




Above on left is NTSB photo of aft midspan latch area of the forward cargo door and above on right is private photo of forward midspan latch area of the forward cargo door of Trans World Airlines Flight 800. Hinge is on top. The petal shaped bulges in both pictures are at the aft and forward midspan latches Note vertical tear lines in skin above door, missing pressure relief door, intact hinge, longitudinal split, missing lower part, and general shattered appearance of door. Those observations are similar to other cargo doors of early model Boeing 747s that have ruptured open in flight.
© 1996 1997 1998 1999, 2000, 2001,
2002, 2003, 2004, 2005© John Barry Smith All Rights Reserved
(Not affiliated with the National Transportation Safety Board
or any airline, manufacturer, legal firm, government agency, or
independent safety group.)
Background and Reference
Newer Page Reasoning behind hull
rupture door opening
Introduction
Introduction Photograph
Introduction Page
reconstructmatches.html
Reconstruction pictures/drawings of AI 182, PA 103, UAL 811,
and TWA 800
reasoning.html Reasoning behind cargo
door hypothesis
Boeing 747.html Basic Boeing 747
information.
747-121dimensions.html Drawing
of Boeing 747-121
747cargo door and nose Pictures and
drawings of cargo door and nose of Boeing 747
747crashes.html List of Boeing 747
crashes.
cargodoorfaraway.html Forward
cargo door far, medium and close up photo.
crashchart0.html Chart of three
Boeing 747 crashes and similarities presenting a pattern.
crashchart1.html Chart of three
different Boeing 747 crashes/incidents and similarities.
800summary TWA Flight 800 ,UAL Flight
811, Pan Am Flight 103, Air India Flight 182 Summaries and explanations.
variousdooraccidents.html
Accounts of various cargo door accidents/incidents.
forwardcargodoorpict.html
Contents of links to door on site to show latch pins, openings,
hinge, seal, and lock sectors.
747passdoor.html 747 plug type
passenger door failed
Why Does Door Rupture/Open?
Door Goes; Nose Goes? When door ruptures,
how and why nose comes off.
Press Kit
Cargo Door Opening/Rupture Event 1985
Boeing 747-237B, Air India Flight 182
AI182essentials.html Extracts from Canadian report, Boeing 747-237B.
Explanations of sudden sound, decompression damage, wreckage plot,
and inflight damage.
182summary.html Description
of Air India Flight 182 crash with cargo door similarities.
Debriefing
AirIndiareportcontents.html
To Canadian and Indian Air India Flight
182 accident report
Air India Flight
182 trial news
Cargo Door Opening/Rupture Event 1988
Boeing 747-121, Pan Am Flight 103
PA103essentials.html Extracts from AAIB accident report. Descriptions
of sudden loud sound, damage location, wreckage plot, and abrupt
power cut.
103radarblip1.html Pan Am Flight 103 cargo door caught on radar. Fig
C-14, Boeing 747. This image matches radar plot of TWA 800.
Debriefing
Pan Am 103 Not a Bomb? Flimsy
evidence for bomb now even weaker with subsequent similar accidents.
103reportcontents.html
To UK Pan Am Flight 103 accident report
Pan Am Flight 103 trial
news
Cargo Door Opening Event 1989
Boeing 747-122, United Airlines Flight 811
UAL811essentials.html Extracts from NTSB accident report. Descriptions
of sudden loud sound, radar tracking, missing bodies, FOD engines,
and sequence of destruction once door opens.
811bigholephotobetter.html
Better picture of big hole that 300 knot
wind enters and blows off nose of UAL 811, Boeing 747.
811page92conclusions3cause.html
Revised probable cause of door opening,
faulty switch.
811PS.html
Popular Mechanics cover picture and story.
811picture UAL 811 cargo door hole picture
More pictures of UAL 811 cargo
door hole
Debriefing
811reportcontentpage.html
To UAL Flight 811 NTSB accident report
Cargo Door Opening/Rupture Event 1996
Boeing 747-131, Trans World Airways Flight 800
747crashes.html List
of Boeing 747 crashes.
cargodoorfaraway.html Forward cargo door far, medium and close up photo.
pressurization1.html Aircraft pressurization theory.
aerodynamics.html Boundary layer aerodynamics.
Airworthiness Directive 79-17-02.html
First Airworthiness Directive against forward
cargo door.
Airworthiness Directive
88-12-04 Original AD to prevent inadvertent
opening of forward cargo door, later amended by AD 89-05-54, not
available, later amended by AD 90-09-06 below.
Airworthiness Directive 90-09-06
Current AD to try again to stop doors from
opening when they shouldn't.
variousdooraccidents.html
Accounts of various cargo door accidents/incidents.
NTSB TWA 800 rebuttal
letter Letter to officials regarding wiring/cargo
door explanation 16 Jan 01
Cargo Door Uncommanded Openings 1991 and 2000 Nonfatal (First instance on -400)
Difficulty Date : 10/11/00
Operator Type : Air Carrier
ATA Code : 5210
Part Name : CONTROLLER
Aircraft Manufacturer : BOEING
Aircraft Group : 747
Aircraft Model : 747422
Engine Manufacturer : PWA
Engine Group : 4056
Engine Model : PW4056
Part/Defect Location : CARGO DOOR
Part Condition : MALFUNCTIONED
Submitter Code : Carrier
Operator Desig. : UALA
Precautionary Procedure : NONE
Nature : OTHER
Stage of Flight : INSP/MAINT
District Office Region : Western/Pacific US office #29
A/C N Number : 199UA
Aircraft Serial No. : 28717
Discrepancy/Corrective Action:FWD CARGO DOOR OPENED BY ITSELF WHEN CB PUSHED IN. ON ARRIVAL, CIRCUIT BREAKERS WERE PUSHED IN, WHEN PRESSURE RELIEF DOOR HANDLE WAS OPENED THE DOOR LATCHES OPENED AND THEN THE DOOR OPENED ON ITS OWN. COULD NOT DUPLICATE PROBLEM AFTER INITIAL OPENING.
From NTSB AAR 92/02 United Airlines Flight 811
1.17.6 Uncommanded Cargo Door Opening--UAL
B-747, JFK Airport
On June 13, 1991, UAL maintenance personnel were unable to electrically
open the aft cargo door on a Boeing 747-222B, N152UA, at JFK Airport,
Jamaica, New York. The airplane was one of two used exclusively
on nonstop flights between Narita, Japan, and JFK. This particular
airplane had accumulated 19,053 hours and 1,547 cycles at the
time of the occurrence.
The airplane was being prepared for flight at the UAL maintenance
hangar when an inspection of the circuit breaker panel revealed
that the C-288 (aft cargo door) circuit breaker had popped. The
circuit breaker, located in the electrical equipment bay just
forward of the forward cargo compartment, was reset, and it popped
again a few seconds later. A decision was made to defer further
work until the airplane was repositioned at the gate for the flight.
The airplane was then taxied to the gate, and work on the door
resumed.
The aft cargo door was cranked open manually, the C-288 circuit
breaker was reset, and it stayed in place. The door was then closed
electrically and cycled a couple of times without incident. With
the door closed, one of the two "cannon plug" (multiple
pin) connectors was removed from the J-4 junction box located
on the upper portion of the interior of the door. The wiring bundle
from the junction box to the fuselage was then manipulated while
readings were taken on the cannon plug pins using a volt/ohmmeter.
Fluctuations in electrical resistance were noted. When the plug
was reattached to the J-4 junction box, the door began to open
with no activation of the electrical door open switches. The C-288
circuit breaker was pulled, and the door operation ceased. When
the circuit breaker was reset, the door continued to the full
open position, and the lift actuator motor continued to run for
several seconds until the circuit breaker was again pulled. At
this time, a flexible conduit, which covered a portion of the
wiring bundle, was slid along the bundle toward the J-4 junction
box, revealing several wires with insulation breaches and damage.
Cargo Door Opening/Rupture Event 2002
Boeing 747-209B, China Airlines Flight 611
PDF Smith AAR and official AAR for Air India Flight 182, Pan Am Flight 103, and United Airlines Flight 811. These Smith AARs show in pictures and text the destruction of Boeing 747s which suffer inflight breakups of which there are now five, Air India Flight 182, Pan Am Flight 103, United Airlines Flight 811, Trans World Airlines Flight 800, and China Airlines Flight 611.
John Denver Plane Crash
NTSB Report
Page 2 Details on Accidents
Boeing Manufacturer
of 747
http://www.ntsb.gov/
NTSB
http://www.faa.gov/avr/aai/aaihome.htm FAA
Email author: barry@qp6.com
Actual Report below:
Canadian Aviation Bureau canadien Safety Board de la sÈcuritÈ
aÈrienne AVIATION OCCURRENCE AIR INDIA BOEING 747-237B
VT-EFO CORK, IRELAND 110 MILES WEST 23 JUNE 1985 1.0 INTRODUCTION
Air India Flight 182, a Boeing 747-237B, registration VT-EFO,
was on a flight from Mirabel to London when it disappeared from
the radar scope at a position of latitude 51O'N and longitude
1250'W at 0714 Greenwich Mean Time (GMT), 23 June 1985, and crashed
into the ocean about 110 miles west of Cork, Ireland. There were
no survivors among the 329 passengers and crew members. The depth
of the water at the crash site is about 6,700 feet.
At 0541 GMT, 23 June 1985, CP Air Flight 003 arrived at Narita
Airport, Tokyo, Japan, from Vancouver. At 0619 GMT a bag from
this flight exploded on a baggage cart in the transit area of
the airport within an hour of the Air India occurence. Two persons
were killed and four were injured. From the day of the occurrences,
there have been questions about a possible linkage between the
events.
This Submission examines the information available to the Canadian
Aviation Safety Board (CASB) with respect to the circumstances
surrounding the AI 182 accident. The sources of information include:
information made public to the Indian Inquiry as a result of the
RCMP investigation; the flight data recorder (FDR), cockpit voice
recorder (CVR) and Shannon ATC tape recording analyses by Canadian,
United Kingdom, and Indian authorities; the medical evidence obtained
from Dr. Hill of the Accident Investigations Branch of the United
Kingdom; and the evidence obtained by examination of the wreckage
recovered, the wreckage distribution pattern, photographs, and
videotapes of the wreckage on the ocean bottom.
2.0 EXAMINATION
2.1 Vancouver
On 19 June 1985, at approximately 1800 PDT (0100 GMT, 20 June),
a CP Air reservations agent in Vancouver received a telephone
call from a male with a slight East Indian accent.* He identified
himself as Mr. Singh and informed the agent that he was making
bookings for two different males also with the surname of Singh.
One booking was made in the name of Jaswand Singh with CP 086
from Vancouver to Dorval on 22 June 1985 to link with AI 182 departing
from Mirabel. The other booking was to Bangkok using CP 003 from
Vancouver to Tokyo and AI 301 from Tokyo to Bangkok. This booking
was made in the name of Mohinderbel Singh. A local telephone contact
number was given and the call lasted about one-half hour.
On the same date at approximately 1920 PDT (0220 GMT), another
reservations agent for CP Air was contacted and requested to change
the booking for Jaswand Singh. The confirmed flight on CP 086
was cancelled and a reservation was made on CP 060 from Vancouver
to Toronto, and a request to be wait-listed on AI 181/182 from
Toronto to Delhi was made.
On 20 June 1985 at about 1210 PDT (1910 GMT), a male appearing
to be of East Indian origin purchased the tickets with cash from
a CP Air ticket office in Vancouver. The booking in the name of
Mohinderbel Singh was changed to L. Singh and the booking using
the name of Jaswand Singh changed to M. Singh. The telephone contact
number was also changed. The final itinerary was as follows:
a) M. Singh - CP 060 Vancouver - Toronto Confirmed Scheduled to
depart Vancouver at 0900 PDT, 22 June 1985
- AI 181 Toronto - Montreal Wait-listed Scheduled to depart Toronto
at 1835 EDT, 22 June 1985
*See Appendix A for chronology of events.
- AI 182 Montreal - Delhi Wait-listed Scheduled to depart Montreal
at 2020 EDT, 22 June 1985
b) L. Singh - CP 003 Vancouver - Tokyo Confirmed Scheduled to
depart Vancouver at 1315 PDT, 22 June 1985
- Air India 301 Tokyo - Bangkok Confirmed Scheduled to depart
Tokyo at 1705 (local time in Tokyo), 23 June 1985
On 22 June 1985 at about 0630 PDT (1330 GMT), a caller identifying
himself as Mr. Manjit Singh called the CP Air reservations office.
The caller spoke with a heavy East Indian accent and wanted to
know if his booking on AI 181/182 was confirmed. The caller was
informed by the agent that he was still wait-listed out of Toronto
and offered to make alternate arrangements to Delhi. The caller
stated that he would rather go to the airport and take his chances.
The caller also asked if he could send his luggage from Vancouver
to Delhi and was told he could not check his baggage past Toronto
unless his flight was confirmed.
On Saturday morning, 22 June 1985, a CP Air passenger agent worked
check-in position number 26 at the CP Air ticket counter, Vancouver
International Airport, and recalls dealing with a passenger booked
on CP 060 and then on to Delhi. The passenger stated that he wanted
his bag tagged right to Delhi from Vancouver. After checking the
computer, the agent explained that since he was not confirmed
past Toronto he could not interline his baggage. The passenger
insisted and, as the line-ups were long, the agent relented and
interlined his suitcase. The flight manifest for CP 060 shows
that M. Singh checked in through this passenger agent, was assigned
seat 10B, and checked one piece of baggage. The flight manifest
for CP 003 shows that on the same day the person using the name
of L. Singh with a ticket to Bangkok also checked in through the
same counter, was assigned seat 38H, and checked one piece of
baggage.
A check of CP Air's records and interviews with passengers on
flights CP 003 and CP 060 indicates that the persons identifying
themselves as M. and L. Singh did not board these respective flights.
2.2 Toronto
Air India Flight 181 from Frankfurt arrived at Toronto on 22 June
1985 at 1430 EDT (1830 GMT) and was parked at gate 107 of Terminal
2. All passengers and baggage were removed from the aircraft and
processed through Canada Customs. Passengers continuing on the
flight to Montreal were given transit cards, and on this flight
68 cards were handed out. These transit passengers are required
to claim their luggage and proceed through Canada Customs. Prior
to entering the public area, there is a belt which is designated
for interline or transit baggage. Transit passengers deposit their
luggage on this belt which carries it to be reloaded on the aircraft.
This baggage was not subjected to X-ray inspection as it was presumed
to have been screened at the passengers' overseas departure point.
