Accident report A05H0002 Air France Flight 358

[serpilot10]

Hello to all I am new in the forum. Someone can say to me where it is possible to obtain the transcription of the CVR of the Air France Flight 358 that slid off the end of the runway into to gully and fire caught fire on Toronto, Canada, on August 02 of 2005 becuase inexplicably does not appear in the final report of the TSB.
The transcription is very important to have a real knowledge of because of the decisions thought by the crew.
The transcription of the CVR should be an obligation to include them in the final report like normally it does the NTSB.

[302B31]

ICAO Annex 13 may help; particularly paragraph 5.12.1

Annex 13 extract

Non-disclosure of records

5.12 The State conducting the investigation of an accident
or incident shall not make the following records available for
purposes other than accident or incident investigation, unless
the appropriate authority for the administration of justice in
that State determines that their disclosure outweighs the
adverse domestic and international impact such action may
have on that or any future investigations:
a) all statements taken from persons by the investigation
authorities in the course of their investigation;
b) all communications between persons having been
involved in the operation of the aircraft;
c) medical or private information regarding persons
involved in the accident or incident;
d) cockpit voice recordings and transcripts from such
recordings; and
e) opinions expressed in the analysis of information,
including flight recorder information.

5.12.1 These records shall be included in the final report
or its appendices only when pertinent to the analysis of the
accident or incident. Parts of the records not relevant to the
analysis shall not be disclosed.

[serpilot10]

Thank you very much (302B31) for his interest and reply, but modestly I know perfectly well what the OACI says.
What I ask is if someone in the forum knows where there can obtain the transcription of the CVR of the Flight 358.
Particularly I believe that in this accident the transcription was pertinent and relevant to put it in the final report. Beyond what says the report on the decisions of the crew, it is necessary to know how and why they took the decision to land under meteorological very adverse conditions. Not what the crew said, but what they really spoke in the cockpit.
In the Final Report of the Flight 358 (1.18.2) two accidents are mentioned: AA Flight 1420 and the Hawaiian Airlines. In both accidents they are transcribed recorded in the CVR.
It is more, the case of the AA 1420 if the web page http://www.ntsb.gov/Events/2000/aa1420/default.htm (http://www.ntsb.gov/Events/2000/aa1420/default.htm) is opened there can read all the declarations taken to all those persons who had to see with the accident, included the co-pilot (the captain died in the accident). Ten points for the NTSB. It is as well as debit of an investigation becoming.
The articles 5.12 and 5.12.1 of the OACI leaves the door opened for much mistrust because the interests in game are very high.
Particularly I believe –as pilot and investigator) that when there is nothing that to conceal and wants really that the investigation contributes that another accident of similar characteristics does not happen it is necessary to expose all the information to the aeronautical community as to the public in general. Unfortunately the OACI only recommends and cannot force to any state to publishing what it does not want to publish.
Something must be that they (state, company air, and manufacturers of aircraft) do not want that it is known publicly.
We know all - I refer to the pilots- to the pressures to which we are submitted (internal - proper of the personality of every pilot especially and of the company for the one that flies away.
I did not want to think that in the decision of the crew to land in these conditions they gave priority to economic reasons.
Hundreds of studies exist on the economic losses of the companies for delays or not to land in the programmed destiny. They will have spoken on this the crew?
It is because of my insistence in wanting to know the transcription of the CVR. I am sure that many pilots wanted the same thing in order that it does not return to happen.

[punkalouver]

You are not going to be able to get it any time soon.

[grizzled]

Serpilot10:

First, let me say that I agree with you entirely regarding the importance and significance of CVR's (and all other relevant recordings for that matter). Having said that, here is the bad news: Canada does not currently endorse that philosophy, as outlined in ICAO Annex 13. The Air France accident (which, sadly, I am intimately familiar with) is no different than any other investigation by the Canadian TSB: They, as a matter of policy, never release CVR data (or even extracts or partial transcripts).

