I assume by the comments above that the investigation findings will be made public. Any idea of a timescale?
The AAIB will no doubt publish a report in due course. It normally takes three or four months. Keep a look out
HERE.
My philosophy has been to lead rather than to follow - it's in my training so if faced with the situation in Phoenix I would like to say that I would have made it 100% clear to the cabin crew that there was a problem. And faced with in-decision/in-action on their part I would have no hesitation when fumes/smoke (or whatever) made breathing/seeing difficult in opening said exit on my own initiative.
Well, I'd hesitate and make damned sure I wasn't about to send my initiative into the vicinity of a running engine first. The evacuation alarm will (hopefully) not be triggered until the engines are shut down. For example, if smoke was being generated by an electical fault, isolating that fault could stop the smoke. You deploying a slide into a running engine would make matters significantly worse. Your philosophy should be to wait until people with more information than you about the situation make a considered decision. Boeing 747s are not evacuated lightly. Part of the decision making process involves considering that there is a significant chance that passengers may be killed or seriously injured during the evacuation itself. Thankfully it didn't happen in this case.
The question is, is the cabin crew permitted to initiate an evacuation without being instructed by the flight deck? If so, what are the circumstances and what would be the repercussions for the crew by senior management for doing so in a case like this? Would they be praised or hung out to dry?
Within BA, the crew can open the exits without instruction in a "catastrophic" emergency. In practice, this is essentially when the pilots have been incapacitated. In this incident, it would not have been permitted and there would undoubtedly be significant repercussions were it to have occurred.