When the transit passengers checked in to proceed to Montreal,
their carry-on baggage was subjected to the normal security checks
in place on this date. Passenger and baggage security checks were
conducted by Burns International Security Services Ltd. and all
passenger and baggage processing for both off-loading and on-loading
was handled by Air Canada staff.
Air India Flight 181 was composed of the following:
- passengers continuing to Montreal (68)
- passengers from connecting flights
AC 102 (Saskatoon) 2
AC 106 (Edmonton) 4
AC 192 (Winnipeg) 1
AC 170 (Winnipeg) 4
AC 136 (Vancouver) 10
CP 060 (Vancouver) 1 Standby (M. Singh)
- passengers originating at Toronto
- diplomatic bags from the Vancouver India Consul General via
AC 508
- produce cargo from India
- cargo in the form of 5th pod engine components loaded in the
aft cargo compartment.
It should be noted that some passengers from India book flights
to Montreal with their intended destination being Toronto. The
reason is that the fare to Montreal is cheaper and therefore some
passengers get off the flight in Toronto, claim their luggage
and leave without reporting a cancellation of the trip to Montreal.
It has been established that 65 of the 68 transit passengers reboarded
the flight to Montreal.
Air India personnel were in charge for the overall operation at
Toronto regarding the unloading and loading of both passengers
and cargo. Although the actual work was performed by various companies
under contract, Air India personnel oversaw the operation. The
Air India station manager was away on vacation on 22 June 1985.
The evidence does not clearly establish who had been assigned
to replace the station manager and assume his duties.
Air Canada had stored in a hangar an engine that had failed on
a previous Air India flight from Toronto on 8 June 1985. Air Canada
received a message from Air India stating that the failed engine
was to be mounted as a 5th pod on Flight 181/182 on 22 June 1985.
The engine was prepared for loading and component parts were crated
for loading into the aft cargo compartment. On 22 June, the component
parts were taken from the hangar and placed outside to be delivered
to the aircraft by MEGA International Air Cargo. The component
parts were placed just inside the airport fence separating the
restricted and unrestricted areas. The installation began immediately
upon the arrival of Flight 181 and was completed at 1530 EDT (1930
GMT). The front engine cowling was crated but would not fit through
the aft cargo door. The crating was rearranged, and the door stops
on the cargo door were removed to permit the loading of the crate
and the remaining engine parts were loaded on pallets. Due to
problems with loading the 5th pod and component parts, the departure
was delayed from 1835 EDT (2235 GMT) to 2015 EDT (0015 GMT, 23
June).
CP Air Flight 060 arrived in Toronto at 1610 EDT (2010 GMT) and
docked at gate 44, Terminal 1. A number of passengers on this
flight were interlined to other flights including passenger M.
Singh wait-listed on Air India Flight 181/182. It has been established
that this passenger did not board Flight CP 060 but did check
baggage onto the flight. This baggage was to be interlined to
the Air India flight departing from Terminal 2. In this case,
CP Air employees would have off-loaded all baggage from CP 060
and deposited the baggage at Racetrack 6 on the ring road of Terminal
1 to be transported to the Air Canada sorting room at Terminal
2.
Consolidated Aviation Fuelling and Services (CAFAS) is a company
which is contracted to pick up and deliver baggage from one terminal
to the other. The CAFAS driver on duty at the time recalls picking
up a bag from a CP Air flight originating in Vancouver and destined
for Air India at Terminal 2. As this piece of luggage did not
turn up as found luggage, it is deduced that normal practice was
followed, and the luggage was interlined and loaded on AI 181/182.
MEGA International Air Cargo is a firm that handled air cargo
and containers for Air India. Since the flight was carrying a
5th engine and component parts, no commercial cargo could be loaded
at Toronto. MEGA delivered the engine component parts to be loaded
in the cargo compartment by Air Canada employees. Later, MEGA
received two diplomatic bags and delivered these to the aircraft.
The bags were loaded into the valuable goods container (see Appendix
B). These bags were not subjected to X-ray or any other security
checks.
All checked-in baggage for AI 181/182 was to be screened by an
X-ray machine which was located in Terminal 2 at the end of international
belt number 4. This location would permit all baggage from the
check-in counters and interline carts to be fed through the X-ray
machine before being loaded. It has been established that this
machine worked intermittently for a period of time and stopped
working during the loading process at about 1700 EDT (2100 GMT).
Rather than opening the bags and physically inspecting them, the
Burns security personnel performing the X-ray screening were told
by the Air India security officer to start using the hand-held
PD-4 sniffer.
One Burns security officer checked the bags with the sniffer while
another put stickers on the bags and forwarded them. The security
officer forwarding the baggage recalls the sniffer making short
beeping noises not long whistling ones. The security officer who
used the sniffer claims it never went off, and the only time any
sound was made was when it was turned on and off. At those times,
it would emanate a short beep (refer to section 2.8 for further
information regarding the PD-4 sniffer).
Burns International Security had a contract with Air India for
the security of the aircraft while it was docked. The security
arrangements contracted from Burns were as follows:
- security at the bridge door leading to the aircraft;
- security inside the aircraft from the time the passengers disembarked
upon flight arrival until flight departure;
- security guards assigned the physical inspection of all carry-on
baggage in the departure room; and
- security guards in the international baggage make-up room conducting
screening of baggage using an X-ray machine and a hand-held PD-4
sniffer.
The statements taken from Burns security personnel in Toronto
indicated that a significant number of personnel, including those
handling passenger screening, had never had the Transport Canada
passenger inspection training program or, if they had, had not
undergone refresher training within 12 months of the previous
training.
As a result of official requests made by Air India in early June
1985 for increased security for Air India flights, the RCMP provided
additional security as follows:
- one member in a marked police motor vehicle patrolling the apron
area;
- one member in a marked police motor vehicle parked under the
right wing from time of arrival until push-back;
- one member on foot patrol at Air India check-in counter; and
- one member at the loading bridge during boarding.
In addition, all RCMP members working in that particular area
of Terminal 2 were aware of the Air India flight and would check
in with the assigned personnel during their patrols in the area
of the aircraft and check-in/boarding lounges. Uniformed members
are to patrol and monitor security within the airport premises
as detailed in section 2.5 below.
Passenger check-in was handled for Air India by Air Canada under
contract with Air India. The check-in included passengers originating
in Toronto and interline passengers but did not include the transit
passengers to Montreal. The check-in passengers were numbered
using a security control sheet in accordance with instructions
from Air India; however, the check-in and interline baggage was
not numbered, and no attempt was made to correlate baggage with
passengers. Hence, any unaccompanied interline baggage would not
have been detected.
The flight and cabin crew had been in Toronto for the week prior
to this flight and were to take the aircraft to London where they
would be replaced by another crew. The crew members themselves
and their carry-on baggage were not subjected to any security
checks; however, their checked-in baggage was screened in the
same manner as other baggage.
2.3 Montreal
Air India Flight 181 from Toronto arrived at Mirabel International
Airport at about 2100 EDT (0100 GMT, 23 June) and parked in supply
area number 14 at 2106 EDT (0106 GMT). The 65 passengers destined
for Montreal along with three Air India personnel deplaned and
were transported by bus to the terminal building. The remaining
passengers remained on board as transit passengers and were not
permitted to disembark at Montreal. Air Canada baggage handlers
off-loaded four containers of cargo, three containers of baggage
and a valuables container. Two diplomatic pouches from the Indian
High Commission in Ottawa were delivered to the aircraft by MEGA
International Cargo. One pouch weighing one kilogram was hand-delivered
to the flight purser for storage in a valuables locker within
the cabin and the other pouch was loaded into the valuables container.
During the check of the aircraft at Montreal, the second officer
pointed out to an Air Canada mechanic that a rear latch on the
fan cowl for the 5th engine did not appear to be properly secured.
The mechanic examined the latch and found it well secured, but
the handle was not flush and was hanging about five degrees. The
mechanic applied high-speed tape to the latch handle for aerodynamic
smoothness. This repair was examined by the second officer who
was satisfied with the work. No records were completed by Air
Canada in connection with this temporary repair.
At about 1730 EDT (2130 GMT), Air Canada, which is Air India's
contracted agent, opened its check-in counter to passengers who
would be flying on Air India Flight 182. Burns security personnel
were also assigned at this time to screen the checked baggage.
Passenger tickets were checked, issued a number, and copies of
the tickets were removed and retained by Air Canada. Boarding
passes were then issued and affixed to the numbered tickets. Also
attached to the ticket booklets were numbered tickets which corresponded
to each piece of checked baggage. The numbered checked baggage
was sent to the baggage area by Air Canada personnel to be security-checked
by Burns security personnel.
The passengers for AI 182 after checking in were free to enter
the departure area. At the entrance to the departure area, Burns
security staff used X-ray units and metal detectors to screen
passengers and carry-on baggage. At about 2100 EDT (0100 GMT),
the passengers proceeded to gate 80 where they gave their boarding
passes and numbered tickets to an Air Canada agent. The agent
kept the numbered flight tickets and checked the numbers against
the passenger list. Also, at gate 80, a secondary security check
was done on passengers by a Burns security officer using a metal
detector. Hand-carried baggage was subjected to further physical
and visual checks. A total of 105 passengers boarded the flight
at Mirabel Airport; there were no interline passengers.
Between 1900 (2300 GMT) and 1930 EDT (2330 GMT), Burns security
personnel identified a suspect suitcase using the X-ray machine.
The suitcase was placed on the floor next to the machine. The
Burns security supervisor told Air India personnel that a suspect
suitcase had been located and was advised within 15 to 20 minutes
to wait for the Air India security officer who would be arriving
on the flight from Toronto. Subsequently, a second suspect suitcase
was identified and a little later a third. The three suitcases
were placed next to the X-ray machine. Between 1930 (2330 GMT)
and 1945 (2345 GMT), all the Burns security personnel at the X-ray
machine were assigned to other duties and the three suspect suitcases
remained in the baggage area without supervision. At about 2140
(0140 GMT), the Air India security officer went to the baggage
room and inspected the three suitcases with the X-ray machine
and a sniffer that was in the possession of the security officer.
The Air India security officer decided to keep the three suitcases
and, if further examination proved negative, send them on a later
flight. At approximately 2155 (0155 GMT), the Air Canada Operations
Centre supervisor contacted the airport RCMP detachment regarding
the suspect suitcases. At about 2205 (0205 GMT), an RCMP member
located the suitcases in the baggage room and requested that an
Air India representative be sent to the baggage room. About five
minutes later, the Air India security officer contacted the baggage
room by telephone and advised that he could not come to the room
immediately. The Air India security officer arrived in the baggage
room at about 2235 (0235 GMT) and, when asked to determine the
owners of the suitcases, informed the RCMP member that the flight
had already departed [2218 (0218 GMT)]. The three suspect suitcases
were later examined with negative results.
The remainder of the checked baggage which cleared the security
check was identified by a green sticker. The baggage was then
forwarded to Air Canada personnel who loaded the baggage in containers
to be placed on board the aircraft. A later check with Canada
Customs and Air Canada at Mirabel revealed no unclaimed baggage
associated with AI 181/182. A similar check at Dorval Airport
was conducted with negative results.
No record was kept as to the location and number of individual
pieces of checked-in luggage. Records were kept as to the location
of the containers according to destination, where loaded and the
number of pieces of luggage in each container (see Appendix B).
The Mirabel Detachment of the RCMP provided the following security
at the airport on 22 June 1985:
- one member in a police vehicle for airside security;
- one member on patrol in the arrival and departure areas;
- one member on general foot patrol throughout the terminal; and
- one member as a telecommunications operator in the detachment
office.
In addition, due to the increased threat to Air India flights,
the RCMP provided the following supplementary coverage to Air
India Flight 181/182 on 22 June 1985:
- one member in a police vehicle escorted the aircraft to and
from the runway and the terminal building and remained with the
aircraft while it was stationary;
- one member in a police vehicle remained at the entrance to the
ramp;
- two members patrolled the area of the ticket counter and access
corridors, and one of these members also served in a liaison capacity
with the airline representatives.
2.4 International Standards and Recommended Practices
International security standards and recommendations to safeguard
international civil aviation against acts of unlawful interference
are listed in ICAO Annex 17 to the Convention on International
Civil Aviation. Suggested security measures and procedures are
amplified in the ICAO Security Manual for Safeguarding Civil Aviation
Against Acts of Unlawful Interference.
Annex 17 requires contracting States of which Canada is one to
"take the necessary measures to prevent weapons or any other
dangerous devices, the carriage or bearing of which is not authorized,
from being introduced by any means whatsoever, on board an aircraft
engaged in the carriage of passengers."
In addition to other recommendations, Annex 17 recommends that
contracting States should establish the necessary procedures to
prevent the unauthorized introduction of explosives or incendiary
devices in baggage, cargo, mail and stores to be carried on board
aircraft.
The Security Manual specifies that,
EMBED MSWordArt.2 \s
EMBED MSWordArt.2 \s
Recently, ICAO has proposed amendments to Annex 17. These proposals
arise from a decision taken by the Council in its 115th Session
on 10 July 1985. The Council instructed its Committee on Unlawful
Interference, as a matter of urgency, to review the entirety of
Annex 17 and to report on those provisions which might be immediately
introduced, upgraded to Standards, strengthened or improved. Among
the proposed amendments is the following upgrading in the Standards:
- Each contracting State ensure the implementation of measures
at airports to protect cargo, baggage, mail stores and operator's
supplies being moved within an airport to safeguard such aircraft
against an act of unlawful interference.
2.5 Canadian Law
In terms of Canadian statutory requirements, the Civil Aviation
Security Measures Regulations and the Foreign Aircraft Security
Measures Regulations made pursuant to the Aeronautics Act require
specified owners or operators of aircraft registered in Canada
or specified owners or operators who land foreign aircraft in
Canada to establish, maintain, and carry out security measures
at airports consisting of:
- systems of surveillance of persons, personal belongings, baggage,
goods and cargo by persons or by mechanical or electronic devices;
- systems of searching persons, personal belongings, baggage,
goods and cargo by persons or by mechanical or electronic devices;
- a system that provides, at airports where facilities are available,
for locked, closed or restricted areas that are inaccessible to
any person other than a person who has been searched and the personnel
of the owner or operator;
- a system that provides, at airports where facilities are available,
for check-points at which persons intending to board the aircraft
of an owner or operator can be searched;
- a system that provides, at airports where facilities are available,
for locked, closed or restricted areas in which cargo, goods and
baggage that have been checked for loading on aircraft are inaccessible
to persons other than those persons authorized by the owner or
operator to have access to those areas;
- a system of identification that prevents baggage, goods and
cargo from being placed on board the aircraft if it is not authorized
to be placed on board by the owner or operator; and
- a system of identification of surveillance and search personnel
and the personnel of the owner or operator.
