Originally Posted by
jcjeant
The BEA have not to be invited to do investigation on reports of incidents or accidents he know(if those are mandatory for flight safety) and he can made any recommendations he want
You're wrong there - while the BEA is independent it can only issue reports either if invited to do so, or if the conclusions it comes to vary from those of the designated investigation authority (in the form of a rebuttal).
Pitot icing problems were identified by the BFU (German BEA) since 1999.
Completely different manufacturer and model of tube and a completely different airframe. Pitot tube icing has been a known issue in aviation circles for as long as they've been used!
Besides Airbus was so aware that it caters to the U.S. FAA September 2009 in an attempt to make him change the negative formulation for manufacturer of the AD
Firstly, Airbus has no direct connection to the BEA, DGAC or any other agency of the French government, so I don't see what this has to do with what we were previously discussing.
Secondly, the change in phrasing does not (as far as I can see) downplay the problem in any way - it simply increases the level of technical detail and accuracy (and apparently also ensures that the FAA document is as in-depth as the EASA document).