On 24/10/2014 at 10:58 a.m., Le Figaro wrote:[...] Despite the detection of the snow plow by the radars, no dialogue was established between the aircraft crew and the control tower [...] the pilots of the aircraft had clearly seen the snow plow that crossed the runway but did not consider it a "threat", according to the statements of Russian investigators [...]
According to the representative of the Russian experts, Alexei Morozov, "The runway was clear when the take-off clearance was confirmed" to the pilots. But ten seconds later, "The control instruments detected the movement of a snow plow on the left side of the runway towards the crossroads". No dialogue was recorded between the crew of the plane and the control tower, after the authorization to take off, said Thursday Alexei Morozov.
«About 14 seconds after the start of takeoff, the crew observed an object identified by them as a machine crossing the road. The object observed (the snowplow) was not considered a threat by the crew, takeoff continued normally» did he declare.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/conjoncture/2014/10/24/20002-20141024ARTFIG00033-mort-du-pdg-de-total-le-pilote-francais-avait-vu-le-chasse-neige.php
... possibly contradicted by the BEA:
The 25/10/2014 at 08:11 ladepeche.fr postpones the opinion of François Hochard, one of the BEA investigators wrote:What really happened
«Chronologically, the plane rolls towards the waiting point, exchanges with the tower are normal (…) and the air traffic controller gives him permission to line up and take off».
«The pilots carry out some checks and a priori at that time, the track is clear. At take-off, the ground radar did not indicate any vehicle on the runway. So the crew does their checks and starts the takeoff phase, they accelerate».
It is from there that the situation will unfortunately turn to drama.
«Fourteen seconds after the start of acceleration"Continues François Hochard, one of the pilots said:
- "what is this car crossing the track? There is a translation problem because in Russian, the car says machine, so the translation gave what is this machine in the middle of the track? ”»
François Hochard specifies that it is indeed "of a snowplow that crosses the runway without authorization from the tower ".
Snow plow, he says, who “for a completely unknown reason, backs onto the runway when the plane arrives».
So, analyze the expert, “The pilot sees this thing crossing the runway, disappearing, it does not interrupt takeoff. He simply says: "I saw something pass" "And it normally continues takeoff. We know this because the flight recorder tells us that the pilots are making the normal announcements before takeoff. ”.
If you had been in the driver's seat at this point:
- you would not have asked the tower for a clarification on what could well happen on the track?
- you would have taken the risk of taking off by only trusting your intuition as the pilot did?
- or you would have asked for a time out before takeoff to dispel the doubt?
The 25/10/2014 at 08:11 ladepeche.fr postpones the opinion of François Hochard, one of the BEA investigators wrote:Was the collision avoidable?
Could the pilots avoid the snow plow? Interrupt takeoff? "This is ambiguity, explains the BEA. It's the shortcut. They are said to have seen the craft 14 seconds before takeoff. No, they saw a car crossing the track, it's not quite the same. So from the moment the car crossed the track, the track was clear again».
“If the pilots had seen a machine on the runway, then yes, they could have interrupted takeoff. When they see something on the runway, it is something that crosses the runway. What we don't know is why this truck came back on the track? What we don't know either is why the pilot didn't see it? ”
http://www.ladepeche.fr/article/2014/10/25/1979160-crash-avion-pdg-total-est-vraiment-passe.html
In short, what about the percentage of pilot responsibility? Of the tower? Coordination of services (Since that of the driver of the snowplow is proven), etc. we will soon know.
Well, well ... on the other hand, what amazes me is the speed with which the BEA deals with this file (nothing to evoke a "willful malice", the track of a"organized crime"seems to have already been dismissed from the outset, on the other hand, it must be said that about the decision of the pilot of"take off in a hurry ", despite some imminent potential danger / s for not having waited for the situation to "clear up": which would have taken - given the unfolding of the facts - barely a few tens of seconds: uh ... how to say ... hum ... it's not "too much ..." ??) however in general a crash takes at least a year before someone dares to comment! There, it is all the same a high personality of a strategic sector: nobody finds such eagerness a little ..."suspect"?
It does not suit France, nor the country on which it has "aligned itself" (from Sarko and up to Flamby it is a real Americamania) ... Neither Franco-Russian interests: I think this affair will be quickly (a little quickly) "classified" ...
For Cuicui, I maintain that his idea was not far-fetched:
Study report, the Technical Service of Civil Aviation wrote:Object detection systems on aerodrome runways
[...] Currently, debris on the runway, sources of damage, loss of capacity, or even accidents, are identified and removed during visual inspections. [...]