Specified carriers including Air Canada, CP Air, and Air India
were required to provide a description of their security measures
to the Canadian Minister of Transport.
An Order-in-Council on 29 September 1960 established that the
RCMP was responsible for the direction and administration of police
functions at major airports operated by Transport Canada. The
duties of the Police and Security Detail at these designated airports
include the following:
- carry out policing and security duties to guard against unauthorized
entry, sabotage, theft, fire or damage;
- enforce federal legislation;
- respond to violations of the Criminal Code of Canada, Federal,
Provincial, and Territorial statutes, and perform a holding action
pending arrival of the police department having primary criminal
jurisdiction;
- man guard posts; and
- provide a police response in those areas of airports where pre-board
screening takes place.
Section 5.1(9) of the Aeronautics Act states that "The Minister
may designate as security officers for the purposes of this section
any persons or classes of persons who, in his opinion, are qualified
to be so designated." Pursuant to this section Transport
Canada has established criteria for persons or classes of persons
that are designated as security officers in a Schedule registered
on 11 April 1984. The criteria also specify that a security guard
company and its employees will meet Transport Canada requirements
provided that the company:
- is under contract with a carrier to conduct passenger screening
under the Aeronautics Act and Regulations;
- is licensed in the province or territory;
- complies with the security guard criteria as follows in that
the guard must:
- be 18 years or older,
- be in good general health without physical defects or abnormalities
which would interfere with the performance of duties,
- be licensed as a security guard and in possession of the licence
while on duty, and
- meet the training standards of Transport Canada consisting of
successfully completing the Transport Canada passenger inspection
training program, attaining an average mark of 70 per cent, and
undergoing refresher training within 12 months from previous training;
- uses a comprehensive training program which has been approved
by Transport Canada and is capable of being monitored and evaluated;
- keeps records showing the date each employee received initial
training and/or refresher training and the mark attained; and
- provides supervision to ensure that their employees maintain
competency and act responsibly in the conduct of searching passengers
and carry-on baggage being carried aboard aircraft.
2.6 Canadian Security Procedures
In accordance with the Canadian Aeronautics Act and pursuant regulations,
air carriers are assigned the responsibility for security. Transport
Canada provides the following security services for the air carriers
using major Canadian airports, including the international airports
in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal:
- security and policing staff including RCMP airport detachments;
- specific airport security plans and procedures;
- secure facilities (e.g., secure areas, pass identification systems,
etc.); and
- security equipment and facilities (e.g., X-ray detection units,
walk-through metal detectors, hand-held metal detectors, explosive
detection dogs).
As of 22 June 1985, the following general security measures were
in place at Canadian airports:
- metal detection screening of passengers; and
- X-raying of carry-on baggage.
Checked baggage was not normally subject to any security screening.
A few air carriers such as Air India had extra security measures
in place because of an assessed higher threat level (see section
2.7 below).
On 23 June 1985, Transport Canada required additional security
measures to be implemented by all Canadian and foreign air carriers
for all international flights from Canada except those to the
continental United States. These measures required:
- the physical inspection or X-ray inspection of all checked baggage;
- the full screening of all passengers and carry-on baggage; and
- a 24-hour hold on cargo except perishables received from a known
shipper unless a physical search or X-ray inspection is completed.
Further, on 29 June 1985, Transport Canada directed that all baggage
or cargo being interlined within Canada to an Air India flight
was to be physically inspected or X-rayed at the point of first
departure and that matching of passengers to tickets was to be
verified prior to departure.
2.7 Air India Security Program in Canada
In accordance with the Foreign Aircraft Security Measures Regulations,
Air India had provided the Minister of Transport with a copy of
its security program. It included measures to:
- establish sterile areas;
- physically inspect all carry-on baggage by means of hand-held
devices or X-ray equipment;
- control boarding passes;
- maintain aircraft security;
- ensure baggage and cargo security; and
- off-load baggage of passengers who fail to board flights.
Under these procedures established by Air India, passengers, carry-on
baggage, and checked baggage destined for AI 181/182 on 22 June
1985 were subjected to extra security checks. A security officer
from the Air India New York office arrived in Toronto on 22 June
1985 to oversee the security operation at Toronto and Montreal.
On 17 May 1985, the High Commission of India presented a diplomatic
note to the Department of External Affairs regarding the threat
to Indian diplomatic missions or Air India aircraft by extremist
elements. Subsequently, in early June, Air India forwarded a request
for "full and strict security coverage and any other appropriate
security measures" to Transport Canada offices in Ottawa,
Montreal and Toronto, and RCMP offices in Montreal and Toronto.
2.8 PD-4 Sniffer
On 18 January 1985, prior to the inaugural Air India flight out
of Toronto on 19 January, a meeting on security for Air India
flights (Toronto) was held with representatives from Transport
Canada, RCMP and Air India. At this meeting, a PD-4 sniffer belonging
to Air India was produced. It was explained that it would be used
to screen checked baggage as the X-ray machine had not yet arrived.
At that time, an RCMP member tested its effectiveness. The test
revealed that it could not detect a small container of gunpowder
until the head of the sniffer was moved to less than an inch from
the gunpowder. Also, the next day the sniffer was tried on a piece
of C4 plastic explosives and it did not function even when it
came directly in contact with the explosive substance. It is not
known if this was the same sniffer used on 22 June 1985.
2.9 Medical Evidence
Medical examination was conducted on the 131 bodies recovered
after the accident. This comprises about 40 per cent of the 329
persons on board. It should be noted that assigned seating is
based on preliminary information. Also, the exact position of
passengers is not certain because it is not known if passengers
changed their seats after lift-off. On the information available,
the passengers were seated as follows:
Passengers:*
Seats Bodies
Available Occupied Identified
Zone A 16 1 0
Zone B 22 0 0
Upper Deck 18 7 0
Zone C 112 104 + 2 29
Zone D 86 84 + 1 38
Zone E 123 105 + 3 50
SUB-TOTAL 377 301 (+6 infants) 117
Crew:
Flight Deck 3 3 0
Cabin 19 19 5
TOTAL 399 329 122
There were 30 children recovered and they showed less overall
injury. The average severity of injury increases from Zone C to
E and is significantly less in C than in Zones D and E.
Flail pattern injuries were exhibited by eight bodies. Five of
these were in Zone E, one in Zone D, two in Zone C and one crew
member. The significance of flail injuries is that it indicates
that the victims came out of the aircraft at altitude before it
hit the water.
There were 26 bodies that showed signs of hypoxia (lack of oxygen),
including 12 children, 9 in Zones C, 6 in Zone D and 11 in Zone
E. There were 25 bodies showing signs of decompression, including
7 children. They were evenly
*See Appendix C for interior seating arrangement.
distributed throughout the zones, but with a tendency to be seated
at the sides, particularly the right side (12 bodies).
Twenty-three bodies showed evidence of receiving injuries from
a vertical force. They tended to be older, seated to the rear
of the aircraft (4 in Zone C, 5 in Zone D, 11 in Zone E, 2 crew
and 1 unknown), and 16 had little or no clothing.
Twenty-one bodies were found with no clothing, including three
children. They tended to be seated to the rear and to the right
(3 in Zone C, 5 in Zone D, 11 in Zone E and 2 unknown).
There were 49 cases showing signs of impact-type injuries, including
19 children (15 in Zone C, 15 in Zone D, 15 in Zone E, 1 crew
member and 3 unknown).
There is a general absence of signs indicating the wearing of
lap belts.
Pathological examination failed to reveal any injuries indicative
of a fire or explosion.
2.10 Flight Recorders and Shannon Air Traffic Control (ATC) Tape
Analyses
VT-EFO was equipped with a Fairchild A100 Cockpit Voice Recorder
(CVR) and a Lockheed 209E Digital Flight Data Recorder (DFDR).
These were each equipped with Dukane Underwater Acoustic Beacons
and were installed adjacent to each other in the cabin on the
left side near the aft pressure bulkhead. The serial digital signal
recorded by the DFDR was generated by a Teledyne Flight Data Acquisition
Unit installed in the forward electronics bay below the cabin
floor.
The Shannon Air Traffic Control Centre was in contact with VT-EFO
and recorded radio communications with the aircraft. At the time
of the accident, 5.4 seconds of noise was recorded, and the transponder
signal seen on the radar scope was lost from the aircraft. This
signal which displays aircraft altitude showed no deviation before
disappearing from the radar scope.
2.10.1 Analysis by National Research Council, Canada
From the CVR and DFDR, AI 182 was proceeding normally en route
from Montreal to London at an altitude of 31,000 feet and an indicated
airspeed of 296 knots when the cockpit area microphone detected
a sudden loud sound. The sound continued for about 0.6 seconds,
and then almost immediately, the line from the cockpit area microphone
to the cockpit voice recorder at the rear of the pressure cabin
was most probably broken. This was followed by a loss of electrical
power to the recorder. The initial waveform of the cockpit area
microphone signal is not consistent with the sharp pressure rise
expected with detonation of an explosive device close to the flight
deck, but, with the multiplicity of paths by which sound may be
conducted from other regions of the aircraft, the possibility
that it originated from such a device elsewhere in the aircraft
cannot be excluded.
By correlating the oscillograph records of the CVR and the Shannon
ATC VHF recording, it was estimated that the unusual sounds recorded
on the ATC tape started 1.4 ± 0.5 seconds after the start
of the sudden sound detected by the cockpit area microphone and
lasted intermittently for 5.4 seconds. It was felt the closeness
in time of the two noises indicated the 5.4 seconds recorded on
the ATC tapes originated from AI 182. The ATC recording that followed
the cockpit area microphone sounds appeared at first to contain
a series of short intermittent sounds. Listening to the sounds,
it also appeared that a human cry occurred near the end of the
recording. Spectral analysis of these sounds and comparison with
voice imitations revealed that the recorded sounds do not contain
all the pitch harmonic frequencies normally associated with voice
sounds. The origin of these sounds has not been determined.
An examination of the DFDR showed no abnormal variations before
the accident. With the spare engine, this aircraft was restricted
to altitudes below 35,200 feet and indicated airspeeds less than
290 knots. During the last 27 minutes of the flight, the computed
airspeed did gradually increase to nine knots above this limit
in the first part of this period and the power was readjusted
several times. The speed fell below the 290 knot limit at about
07h:09m GMT as recorded by the DFDR; power was increased again
at about 07h:10m causing the aircraft to accelerate to six knots
above the limit by the time the accident occurred at 07h:13m:59s.
The observed excursions outside the specified limits are not considered
significant.
The aircraft was flown with 1.5-degree left-wing-down with 4.2
degrees clockwise control wheel as compared to the aircraft without
the 5th engine installation. Also, 9.4 per cent of right rudder
pedal was applied giving a 1.1-degree right deflection of the
upper and lower rudders. Considering the carriage of the 5th engine
on the left side, these figures are not considered abnormal.
When synchronized with the other recordings, it was determined,
within the accuracy that the procedure permitted, that the DFDR
stopped recording simultaneously with the CVR.
Irregular signals were observed over the last 0.27 inches of the
DFDR tape. Laboratory tests indicated that the irregular signals
most likely occurred as a result of the recorder being subjected
to sharp angular accelerations about the lateral axis of the recorder,
causing rapid changes in tape speed over the record head. This
equates to an angular acceleration on the recorder about the aircraft's
longitudinal axis in a left-wing-down sense. Therefore, these
tests indicate that the digital recorder was subjected to a sharp
jolt separate from any violent motion of the aircraft.
The other possibility for the irregular signals is that the Flight
Data Acquisition Unit which generated the serial digital data
signal and which is located in the electronics bay under the cabin
floor forward of the cargo compartment could have suffered some
damage or had an intermittent power supply that caused it to generate
the irregular signals.
2.10.2 Analysis by Accidents Investigation Branch (AIB), United
Kingdom
The AIB analysis was restricted to the CVR and the Shannon ATC
tape. The correlation of the CVR and ATC tapes showed that the
ATC recording started after the CVR had stopped recording and
1.1 ± 0.4 seconds from the start of the sudden sound. The
total duration of the signal on the ATC tape was 5.4 seconds.
An analysis of the CVR audio found no significant very low frequency
content which would be expected from the sound created by the
detonation of a high explosive device. Evidence of the presence
of audio warning signals buried amongst the noise was investigated
with negative results. A comparison with CVRs recording an explosive
decompression* on a DC-10, a bomb in the cargo hold of a B737,
and a gun shot on the flight deck of a B737 was made. Considering
the different acoustic characteristics between a DC-10 and a B747,
the AIB analysis indicates that there were distinct similarities
between the sound of the explosive decompression on the DC-10
and the sound recorded on the AI 182 CVR.
The analysis of the ATC tape audio determined three or four words
could be heard at the beginning of the transmission, but extensive
filtering did not allow the sounds to be transcribed. Two bursts
of tone occurred during the first second. The spectrum of the
tone does not coincide with any B747 audio warning. The transmission
is chopped until at about 2.7 seconds into the transmission a
loud noise lasting about 200 milliseconds is heard. This is followed
about 0.5 seconds later by a sound which increases in volume.
This sound is similar to that heard in other accidents where there
has been a rapid increase in airspeed. Toward the end of the transmission
a crying sound was heard; however, a study of the noise indicates
a human cry would contain more harmonics. The origin of this sound
was not determined. Knocking sounds were also heard during the
transmission. These were initially thought to be due to hand-held
microphone vibration, but this was discounted because of the frequency
of the sounds. Almost identical sounds were heard on the DC-10
CVR after the explosive decompression had occurred. Their source
was not identified. On the DC-10, the pressurization audio warning
sounded 2.2 seconds after the decompression. No such warning was
identified on the ATC tape.
*Explosive decompression is an aviation term used to mean a sudden
and rapid loss of cabin pressurization. A loud noise is associated
with this event but not necessarily an explosion.
Every aircraft provides a different signature when the press-to-transmit
button is released. These signatures were compared with transients
which occurred during the open microphone transmission. There
is a close match with the previous AI 182 signatures. Therefore,
it is almost certain that the ATC tape recording originated from
AI 182.
The AIB report concluded that the analysis of the CVR and ATC
recordings showed no evidence of a high-explosive device having
been detonated on AI 182. It further states there is strong evidence
to suggest a sudden explosive decompression of undetermined origin
occurred. Although there is no evidence of a high-explosive device,
the possibility cannot be ruled out that a detonation occurred
in a location remote from the flight deck and was not detected
on the microphone. However, the AIB report is of the opinion that
the device would have to be small not to be detected as it is
considered that a large high-explosive device could not fail to
be detected on the CVR.
2.10.3 Analysis by Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), India
The BARC analysis was restricted to the CVR and the Shannon ATC
tape.
