Well, the maintenance technicians declared today for several hours in front of the judge.
Doesn't look very good.
It seems that Boeing's repair manual that Spanair gave the judge detailed the RAT heater and related issues. That would be the manual used for training.
The technicians declared that they didn't consult the manual, only the MEL. They also declared that they didn't perform a TOWS test, as that would've been the pilot's job. They also re-assured that the c/b they disconnected only affected the RAT heater and nothing else.
I have the feeling the judge thinks that wasn't enough and their jobs required a bit more foresight.
They continue being indicted.
The judge has called another set of technicians in Barcelona who previously dealt with reported RAT heater issues the day before.
He has also requested declarations from the technicians dealing with the pilot's report of autoslat warning light several days before (this last thing, not related to the accident in all likehood, but the judge has to follow every concievable lead, I guess, as well as try to stablish if there could've been any relation or not. Any technician can tell him that it is not technically possible that any sort of autoslat failure could have prevented the slats to be mid-seal deployed with a just the "green" takeoff light and the flaps retracted while the analog watch indicator measuring 11º for both wings).
Last edited by justme69; 12th Nov 2008 at 22:16.