AirBlue jet down in Islamabad

[Shamim Shaikh]

Ali Abbas is absolutely right. Though a truncated one, publication of the report is a turning point in the aviation history of Pakistan. This has been possible only due to resolve of the victims' family association namely AirBlue Crash Affectees Group (ACAG) and the unwavered support rendered by Ms Marvi Memon, Advocate Omer Adam and various other civil society organizations. You can visit ACAG on the Facebook to see its various activities.
I am not an aviator. I request the professionals to kindly give their feedback on the findings and conclusions of the report writer. We also need to break the tradition of putting the entire blame on the cockpit crew who are no more there to defend themselves.

Shamim Shaikh

[umar744]

KLM 747-200B PH-BUF Captain was senior famous unlucky collision collasped Pan Am 747 N736PA (First passgener JFK-LHR 21 Jan 1970)Clipper Victoria in Tenefie on 27 March 1977 same my flight British Airways BAC VC10 Rawalpindi-Jeddah-LHR.

PIA A300B4 AP-BCP Captain Iftikhar was senior check instructor pilot famous unlucky crashed into mountain in Kathmandu. Also PIA B720 AP-AMH Capt. Ali Akhtar Khan was Number One pilot 720B crashed into Cairo.

my friend Capt Graham Qantas B747400 VH-OJH flew with me after took off 320,000kg from Bangkok to got No.4 caught fire engine and emergency back to Bangkok landed safely 315,000kg without jettism fuel pump before 1 week VH-OJH other Captain famous pilot accident overran crashed into Bangkok damaged nosewheel and repaired 6 six months.

Qantas A380 got engine problem to safely landed Singapore and Dubai

My friend Captain Concorde BA got engine trouble emergency landed Gander Canada and Cardiff Wales twice times.

It happened Air Blue A321 accident.

[pkheavy]

The following comment on a draft report was provided by BEA and Airbus on the final draft of the report:

"However, some sections of the draft report use harsh words to describe the crew’s behaviour.
Annex 13, paragraph 3.1 states that the objective of the investigation is not to apportion blame
or liability. This is also reminded in the chapter 2 of your draft report. Therefore, the BEA
suggests re-wording some parts of the draft final in order to soften the criticism towards the
crew."

Sadly, it would appear that this comment did not make into the final version as the report definitively apportions blame on the crew.

The recommendations in section 13 are numerous without a recommended schedule for implementation (short, medium or long term). I would like to throw the following additional recommendations on the table for discussion in the forum:

1) Modify the Heading Select Knob functionality such that it effectively remembers the desired direction of turn instead of calculating the shortest angular rotation to the desired heading.

2) Implement an automatic terrain avoidance mode through the autopilot/auto-throttle system, that provides max rate of climb if the EGPWS warnings continue unabated.

[TAILWIND]

In the context of this accident, one recommendation is about the early completion of new Islamabad airport. Does this imply that the existing airport had some contribution in the accident thus not safe for commercial operation?

[imiakhtar]

1) Modify the Heading Select Knob functionality such that it effectively remembers the desired direction of turn instead of calculating the shortest angular rotation to the desired heading.

2) Implement an automatic terrain avoidance mode through the autopilot/auto-throttle system, that provides max rate of climb if the EGPWS warnings continue unabated.

1) Doesn't make sense
2) What happens when you have traffic below in RVSM triggering the EGWPS to activate as it occasionally does?

[pkheavy]

1) Modify the Heading Select Knob functionality such that it effectively remembers the desired direction of turn instead of calculating the shortest angular rotation to the desired heading.

2) Implement an automatic terrain avoidance mode through the autopilot/auto-throttle system, that provides max rate of climb if the EGPWS warnings continue unabated.

1) Doesn't make sense
2) What happens when you have traffic below in RVSM triggering the EGWPS to activate as it occasionally does?

1) What does not make sense? Please elaborate.
2) Given that EGPWS's typically have a global terrain database it would be fairly easy to differentiate between Terra firma and other moving traffic.

