punkalouver, thanks also for your effort, you did a very meticulous job.

Would you be interested in translating as well Habsheim and Ste-Odile ... ?

For Perpignan, the BEA did his part this time !?
... will it be their defeat to justify the 3 months waiting period ?

http://i15.servimg.com/u/f15/11/75/17/84/nz_07911.gif

CONF iture,

Do you mean to say 'Habsheim' and 'Ste-Odile' haven't been translated either?
If so, it mght be a good idea even now, because so many people seem to have no idea what really happened at Habsheim.

I wouldn't know, because I read both languages, and I can't remember in which language the reports that I read were written.

A babelfish translation is usually a good starting point, because it does save you a fair amount of typing... I prefer revising to doing the whole thing from scratch.

CJ

Neither has been translated. However, these are big reports and both of you know how long it took us to do this small A340 report. As well I have no Airbus experience and these two might be quite technical. I had been thinking of the Twin Otter in Moorea. But if you want to try something big we can. Just be aware of what you are getting into. It will be huge. The last one worked well with CONF iture starting out. Then me adding to it and Christiaan J completing it.

punkalouver,

I just switched to a somewhat more "capable" computer, and I've done this kind of thing before, so I wouldn't mind giving it a go, especially since it's not that urgent any more......

Anybody for links to the original reports?
Yes I know, I'm lazy.

CJ

Thanks CONF iture, just downloaded it.
About 36Mb.... ça promet ....

Let me know when the rough translation is complete.

Compliments Punkalouver for your work. The BEA should pay you for this ! ;)

Just, on the side a small poosible explanation why Habsheim, Mt St Odile .reports were not translated : Operators were French, so report remained in French. In Perpignan Operator is ANZ, preliminary and final reports needs to be in English as well.

For Blagnac, the 340 still belonged to AI , so formally the BEA does not even need to be involved ( it was not for the A330 crash during fligh test a few years back ) as theses aircraft were still under test flight rules ( Essais et receptions ). But as the 340 was registered in France ( F-WWCJ ) the report does not need to be in English.

But I can guarantee you the BEA guys speak very good english ! I think lack of ressources to provide translations is more likely to be the reason , rather than lack of willingness. At least, I sincerely hope this is true.

ATC Watcher,
I think you're entirely right in your assessment.

Once there is no formal requirement for a translation, and there wasn't one in these cases, no formal translation is provided.

Because, one) it would be only be a translation, not the formal document, two) people would not bother to read the caveat at the head of the translation, and still refer to it, rather than to the original, and three) doing a sufficiently close and expert translation IS a fairly major job (and expensive...), and might well be counterproductive, with endless arguments about details in the translation not sufficiently matching the original.

punkalouver, CONF iture,
Had a look at the pdf.... looks like an ancient format.... not sure I can extract it in text format to have a go....
Any help welcome.

CJ

I think we accept this situation too easily!

Surely the purpose of publishing an accident report is to educate the whole aviation industry on what happened and thereby maybe prevent a recurrence.

Mere publication in the language of the certifying state or where the accident occurred is not acceptable surely?

Seriously, what would you do about it?
I think you'll probably find, that the formal requirement is for the report to be published in an ICAO language, of which French is one.

NTSB or AAIB don't translate their reports into other languages either, even if a lot of people in the aviation industry with little English could do with the "education", as you put it.

CJ

The only thing I can suggest is to ask the question in the computer/internet issues forum on PPRUNE.

http://i85.servimg.com/u/f85/11/75/17/84/340den10.jpg

This particular one didn't receive a lot of attention ...
This particular one is nowhere to be seen in the official report.
This pecular one doesn't show any braking action by opposition to what is stipulated in the same official report ?

CONF iture,

We'll probably have to read again carefully through what the MLG brake pressures were doing over the last second or three.
NLG shows skid marks (braking?) before it goes completely sideways.

CJ

Symmetrical braking traces from both MLG are present from around 60 meters until the wall
ChristiaanJ, this seems to be an accurate translation from the report.
The question is : Where are the braking traces ???

As you know, NLG is not equipped with brakes, so the earliest visible marks are not from braking action but well from skidding. Just a mere degrees sideways in the early stage are enough to produce these marks.

Is anyone else who reads these threads in the least bit curious as to why the three photographs I posted yesterday have been deleted?

No not in the least bit "curious". Those photos have been doing the rounds for quite some time. Have you got some new ones or something else that is worthy of Rumours & News?

rubik101,
Where were those photos originally, that you say were deleted?

CONF iture,
Thanks re the NLG.

Re the other tyre traces, I think we already discussed that, but I haven't been back through the earlier 26 pages yet...

The report says:
• When the aircraft began to move, the ground testing technician pushed on the brake pedals and released the parking brake
• The ground testing technician turned the NWS to the right. This action, by inhibiting the CLG braking, limited the braking effectiveness
• The actions on the brake pedals were not sustained to the maximum level

and, as you quoted:

- Symmetrical braking traces from both MLG are present from around 60 meters until the wall.

IIRC, my reaction was then and now that, since "the actions on the brake pedals were not sustained to the maximum level", the MLGs were not skidding, or at least not much, hence didn't leave any heavy black tyre marks that would have shown up on the photo you posted again (I'd already seen that one too). Braking traces were likely visible at ground level (those that hadn't already been washed away), but not enough to show up on the photo.

I haven't checked yet whether the brake pressure traces corroborate that "analysis".

CJ

Thats the best looking airbus I have ever seen! :E