Coroners Inquest and Criminal Proceedings
 

The Coroner's narrative verdict is worth reading in full. Civil proceedings are unlikely in most cases since they have been settled by the majority of the families. The other legal activity is the French Criminal Investigation, into involuntary homicide. The investigation proceeds and the Judge has yet to even consider whether charges will be made.

According to today's Times, it was the aircraft's "pathfinding" pitot tubes that froze.:ugh:

Coroner's report seems fair, lucid and balanced..
 

This recently-retired old-stager has, during recent years, been involved in simulator-assessment of prospective pilot candidates. Two issues were patently clear almost every day...

1 Candidates with considerable glass-cockpit/advanced-automation equipment very frequently lacked the necessary limited-panel skills... often taking far too long to identify and master system failures.

2 Candidates fresh from ab-initio schools normally fared much better when faced with a requirement to fly limited-panel.. particularly if they were relatively current on limited-panel recovery by reference to clockwork instruments.

This appeared to be a cultural/national issue however.. substantially confined to certain nations.. but not including US,UK, Oz or NZ candidates who generally performed well under limited-panel conditions.

All these computer-laws and nanny-systems can be wonderful things IF they are mounted atop a sound foundation of solid, oft-practiced basic airmanship procedures. IMHO of course.

French corporate attitudes
 

Well said, Capetonian. Completely justified in the light of this sorry saga (and others).

Basic flying skills
 

Again, well said, talkpedlar. It's the need to be able to fly on not just basic but sub-basic (ie, limited panel) information which seems to be in danger of being lost in these automated days.

Just...
 

It has been argued for years: the responsibility of those who cause accidents. Whether in the streets, in the depths of the sea or in the heights of heaven. We've all seen that we try to make the best (each in their own way), yet we continue to fail. I think it's time to take decisions about these problems as soon as possible. In regard to aviation, it is my personal opinion that trying to automate extremely complex systems for our understanding is a risk that must be assumed. And it is very easy to point to a colleague .. After the failure ... IMHO...

As one Boeing 787 simulator instructor in Seattle was told by one of the designing team "We have designed the 787 on the basis it will be flown by incompetent pilots - hence the emphasis on automation. :confused:

Please tell me the B787 is not going into the same hole as Airbus did.

You can bet your bottom dollars the share holders will make sure they damn well do. These days, everything is about $$$ - and those who have it care very little about integrity or preservation of the ideals which got us where we are.

Clayne, agree entirely.

This is the new world.

You have to put your arguments in terms that these people understand, Talk about 'integrity' and 'preservation of ideals' and you will see their eyes glaze over. You have to put things in terms of monetary risk if you can't they are not interested - despite mouthing all the platitudes about safety being first priority etc., if you can't put your argument into dollars they will not be even listen.

What a coroner knows about aviation, and aviation safety, strikes me as a valid question regarding this report and its credibility.

I have a question:
did he have access to the training records and quals for all three pilots?
If so, did Air France make them available to him?

Just wondering.

There are a million and one ways in which people can die. If a coroner was expected to be an expert in every one of them, I doubt that there would be anyone qualified for the role.

Exactly. He is perfectly qualified to suggest that they died due to traumatic impact with the ocean. How the hell is he supposed to know if a pilot has been trained in stall recoveries without access to training records.

Reasonable to assume that at least one of the pilots had once held a ppl, and therefore must have been trained in stall recovery. ( and recognition of the condition)

I would guess that is extremely unlikely. AF would not be likely to hand over the records voluntarily, and UK coroner would have had to go through French courts to sub-poena them.

The coroner did not make any judgement on the training of the crew or their ability to recognise/recover from a stall, other than referring to the findings in the Final Report on the BEA accident investigation - which he was perfectly entitled to do.

Thank you Dave.
I must then ask why it is that the coroner's report goes into areas where he knows BFA.
If the BEA report is the ref, well ... it's already been done.
I guess one must follow protocol when one holds the job.

It appears the Boeing 787 was designed by incompetent designers - hence all the problems....:D