Originally Posted by
noske
More seriously: I find it also frustrating to know that an English translation of the report was made, but was never published on the web.
I don't think it was - I suspect that's Airbus's own translation. They certainly have no shortage of multilingual people working for them!
@Dozy: Page 23 in the report has a list of annexes, including "7. Corrélation DFDR-CVR", which never actually appears anywhere in the PDF. That is indeed a bit strange, but looks like an honest mistake to me. For some reason, the "Rapport final (additif)" (starting at page 55) consists of odd-numbered pages only, with blank pages in between. So annexe 7 may just have been on one of those even-numbered pages.
That's weird, on this PDF (the one I've been using):
http://www.bea.aero/docspa/1988/f-kc...f-kc880626.pdf
Annexe VII starts, clearly headed, on page 36.
Possibly there's an earlier version doing the rounds where some hapless intern loaded the scanning hopper incorrectly?
Originally Posted by
roulishollandais
...that some would have preferd they be dead instead asking questions about the A320 design and working that day.
Who? I love all this daft conspiracy talk, but spit it out - who do you think would have preferred them dead?