[mhansari]

This morning I saw an episode of Air Crash Investigation, featuring the crash of Birgenair Flight 301 in February 1996, which bears a chilling similarity to ED202.

A little background:

The flight was operated by a B757-200 aircraft with a planned flight from Puerto Plata in the Dominican Republic to Frankfurt, Germany via Gander, Canada and Berlin, Germany. The captain was a seasoned pilot with a lot of experience on 757s while the FO was new, with only 75 hours on 757s (similar to the crew of ED202).

Prior to the flight, the aircraft was parked at the airport for 25 days - with the pitot tubes uncovered. This resulted in a wasp building its nest in the captain's pitot tube, blocking it partially. During the takeoff roll, it became apparent that something was wrong, when the FO called out 80 knots and the captain's instruments were showing 34 knots. However, the captain CHOSE NOT TO ABORT TAKEOFF. Investigators found that he had enough runway left to safely abort takeoff at that speed - but that he was probably wanting to get home, after being stranded at Puerto Plata for 25 days. (This is another similarity - the CAA report found that the captain of ED202 might have been under pressure to land at ISB since a PIA flight had landed safely as well, and that this may have been a contributing factor to him choosing not to divert).

The pilot took off with a faulty IAS and at 1300 feet, handed over command to the autopilot - without configuring the AP to take its data from the FO's instruments (the default setting is to take the data from the captain's instruments). As the aircraft continued to climb, the air trapped in the captain's pitot tube expanded, causing the IAS to suddenly come alive and climb rapidly. While the FO's IAS showed the aircraft at 220 knots, the captain's IAS showed it reaching almost 300 knots. The autopilot adjusted the rate of climb (I'm guessing the aircraft was on FLCH mode) to reduce airspeed. However, the faulty IAS continued to show airspeed increasing, until it exceeded 350 knots, triggering the overspeed alarm. This caused the autopilot to pitch the nose up further to try to arrest the speed. The FO's instruments, meanwhile, showed that the plane had come down to 190 knots. As the faulty IAS continued to feed the autopilot and the autopilot continued to raise the nose to reduce speed, the aircraft eventually came close to a stall.

This triggered the stick-shaker warning, which disconnected the autopilot and gave control back to an already confused captain. In the next few minutes, the captain, who was very very confused by the bewildering combination of an overspeed warning and a stall warning, reduced the throttles, raising the nose further and throwing the aircraft into a stall from which it never recovered.

And here is where the FO realized the problem - but instead of taking control, he offered to suggestions to the captain that they needed to get the nose down. Not once, not twice but many times. Finally, he asked if he should throttle up, to which the captain agreed, but it was too little, too late. The aircraft crashed into the sea, killing all 189 people on board.

The investigation revealed that cultural limitations had impacted the actions of the crew - the FO never questioned his captain because of respect for his age and his seniority on an aircraft on which the FO himself was relatively junior. This was clearly the case also with ED202, where the FO was snubbed by the captain in the initial parts of the flight, resulting in his diminished confidence and initiative.

The conclusions of the investigation showed that:

The pitot tubes should have been covered during the time the aircraft was parked.
The captain should have aborted take off when his instruments disagreed with the FO's.
Failing that, he should have configured the AP to take data from the FO's instruments, since his own were clearly not working.
When the overspeed warning and stick shaker happened, he should have remembered that his IAS was faulty.
The FO should have taken corrective action, instead of offering suggestions to the captain.

As a result of this crash:
Boeing implemented a warning to alert crews when their instruments disagree.
Boeing made it easier for pilots to change AP data source settings.

[Abbas Ali]

PHC terms inquiry report incomplete, orders fresh probe

Akhtar Amin

Friday, January 20, 2012

PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court (PHC) on Thursday termed the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) inquiry report about the Airblue crash in which all 146 passengers and six crewmembers were killed on July 28 last year, as inconclusive and incomplete and directed the federal government to constitute a high level board of inquiry for a fresh probe.

