Originally Posted by
kjnangre
If you come, literally, within seconds of challenging Tenerife for the worst aviation disaster in the history of the world, I think it's safe to say that's a "reportable incident"
The next flight for that plane was many hours later. I have a hard time buying the idea that during all that time, it never occurred to a single person over at Air Canada to save the tapes. I don't work in the industry and that was my first thought. Yet these professionals who run a major airline never even thought about it? Can I prove a cover-up? No of course not. But it sure smells fishy to me.
I don't dispute that this is something worthy of serious investigation. But you've accused AC and/or the pilots of not just negligence, but deliberate behaviour to cover up. I'm not here to defend AC's honour, but an objective investigation requires, well, objectivity.
I'm trying to find out what "reportable incident" means in law, and the closest I can find is
this description of incidents requiring immediate reporting. My reading of it? This doesn't apply, though just by a whisker. Had they actually landed on an empty taxiway, it clearly would have applied. (Had they landed on the taxiway in this case, it probably would have been an
accident, and no mere incident.)
Don't get me wrong; I'm appalled at what happened in the air, and very disappointed that the pilots
didn't do better to preserve the CVR. I just find it far more likely this happened due to inattention rather than malice.
Edit: can the tapes actually be "saved" more than 9 minutes after stopping at the gate, in the hours that follow, as you suggest? Does CVR stop recording for any reason
other than its circuit breaker being pulled, or its electrical supply otherwise being interrupted by an accident?