Channel 3 of the recording which corresponded to the cockpit area
microphone showed the first indication of a rising audio signal.
The signal level rises from the ambient level in the cockpit by
about 18.5 decibels in approximately 45 milliseconds. The signal
starts falling and stabilizes at a level about 10 decibels higher
than ambient for about 375 milliseconds. The total duration of
the signal is about 460 milliseconds.
The timings of the CVR and the Shannon ATC tape were correlated,
and it was determined that the explosive sound on the CVR coincided
with the beginning of the series of audio bursts on the ATC tape.
The report concluded that the sounds recorded on the ATC tape
emanated from AI 182 at the time of the occurrence.
The noise on the CVR was compared with an explosion which caused
the crash of an Indian Airlines B737. In this occurrence, the
explosive sound recorded on the cockpit area microphone showed
a rise time of about 8 milliseconds. It was also determined that
the explosion occurred 8 feet from the microphone. The report
concluded that the rise time is a measure of the distance from
the cockpit area microphone to the source of an explosion. Hence,
the exact location in the aircraft at which the explosion occurred
is likely to be about 40 to 50 feet from the cockpit judging from
the rise time of 45 milliseconds.
The report concluded that the series of audio bursts on the ATC
tape were most probably generated by the break-up of AI 182 in
mid-air.
2.11 Aircraft Structures Examination
The examination of aircraft structures consisted of the following
areas: floating wreckage, wreckage mapping and surveying, wreckage
distribution, photographic and video interpretation of wreckage,
wreckage recovery and initial examination, and examination of
recovered wreckage.
2.11.1 Floating Wreckage
During the search, aircraft wreckage was sited and recovered by
several search vessels. The wreckage was transported to Cork,
Ireland, where preliminary examination was conducted. This examination
took place in June and July, 1985.
The wreckage consisted mainly of various leading edge skin panels
of the left and right wings, left wing tip, spoilers, leading
edge and trailing edge flaps, engine cowlings, flap track canoe
fairing pieces, landing gear wheel well doors, pieces of elevator
and aileron, cabin floor panels, cabin overhead and upper deck
bins, passenger seats, life vests, slide rafts, hand baggage,
suitcases, personal effects and a number of internal fittings.
The floating wreckage constitutes about three to five percent
of the aircraft structure.
The wreckage was then transported from Ireland to Bombay, India
where it underwent further examination by the Floating Wreckage
Structures Group which then produced a report which was submitted
to the Indian Inquiry. The report concluded:
- There was no evidence of fire damage.
- There was no evidence of lightning strike damage.
- The cabin floor panels from the forward and rear sections of
the aircraft separated from the support structure in an upward
direction (floor to ceiling) pulling free from the attaching screws
and, in some cases, breaking the vertical web of the seat track/floor
beams.
- The position of the leading edge flap rotary actuator and the
damage to the flap structure indicated that the leading edge flaps
were in the retracted position.
- The six spoiler actuators found were in the retracted position.
The lower surface of all the spoiler panels showed signs of spanwise
skin splits with the edges curled into the core of the honeycomb.
The report concluded that this was possibly due to the loading
of the spoilers by being deployed in flight at high speed, resulting
in compression on the lower surfaces. This, in turn, caused splitting
of the lower skin into the honeycomb.
- The right wing root leading edge, number 3 engine inboard fan
cowling, the right inboard midflap inboard leading edge, and the
right stabilizer root leading edge all exhibited damage possibly
due to objects striking the right wing and stabilizer before water
impact.
In addition to the above conclusions, the following significant
information regarding the floating wreckage is noted in the report:
- The aircraft was carrying a -7Q engine at the 5th pod and a
-7J 5th pod kit in the aft cargo compartment. In all there were
14 engine fan cowls (four in the aft cargo compartment). Out of
these 14 fan cowls, nine, including six from the working engines
and three from the aft cargo compartment, and two additional pieces
of fan cowls were found. Five of the fan cowls from the working
engines showed folding damage lines at about the three and nine
o'clock positions. The number 3 engine inboard fan cowl had severe
impact damage on its leading edge and had small outward puncture
holes but no penetration through the outer skin in the lower centre
region. The two fan cowls of the -7J 5th pod kit stowed in the
aft cargo compartment showed severe damage. One piece was cut
at one corner in an arc of about 20 inches diameter and its external
skin was peeled back.
- The cockpit entry door and the side bulkhead panel were found
relatively intact but had come out of their attachments.
- Twelve toilet doors out of 16 were found and were relatively
intact but had come out of their attachments.
- Cabin interior panels and overhead bins of the main and upper
decks which were recovered exhibited only minor damage.
- The wooden boxes which contained the fan blades of the 5th pod
engine were loaded in container 24L in the forward cargo compartment
and were found broken apart exhibiting no burn marks.
- One passenger oxygen bottle and one portable oxygen bottle were
recovered and showed no sign of damage.
Mr. V.J. Clancy, an aviation explosives expert representing Boeing
Aircraft Corporation, prepared a preliminary report based on his
examinations of certain items of recovered and floating wreckage.
Mr. Clancy's report notes the following with respect to floating
wreckage:
- A foam-backed floor panel which showed a small number of perforations
was recovered. Mr. Clancy recommended that it should be X-rayed
and a detailed examination completed.
- One of the lavatory doors had, into its inner surface, a number
of fragments of glass mirror - presumably from breakage of a mirror
normally fitted into the lavatory. Most of the fragments, buried
edgeways, were oriented parallel to each other. The remainder
were approximately at right angles to the others. Mr. Clancy concluded
that it would be improbable that any reliance could be placed
on the penetration by mirror fragments as being indicative of
an explosion.
- Three steel oxygen cylinders which were stowed in the forward
cargo compartment were recovered. One had been dented apparently
by the impact of an object measuring about one to two centimetres.
The depression had a maximum depth of about four millimetres.
- A few suitcases recovered among the floating wreckage were examined.
Mr. Clancy felt that one might provide useful information. It
was of red plastic material with a blue lining. Mr. Clancy reported
that plastic material has been found to retain identifiable traces
of explosive after long immersion in the sea. Also, the lining
which was severely tattered resembled that of one found after
an explosion in an aircraft in Angola.
- A wooden spares box was found on the foreshore of Wales. It
was of the kind used on the aircraft. It was charred on one side
and partially on the bottom. The depth of charring suggested that
the burn time was three to four minutes. This box was normally
stowed in the aft cargo compartment; however, on this flight it
may have been stowed in the forward compartment.
- Two pieces of the cover of an overhead locker originating above
either door 2R or 4R were also found on the foreshore. They were
partially damaged and blackened by fire. Mr. Clancy concluded
that this indicated the presence of fire.
- Two pieces of U-section alloy channel partially filled with
plastic foam were found on the foreshore. The alloy was of a kind
not used in aircraft structure; however, it could have been from
some fitting supplied by a sub-contractor. Also, since the pieces
were found near an area where practice firings at targets are
carried out off the west coast of the United Kingdom, it could
have come from some other source. One piece of the alloy bore
marks ("mooncraters") typical of an attack by very high
velocity fragments such as produced by an explosion. X-rays showed
the presence of a few small particles buried in the foam which
Mr. Clancy recommended should be extracted and examined. He also
felt that this provided the strongest single indication of an
explosion and that it was essential to determine if these pieces
came from the aircraft or any of the equipment or cargo aboard
the aircraft.
The CASB in its examination of the floating wreckage noted the
following:
- The fan cowls of the number 4 engine had a series of five marks
in a vertical line across the centre of the Air India logo on
the inboard facing side of the fan cowl. These marks had the characteristic
airfoil shape of a turbine blade tip. It is possible that a portion
of the turbine parted from the number 3 engine and struck the
cowl of the number 4 engine.
- The upper deck storage cabinet which was located on the left
side had unusual damage to its bottom. A large rounded dent in
the bottom inboard edge of this stiff cabinet structure revealed
smooth stretching without breakthrough. The damage did not seem
to be achievable by inertia or impact forces as the cabinet except
for the bottom was undamaged. The damage was considered by a CASB
investigator to be compatible with the spherical front of an explosive
shock wave generated below the cabin floor and inboard from the
cabinet; however, it is not known if this damage could be caused
by some other means.
- The right wing root fillet which faired the leading edge of
the wing to the fuselage ahead of the front spar had a vertical
dent similar to that which would have resulted had the fillet
run into a soft cylindrical object with significant relative velocity.
The paint on the inboard chord appeared to be scorched brown in
the centre areas of three honeycomb panels. It has been determined
that sudden heat can turn these panels brown, but it is not known
if other reasons for the discolouration exist. The fillet abutted
the fuselage side at the aft end of the forward cargo compartment.
- There was blackened erosion damage to the bottoms of some seat
cushions. The damage had an appearance similar to that which would
have been caused by an explosive device. It is not known if marine
life feeding on the cushions or some other cause could have produced
the same effect.
- The charred wooden spares box contained some sand and small
shellfish. The flesh from the shellfish appeared to be charred,
indicating that the box was subjected to fire after the occurrence.
An electronic device was found among some floating wreckage and
was forwarded to the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre for analysis.
There was some concern that it could have been used to detonate
an explosive device. The device was forwarded to the RCMP who
in conjunction with the CASB determined it to be an item manufactured
for use in radiosondes (weather balloons) and was not modified
as a detonating device.
2.11.2 Wreckage Mapping and Surveying
The Canadian Coast Guard Ship (CCGS) John Cabot was given the
task of mapping the wreckage on the ocean floor. On 19 July 1985,
the Cabot with a SCARAB deep submersible on board departed Cork.
On arrival at the site, and based on surface wreckage distribution
and bottom side scan sonar plots, four transmitters were placed
on the sea bed. These transmitters provided signals for the ALLNAV
navigation system used to accurately plot the sea bed wreckage.
Based on all the data available, the SCARAB was launched on 24
July 1985 to begin the bottom search in position 5101.9'N 1241.0'W.
During the mapping, stage areas were designated for search and
each progressive area was determined based on the information
gained during the search. The search was conducted using sonar
and video. Wreckage found was recorded on video tape and on 35mm
positive film.
The first object plotted on the sea bed was a torn suitcase located
at lat 5102.63'N, long 1253.15'W and was the most westerly object
located. This suitcase has not been recovered, nor has it been
positively identified as having come from the accident aircraft.
As the search progressed eastward, the first positive identification
of aircraft wreckage was made at lat 5102.9'N, long 1249.93'W.
Slowly, over a period of about 90 days, a detailed bottom wreckage
plot was developed.
While mapping was in progress, some of the wreckage was revisited
to obtain additional data. During the transit through areas already
searched, wreckage not previously plotted was found, and, in some
areas, the density of wreckage physically precluded 100 per cent
coverage. Components and major structural items were identified
from all sections of the aircraft and when the mapping of the
sea bed ended, most of the aircraft had been found and photographed.
Although positive identification of each piece of wreckage could
not be made, it was decided in late October 1985 that the search
phase was essentially completed and wreckage recovery could begin.
A bottom wreckage distribution plot is contained separately in
an envelope as Appendix F.
2.11.3 Wreckage Distribution
The wreckage distribution as determined by the mapping of the
sea bed provided some distinct distribution patterns. The depth
of the wreckage varies between about 6000 and 7000 feet, and the
effect of the ocean current, tides and the way objects may have
descended to the sea bed was not determined, thus some distortion
of an object's relationship from time of water entry to its location
on the bottom cannot be discounted. In general, the items found
east of long 1243.00'W are small, lightweight and often made of
a structure which traps air. These items may have taken considerable
time to sink and may have moved horizontally in sea currents before
settling on the bottom. Marks left on the sea bed beside some
wreckage does indicate horizontal movement of the wreckage as
it settled.
Although badly damaged, sections 41, 42 and 44*, and the wing
structure were located in a relatively localized area centred
about lat 5103.30'N and long 1247.80'W, and the wreckage scatter
was oriented north/south. The wreckage scatter in this area was
so dense that it is probable that some of the wreckage may not
have been plotted or photographed.
Sections 46 and 48, including the vertical fin and horizontal
stabilizer, extended in a west to east pattern with the westernmost
identified aircraft component located at lat 5102.90'N and long
1250.1'W. The wreckage extended in a line about 110 degrees True
to an eastern position of lat 5102.04'N and long 1241.26'W, a
distance of approximately 6.5 nautical miles. The aircraft structure
had a random scatter pattern. That is, items such as the aft pressure
bulkhead were broken into several pieces, and these pieces were
located throughout the pattern.
A?? third area which had some distinctive pattern was that of
the engines, engine struts and components and was localized about
lat 5103.25'N and long 1247.4'W in a northwest/southeast orientation.
One of the operating engines was displaced 0.5 nautical miles
to the north of this area, and it was also geographically separated
from the wing structure. The number 3 engine nacelle strut was
also separated from the rest of the engine components and was
located about one nautical mile to the west-southwest at lat 5102.87'N,
long 1248.05'W. The reasons for the displacement of the number
3 engine nacelle strut and one of the operating engines from the
other engines are not known.
*See Appendix D for location of aircraft sections and aircraft
body stations (BS).
2.11.4 Photographic and Video Interpretation of Wreckage
2.11.4.1 Photographic Interpretation
All wreckage sighted was recorded on video tape and all major
items were recorded on 35mm positive film. During the course of
the investigation, several members of the investigation team had
the opportunity to view the tapes and photographs. Subsequently,
when some items were recovered, it became apparent that the optical
image presented on video and still film had some limitation with
respect to identification of damage or damage patterns. For example,
the sine wave bending of target 7* appeared in the video and photographs
as a sine wave fracture, and some of the buckling on target 35
was not evident in either the video or photographs. The interpretation
of damage through photographic/video evidence without the physical
evidence might be misleading, and any interpretation should take
this into account.
2.11.4.2 Engines
The four operating engines were all extensively damaged. A view
of the fan blades did not show signs of any rotational damage,
and it could not be determined whether any pre-impact failures
had occurred. The external damage to the engines varied, and at
least one engine appeared to be attached to part of the nacelle
strut. Except for the non-operational fifth engine, the engines
could not be matched with their original positions on the aircraft.
2.11.4.3 Landing Gear
The nose, wing, and body landing gear were all located. Photographic
examination indicated that all the gear were in the 'up' position
at the time of impact.
2.11.4.4 Flaps and Spoilers
Positive identification of all the flap and spoiler surfaces was
not made. All the flap jackscrews indicated that the flaps were
retracted at impact. Of the spoilers identified, six had actuators
attached. The actuators were in the fully retracted position.
*See Appendix E for location of targets on aircraft.