A two-member bench comprising PHC Chief Justice Dost Muhammad Khan and Justice Waqar Ahmad Seth stated in the order that the 38-page CAA inquiry report about the Airblue crash in the Margalla Hills in Islamabad submitted to the court on December 20, 2011 was incomplete and inconclusive in several aspects that were mandatory for the inquiry.

The bench directed the federal government to constitute a high level board of inquiry of related experts, even from foreign countries if need be, and conduct fresh inquiry on the pattern of international guidelines.

It directed that the findings of the CAA inquiry be revisited and the report be completed within three months. The first inquiry had held inclement weather and the pilot of the plane responsible for the crash.

Former Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid MNA Marvi Memon along with the crash victims’ families had moved the Peshawar High Court with the request that the federal government be directed to constitute an independent board of inquiry to determine and make public the cause of crash.

To examine the present condition of aircraft of the Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) and their fitness for flying on domestic and international routes, the bench through its detailed order directed the federal government to hire a team of foreign experts to examine condition of the national airlines under the International Civil Aviation Organisation.

Source: The News

2010 Airblue crash: Centre told to revisit CAA inquiry

Waseem Ahmad Shah

PESHAWAR, Jan 19: Dissatisfied with the Civil Aviation Authority investigation into the July 28, 2010 crash of Airblue plane in Islamabad`s Margalla hills, the Peshawar High Court on Thursday directed the federal government to constitute a new board of inquiry/investigation under domestic and international laws for revisiting the said probe.

The government was also told to form a separate board of inquiry, including foreign experts, to inspect all aircraft of PIA and private airlines, examine the CAA performance and check the capability of flying pilots and other crew members.

On December 20, the CAA safety investigation board (SIB) had submitted the Airblue crash inquiry report blaming the pilot`s errors and inclement weather for the incident, which left all 152 aboard dead.

The court was hearing a writ petition filed by former MNA Marvi Memon and members of the some crash victims` families.

Taking exception to non-compliance of its orders for deputing senior civil judges in Islamabad and Karachi for early completion of documentation for compensation payment, a bench consisting of Chief Justice Dost Mohammad Khan and Justice Waqar Ahmad Seth issued contempt of court notices to the federal defence and law secretaries and asked them to explain their position on the matter.

It observed that the inquiry report submitted by SIB president was found to be inconclusive and incomplete in many aspects as questions asked by the court to him on many aspects of the accident remained unattended and unsatisfied.

The court said the report submitted to it was not strictly in line with the relevant laws and had discrepancies and was incomplete, and therefore, the federal government, especially the defence ministry, should form a board of inquiry/investigation according to provisions of law, both domestic and inter-national, before asking it to complete the task within three months.

It also said the said board should consist of all experts mentioned in charter of ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation) and Warsaw Convention of 1929 and other laws on the subject and that it should revisit the SIB findings.

`As we feel, it essential to safeguard the life of citizens being a fundamental right and because of consistent negative reports with regard to national fleet i.e. PIA performance vis-à-vis its large aircraft flying on international route and others on domestic route, we issued directions that this aspect of matter should be investigated into by experts to be provided by ICA, Consortium for Aviation System Advancement, Airlines Pilot Associations and other safety organisations,` the court observed, adding that it should be the duty of the federal government to invite such experts and check the entire PIA fleet whether they are fit for flying anymore on international and domestic flights and why it should not be grounded.

It also issued directions for investigation by experts into capability of flying captains and other crew members and that they should submit their report to it and the government within 90 days of formation.

`It shall also be competent to inquire into facilities and safety measures provided by CAA both to aircraft during flight hours, equipments, ground communication systems, landing and taking of facilities and spare parts purchased and available in store,` it said, adding that the capacity of mechanical, electrical and other engineering staff attached with aircraf t on a daily basis and provide fitness certificate.

The court said the federal government should direct the said board of experts to investigate in a similar manner into all affairs of private airlines.

