The mystery continues to grow and the plot thickens.
We now have the much awaited Preliminary Report. You’ve all read it and so have I. It refines some information that we already knew, and introduces a new opinion that most of us did not seem to share before its release. The Board conjectures that the aircraft did not break up in flight but struck the ocean in a level attitude and right side up. That may be nice to know but it does not answer the question that we are all asking: Why did the crew lose control of this aircraft?
The evidence of compression is significant but it does not actually tell us if the entire aircraft stuck the surface at the same time, or perhaps only major sections of its structure, or if that actually occurred at all. Was it in one piece; two; three? No one knows.
As may have been anticipated, some of us are eager to embrace this new theory of belly impact, in what is assumed to be one piece, as factual; others, like me, remain skeptical.
While the Board has better data than we do, they do not have enough data to reach any definitive conclusions. Thus, they have been forced to form some opinions based on what little evidence they do have. What they have issued is an educated guess – an opinion – nothing more. We should all recognize that truth for the reality that it is.
Let us not forget that all AI Boards are composed of a number of committees whose membership includes a cross section of the “interested parties”. I do not question their integrity but neither do I ignore their humanity nor their often divergent agendas. We cannot ignore that potentially hundreds of millions of dollars may be at stake and dependent upon the final outcome of this investigation. I do not intend to infer conspiracy; I merely state the obvious.
Whatever the case, their renderings are always an opinion – including the final report – reached by consensus or majority vote. Keep that in mind as you think about what they have said so far at this early stage of the inquiry, as well as what they may say in the future.
The objective of all investigations is to determine within our capability – what happened. But, the true purpose of the investigation is to prevent a future recurrence of the event.
If we are to achieve the purpose, we must determine the factual cause beyond all reasonable doubt. Preliminary opinions are of little consequence; only those opinions supported by definitive facts are relevant. In that context it does not really matter whether this particular aircraft broke up in flight or struck the surface while intact. Whichever of these two things may have occurred, neither one of them is the cause of this accident. Each of them is no more than an after effect – a consequence of the cause.
What does matter is that control of this aircraft was lost while in flight. The crew most certainly did not land in the water - whether in one piece or fifty - because they had a penchant for boating. At this point in time that is all that we, including the BEA, actually know to be factual. The consequence of that loss of control was a fatal crash in which 228 souls lost their lives. The true cause of that loss of control is what the Board must ultimately determine. The rest is educated guess + not so educated guess.
Unfortunately, the location of the accident severely limits the data available to the investigators. If the recorders should not be recovered intact, this mystery will remain unsolved. Fate is the Hunter.