2.11.4.5 Section 41
Section 41, consisting of the cockpit, first-class section, and
electronics bay and identified as target 192, was found in a near-inverted
attitude. This section was severely damaged. The electronics bay
and cockpit areas could not be located within the wreckage. The
first officer's seat was found on the sea bed near section 41
wreckage.
2.11.4.6 Section 42
Portions of section 42, consisting of the forward cargo hold,
main deck passenger area, and the upper deck passenger area, were
located near section 41. This area was severely damaged and some
of section 42 was attached to section 44. Some of the structure
identified from section 42 was the crown skin, the upper passenger
compartment deck, the belly skin, and some of the cargo floor
including roller tracks. The right-hand, number two passenger
door including some of the upper and aft frame and outer skin
was located beside section 44. Scattered on the sea bed near this
area were a large number of suitcases and baggage as well as several
badly damaged containers.
All cargo doors were found intact and attached to the fuselage
structure except for the forward cargo door which had some fuselage
and cargo floor attached. This door, located on the forward right
side of the aircraft, was broken horizontally about one-quarter
of the distance above the lower frame. The damage to the door
and the fuselage skin near the door appeared to have been caused
by an outward force. The fractured surface of the cargo door appeared
to have been badly frayed. Because the damage appeared to be different
than that seen on other wreckage pieces, an attempt to recover
the door was made by CCGS John Cabot. Shortly after the wreckage
broke clear of the water, the area of the door to which the lift
cable was attached broke free from the cargo door, and the wreckage
settled back onto the sea bed. An attempt to relocate the door
was unsuccessful.
2.11.4.7 Section 44
Section 44, containing the aircraft structure between body station
(BS) 1000 and BS 1480 including that area where the fuselage and
wings were mated was located in the same general area as the forward
sections of the aircraft. This section was severely damaged but
maintained its overall shape and was lying on its right side.
Part of the left wing upper skin was attached to the fuselage
and a large portion, about one-third of the upper wing skin, separated
and was lying against the fuselage crown skin. Some of the body
and wing landing gear were found beside this section of the aircraft.
The gear was detached from the main structure. The interior of
the fuselage was extensively damaged.
2.11.4.8 Wing Structure
The wing structure was located near the forward area of the aircraft
structure and towards the northernmost area of the wreckage pattern.
The wings showed extreme damage patterns with the top and bottom
surfaces separated and the wing surfaces broken into segments.
2.11.4.9 Sections 46 and 48
Sections 46 and 48 contain that part of the aircraft structure
aft of BS 1480 and, for purposes of this Submission, will include
the horizontal stabilizer and vertical fin. This section of the
aircraft was scattered in a west to east pattern about 6.5 nautical
miles in length and exhibited severe break-up characteristics.
The aft cargo and bulk cargo doors were found in place and intact,
and 5L, 5R and 4R entry doors were identified. Four segments of
the aft pressure bulkhead were identified (targets 35, 37, 73
and 296), and one portion of the bulkhead was never located. Much
of the fuselage which was forward of the number five door and
above the passenger floor area was not located, or if located
was not recognizable as having come from a specific area of the
aircraft.
Sections of the outer skin below the cargo area were located as
was some of the cargo floor structure. Generally, the stringers
and stiffeners are attached to the skin; however, the lower frames,
which provided the cargo floor support, were detached from the
skin. The rear cargo floor from BS 1600 to BS 1760 was located
and was found to have little or no distortion; however, the lower
skin and stringers were missing. A second portion of the aft cargo
compartment floor containing cargo drive wheels and cargo roller
trays was located. This structure was severely damaged and mangled.
The tail cone and the auxiliary power unit (APU) housing were
located and had received relatively minor damage; however, the
APU had broken free and was never located.
A large portion of the outer skin panels showed signs of a force
being applied from the inside out. On several pieces of wreckage,
the skin was curled outwards away from the stringers and formers.
This could have been the result of an overpressure of air or water.
The vertical tail was found in good condition, in a single piece
with both rudders attached. The top cap was partially separated
and a small dent was noticed in the middle of the leading edge
at the bottom. A curved broken portion of fuselage was observed
with a portion of the "Y" ring and pressure bulkhead
attached. Another small segment of the pressure bulkhead was leaning
on the lower section of the tail.
The horizontal stabilizer tail section was located and was one
unit with the elevators attached. The actuator jackscrew was attached
to the assembly. The stabilizer jackscrew ballnut was observed
to be located at the upper jackscrew stop. This equates to a full
deflection of elevator trim. Since there is nothing on the DFDR
or CVR to indicate a malfunction of the trim, it is deduced that
this was not the lead event. It is not known if the position of
the ballnut resulted from a pilot trim selection, a result of
the initial event or if it rotated to the observed position under
the influence of gravity. Two-thirds of the leading edge of the
right horizontal stabilizer was missing and the auxiliary spar
was exposed. There was localized damage to the right-hand root
of the leading edge through about a span of five ribs. The leading
edge skin and part of the leading edge ribs were torn downwards.
Some localized damage to the root of the left leading edge was
visible with the remainder of the leading edge undamaged. There
was minor damage to the trailing edge of the outboard left elevator,
and a major portion of the inboard left elevator was missing.
2.11.4.10 Passenger Seats
Many of the passenger seats located among the wreckage pattern
and identified as having come from sections 46 and 48 appeared
to have the aft support legs buckled with little or no damage
to the forward support legs. Seats located in the wreckage containing
sections 41, 42, and 44 appeared to have varying types of damage,
that is, aft support legs only buckled, and all legs buckled.
One consistent feature noted was that in the majority of seats
located it was possible to ascertain that the seat-belts were
not fastened.
2.11.5 Wreckage Recovery and Initial Examination
During the wreckage mapping, some small items were recovered,
and an unsuccessful attempt was made to recover a portion of the
forward cargo door. On completion of the sea bed survey, an offshore
supply ship, Kreuztrum, chartered by the National Transportation
Safety Board (NTSB), joined John Cabot for a wreckage recovery
operation. Prior to the commencement of the wreckage recovery,
the structures group met at the Boeing facility in Seattle, USA
and reviewed the video tapes and photographs of the wreckage.
Based on their findings, a list of items was identified as being
most desirable for recovery. The priority list was prepared by
a group in Cork, Ireland, headed by Dr. V. Ramachandran. On 8
October 1985, the John Cabot sailed, and on 9 October 1985, the
Kreuztrum sailed for the accident site. The following target numbers
and items were recovered during the mapping and wreckage recovery
stages of the investigation: 7, 8, 35, 47, 117, 193, 223, 245,
287, 296, 299, 362/396, and 399 (as the location on the aircraft
of some of the targets was not known when Appendix E was created,
some are not shown in the appendix). The first officer's seat,
some suitcases and small debris were also recovered using a metal
frame basket. Initial examination of the wreckage was carried
out in Cork and then it was transported to Bombay for detailed
examination.
2.11.6 Examination of Recovered Wreckage
Although all the recovered wreckage was examined, only those items
exhibiting characteristics which provided some evidence as to
what may have happened to the aircraft during its final moments
of flight are discussed. CASB engineering personnel and other
participants examined the recovered wreckage at Cork and Bombay.
The observations made during their examinations are discussed
below.
2.11.6.1 Target 7 - Lower Fuselage Skin Panel
This skin panel was located below the aft cargo area and contained
the keel beam. Target 7 extended from BS 1480 to 1860 and was
about eight feet in width and 32 feet in length. The left edge
had a full length rivet line tear, and the torn edge was buckled
in waves, like the trace of a sine wave. On the right side, between
the one-quarter and midway segment, a large flap of skin was attached.
The skin was folded aft, diagonally underneath, from right to
left and the paint was scoured off the leading edge. The forward
break was at the joint at BS 1480. The skin tear located at about
BS 1860 was irregular in nature. The forward keel joint splice
plate was bent, and the keel joint bolt holes were distorted and
elongated.
The left and right trunnion vertical support fittings located
at BS 1480 were examined optically using the stereomicroscope.
Both trunnions were fractured through the three bolt holes. The
right fracture characteristics were consistent with an overload
mode of failure. Although most of the left fracture surface was
also characterized by overload features, there were heavily corroded
areas where the fracture mode could not be confirmed through optical
examination. One lug fracture was sectioned from the left trunnion
and prepared for scanning electron microscope (SEM) examination.
After the corroded area was cleaned, the examination revealed
some ductile characteristics on the fracture surface. There was
no evidence of intergranular fracture observed to suggest a stress
corrosion cracking mode of failure, nor was there any evidence
of progressive failure observed. The corrosion appeared to have
developed after the accident.
2.11.6.2 Target 8 - Lower Fuselage Skin Panel
This skin panel was located below the aft cargo area and extended
from BS 1860 to 1960 and from stringer 46L to 46R. A small section
from the aft end along the belly skin splice at stringer 46L was
removed for examination. SEM examination revealed that the fracture
was characterized by slightly elongated ductile dimples along
its length, including areas adjacent to the edges of the rivet
holes. On the aft edge of each rivet hole examined, a distinctive
shear lip was observed. These features are consistent with an
overload mode of failure along the skin splice with an apparent
direction of failure from aft to forward.
2.11.6.3 Target 35 - Portion of Rear Pressure Bulkhead
Looking forward from behind the aircraft, this segment of pressure
bulkhead occupied the 9 to 1 o'clock position. The piece from
12 to 1 o'clock had the flange from the outer ring attached. The
web below the outer ring flange had areas of buckling. From the
11 to 12 o'clock position, the outer edge showed sinusoidal buckling,
and the edge sector at 9 o'clock was partially collapsed and its
edge was turned under. Samples taken for optical stereomicroscope
and SEM examination revealed that the fracture characteristics
were consistent with an overload mode of failure. The examination
suggested a general direction of failure from the aft to the forward
edge of the rear pressure bulkhead panel.
2.11.6.4 Target 296 - Portion of Rear Pressure Bulkhead
Looking forward from the rear of the aircraft, this segment of
the bulkhead occupied the 7 to 9 o'clock position. Optical and
SEM examination were undertaken on this item.
The fracture along the left-hand edge of target 296 (viewed from
the rear) was examined optically prior to removing any representative
samples. The fracture was at the rivet line at a skin splice,
except for a length of fracture about 15 inches long near the
forward end, which was through the skin away from the rivet line.
Most of the rivet holes along the fracture path showed some slight
elongation and skin deformation.
Representative fracture samples were cut from the left-hand and
right-hand edges of the fracture surfaces. Optical and SEM examination
revealed that the fracture characteristics are consistent with
an overload mode of failure.
2.11.6.5 Target 47 - Aft Cargo Compartment
This portion of the aft cargo compartment roller floor was located
between BS 1600 and BS 1760. Based on the direction of cleat rotation
on the skin panel (target 7) and the crossbeam displacement on
this structure, target 47 moved aft in relation to the lower skin
panel when it was detached from the lower skin. No other significant
observation was noted. There was no evidence to indicate characteristics
of an explosion emanating from the aft cargo compartment.
2.11.6.6 Target 117 - Floor with Seats Attached
These seats were right-section doubles, located between BS 1880
and 1980 and were from rows 46, 47 and 48, F and G (Zone E). The
seats were displaced to the left with the rear legs buckled to
the left. The front leg supports exhibited only minor damage.
The middle and rear doubles had aisle-side seat arms bent to the
right. There was no impact damage to the seat backs or seat pans,
and all life vests except one were gone from the underseat container
bags.
2.11.6.7 Target 399 - Left-Hand Side Triple Seat with Tray Arms
It would appear that this section was from row 18, seats A, B
and C, the first set of triple seats aft of door 2L. The notable
damage to this unit was as follows: front leg aisle side buckled
and crushed in place; front leg window side buckled and crushed
in place; forward edge tube to seat broken and bent downwards
at joint with fore and aft tube between window and centre seats;
and fore and aft tube between centre and aisle seat broken at
start of T-connection to rear edge of seat tube. The damage suggests
that the failures resulted from vertical loading. All the life-jackets
were in place.
2.11.6.8 Target 399 - Fuselage Side and 2R Entry Door
The fuselage segment was located between BS 780 and 940. This
piece was badly damaged and buckled inwards along a line through
the lower door hinge. There were 12 holes or damaged areas on
the skin generally with petals bending outwards. The curl on a
flap around a hole had one full turn. This curl was in the outward
direction. Cracks were also noticed around some of the holes.
Part of the metal was missing in some of the holes. The edges
of some of the petals showed reverse slant fracture. In one of
the holes, spikes were noticed at the edge of a petal.
When this target was recovered from the sea, along with it came
a few hundred tiny fragments and medium-sized pieces. One of the
medium-sized pieces recovered with this target was a floor stantion
about 35 inches long. It was confirmed that this stantion belonged
to the right side of the forward cargo hold. The inner face of
the stantion had a fracture with a curl at the lower end, the
curl being in the outboard direction and up into the centre of
the stantion.
Scientists from the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, the National
Aeronautical Laboratory and the Explosives Research and Development
Laboratory in India conducted a metallurgical examination of certain
items of wreckage. Their report on target 399 concluded that:
- the curling of the metal on the floor channel was indicative
of a shock wave effect;
- the large number of tiny fragments from the disintegration of
nonbrittle aluminum was a characteristic indication of explosive
forces; and
- the indications of punctures, outward petalling around holes,
curling of metal lips, reverse slant fracture, formation of spikes
at fracture edges and certain microstructural changes all were
indicative of an explosion.
2.11.6.9 Target 193 - Fuselage Side and 2L Entry Door
The fuselage segment was located between BS 720 and 840. The door
and fuselage skin were buckled outwards, approximately in line
with the buckling on the fuselage and 2R entry door directly opposite.
2.11.6.10 Target 362/396 - Lower Skin Panel - Forward Cargo Area
This section of skin panel was located between BS 720 and 860
and is just below target 399. The skin was badly crumpled and
torn and had several punctures. It was pulled free from a large
mass of debris which included some mangled cargo floor beams and
roller trays. Some of the punctures had a feathered or spiked
profile, with spikes angled at approximately 45 degrees to the
edge. Other puncture holes gave clear indication of being formed
by underlying stiffeners at impact. Two of these holes contained
pieces of web stiffener. Most of the punctures were the result
of penetrations from inside.
In the preliminary report of Mr. V.J. Clancy, representing Boeing,
the following observations regarding target 362/396 were made:
- There were about 20 holes in the lower skin panel clearly resulting
from penetration from inside.
- In addition to the fact that perforation was from inside, there
were certain features which suggested that they were made by high
velocity fragments such as those produced by an explosion. Mr.
Clancy's report describes these features as follows:
- the presence of toothed or spiked edges at some parts of the
metal which has petalled out from the perforations;
(Tardif and Sterling, Canadian Aeronautics and Space Journal,
1969, 15, 1, 19-27, obtained spiked fractures in fragments from
sheet alloy subjected closely to an explosion. They stated that
they had not obtained this effect in fractures otherwise produced.)