The chief justice observed that during previous hearing, the court had ordered the speeding up of the compensation payment by the government and Airblue, and the deputing of two senior civil judges in Islamabad and Karachi for documentation of the same. He said compensation should be paid to fami-lies of the crash victims within 90 days.

However, deputy attorney general Mohammad Iqbal Mohmand produced the January 18 fax of defence ministry section officer Mohammad Qadir in which more time was sought saying the advice of the law ministry on the matter was awaited.

`We are shocked to see that how such important matters are handled by top bureaucrats and how directions of this court issued in the constitutional jurisdiction violated,` the bench observed and decided to issue contempt notices to the two secretaries.

The counsel for Airblue, Ali Waseem Sajjad, said his client had been paying Rs5.5 million compensation, the highest in the country`s history, to the families of crash victims.

He said Airblue had so far paid compensation to 71 families, while that to 20 more was in documentation process.

The lawyer said compensation won`t be paid to 56 families as they had filed cases against his client in different courts and had not been submitting the compulsory undertaking that they would not enter into litigation once they received compensation.

The petitioners` lawyer, Umar Farooq Adam, objected to the said agreements and said such agreements were illegal under the Contract Act.

He said the author of the agreement had mentioned around 150 international organisations apart from Airblue which could not be sued once the compensation was received. He further said under the relevant international convention the company had to pay much higher amount equivalent to 250,000 Francs.

The lawyer alleged that Airblue, CAA inquiry board and others acted in collusion with each other and put the entire blame of the crash on a person (pilot), who could no longer defend himself.

The court said it would not go into the controversy of litigation over the fixing of compensation and leave it to the relevant court to decide.

It, however, said the relevant insurance company was bound to pay compensation through Airblue to legal heirs of victims and that should be done at the earliest.

Source: DAWN

[Abbas Ali]

Informative article on www.flightglobal.com with technical information about AirBlue tragedy.

Captain's arrogance preceded Airblue A321 catastrophe

By David Kaminski-Morrow

Pakistani investigators have catalogued the arrogance and poor airmanship demonstrated by an Airblue Airbus A321 captain before the twinjet crashed into high terrain during a bungled circling approach to Islamabad.

The inquiry found that the enhanced ground-proximity warning system issued 15 'pull up' warnings, among a total of 21 alerts, but the crew failed to respond.

It also determined that the first officer had tried in vain to warn the captain of danger, but that he had been subjected to humiliation, castigation and an overbearing manner during the flight.



The aircraft had lined up for Runway 30 before breaking off for the circling approach, in low visibility, to the opposite-direction Runway 12.

But the A321 strayed north-west after the crew failed to follow the prescribed course, and the captain inadvertently turned the aircraft towards mountainous terrain while attempting to correct its heading.

Evidence of poor crew co-operation had emerged at the beginning of the flight from Karachi. During the initial climb the captain "tested the knowledge" of the first officer, using "harsh words and snobbish tone", said the Pakistan civil aviation authority.

These "intermittent humiliating session" continued over the space of an hour, sapping the first officer's confidence and rendering him "quiet" and "submissive", with the result that he did not challenge the captain's subsequent violations of procedure during the flight.

The captain had a "strong fixation" for a right-hand downwind circling approach, said the Pakistani accident report, and air traffic control twice had to refuse his request for such a manoeuvre, as it was not permitted. The CAA also pointed out that the successful touchdown by a Pakistan International Airlines flight - albeit at the third attempt - probably put the captain under "further pressure" to land the Airblue jet.

After breaking off to execute the left-hand circle, the captain then took the aircraft down to 2,300ft, below the minimum descent altitude of 2,510ft. The first officer - who had logged fewer than 1,900h, against nearly 25,500h for the captain - did not challenge the breach.

The circling procedure required the jet, after the break-off, to turn left in order to track downwind parallel to the runway - displaced no more than 1.3nm from the centreline.

