You may think that, and Mahon obviously thought that, and the result of not complying with a CAA requirement, and a Company SOP is perfectly obvious in this case.
" not a requirement they were lawfully obliged to observe'
At what time, and by whom, do you think this crew was advised there was no legal requirement to comply???? must have been prior to the descent below 16,000ft, who of the crew was legally qualified to state such a thing??
For a starter why would you say that the route MSA was established. You would agree that it was not a legal requirement??
This from John Kings publication:
"This was referred to in a Company Memorandum to AntArctic crews', OAA: 14/13/28 dated 9th November 1979 Headed MCMURDO NDB NOT AVAILABLE; it was succinct and unambiguous." and then the mandatory requirements as printed many times on this and other threads.
So many people think for some reason that the radar was the prime requirement for any descent, but read what the SOP stipulates.
4. Descent to be co-ordinated with local radar control as they may have OTHER TRAFFIC IN THE AREA.
How much more specific could these instructions be??? Note the only let down procedure available is VMC below 16,000ft to 6,000ft..
"where SOPs could be later found by a court to be not SOPs afterall"
That may well be so, but the SOP's are not written for a court, they would , I think, be normally written by company ops people, not lawyers. And the intent, as in this case, was perfectly obvious for Aviation experienced people. Obviously very murky for legal people.
Last edited by prospector; 5th Dec 2011 at 07:46.