- the presence of marked curling (in some cases of more than 360
degrees) of some of the petals;
(Tardif and Sterling stated that such curling was a feature of
explosively produced fragments.)
- the virtual absence of scratches or score marks on the petals
such as might be expected if something were slowly forced through
the metal;
- the virtual absence of other impact marks on the inside surface
such as might have been produced by a massive impact with a substantial
object, thereby suggesting that the production of at least many
of the perforations were separate independent events; and
- the presence of one perforation (identified as number 14) resembling
a "bullet hole" that was clearly punched out - a type
of hole usually associated with a high velocity missile.
- There was evidence that the forward part of the skin panel had
been folded back inward along the line of station 760 and then
bent back again along a line slightly forward of this station.
- Such folding, perhaps violently produced on impact with the
water, could have brought broken metal of stringers or stiffeners
into forceful contact with the internal surfaces, thus producing
perforations outwards. The overlap of such folding would conceivably
have covered the area up to station 800 and thus included most
of the perforations.
- One hole (identified as number 13) was almost certainly caused
by a slipping wire rope used as a sling.
- Part of the inner surface, aft of station 780 was superficially
blackened as if by soot from a fire. Swabs were taken of this
area for further examination for evidence of fire or explosives.
- A large number (several hundred) of small fragments were recovered.
These varied in size from an inch or less to a few inches. They
included fragments broken out of sheet metal, and these were reported
to be from the same area as T362.
- The production of a large number of small fragments is generally
regarded as an indication of an explosion.
- One piece, which was isolated, was about an inch square of sheet
alloy with characteristic spikes on one edge similar to those
described by Tardif and Sterling.
The following is an excerpt from the report by Mr. V.J. Clancy
wherein he gives his opinion and conclusions regarding target
362.
"Opinion
The features discernible to a careful close visual examination
point towards the possibility of an explosion but taken alone
do not justify a firm conclusion.
Curling of petals and spiked or toothed fractures may be observed
in other events than explosions despite the failure by Tardif
and Sterling to obtain them in their limited number of attempts.
It is probable that these features indicate a rapid rate of failure
but not necessarily of a rapidity which could only be produced
by an explosion.
A more detailed study, metallurgical and fractographic, is required.
The studies by Tardif and Sterling were done on fragments produced
from aluminium alloy in contact with the explosive. Very little
information is available on the behaviour of aluminium alloy some
distance from the explosive and subjected to attack by secondary
fragments. To determine this some trials will be necessary, to
obtain reference samples for comparison.
The single "bullet hole," No. 14, strongly supports
an explosion hypothesis but, being the sole example of its kind,
is not, by itself determinative.
If the forward part of this item was forcefully and rapidly folded
back to impact on the other part, it might explain the other features
apparent to visual examination. It would require detailed laboratory
examination and tests to eliminate this possibility.
The production of a large number of small fragments is generally
regarded as a pointer towards an explosive cause but cannot be
relied upon unless it is clear that they could not have been produced
by some other means. It is known that the break-up of an aircraft
at high speed may produce great fragmentation.
The single spiked fragment must be regarded as important but a
single specimen is not, by itself, determinative."
Mr. Clancy concluded that:
"there is strong circumstantial evidence that an explosion
occurred but neither individually nor collectively do the several
pointers give the degree of confidence necessary for a firm and
final conclusion, at this time."
With respect to target 362/396, in his report Mr. Clancy recommended:
"that firing trials be carried out projecting various size
missiles at targets similar to the material of T362 to obtain
reference samples for laboratory comparison with the perforations
in T362."
The Indian report, in addition to the observations made by Mr.
Clancy, noted the following with respect to the metallurgical
examination:
- The microstructure in the various areas examined on target 362/396
confirmed explosive loading in this part of the aircraft.
- The holes and other features observed in targets 362/396 and
399 must have been due to shock waves and penetration by fragments
resulting from an explosion inside the forward cargo hold.
- The chemical nature of the explosive material was not identified.
No part of an explosive device, its detonator or timing mechanism
was recovered.
2.11.6.11 Examination of Wreckage in India with CASB Participation
The examination of the targets recovered did not reveal any pre-existing
defect, premature cracking or pre-impact corrosion damage associated
with any of the failures.
3.0 DISCUSSION
3.1 Initial Event
From the correlation of the recordings of the DFDR, CVR and Shannon
ATC tape, the unusual sounds heard on the ATC tape started shortly
after the flight recorders stopped recording. The conversations
in the cockpit were normal, and there was no indication of an
emergency situation prior to the loud noise heard on the CVR a
fraction of a second before it stopped recording. The DFDR showed
no abnormal variations in parameters recorded before it stopped
functioning. The only unusual observation was the irregular signals
recorded over the last 0.27 inches of the DFDR tape. Laboratory
tests indicated the possibility that these signals resulted from
the recorder being subjected to a sharp disturbance at the time
it stopped recording. The other possibility for the irregular
signals on the DFDR is that they were caused by a disturbance
to the Flight Data Acquisition Unit in the main electronics bay.
Since there was an almost simultaneous loss of the transponder
signal, this indicates the possibility of an abrupt aircraft electrical
failure. The medical evidence showed a general absence of signs
indicating that seat-belts were fastened. From the video and photographic
examination of the wreckage on the bottom, it was ascertained
that the majority of seats located did not have the seat-belts
fastened. The above evidence indicates that the initial occurrence
was sudden and without warning. The abrupt cessation of the data
recorder could be caused by airframe structural failure or the
detonation of an explosive device as the initial event. The millisecond
noise on a CVR as observed in this case is usually, as described
in the available literature, the result of the shock wave from
detonation of an explosive device. However, in this case, certain
characteristics of the noise indicate the possibility that the
noise was the result of an explosive decompression. There is some
disagreement regarding the cause and location of the source of
the noise heard on the CVR, that is, whether the noise resulted
from an explosive device or an explosive decompression and whether
the noise originated from the rear or closer to the front of the
aircraft.
3.2 Passenger/Flight Deck Area
From the examination of the wreckage recovered and wreckage on
the bottom, there is no indication that a fire or explosion emanated
from the cabin or flight deck areas. The medical examination of
the bodies also showed no fire or explosion type injuries. However,
pieces of an overhead locker coming from above door 2R or 4R had
been blackened by fire. There was blackened erosion damage to
the bottoms of some seat cushions, showing damage possibly from
an explosive device, and the upper deck storage cabinet had a
large rounded dent in the bottom inboard edge which might have
been caused by an explosive shock wave generated below the cabin
floor and inboard from the cabinet. It should be noted that the
pieces of the overhead locker were found on the Welsh shore some
time after the accident, and it is not known if the pieces were
subjected to a fire after the accident. Also, it is not known
if the damage to the seat cushions and the upper deck storage
cabinet could have been caused by other means. Nevertheless, the
above evidence suggests that some areas of the passenger cabin
may have been subjected to minor fire and explosive damage possibly
emanating from below the cabin floor.
3.3 Aircraft Break-up Sequence
The medical evidence showed a proportion of the passengers with
indications of hypoxia, decompression, flail injuries and loss
of clothing. The incidence of hypoxia and decompression indicates
that the aircraft experienced a decompression at a high altitude.
The flail injuries and loss of clothing indicate a proportion
of the passengers were ejected from the aircraft before water
impact. The severity of injuries increased from Zones C to E and
was significantly less in Zone C than in Zones D and E.
The wreckage of the forward portion of the aircraft up to and
including the aircraft body wheel well area and the wings was
lying about 0.8 miles north of the vertical and horizontal stabilizers.
Hence, it is likely that the aft portion of the aircraft separated
from the forward portion before striking the water. In addition,
the wreckage found west of longitude 1248' consisted of suitcases
and aft cargo compartment lower skin panels. There was also a
wide scatter of sections 46 and 48 in an east-west direction,
whereas the wreckage of the forward portion was mainly localized
within a relatively small area.
The higher severity of injuries in the aft end of the passenger
cabin appears to coincide with the break-up of the aft end, sections
46 and 48 of the aircraft. The fact that items from the aft cargo
compartment were found further west than the tail section indicates
that the aft cargo compartment ruptured first during the break-up
sequence of the aft end. The forward portion of the aircraft was
highly localized, which indicates that it struck the water in
one large mass.
3.4 Aircraft Structural Integrity
As described earlier, the sudden nature of the occurrence indicates
the possibility of a massive airframe structural failure or the
detonation of an explosive device.
3.4.1 Aircraft Break-up
The examination of the floating wreckage indicates that the right
wing root leading edge, the number 3 engine inboard fan cowling,
the right inboard midflap leading edge, and the right horizontal
stabilizer root leading edge all exhibit damage consistent with
objects striking the right wing and stabilizer before water impact.
In addition, the right wing root interior area appears to have
been scorched briefly by a heat source. The fan cowls of the number
4 engine show evidence of being struck by a portion of the turbine
from number 3 engine.
The number 3 engine nacelle strut was separated from the rest
of the engine components and was located about one nautical mile
to the west indicating that there was some break-up of the number
3 engine before water impact.
The forward cargo door which had some fuselage and cargo floor
attached was located on the sea bed. The door was broken horizontally
about one-quarter of the distance above the lower frame. The damage
to the door and the fuselage skin near the door appeared to have
been caused by an outward force and the fracture surfaces of the
door appeared to be badly frayed. This damage was different from
that seen on other wreckage pieces. A failure of this door in
flight would explain the impact damage to the right wing areas.
The door failing as an initial event would cause an explosive
decompression leading to a downward force on the cabin floor as
a result of the difference in pressure between the upper and lower
portions of the aircraft. However, examination showed that the
cabin floor panels separated from the support structure in an
upward direction. Also, passenger seats viewed and recovered exhibited
that they had been subjected to an upward force from below. They
showed that the seats to the rear in sections 46 and 48 had their
back legs buckled, and the seats toward the front had both front
and back legs buckled. This indicates the vertical force was greater
at the front than the rear of the aircraft. It is possible that
this vertical force on the floor was caused by the force of the
water during impact, but the rear of the aircraft broke up before
impact and therefore any vertical loading on the floor in this
area is unlikely to have occurred at impact. Twenty-three passengers
also showed evidence of vertical impact injuries. These could
have been caused from a force from below during flight or at water
impact. Sixteen of these passengers had little or no clothing
indicating that some may have been ejected before water impact.
Therefore, there is some indication that the upward force on the
floor may have occurred in flight and was more severe toward the
front.
3.4.2 Aft Pressure Bulkhead
The localized impact mark found on the leading edge of the right
horizontal root leading edge is indicative of an object striking
the stabilizer in flight before water impact. This suggests that
the loss of the tail plane was not the first event. The horizontal
and vertical stabilizers were found separated and each was intact
and in good condition. Items from the aft cargo compartment were
found further to the west of the tail plane. The absence of the
type of damage to the tail plane as was found in the Japan Airlines
(JAL) Boeing 747 accident where the aft pressure bulkhead failed
and which took place shortly after this occurrence, and the rupture
of the aft cargo compartment before the loss of the tail indicate
that there was not an in-flight failure of the aft pressure bulkhead.
In addition, examination of the recovered portions of the bulkhead
shows evidence of overload failures from the rear to front only
and no evidence of any pre-existing defect, premature cracking
or pre-impact corrosion damage.
3.4.3 Target 7 - Lower Fuselage Skin Panel
Target 7 which extends from BS 1480 to 1860 shows a break at the
joint at BS 1480. The forward keel joint splice plate is bent
and the keel joint holes are distorted and elongated. Some of
the fracture surface was heavily corroded. An in-flight failure
in this area would cause a massive failure of the aircraft's structural
integrity. Further examination showed the fractures to be overload,
and there was no evidence of an intergranular type fracture to
suggest a stress corrosion cracking mode of failure. The corrosion
was concluded to be post-impact and, therefore, there is no evidence
to suggest an in-flight failure in this area as the initial event.
3.4.4 Structural Failure
The examination of the floating and recovered wreckage and the
analysis of the photos and videos of the wreckage on the bottom
failed to indicate any evidence of a failure of the primary or
secondary structure as a result of a pre-existing defect. The
initial event has been established as sudden and without warning.
The abrupt cessation of the flight recorders indicates the possibility
of a massive and sudden failure of primary structure; however,
there is evidence to suggest that there were ruptures in the forward
and aft cargo compartments prior to any failure of the primary
structure in flight. Therefore, available evidence tends to rule
out a massive structural failure as the initial event.
3.4.5 Explosive Device
A violent explosion occurring within an aircraft in flight usually
leads to a complicated break-up mode and sequence of failure.
Fractures of metal caused by an explosion are normally different
in character to those caused by overstressing or crash impact
forces. Shattering of metal into very small and numerous fragments
and minute deep penetration of a metal surface are not usually
found in aircraft accident wreckage. The size and characteristics
of these particles often accompanied by rolled edges, surface
spalling, pitting or evidence of heat are indicative of an explosion.
Of the floating wreckage, there is little to indicate the possibility
of an explosion:
- the lining in one suitcase was severely tattered;
- although the wooden spares box was burned, this could have happened
after the occurrence;
- although pieces of an overhead locker were damaged by fire,
it is not known if the burning happened at the time of the occurrence;
- although the pieces of U-section alloy clearly indicated evidence
of an explosion, it is quite possible that these pieces were not
associated with the aircraft;
- the bottoms of some seat cushions show indications of a possible
explosion;
- the inside of the right wing root fillet appears to have been
scorched; and
- the deformation of the floor of the upper deck storage cabinet
might have been caused by an explosive shock wave generated below
the cabin floor and inboard from the cabinet.
It is not known if the suitcase came from the aft or forward cargo
compartment, and the location of the seats from which the cushions
came is also unknown.
The scorching of the right wing root fillet and the damage to
the upper deck cabinet suggest, if there was an explosion, it
emanated from the forward cargo compartment.
From the examination of the recovered wreckage, the following
deductions can be made:
- Target 47, which is a portion of the aft cargo compartment roller
floor, shows no indications characteristic of an explosion emanating
from the aft cargo compartment.
- Target 362/396, which is a lower skin panel from the forward
cargo compartment is badly crumpled and torn and has about 20
punctures resulting from penetration from inside. It appears that
some folding occurred on water impact which brought stringers
or stiffeners from the aircraft structure into forceful contact
with the internal surface of the panel producing most of the penetrations.
However, there are certain punctures which indicate no evidence
of impact marks on the inside surface and show evidence of being
produced by high velocity fragments. Part of the inner surface
of the skin panel appeared to have been blackened by soot from
a fire.
