First, congratulations to all members of this forum, specially in this thread. I´m only a reader and entusiast from Brazil (sorry my bad english). I need to put a question publish today in brazilian media -
Revista Veja and I use a Babelfish translator (some erros in automatic translate). For Yours opinions:
MAGAZINE VEJA: GUILT WAS OF THE PILOT
A human error is in the origin of the worse air accident of the history of Brazilian aviation. The information already gotten by means of the analysis of the box-black color of the Airbus A320 of the TAM – that in last day 17 if the death of 199 people shocked against a building of the company, causing – they indicate that the airplane, when settling, did not obtain to decelerate the sufficient because of an error of the commander of the flight.
These information, still kept in secrecy for the commission of the Aeronautics that investigates the accident, show that one of the two handspikes that regulate the functioning of the turbines, called manetes, was is of position when the airplane touched down main of the Airport of Congonhas. The error made with that the turbines of the Airbus functioned in opposing directions: while the left helped the airplane to brake, as he was desired, the right made it to speed up.
With this, the airplane, that settled about 240 kilometers for the moment, did not obtain to stop. Inquiries still disclose that, despite rain, it did not have aquaplaning in the track nor fails in the system of brakes of the tires. The news article of SEES also selected that who piloted the Airbus at the moment of the accident was Kleyber commander Rasp, and not, as suspected the Aeronautics, the copilot Enrique Stephanini Di Sacco, that is dismissed of the Goal after three months of work and was in the TAM had little time.
The complete inquiry of the accident will have to still last ten months. However, already it was arrived at the conclusion of that the error of the pilot was same the initial cause of the accident – that, it was not for the characteristics of the track of the Airport of Congonhas, could have had very lesser consequences. The reasons that had led to the fall of the Airbus of the TAM have indirect relation with the fact of the aircraft to be flying in that day with the stopped right reverse.
Reverse is a mechanism that, when inverting the air flow of the turbines, helps to decelerate the airplane. As the system of lockwire of an aircraft he is composed of a set of resources, a device can even fly without problems with one of the disactivated reverses or with two. Only that, when this happens, the pilot, when settling, has to operate manetes of different form of the routine. E this is what it can have confused the commander of the flight.
When keeping manete of the right turbine – that he was with the stopped reverse – in acceleration position, and not in the position "idling", it hindered the complete lockwire it airplane, that for the moment crossed the end of the track to a next speed the 200 kilometers. One is not about an unknown error. It was committed by the pilots of the o but others two aircraft of the same model, the A320 of the Airbus. As much in the disaster occurred in March of 1998, in the Phillipino, how much in the accident that had in 2004, in the airport of Taipei, in Taiwan, one concluded that he had imperfections in the operation of manetes.
The coincidences go beyond: in the two cases, the airplanes were with one of the stopped turbines, accurately as in the accident of the TAM. In the Phillipino, a flight of the Airlines Phillipine passed direct for the track and alone it after stopped shocking itself with barracos wooden in the neighborhoods. In 2004, the fact if repeated with rigorous exactness. Of this time, a A320 crossed the track of the airport of Taipei. Again the inquiries had shown that manete of the turbine that had the stopped reverse it was in the missed position, pushing the onward A320.
In the thursday, Brigadier General Jorge Kersul Son, head of the inquiries of the Center of Inquiry and Prevention of Aeronautical Accidents (Cenipa) of the Ministry of the Defense, said that the landing with the stopped reverse can have psicologicamente "influenced" the pilots. He still said to be improbable that the absence of grooves for water draining in Congonhas, grooving, has had some relation with the accident (it rained in São Paulo in the night of day 17).
The conclusion is that it did not have aquaplaning in the day of the tragedy. Apóia it in three evidences. The first one of them is the absence of specific marks in the track of the airport. These marks are formed when the water under the tires of an aircraft that is skidding esquenta until the boil point. They are clear, very different of the black marks caused by normal lockwires. In the track of Congonhas, such marks had not been found. The data already harvested in the box-black color and the analysis of that it remained of the tires of the Airbus, found in rubbles of the building of the TAM, had moved away from time this hypothesis. (Source: Magazine
VEJA)
The original in brazilian portuguese can read
here