Once again, a question of interpretation, who was trying to deceive who???
'Oh what a tangled web we weave,When first we practice to deceive'
What interpretation would you take from Judge Harold H. Greene's ruling stating " It is clearly established that, when the pilot told Mac Centre he wished to descend VMC, he effectively informed the controllers that he could see where he was going. In so doing he took sole responsibility for separating the airplane from other aircraft and terrain, and he was on his own".
He also stated "The operational crew of Flt TE901 acted unreasonably in several respects, including not plotting their actual position from the AINS and descending below 16,000ft contrary to both prudent airmanship and Air New Zealand policy, without first ascertaining what was there or following the other requirenments for such descent. The crew also missed the obvious landmark of Beaumont Island being on the wrong side of the flight path and pressed on in the face of deteriorating weather, with five or six extra [eople milling around the cockpit causing some distraction during the critical period."
Toshirozero,
Perhaps you would like to give us your take on how Justice Greene of the US District Court in Washington was influenced by either the NZ Government NZ CAA, or the fact that the Airline was Govt owned?
Who was it who took the case to the US court, and for what reason?
It was not the decision that was expected, This judge obviously agreed with the Chief Accident Inspector's findings, and the published beliefs of many past and present aircrew, totalling many hundreds of thousands of hours of air time, as against a judge who had none.