- Target 399, consisting of a piece of the skin and stringers
on the right side in the area of the forward cargo compartment
contained holes and several hundred metal fragments. The damage
to the floor stantion and the presence of the fragments are consistent
with an explosion.
The examination of the recovered wreckage contains no evidence
of an explosion except for targets 362/396 and 399 which contain
some evidence that an explosion emanated from the forward cargo
compartment.
An explosion in the forward cargo compartment would explain the
loss of the DFDR, CVR and transponder signal as the electronics
bay is immediately ahead of the cargo compartment.
3.5 Security Aspects
There is a considerable amount of circumstantial and other evidence
that an explosive device caused the occurrence. Therefore, it
is reasonable to examine the security measures in place on 22
June 1985. The evidence indicates that if there was an explosion,
it most likely occurred in the forward cargo hold, not the passenger
and flight deck areas or exterior to the fuselage. Although an
explosive device could have been placed in a cargo hold in a number
of ways, the available evidence points to the events involving
the checked baggage of M. and L. Singh in Vancouver. The investigation
determined that a suitcase was interlined unaccompanied from Vancouver
via CP Air Flight 060 to Toronto. In Toronto, there is nothing
to suggest that the suitcase was not transferred to Terminal 2
and placed on board Air India Flight 181/182 in accordance with
normal practice. The aircraft departed Toronto for Mirabel and
London with the suitcase unaccompanied. Similarly, a suitcase
was interlined unaccompanied on CP Air Flight 003 from Vancouver
to Tokyo to be placed on Air India Flight 301 to Bangkok. The
explosion of a bag from CP 003 at Narita Airport, Tokyo, took
place 55 minutes before the AI 182 accident. Therefore, the nature
of the link between the two occurrences raises the possibility
that the suitcase which was unaccompanied on AI 182 contained
an explosive device.
3.5.1 Canadian Security Situation
Canadian security arrangements in place prior to 23 June 1985
met or exceeded the international requirements for civil air transportation.
However, before this date, the emphasis was on preventing the
boarding of weapons including explosive devices in hand luggage.
Hence, the screening of checked baggage was only undertaken in
conditions of a heightened threat as was the case with respect
to Air India flights.
In Canada, the Department of Transport (Transport Canada) is responsible
for establishing overall security standards for airports and airlines,
and for the provision of certain security equipment and facilities
at airports. By regulation, air carriers are responsible for applying
security standards for passengers, for baggage and cargo and for
ensuring security within individual aircraft. The RCMP provides
airport physical security and responds to criminal incidents.
Air carriers contract for or otherwise provide the personnel who
operate the security check-points through which passengers and
their carry-on baggage enter the secure area of the airport terminal.
These personnel also operate security equipment for the screening
of cargo, passengers and checked baggage. Usually, air carriers
use the service of private security firms. Transport Canada has
established certain standards required for licensed security guards,
such as the successful completion of the Transport Canada passenger
inspection training program and annual refresher training. As
stated earlier, a significant number of the security guards did
not meet the criteria with respect to the completion of the training
program and refresher training. In addition, the criteria do not
require training for the screening of cargo and checked baggage.
ICAO Annex 17 recommends that contracting States establish the
necessary procedures to prevent the unauthorized introduction
of explosives or incendiary devices in baggage or cargo intended
to be carried on board aircraft. For all Canadian airlines, Canadian
regulations before 23 June 1985 required a system of identification
that prevented baggage, goods and cargo from being placed on board
an aircraft if it was not authorized to be placed on board by
the airline operator. However, if someone were to purchase a ticket,
check in baggage and not board the aircraft, the baggage would
in all likelihood have been authorized by the airline to be placed
on board the aircraft. Therefore, it was possible to interline
baggage unaccompanied and this explains how a suitcase was interlined
to AI 181/182 from CP 060. It is not the normal practice of airlines
to interline baggage if there is not a confirmed reservation to
the destination. In this case, the ticket agent allowed the suitcase
to proceed; however, if there had been a confirmed reservation,
the suitcase would have been interlined unaccompanied without
question.
3.5.2 Air India Security
Air India, as required by Canadian regulation, had a security
program. Because of the threat level assessed against the airline,
Air India had more extensive security measures than almost any
other Canadian or international airline. These measures were generally
in accordance with the recommended procedures of the ICAO Security
Manual for special risk flights. Air India had also requested
and received extra security from Transport Canada and the RCMP
for the month of June 1985. For Air India Flight 181/182, Air
India provided a security officer from its New York office to
oversee the security arrangements at Toronto and Mirabel. The
security program at each airport was under the overall supervision
of the respective Air India station managers. In Toronto, it was
not clear who, if anyone, was undertaking this function.
It is not known if the suitcase interlined from CP 060 was screened
before or after the X-ray machine broke down in Toronto. Although
baggage not examined by X-ray was screened by a PD-4 sniffer,
there are indications that the sniffer could have been ineffective
in detecting explosives, especially plastics. Rather than using
the sniffer, it would have been more effective to open all bags
and physically inspect them. Even though a number of security
personnel were not adequately trained in the screening of passengers
and baggage, it is not known whether more training would have
prevented an explosive device from being placed on board.
Although airline procedures required baggage to be accompanied,
the agents checking in passengers in Toronto used a passenger
security numbering system but did not number checked-in baggage,
and baggage was not correlated with passengers. Therefore, the
interlined unaccompanied suitcase from CP 060 was not detected.
At Mirabel, checked-in passengers and baggage were numbered so
that the number of passengers checking in baggage could be correlated
with the number of passengers boarding the aircraft. Had a passenger-baggage
correlation been carried out in Toronto, the suitcase from CP
060 would have been detected. The airline procedures would have
prevented the placement of the suitcase on the aircraft.
Once loaded on the aircraft, the suitcase would have been placed
in container 11L and 12L (see Appendix B) if in the forward cargo
compartment, in container 44L or 44R if in the aft cargo compartment,
or in position 52 if in the bulk cargo compartment. It could not
be determined in which cargo compartment the suitcase was loaded.
Therefore, although the procedures were in place to prevent an
explosive device from being placed on board the aircraft in checked-in
baggage, there was a breakdown in the X-ray machine used to screen
baggage, and there are indications that the PD-4 sniffer was inadequate.
Also, the security numbering system used in Toronto was ineffective
in preventing unaccompanied interlined baggage from being placed
on board the aircraft.
4.0 CONCLUSIONS
The Canadian Aviation Safety Board respectfully submits as follows:
4.1 Cause-Related Findings
1. At 0714 GMT, 23 June 1985, and without warning, Air India Flight
182 was subjected to a sudden event at an altitude of 31,000 feet
resulting in its crash into the sea and the death of all on board.
2. The forward and aft cargo compartments ruptured before water
impact.
3. The section aft of the wings of the aircraft separated from
the forward portion before water impact.
4. There is no evidence to indicate that structural failure of
the aircraft was the lead event in this occurrence.
5. There is considerable circumstantial and other evidence to
indicate that the initial event was an explosion occurring in
the forward cargo compartment. This evidence is not conclusive.
However, the evidence does not support any other conclusion.
4.2 Other Findings
Even though they may not be causal or related to the accident,
the following additional conclusions can be drawn from the investigation
with respect to certain security arrangements and their application
pertaining to this flight:
1. In compliance with the International Civil Aviation Organization
Annex 17 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, the
Department of Transport of Canada has made regulations requiring
foreign aircraft operators who land in Canada to establish, maintain,
and carry out certain security measures at airports.
2. In accordance with these regulations, Air India submitted a
security program to the Minister of Transport which included security
measures with respect to aircraft, cargo, baggage, and passengers.
3. On 22 June 1985, an unaccompanied suitcase was interlined from
Vancouver to Toronto on CAP Flight 060 for transfer in Toronto
to Air India Flight 181/182.
4. The baggage loaded in Toronto was screened through an X-ray
machine process but, during the course of this procedure, the
X-ray machine broke down.
5. After the X-ray machine breakdown, an explosives detector was
used to screen the baggage; the baggage was not opened and physically
examined.
6. The effectiveness of the explosives detector is in doubt.
7. It is not known whether the unaccompanied suitcase interlined
from Vancouver was screened before or after the X-ray machine
broke down.
8. The security numbering system used in Toronto did not prevent
unaccompanied interlined baggage from being placed on board the
aircraft.
9. The normal procedures for interlining baggage in Toronto indicate
that the unaccompanied suitcase was loaded on Air India Flight
181/182.
Appendix A
PAGE
- PAGE 60 -
REPORT OF THE COURT INVESTIGATING
ACCIDENT TO AIR INDIA BOEING 747 AIRCRAFT VT-EFO, "KANISHKA"
ON 23RD JUNE 1985
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. N. KIRPAL JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF DELHI
ASSESSORS
DR. V. RAMACHANDRAN MR. J. S. GHARIA
CAPT. J. S. DHILLON MR. J. K. MEHRA
CAPT. B. K. BHASIN
SECRETARY
MR. S. N. SHARMA
FEBRUARY 26, 1986
CONTENTS
Page No.
1. PREAMBLE
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Initial Action taken by the Government of India 3
1.3 Action taken by Government of Ireland, including
the Cork Regional Hospital 6
1.4 Action taken by the Court 15
1.5 Commencement of formal investigation 22
2. FLIGHT INFORMATION
2.1 Flight preparation 31
2.2 Progress of the Flight 37
2.3 Personnel Information 41
2.4 Aircraft Information 46
2.5 Meteorological Information 55
2.6 Aids to Navigation 56
2.7 Communication 57
2.8 Search and Rescue 58
3. INVESTIGATION
3.1 Injuries to persons 64
3.2 Mapping, wreckage distribution and salvage 71
3.2.1 Introduction 71
3.2.2 Scarab 72
3.2.3 Control and monitoring of operations 73
3.2.4 Daily monitoring of progress 76
3.2.5 Monitoring at Cork 77
3.2.6 Operations 78
3.2.7 Wreckage distribution 80
3.2.8 The break-up pattern 81
3.2.9 Extent of damage 83
3.2.10 Salvage operations 87
3.2.11 Examination of wreckage 91
3.3 Fire 114
3.4 Flight Recorders 115
3.4.1 Recovery of Flight Recorders 115
3.4.2 Description of Flight Recorders 116
3.4.3 Examination of Flight Recorders
and Tapes 117
3.4.3.1 General 117
3.4.3.2 Cockpit Voice Recorder 117
3.4.3.4 Digital Flight Data
Recorder 118
3.4.4 Recovery of Information 119
3.4.4.1 Cockpit Voice Recorder
Tape 119
3.4.4.2 Shannon Air Traffic
Control Tape 120
3.4.4.4 Digital Flight Data
Recorder Tape 120
3.4.5 Reports Received by the Court 122
3.4.6 Court Observations 125
3.4.6.1 Digital Flight Data
Recorder 125
3.4.6.5 Cockpit Voice Recorder 126
3.4.6.7 Caiger's Report and
Deposition 126
3.4.6.12 Davis's Report and
Deposition 129
3.4.6.19 Seshadri's Report and
Deposition 133
3.4.6.36 Turner's Report 144
3.4.6.49 Court Evaluation 147
3.5 Tests and Research 152
3.6 Security 154
3.7 International Cooperation 155
4. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS 158
5. RECOMMENDATIONS 172
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 176
APPENDIX 1
Wreckage Distribution Chart
APPENDIX 2
Cockpit Voice Recorder Tape Transcript
INTRODUCTION
1.1.1 On the morning of 23rd June, 1985 Air India's Boeing 747
aircraft VT-EFO (Kanishka) was on a scheduled passager flight
(AI-182) from Montreal and was proceeding to London enroute to
Delhi and Bombay. It was being monitored at Shannon on the Radar
Scope. At about 0714 GMT it suddenly disappeared from the Radar
Scope and the aircraft, which has been flying at an altitude of
approximately 31,000 feet, plunged into the Atlantic Ocean off
the south-west coast of Ireland at position latitude 51 3.6'N
and Longitude 12 49'W. This was one of the worst air disasters
wherein all the 307 passengers plus 22 crew members perished.
1.1.2 The fact that emergency had arisen was first noticed by
Shannon Upper Area Control (UAC) after the aircraft had disappeared
from the Radar Scope. The control gave a number of calls to the
aircraft but there was obviously no response. Thereafter various
messages were transmitted and that is how the rest of the world
came to know of the accident.
1.1.3 Shannon Control at 0730 hours advised the Marine Rescue
Coordination Centre (MRCC) about the situation which appeared
to have arisen. MRCC, in turn, explained the situation to Valencia
Coast Station and requested for a Pan Broadcast. Thereafter ships
started converging on the scene of the accident and they commenced
search and rescue operations.
1.1.4 The aircraft in question - Kanishka, was named after the
most powerful and famous king of the Kushanas who perhaps ruled
in India from AD 78 to AD 103. Besides being a great conqueror,
he was an ardent supporter and follower of Budhism - a religion
which preaches non-violence. Emperor Kanishka, however, met a
violent end. After 25 years of reign he was killed by some of
his own subjects. His life was thus brought to an abrupt end.
1.1.5 It is indeed ironical that the Jumbo Jet which bore the
name 'Kanishka' also met with a violent and a sudden end on that
fateful morning of 23rd June, 1985.
INITIAL ACTION TAKEN BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
1.2.1 Initial intimation of the accident was received by Air India
who, in turn, communicated the same to Mr. H.S. Khola, Director
of Air Safety, Civil Aviation Department, New Delhi. The Accident
Investigation Branch of United Kingdom also sent information to
the Director General of Civil Aviation, New Delhi to the effect
that the accident had taken place on international waters and
as such it was India which was the authority to investigate the
accident in accordance with the provisions of ICAO Annex 13.
1.2.2 Thereupon Order No. AV.15013/8/85-AS dated 23rd June, 1985
was issued by the Director General of Civil Aviation whereby Mr.
H.S.Khola was appointed Inspector of Accidents for the purpose
of carrying out the investigation into the aforesaid air accident.
This appointment was made under Rule 71 of the Aircraft Rules,
1937.
1.2.3 While search and rescue operations were underway at the
site of the accident, a team of officials headed by Dr.S.S. Sidhu,
Secretary, Ministry of Tourism & Civil Aviation rushed from
India to Cork. The said team was joined by Mr. Kiran Doshi, the
Indian Ambassador to Ireland, and also by two officers of the
Indian Navy who were attached to the Indian High Commission at
London. Subsequently two Medical Experts from India also joined
the said Team.
1.2.4 The Indian Team arrived at Cork, Ireland on 24th June, 1985.
Representatives of the Governments of United States of America,
Canada and United Kingdom also reached there that day. They were
met by the representatives of the Government of Ireland.
