Anyone find out about the switch on the SuperTANS? - no? Simple enough, one would have thought - if STANS is turned off, do Doppler and GPS subsystems still carry on calculating?
Walter
Not quite the correct question but close. If TANS is switched off (as stated by the AAIB), does it still accept, process and record in memory the external inputs (Doppler, GPS, ADS)?
But you make a very good point. After 16 years there is still much debate about how systems work, are presented to the crew and used by them. For example, I’ve read dozens of interpretations of what the Safety Altitude was. I can’t say Wratten and Day are wrong as I’m no expert, but there are many experts here who have different opinions; which means doubt. But I’ve sat and listened to the RAF’s senior test pilot of the day and the most experienced man on HC Mk2 at the time, and he says W&D are wrong on this, and many other aspects. I gravitate toward such an expert opinion, but accept others don’t.
Throughout this case we come across such conflicts. Too often we see evidence of MoD searching for different opinion until finding one that suits the verdict of gross negligence against the pilots. In my little area of knowledge the classic example is the FADEC software.
MoD’s own experts were tasked, as they had been hundreds of times before on other projects, to validate and verify the software. As it was Safety Critical, a specific set of regulations applied (which I have a copy of). Despite A&AEE and Boeing stating it was Safety Critical, MoD’s case is based on their retrospective claim it was not (something they didn’t claim when A&AEE were conducting their V&V) – allowing them to quote the lesser regulations and claim A&AEE went beyond their remit. Then they went round the bazaars on the V&V until someone vaguely agreed with their flawed line; and presented this as proof of compliance.
But all that alternative view did was create a conflict. Such conflicts create doubt and must be resolved. MoD made no effort to do so. In the words of one distinguished contributor here, they “situated the appreciation”.
So, it seems a truce of sorts has been called here. I hope the time is spent fruitfully, preparing your submissions to Lord Philip. Remember chaps, he is a legal type and only interested in verifiable facts. So, he has my evidence on airworthiness (kindly provided by MoD) demonstrating the aircraft was immature and that, in signing the CAR and RTS, senior staffs withheld vital safety related information from aircrew. The absolute certainty as to what happened in the last couple of minutes of the flight, and the accompanying and similarly irrefutable evidence, will presumably form others’ submission. An interesting possibility arises. A verdict of “Verdict remains against pilots, to which I add the following names of senior officers........” After all, Haddon-Cave named two officers and they are being investigated as we speak, so a precedent has been set.