Well, I don't want to get in an argument here, but if indeed the response to the checklist item flaps/slats was "OK", then that's your first evidence that the crew wasn't doing their job properly.
They should've answered with the degrees setting and the setting, like "11º/Takeoff", as trained and required by the SOP.
Also, it wouldn't be the first proven case in the history of aviation of a rotten response, but it would be the first one of a multiple system failure involving a very simple and reliable mechanism that developed into no less than 8 (4 for each wing) simultaneous failures (flaps actuators, flaps sensors, slats actuators, slats sensors), that resulted in a lighted indicator and an analog watch dial indications TAKEOFF for slats and 11º for each of the flaps when indeed both flaps were at 0º and the slats (likely) retracted.
If you choose to rather believe in someone saying "ok" rather than both needles of an ANALOG indicator gauge pointing "mysteriously" to 11º (while the flaps were at 0º) and a lighted indicator receiving power from TWO switches (one on each wing) closed by "something" in the place of the slats while the slats weren't actually there ... well, that's your choice and indeed it's a possibility.
But realistically, we all know what is far more likely.
Also, it has been proven in the past that crews failed to deploy flaps and slats in at least 4 more cases (Detroit, Delta, LAPA, MAP). So it is not so "unusual".
And the CIAIAC CVR preliminary analisys doesn't say the pilots completed the checklist, only that there is evidency of SOME ITEMS of the checklists being performed. Exactly, what it says is:
"The conversations of the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) revealed CERTAIN EXPRESSIONS corresponding to the before engine start checklists .... the normal start list, the after start list and the taxi checklist ..."
It doesn't say anywhere that the pilots called flaps/slats and the response was "ok", which still would've been a wrong response, but at least it would show that they were trying and they probably thought they had set it.
And UNOFFICIALLY, sources close to the investigation say that you can perhaps, with foreinsic CVR analysis help, indicate that indeed the pilot called flaps/slats and the copilot answered ok. But that's unofficial and would still not prove that the actual flaps and slats were commanded to deploy and the indicators verified, only that they thought they had set them.
The alleged response of "OK" (instead of 11º/Takeoff) could also mean that the copilot understood a different item to be checked instead of the flaps/slats and replied to that, while the pilot calling the item didn't verify or requested the proper response.
Last edited by justme69; 24th Oct 2008 at 16:03.