ITS back to the wall, ajet, formerly known as Helios, is disputing the report into last August’s air disaster, questioning the reliability of chief investigator Akrivos Tsolakis.
Though not naming names, the fact-finding report established human error – primarily by the captain and his co-pilot – as the primary cause of the calamity, but it also noted several latent – or underlying – causes, such as the inadequate workings at Civil Aviation.
Hounded by the media ever since arriving on the island to hand over the report, Tsolakis caused controversy when he said that Helios Airways did not exist as an entity.
He was responding to a question as to why his report did not make any safety recommendations to the airline.
“We cannot deal with ghosts,” Tsolakis offered.
“Let us not try to delve into grey areas…our report flies only in clear skies.”
Helios changed its name a few months after the crash, provoking a general perception that the airline was attempting to avoid its responsibilities towards the victims’ families.
But Helios’ lawyers were yesterday up in arms over the comment, arguing that Tsolakis was contradicting himself.
They say it does not make sense for Tsolakis to mention the airline under the latent causes of the accident while at the same time not make any safety recommendations to Helios.
“It would be far more professional of Mr Tsolakis to admit that Helios is not at fault in the first place, rather than insult people’s intelligence,” challenged lawyer Demetris Araouzos.
Christos Neocleous, another Helios lawyer, added: “The company does exist, though under a different name. It makes no difference – this does not mean the airline will shirk its responsibilities.”
But the airline went a step further, casting doubts over the accuracy of the fact-finding report. According to the probe, on the night before the doomed flight airline engineers left the depressurisation switch on manual. The pilots failed to notice this and to reset the switch to auto; as a result, the plane did not pressurise properly, leading to a lack of oxygen supply in the cabin – the primary cause of the accident.
The final report features evidence of this – pictures of the scarred decompression panel.
But Helios insisted it had conducted extensive tests showing that it was “next to impossible” for a commercial jet to take off with the decompression switch on manual.
Yet Boeing pilot Costas Pitsilides told the Mail yesterday that this was not necessarily the case.
He said a plane could take off on manual, depending on the position of the airflow valve.
Assuming the valve was partly open, that would allow for some pressurisation at low altitudes.
“In my view, this is the most likely scenario: ground crew left it in manual, but the pilots should have carried out a checklist of the components. This is standard procedure. Evidently, they did not, and one thing led to another.”
The situation was compounded in the air because, on Boeing 737s, the sounds emitted for faulty pressurisation are identical to those for a glitch in the positioning of the flaps.
In his report, Tsolakis recommended to Boeing to take corrective steps to resolve this issue.
Yesterday, the Greek aviation expert said the manufacturers had already acted on his recommendations.
There are approximately 2,500 Boeing 737s in service today.
“I think that [based on these recommendations] an accident under similar circumstances shall never occur again worldwide,” Tsolakis told state radio yesterday.
Meanwhile Helios hinted it might altogether walk out of the committee of inquiry tasked with apportioning liability for the crash.
Based on its conclusions, the Attorney-general will next decide on whether to prosecute.
Araouzos suggested the company was not getting a fair trial.
“Why does the committee not call on Tsolakis to testify before it, so that he might back his claims?”
The company has filed a motion with the Supreme Court to have the hearings cancelled because, as it says, the committee’s proceedings are “flawed”.
The report itself contains some chilling details. In one passage it reads:
“The accident was not survivable for any of the aircraft occupants. The remains of the victims were removed from the wreckage area by fire fighters of the Fire Corps Special Rescue Forces. Most of the victims were found strapped in their seats. The seats had broken out of their rails in the aircraft floor during the impact sequence.”
The 121 passengers of flight ZU522 evidently did not realise what was happening, gradually slipping into hypoxia, a condition characterised by light-headedness, a feeling of euphoria and loss of cognitive performance.
From the mobile phones recovered from the crash site, “no data related to the accident flight were obtained”.
Tsolakis has therefore recommended to EASA and JAA (Joint Aviation Authorities) that henceforth flight crew and cabin crew undergo hypoxia training:
The report also appears to put to rest speculation that co-pilot Pambos Charalambous was unfit to fly:
“On the basis of the data that were given to us, such as the height of the flight, the fact of the existing heart function (pump function) upon crashing, and the fact that there is a similar pathologo-anatomical image both in the ‘suffering’ heart (myocardium) of the co-pilot, and in the ‘healthy heart’ of the pilot, we estimate that the brain hypoxia was the dominant and determinant cause that incapacitated the flying crew, with the findings of the heart being the matter of course and epiphenomenona [symptom] of the prolonged hypoxia.”
Further, from Tsolakis’ findings it can be inferred that the department of Civil Aviation – accused of cutting corners when it came to safety – was poorly organised and staffed:
“The structure of the DCA [Civil Aviation] to support safety oversight is inadequate to support current and future operations;
“The Systems supporting the technical programmes are not fully implemented in the areas of safety and security;
“At the time of this Diagnostic, there was no evidence that confirmed the existence of any Risk Management process within the DCA.”
Last month, it emerged that ajet and the civil aviation department in Cyprus were in trouble with the European Commission and EASA for not complying with EU air safety standards. It was even said the airline risked being placed on the EU’s blacklist – effectively banning it from operating inside EU airspace.
However, latest reports quoted EU officials as saying that ajet had not been blacklisted.