And that isn’t the worst part . . . Since the ANS system was privatised in Canada in 1996, no one ever gets to hear ATC tapes, or see ATC radar tapes, or any other such data because it is the property of Nav Canada. So far Nav Canada has been successful in defending the statutes that give them that ownership, and in their continued refusal to share any of that data. Believe it or not, the Canadian TSB sometimes cannot get Nav Canada to supply them with all the data they request and require. The TSB have even gone to court to attempt to compel Nav Canada to release information to them.

Don’t get me going on the whole “privatised ATC” question . . .

Can I ask what your specific interest is in this particular accident or CVR? Maybe I can be of some help . . .

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<Since the ANS system was privatised in Canada in 1996, no one ever gets to hear ATC tapes, or see ATC radar tapes, or any other such data because it is the property of Nav Canada. >>

Your profile gives no clue to your profession so may I ask why you feel this information should be readily available? I was an air traffic controller for many years and had the misfortune to be involved in two bad accidents (neither to do with me!). For one, the reporting by the UK media was quite inaccurate and I dread to think what the Daily Splurge would make of ATC/CVR tapes... No thank you!

[Jerricho]

So far Nav Canada has been successful in defending the statutes that give them that ownership, and in their continued refusal to share any of that data. Believe it or not, the Canadian TSB sometimes cannot get Nav Canada to supply them with all the data they request and require. The TSB have even gone to court to attempt to compel Nav Canada to release information to them.

I think you need to get your facts straight. There were 4 incidents (one of those included a collision between a fishing boat and a ferry), where the TSB only released transcripts of "CVR", but not the actual tapes under the premise they contained "personal information" and citing the Canadian Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) policy and Privacy Act. This decision was upheld and supported by the Canadian Information Commissioner. After public outcry and complaints, the Commissioner rescinded his support and the whole thing went to court. After decision, appeal and appeal, the court ruled for the release, stating against the argument of "personal information". Nav Canada "ownership" of the recordings were based on a commercial interest, which was also overruled by the court.

[grizzled]

Jerricho . . .
I'm not sure if you're confusing CVR's with ATC tapes (including digital radar data); Nav Canada has nothing at all to do with CVRs -- or marine accidents.

So, in what part of my quote (that you refer to) did I have my facts wrong? Nothing in your post is in disagreement with what I said about Nav Canada, the TSB, and court actions that have taken place.

[grizzled]

Heathrow . .

I too spent many years as a controller and I understand your feelings re how the media distort whatever they get their hands on. Having said that, I think one needs to distinguish between pubic info and private info. My position -- and that of the courts or laws in many countries - is that whatever is transmitted "over the air" should be considered public info; that is to say it should not be considered "owned" by any party, and it should be available and distributable without restriction. I say that because those words and sounds are already public by the very nature of the fact that radio transmissons are by definition "out there" in the public domain.

Where you and I would agee (I assume) is in the release of data that has not been transmitted in a form that anyone can receive, and is not intended to be public. CVR info falls in that category. Conversations recorded on CVR's are just that -- conversations -- and include the same private information that any other conversation between individuals may contain. Those words and sounds are recorded solely for the purpose of assisting post-facto in an investigation of an accident or incident. Therefore they should not be used for any purpose that does not advance that investigation.

On that point, my reference to the release of CVR's in my earlier post (regarding AF358) was meant to refer to release of that data in and for legal proceedings. Desite Jerricho's comments earlier, in many cases it is still extremely difficult in Canada for lawyers to get access to original CVR data as part of information and evidence gathering in legal proceedings. Whether that is "right or wrong" will surely be further debated here and elsewhere. I'm simply reporting on the current situation in Canada.

[Jerricho]

Note I put "CVR" in inverted commas.......I guess i should have made it a little clearer as to what I was referring to. And I think you're starting to confuse yourself.

Nav Canada has nothing at all to do with CVRs -- or marine accidents.

That's right. Nav Canada will never have the physical CVR from an aircraft now, will they? As to radar and ATC recordings, as I mentioned, "the TSB only released transcripts of "CVR" (I should change this to recorded data), but not the actual tapes under the premise they contained "personal information" and citing the Canadian Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) policy and Privacy Act." So, the TSB were taking themselves to court???? I love the bureaucracy of this place.