But the captain, in another breach of procedures, had instructed the first officer to insert four additional, unauthorised waypoints into the flight management system, effectively creating a new flightpath for the approach.

"The [cockpit] recording and flight simulation show that the captain probably decided to fly a managed approach on pre-selected [unauthorised waypoints] unbeknown to [air traffic control]," said the Pakistani CAA.

Against procedures the captain failed to maintain visual contact with the airport. The aircraft continued to fly north-west, heading for high terrain and an area of restricted airspace. This caused the terrain-warning system to begin issuing cautionary alerts, and prompted air traffic control to instruct the A321 to turn left. The first officer also verbally informed the captain of the terrain risk.

But while the captain kept dialling in a reduced heading, the aircraft did not respond because he had opted to fly the approach using the A321's 'NAV' mode.

"The pilots were unsure of their geographical position and did not seek radar help," said the CAA. "The consequent loss of situational awareness caused the aircraft to go astray."

Forty seconds before the accident the correct mode for a heading change was engaged. But by this time the requested heading had been dialled down to 086°, and the aircraft naturally took the shortest approach to this new heading - turning right instead of left, taking the twinjet towards the Margalla hills.

Despite the ground-proximity warning system sounding 'pull up' warnings, and the first officer urging the same, the captain failed to respond, instead executing extreme manoeuvres - including banking 52° - and expressing his inability to understand why the aircraft was not turning as instructed.

"The aircraft had ended up in a dangerous situation because of [the] most unprofessional handling by the captain," said the CAA. "Since the desired initiative of [the first officer] had been curbed and a communication barrier had already been created by the captain, the first officer failed to intervene, take over the controls to pull the aircraft out of danger and display required [crew resource management] skills."

None of the 146 passengers and six crew members survived when the aircraft hit the Margalla hills, some 7.3nm north of the Runway 12 threshold.

In its conclusions over the 28 July 2010 accident the CAA said the crew "failed to display superior judgement and professional skills", and added: "In their pursuit to land in inclement weather they committed serious violations of procedures and breaches of flying discipline, which put the aircraft in an unsafe condition over dangerous terrain at low altitude."

Source: www.flightglobal.com

Abbas

[Abbas Ali]

AirBlue Crash to be Re-investigated

FEBRUARY 21 - According to Express News channel, AirBlue crash will be re-investigated. A notification in this regard is expected to be issued by Interior Ministry in next 24 hours.

A new investigation team, including Pakistani and foreign experts, will prepare its report in 90 days.

Abbas

[Abbas Ali]

Airblue crash: centre to appoint new inquiry panel

PESHAWAR, Feb21: The federal government has decided to appoint a board of accident inquiry into the Airblue plane crash in line with the orders of the Peshawar High Court, which had expressed dissatisfaction at an early probe.

A high court bench comprising Chief Justice Dost Mohammad Khan and Justice Waqar Ahmad Seth was informed on Tuesday that the defence ministry had issued a notification on February 17 wherein it was mentioned that the federal government had decided in public interest to appoint a board of accident inquiry into the July 28, 2010 Airblue crash, which left 152 persons on board dead on Margalla Hills.

Senior law officer of the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) Ubaidur Rehman Abbasi informed the benchthat the authority had received the notification issued by the government which provided that the said board should exercise powers conferred under the Civil Aviation Rules 1994 and furnish its report to the defence ministry within 30 days from the date of notification of the chairman and the members which would follow shortly.

The court issued directions for the heading of the said board by a team of international experts and CAA and the federal government should have no controlling power towards it.

It was added that as soon as the inquiry was completed, it should be submitted to the court.

The court was hearing a writ petition filed by former MNA Marvi Memon and some family members of crash victims.

The bench fixed March 27 for the nexthearing into the case.

Both defence and law secretaries tendered unconditional apologies to the court in written statements given in reply to contempt of court notices issued by the court during previous hearing on January 19 for not following certain court orders.

