Captplaystation, I suppose you remember that the UK AAIB were also party to the Concorde investigation? And that you have read the appendix they were permitted to add, pointing out where they disagreed?
But the AAIB did not dissent from the BEA on any substantial issues, and they certainly did not argue in favour of any of the popular bar-room-chat points you threw into the ring.
Incidentally, it's true that in recent history there have been quite a few shameless attempts by national investigators to choose the most convenient "truth", but they have not been European. Namely the Egyptian version of what happened to the Egyptair 767, but remember the NTSB was in charge of that report, the truth came out in the NTSB part of it (as diplomatically phrased as possible), and the Egyptian version was an appendix to the main report.
Then there was the Egyptian report on Flash at Sharm el-Sheikh, which avoided the truth, but the BEA was allowed to append what really happened to the back of that report too. Then finally (for today) there was the Silk Air cover-up by Indonesia/Singapore. But even there, the NTSB was allowed to append its view. In that case the Board was so angry at the distortion it publicised its own summary of what happened.
The truth will out. It always does in the end, because the industry recognises rubbish when it sees it.
The allegations about FDRs "tampered with" at Habsheim came from the French SNPL (pilots' union), which had a major industrial row going with Air France at the time and wanted flight engineers on everthing including the A320. The SNPL wanted to kill the A320 at birth, and they saw this as their chance. Well, history shows they didn't succeed, but a lot of the mud they slung has stuck in people's selective memories because the media loved the union's accusations so much at the time.
Last edited by shortfinals; 25th Aug 2009 at 14:17.
Reason: Wrong edit first time