Re the report in French posted by Catchup
From (English) reports I've read, it seems some new report into the AF Concorde crash, which is critical of French officials for allegedly not rigorously monitoring Concorde's safety, has been leaked to the press.
NB: It’s not clear from what I’ve read whether the new report was prepared by an independent body or by experts instructed by lawyers representing people claiming damages.
French lawyer Roland Rappaport who represents the family of pilot Christian Marty says he’s read the report and expects it will lead investigating judge Christophe Regnard to place officials from DGAC, the country's civil aviation authority, and the aerospace giant EADS, which made the supersonic airliner, under investigation.
Claire Hocquet, a colleague of Mr Rappaport, said: "We have all reason to think, we're hoping it in any case, that the judge will announce the placing under investigation."
Rappaport (predictably) makes lots of emotive comments, claiming "For 20 years, Concorde was a danger to the public, and the accident had to happen some time."
An article in Valeurs Actuelles, a French weekly magazine, said the new, follow-up safety report had explored who was at fault for failing to come up with a system to monitor years of safety incidents leading up to the crash. It says the report states: "[The plane's] owners, authorities and builders failed to put into place a system collecting reports on [past] incidents".
The magazine says the new report could lead to the judge launching investigations into whether there had been "involuntary homicide".
In March, the French judge placed Continental Airlines under judicial investigation for "involuntary homicide and injuries".
A lawyer for Continental has denied the United States airline bore any responsibility.
The prosecutor's office has contended that Continental broke US Federal Aviation Administration rules by using titanium in a part of the plane that normally required the use of aluminium, which is softer.
A spokeswoman for EADS said: "On anything related to judicial enquires, our policy is to refrain from making any comments."
British Airways, which also operated the supersonic aircraft, categorically denied the lawyer's claims about Concorde safety. A spokeswoman said yesterday: "We would never have operated an aircraft we considered to be in any way unsafe."
A spokesman for the UK CAA said Concorde had been one of the most closely-monitored aircraft because its supersonic capability made it so complex: "The aircraft would not have flown unless it met CAA and European safety requirements. " Maintenance would have been carried out by airline engineers after every flight to CAA specifications, but there would also have been independent inspections, sometimes as often as weekly."
(Edit)
This has been split from another thread, hence the reference to a post by 'Catchup'.
Just in case anyone misunderstands my post - I think it was one of the saddest events in the history of aviation when one of the finest aircraft ever built stopped flying.
Last edited by Flying Lawyer; 27th August 2005 at 15:24.