Did you lot read the rest of the report or were there too many big words? F/O did a great job (I mean that!)
Connector - whether indexed or not, crossed pins would not have prevented the connector from correctly engaging. (Contacts/receptacles are the correct term). If Flight report is true, there is no excuse for not having done a continuity check on completion (a primary FCS!!!)but there again, what did ADRES tell him to do? This constitues a repair and would be covered under ATA 20 Wiring Practises.The engineer had allegedly only done a flight control function on the right stick. Do Lufthansa/LBA procedures demand a duplicate inspection? Do Airbus classify it as a "vital point"? They may have deemed this incident impossible with the system as currently designed. Another problem, FBY systems make such a repair or maintenance (on the side-stick) the reponsibility of both ATA 27 & 22 (flying controls and auto-flight) disciplines. Was there confusion or another Human Factors issue? Was the engineer being pushed to get the job done quickly? Had the crew performed a correct sense check (think about Excalibur a few years ago)?
Accidents are caused when a chain of relatively insignificant incidents link up. Think of James Reason's analogy of the spinning discs or the Swiss Cheese model.
------------------
Bus429 - the pilot's pal!
[This message has been edited by Bus429 (edited 22 May 2001).]