Hi,
The opinion of HMC
AF 447. The "circumstances" of the accident: an "unsafe condition"
Thus, BEA announced it will unveil the "circumstances" of the accident on 1 June 2009 next weekend. In reality, the BEA will say * "how the accident took place after reading the recorders. She will then determine "why" this tragedy happened.
Because the "circumstances", that is to say the situation was the A 330, its crew and passengers, were known by the Flight 447 was going through a very disturbed area (whose characteristics have been widely underestimated in the weather records provided to the crew during the flight preparation), it was dark, the pilot avoided the active nuclei, the workload was so important. She suddenly became excessive because, following the blocking of pitot probes, the crew had to perform 13 procedures in a very limited period of time (among them, the procedure was ineffective and unreliable AIRSPEED acknowledged that Airbus)
The "circumstances" of the accident are therefore excessive workload in a degraded environment no longer allows the crew to perform its tasks with precision or their completion.
That is what is called a "unsafe condition".
The risk of this "unsafe condition" related to the inconsistency of the output was measured velocities of the flight, that is to say the aircraft's stall. The FAA had said in 2001 and reconfirmed after the accident when the probes were removed by Thales emergency.
Nobody has taken into account.
Finally, we recall again here that blocking the pitot probes by ice crystals is a design flaw due to certification standards obsolete. This is not a failure. If the drivers have a responsibility to deal with failures listed by the application of procedures, it is the responsibility of the manufacturer and regulator to eliminate all defects from an airplane. Equipment of an aircraft must operate throughout its flight envelope (ref. CS25)
Source:
AF 447. Les « circonstances » de l