If you are right about the need to listen elsewhere in optimum conditions, why did these operatives handle such a delicate and central component of the investigation in less than optimum conditions?
And if my understanding is correct and they listened to the recording under the best conditions available, why was the boss not interested in listening in to such a crucial piece of evidence at the earliest possible opportunity?
Because it is a serial process:
- Receive and document the CVR condition
- Determine how to dismantle the CVR given it's condition
- Technically treat the CVR innards with the highest level of care, and with minimum risk, attempt to extract data
- In the event you get data, preserve and document that data (backups, file characteristics)
- Using a copy of the data, check it is readable / valid data i.e. not blank or corrupt
- Preliminary assessment of the data - timings, matching to other data, clear / easy to interpret output
- Process of establishing formal transcript
The above is a guess, but I got the impression we are somewhere about 3 from the bottom. When we get second from bottom, there will be political and commercial implications of releasing the info.
Much as we on pPrune might like some "hot info", we have no right to it, and the BEA will not be concerned about our wishes. Their priority is not to establish what happened (that comes later), but if there are immediate safety implications for other aircraft?