Hi,
IGh:
After UA811 [Fwd Cargo Door electrically-unlocked during flight] the manufacturer misinformed the NTSB:
"... .. Based on what Boeing has told them, investigators say four independent systems would have had to have failed for the door to open in flight...." [Wall Street Journal, 27Feb1990].
This misleading information, from that manufacturer, led to the incorrect P.C. published by NTSB in their initial AAR.
If in a "simple" issue (a door part) this occurred,
what could happen when investigating a System (effective aircraft: System + crew) even the designers don't understand completely? AF447 was
failing (a closed loop feedback System presenting failures since the beginning: 02:10:05 or even before per ACARS analysis) with the crew applying (surprising ones) inputs based on System outputs we may never know.
(RHS was not recorded).
It seems the misleading (may) yet occurred. ("plane operated as designed, etc."). Public (also detected in PPRuNe) was being prepared (induced?) to: "crew error" in the end. If crew error was the cause (if), the media would emphasize (in the headlines just after Final Report publication)
Why they made (errors)?
IMO they never could say plane was OK
at that "investigation timing". Subtle bias?
Mac
Timing: Paris air show
PS
The plane was really, OK? The crew received (required) System "outputs" to proceed safely? System "helped" the crew or mislead them?