Spanair accident at Madrid

[justme69]

The "political" "blaming" BS game keeps on going.

Seems Boeing did a "Flight Operations Support" to Spanair between Nov 5 and 14th 2007, and declared Spanair procedures "excellent" as well as the degree of compliance by their crews, pointing out that the degree of coordination (CRM) between crew within Spanair "exceeded world standards".

Some CIAIAC members have resigned after what they consider is excesive "blaming" of Spanair for not following Boeing's recommendation of TOWS alarm verification prior to each flight issued 21 year ago after Detroit's accident, which, let's remember again, was neither mandatory anywhere in the world nor was ever made known to Spanair.

Those members feel that more "blame" (another way to say "more important in the circunstances leading to the accident") was the de-energizing of the TOWS system itself (i.e. why the TOWS didn't work to begin with).

In another words, they feel that, after the pilots themselves, Boeing is next contributor to the cause of the accident for the TOWS failure itself (not easy to detect without specific testing) and the failure to warn Spanair to update their testing procedures (where TOWS would've been found inoperative and the plane not fit to fly, as it's MEL).

You Mad Dogs out there: did/do you have to check TOWS before each flight by you companie's procedures?

For almost 5 hours the judge in charge of the judiciary investigation (and a judicial secretary and the general attorney) have been listening to the CVR recordings, in a process more difficult than anticipated. Within a few days, the relevant transcripts will be once again checked against the actual recordings by a judicial secretary and then will be incorporated to the judiciary investigation. No more actions are expected from the judge until he receives a copy of the preliminary CIAIAC's report, probably on Monday.

This finalised preliminary report will include any new proven facts / clarifications plus alegations to the draft made by parties involved (manufacturers, safety regulation bodies, operators, ...) to which the draft was made available a couple of days ago.

So far it seems that at some point somehow, the copilot, who is the one that performed the take-off, does call the flaps and slats to be in place (i.e. "slats ok, flaps ok" ... exact wording not known by me yet).

Quality of the voice on the recording (crew's channels) is quite low (I don't know why, but pbbly will be blamed on post-accident damage). Other channels have better audio quality.

So it seems it was either a rotten checklist challenge response or some malfunction that made him think the flaps were out, but they didn't deploy (less likely, of course).