Lawyer of defence secretary Tanveerul Islam Khan and consultant with the law division Mohammad Jawed Iqbal submitted the replies on behalf of the two secretaries saying they had taken several steps in accordance with the court orders and could not even think of disobeying it.

Mr Abbasi and Mr Tanveer informed the bench that in line with that order, the defence ministry issued a letter to the CAA on February 15 directing it to approach International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) and others for nomination of experts. CAA was also asked to direct PIA and other private airlines operating under their regulatory control to prepare themselves for safety audit/assessment to be done in pursuance of the court order.

The bench observed that this being serious issue because lives of citizens were involved on a daily basis in thousands and therefore, all authorities, including federal government, was directed to undertake inspection process at the earliest otherwise if any mishap occurred responsibility would lay on the relevant authority.

During proceedings, the bench expressed annoyance over CAA performance saying facilities at airports and in aircraft were not up to international standards.

Source: DAWN

[Abbas Ali]

Draft final report of AirBlue accident prepared by Pakistan CAA was also reviewed by National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) of USA and Bureau d'Enquêtes et d'Analyses (BEA) of France.

Letter by NTSB dated December 9, 2011, and by BEA dated November 15, 2011, with comments and technical amendments/corrections suggested by the two respected aviation safety organizations can be viewed/downloaded from Pakistan CAA website on following link:

Download Link: Pakistan CAA - AirBlue Airbus A321 July 28, 2010, Accident

Pakistan CAA investigation report can also be downloaded from the link.

Abbas

[Abbas Ali]

World aviation body asked to probe Airblue crash, court told

PESHAWAR, March 27: The Peshawar High Court was informed on Tuesday that government had approached International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) to appoint international experts for inquiry into the Airblue plane crash as court had expressed dissatisfaction over the previous inquiry report.

A two-member bench comprising Chief Justice Dost Mohammad Khan and Justice Waqar Ahmad Seth was informed that the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) had sent a letter to ICAO, which forwarded the same to its secretary general, based in Montreal, Canada.

A senior law officer of CAA, Ubaidur Rehman Abbasi, informed the bench that they were awaiting outcome of their request made to ICAO.

The ministry of defence had last month issued a notification for appointing a board of accident inquiry into Airblue flight accident, which crashed on July 28, 2010, at Islamabad leaving 152 persons dead.

The notification said that the board should exercise powers, conferred o it under the Civil Aviation Rules 1994, and furnish report to the ministry of defence within 30 days.

The court had earlier ordered that the board should be headed by team of international experts and CAA and the federal government should have no controlling power towards the team.

The court was hearing a writ petition filed by former MNA Marvi Memon and some family members of victims of the crash. The bench fixed April 25 for next hearing.

During course of proceedings Mr Abbasi put forward a proposal to the bench that under Rule 283 of the Civil Aviation Rules 1994 a person with legal knowledge could be appointed as chairman of the inquiry board.

He suggested if the court had no trust in the CAA, it could nominate a judge of the high court or a judge of Supreme Court could be appointed as chairman of the board.Mr Abbasi pointed out that nomination of an international expert would be a time consuming process over which a lot of resources of the government would be spent.

The bench, however, turned down his suggestion observing that it would be appropriate that the inquiry should be conducted through international aviation experts. About the performance of CAA, Mr Abbasi said that recently international safety audit of around 100 countries were conducted by ICAO in which it was revealed that CAA was among top 10 performance-wise.

A counsel appearing for ministry of defence stated that so far the government had received claims of 84 families of deceased persons out of which compensation of Rs500,000 had been paid to 62 families and others would also be paid soon.

He said that the chief justices of Sindh and Islamabad high courts had nominated senior judicial officers for expediting issuance of succession certificates to the legal heirs of the deceased passengers.

Source: DAWN

ICAO experts to conduct fresh probe

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

PESHAWAR: The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) on Tuesday informed the Peshawar High Court (PHC) that it had sent a letter to the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) to hire the services of experts to hold an independent and fresh inquiry into the Airblue crash in which all the 146 passengers and six crewmembers were killed on July 28, 2010.

