)
As for a vehicle within which to make this quite atypical disclosure, well Annex 13 isn't carved in stone (ask the Iranians . . . ) and so it "**should**" be possible and even feasible to create a subgroup, and to have the equivalent of what we do in courtrooms in the U.S. -- in camera review, where only the judge and his or her staff see the material, and then decide what -- if anything -- can be put on the record. I quite realize this process doesn't exist at present. But….some combination of 'necessity is the mother of invention' with 'hard cases with allegations of bribery in the background make uncomfortable law'.
Last edited by WillowRun 6-3; 30th Jun 2020 at 11:09.