Senior law officer of the CAA Obaidur Rehman Abbasi informed a division bench comprising Chief Justice Dost Muhammad Khan and Justice Waqar Ahmad Seth that the authority had written the letter to the ICAO as per the high court’s directives. He said the ICAO replied that its secretary general was in Montreal and provision of the international experts for fresh probe would take time.

However, he informed the bench that under the CAA rules legal expert could be appointed as supervisor of the investigation and the court could also appoint a judge of the superior judiciary if international experts were not available. The bench rejected this point and asked the CAA to hire international experts for conducting fresh inquiry into the crash.

During the previous hearing, counsel for the Defence Ministry Tanvirul Islam Khan submitted a written reply to the bench stating that in compliance with the court’s orders the federal government on February 17 exercising powers under rule 282 of the Civil Aviation Rules, 1994 decided to appoint a Board of Accident Inquiry into the Airblue crash.

On December 20, 2011, the CAA Safety Investigation Board (SIB) had submitted the Airblue crash inquiry report blaming the pilot and the inclement weather for the crash. On January 19, the court rejected the first inquiry report and directed the federal government to constitute a new board of inquiry/investigation under domestic and international laws for revisiting the said probe.

About the safety audit and assessment of the PIAC and other private airlines operating under the CAA control, Obaidur Rehman Abbasi said that majority of airlines companies had said they were engaged in making new airplanes and had no time for fresh checking of their running aircraft.

He also informed the bench that under the recent safety audit report, out of 100 airlines the CAA was placed at number 10 in terms of its safety measures.

The bench had asked the government to form a separate board of inquiry, including foreign experts, to inspect all aircraft of the Pakistan International Airlines and private airlines, examine the CAA performance and check the capability of flying pilots and other crewmembers.

The bench observed that it was a very serious and grave matter as thousands of passengers were travelling with the airlines whose planes were outdated and unsafe.The Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS), Islamabad, submitted the DNA report in the court in which majority of the tests didn’t match with the family members.

The petitioners’ lawyer, Umar Farooq Adam, submitted that the Islamabad administration had buried 76 bodies in a mass grave instead of conducting the DNA test for identification.The court was hearing the writ petition filed by former MNA Marvi Memon and some victim families seeking an independent inquiry into the crash and compensation under the international laws.Deputy Attorney General Iqbal Mohmand and counsel for the other parties appeared in the case.

Source: The News

[Abbas Ali]

Pakistan Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) message in today's (April 15) newspaper.

"Ministry of Defence - Government of Pakistan

Government of Pakistan has been disbursing compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees, Five Lacs only) for legal heirs of the victims of Air Blue flight (ED-202) which crashed in Margala Hills, Islamabad, on 28th July, 2010. Besides, M/s Air Blue management has been paying Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees, Fifty Lacs only) as compensation to such legal heirs.

Recently, on request of the Ministry of Defence/Law, the Honourable Chief Justice, High Court of Sindh, Karachi, has passed orders directing all District and Sessions Judges in Sindh to dispose of Succession Applications in respect of compensation of Air Blue crash victims on top priority basis, preferably within ten (10) days from the date of receipt of such applications. Similarly, the Honourable Chief Justice Islamabad High Court, Islamabad, has specially nominated Mr. Abdul Ghafoor Kakar, Senior Civil Judge (ICT-East) for issuance of Succession Certificates in this regard.

Civil Aviation Authority hereby informs in the public interest, on directive of the Ministry of Defence, that such legal heirs of the victims of Air Blue crash, who have yet not been able to get Succession Certificates, are requested to immediately approach nearest courts of their respective territorial area (as mentioned above) to obtain Succession Certificates, so that air crash compensation may be disbursed/paid to them expeditiously by the Government of Pakistan and M/s Air Blue management."



Abbas

[malpensa26]

its still hard to beleive a plane could hit the hills with all the latest technology