1.2.5 The members of the Team saw the rescue and salvage operations
being conducted. They also visited the Cork Regional Hospital
and had discussions with Irish and other Authorities with a view
to release the bodies of the victims which were being brought
to Cork.
1.2.6 For facilitating the process of investigation the Inspector
of Accidents after consulting the representatives of the aforesaid
Governments formed the following groups:
a. Structures, Power Plant and Systems Group.
b. Operations Weather & ATS Group.
c. Medical and Human Factor Group.
d. Search & Rescue Group.
The aforesaid groups were required to collect evidence and to
submit their respective reports to the Inspector of Accidents.
1.2.7 The bodies which were being recovered were brought to the
Cork Regional Hospital for identification and post-mortem. At
that time it was considered proper that apart from the two medical
experts from India, Wing Commandor Dr.I.R. Hill, who is an expert
in aviation pathology should also be called from United Kingdom.
1.2.8 It was also being speculated that the accident may have
occurred due to an explosion on board the aircraft. In order to
see whether there was any evidence of an explosion which could
be gathered from the floating wreckage which was being salvaged,
the Government of India requisitioned the services of Mr. Eric
Newton, a Specialist in the detection of explosives sabotage in
aircraft wreckage.
1.2.9 In order to coordinate and guide the operations of the various
ships working at the crash site, a control centre was set up at
Cork Airport on 30th June, 1985.
1.2.10 The control centre was manned by representatives of the
Governments of Ireland, Canada and United States. The Indian Naval
Officers from the High Commission at London were overall in-charge
of this centre. After the flight recorders had been recovered
the centre continued to function, but the representatives of the
United States departed.
1.2.11 For retrieving the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) and Digital
Flight Data Recorder (DFDR), a cable ship named Leon Thevenin
was engaged which had on board Submersible Robot (Scarab) which
was fitted with a Sonar receiver and TV Cameras. The aforesaid
ship was engaged and after an intensive search CVR and the DFDR
(more popularly known as 'the black boxes') were located and retrieved
on 10th July and 11th July, 1985 respectively.
1.2.12 The Government of India, in exercise of the powers conferred
by Rule 75 of the Aircraft Rules, 1937 vide Notification No. AV.15013/10/85-A,
dated 13th July, 1985, directed that a formal investigation of
the accident be carried out. Mr Justice B.N. Kirpal, Judge of
the Delhi High Court, was appointed as the Court to hold the said
investiation. The Central Government also appointed Dr. V. Ramachandran
of National Aeronautical Laboratory, Bangalore; Mr. J.S. Gharia
of Explosive Research and Development Laboratory, Pune; Captian
J.S. Dhillon, retired Director of Operations, Air India, Bombay;
Mr. J.K. Mehra, retired Manager (Technical Training), Indian Airlines,
Hyderabad and Captain B.K. Bhasin, Deputy Managing Director of
Indian Airlines, New Delhi to act as Assessors of the said Investigation.
The Court was required to make its report to the Central Government
by 31st December, 1985, which date was later extended to 28th
February, 1986.
1.2.13 Mr. S.N. Sharma, Director of Airworthiness, Civil Aviation
Department, was appointed as Secretary to the Court vide Ministry
of Tourism & Civil Aviation letter No. AV/15013/10/85-A, dated
22nd August, 1985. The appointment was to take effect from 13th
July, 1985.
ACTION TAKEN BY IRELAND, INCLUDING THE CORK REGIONAL HOSPITAL
1.3.1 The accident had occurred on the Atlantic Ocean approximately
100 miles south-west of the coast of Ireland. It is the Air Traffic
Control at Shannon, Ireland who first became aware of the tragic
event.
1.3.2 On coming to know of the accident, various authorities in
Ireland took immediate action. The Shannon ATC asked the Marine
and Rescue Coordinating Centre there to take emergency action.
Thereupon MRCC, Shannon asked Valantia Coast Radio Station (CRS)
for a PAN broadcast requiring all the vessels in areas 51N/1250W
to keep a look out for the wreckage of an aircraft. The PAN broadcast
was repeated and all ships were directed to proceed to the site
of accident which was determined as 5101.9N/1242.5 W.
1.3.3 Irish authorities also took great pains in rendering every
possible assistance to the Indian and other authorities. Some
of the wreckage which had floated in to the west coast of ireland
was transported to Cork where a boat house had been hired by the
Government of India. The wreckage which was placed in the said
boat house was protected from any outside interference by the
local Gardai (police).
1.3.4 Irish ships proceeded to the scene of accident and helped
in search and rescue operations. The ATC at Shannon gave details
about the accident, in so far as they were aware of it, and copies
of the ATC tapes were supplied. Aer Lingus, national airline of
Ireland, provided assistance by making available its local engineering
facilities to the coordinating centre at Cork and also to the
other authorities.
1.3.5 Cork is a city having a population of approximately 1,34,000.
One of the hospitals which was opened in 1978 is the Cork Regional
Hospital which had been set up to meet the needs of the people.
This 600-bed hospital was designated for the purposes of the Major
Accident Plan of the Southern Health Board and thus became the
appropriate centre for the reception of the casualities of the
Air India disaster. Since
the hospital first opened, it had dealt with a number of major
accidents involving road, rail and marine incidents. The Major
Accident Plan of the Southern Health Board sets out formally,
the strategy and procedure which the hopital is required to follow
while deailing with major accidents.
1.3.6 On the morning of 23rd June, 1985 at approximately 11.20
A.M. the hospital was put on alert following the disappearance
of the Air India Flight 182 off the south-west coast of Ireland.
The first message which was communicated to the hospital indicated
that it was unlikely that there would be any survivors. The key
hospital personnel were alerted and a meeting was arranged in
the hospital for the purposes of discussing and making arrangements
for the receipt of the bodies on the basis of the information
which was available at that time.
1.3.7 On being informed that there were no survivors in the accident
and that the hospital should be prepared to receive a large number
of bodies, then, in accordance with the Major Accident Plan, mortuary
facilities were improvised by appropriating the gymnasium attached
to the Deparatment of Rheumatology. Subsequently it became evident
that additional mortuary and postmortem facilities would be needed.
In order to decide where the second mortuary was to be located,
the hospital had to take into cosideration the following factors:-
(a) The number and the condition of the bodies;
(b) The period during which the bodies would be retained;
(c) The hospital would be required to provide an on-going service
for in-patients, out-patients and serious accident and emergency
cases;
(d) To avoid unnecessary internal transport problems, the bodies
should be near the Post-Mortem and Pathology Departments; and
(e) To facilitate traffic flow in the hospital curtilage and to
to aviod unduc public access.
The hospital authorities accordingly located the second mortuary
in a recreational room adjoining the gymnasium.
1.3.8 Two rooms were put at the disposal of the Garda (Police)
authorities for use as Garda Control Rooms in the hospital. Telecommunications
lines were set up immediately for their assistance as the Gardai
was responsible for the forensic and identification procedures
in regard to the bodies brought to the hospital.
1.3.9 A small Co-ordinating Group was set up consisting of the
Chief Executive Officer of the Southern Health Board, Medical
Co-ordinating Officer, Press Liaison Officer, a Senior Registrar
who knew about Indian customs and traditions and a Hospital Administrator.
This small Co-ordinating Group, whose membership never changed,
worked together and were capable of assessing situations, making
decisions, liaising with other agencies and services and undertaking
with other agencies and services and undertaking responsibility
for hospital press releases. Apart from individual contact between
members, the Group had a standing arrangement to meet every morning
and afternoon. In the late evening, the Group, met the Garda,
Hospital Pathologists and key staff members for a general review
of progress and to decide the tasks and objectives for the following
day.
1.3.10 Within a few hours, the Co-ordinating Group realised that
the hospital was a world focal point of the international media,
and was required to:
a. Accommodate 131 bodies;
b. Provide pathological and Radiological services for each body;
c. Co-operate with the Garda in their forensic work;
d. Cater for relatives of the victims;
e. eet representatives of foreign Governments; and
f. Keep press agencies informed.
Thus began an operation which demanded a quick and dedicated response
from all staff working in close cooperation with the Gardai. At
the same time, the hospital was required to continue functioning
in the delivery of normal in-patient and out-patient services.
The Major Accident Plan, apart from alerting staff, provided the
framework and basis for many
decisions taken as events evolved. An additional advantage in
the practical implementation of the Plan was the fact that the
hospital had staff experienced in dealing with previous emergency
situations and could marshal the extensive manpower resources
available.
1.3.11 The hospital authorities also made the following arrangements:-
a. They briefed Government Ministers and Officials and other dignitaries
who visited the hospital. They were taken round the hospital and
were explained the arrangements which had been made.
b. Some of the services which were being provided at the hospital
were either discontinued or postponed.
c. Bodies were received at the hospital and arrangements were
made on their arrival to numerically label and certify as dead
all the 131 bodies which were initially received. All the bodies,
at that stage, had been individually placed in special purpose
body bags. Initially, bodies were placed on tables, but, it was
subsequently decided that it would be much easier for all concerned
to place the wrapped bodies on polythene covered floors.
d. Arrangements were made for carrying out of the post-mortem
examinations. Three Pathologists from other city Hospitals were
recruited to augment the existing staff. Dr. Harbison, State Pathologist,
was in charge of this aspect of the operation. All the post mortem
were completed by 27th June, 1985.
e. For the preservation of the bodies five refrigerated containers
with a capacity to hold 140 bodies were hired. These containers
were fitted with timber shelving.
f. Government Information Service was located in the Matron's
Office.
g. The Army provided troops for the unloading of the bodies from
the helicoplers at Cork Airport. They also supplied and erected
two large tents for storing bodies after post mortem and embalming.
Under Garda escort transport of all the bodies which were recovered
was undertaken by the
Army and these arrangements were co-ordinated by Chief Ambulance
Officer.
h. Embalming was carried out in the hospital and bodies were then
coffined and the coffins with appropriate number plaques were
subsequently laid out in the numerical order on the floor when
all the post mortems had been completed.
I. All the embalmed bodies were x-rayed (whole body). The examination
was completed on 28th June, 1985.
j. A provision was made for a 24 hour extended catering service
to meet the needs of staff, Gardai, Army and other personnel involved
including visiting relatives.
k. A simple plan was devised for dealing with the relatives. This
was a sensitive task bearing in mind the varying religious beliefs,
customs and cultures generally of the visiting relatives. Their
main function was to provide moral and emotional support to the
relatives.
l. As identification progressed, special arrangements were made
to assist the relatives. They were met by teams of councellors
from the Hospital as soon as they disembarked at Cork Airport
and subsequently at the Hospital. The relatives had the same Counsellor
and Garda Officer throughout the identification procedure. An
interesting development noted was that each family group of relatives,
their Counsellor and Garda officers formed a single family unit
transcending cultural barriers. On subsequent visits, families
appeared lost if their own Counsellor was not immediately available
to them. Usually, the Counsellor and the Garda officers accompanied
the relatives, at their own request, for visual identification.
m. When plans were being formulated to receive the relatives,
it had been hoped to discourage them from coming to the Hospital
until such time as progress had been reported on the identification
process. Practical experience subsequently proved this strategy
to be inappropriate for a number of reasons. Apart from facilitating
the collection from relatives
of salient information on the victims, the most fundamental reason
was the underestimation of the abiding wish of the relatives to
be physically and psychologically as close as possible to their
deceased dear ones. Moreover, it was the express wish of almost
all relatives on arriving at Cork Airport to proceed directly
to Cork Regional Hospital; there, they were given an informal
talk by Air India and Garda representatives on the progress of
the investigation and the methods of identification. Many of the
relatives visited the hospital daily and remained there throughout
each day.
n. Coach trips were arranged to Bantry Bay for the relatives;
Bantry Bay is the nearest landmark from the site of the crash.
Relatives visited the seaside to pay their last respects to the
departed souls. These were solemn occasions when each relative
prayed in his/her own way. Rose petals and wreaths were immersed
in the sea in keeping with Indian traditions. The visit gave them
mental satisfaction and in the early days following the crash,
helped in diverting their attention while the investigative procedures
were being completed.
o. A small number of visiting relatives had personal medical problems
and they were treated at out-patient and in-patient levels at
the Hospital.
p. Cork/Kerry Tourism Organisation helped to co-ordinate the accommodation
of relatives between a number of hotels. Approximately seven hotels
were used within a radius of twenty miles of the city for this
purpose.
g. A number of press conferences were held. The Chief Executive
Officer, directed that press photography and television filming
be not allowed within the hospital in deference to the privacy
of patients and in respect for the relatives wishes.
r. Responsibility for the identification of bodies rested with
the Garda Authorities and the conditions under which bodies were
released are summarised as follows :-
(I) Satisfactory identification
(ii) Consent of the Coroner
(iii) Proper authentification of the person claiming each body
All bodies arriving at Cork Regional Hospital had already been
numerically labelled by the Garda Authorities. To prevent confusion,
the bodies were then given identical numbers under the hospital
major accident labelling system and this proved to be very helpful
later during identification, investigations and recordings. A
routine was established for examining and recording information
about each body. Teams consisting of a doctor, nurse, clerical
officer and Garda made the necessary examination, labelling and
recording each body and such details as :-
a. Sex
b. Adult or child
c. Clothing
d. Jewellery and personal effects
e. Injuries
f. Obvious scars
Death was confimed in all cases. Each body was fingerprinted and
photographed by Garda Technical Bureau Staff. Each body was subjected
to autopsy, forensic and dental examination. All bodies were embalmed
and following embalming, were photographed and x-rayed. This procedure
was completed in respect of all the bodies by the evening of the
fifth day of the crash. The data from these investigations was
collated on an Interpol form (pink) for each body. Similar ante-mortem
information was obtained from the relatives about each victim
on a separate Interpol form (yellow). When the information on
the pink and yellow forms matched beyond doubt, a positive identification
was made. It might be noted that the photographs originally taken
by the Garda Technical Bureau Officers of each body were matched
with photographs of the 131 embalmed bodies. When a positive identification
was made, the relatives were shown photographs of the deceased.
These photographs were available for inspection by Saturday, 29th
June. As positive identification progressed,
personal effects were added to the identification process and
finally, visual identification took place. For obvious forensic
reasons, positive identification was necessarily slow and meticulous
and, in fact, was made more difficult by reason of the fact that
only 131 bodies out of the 329 passengers and crew were recovered.
All 131 bodies were identified, the first positive identification
was made on 27th June and the last on the 6th August. Each coffin
had affixed to it a metal plaque clearly indicating the number
assigned in the first instance to the body it contained. The bodies
when identified were released by the Garda Authorities through
the undertaker. The Coroner directed that a reasonable time would
have to elapse before unidentified bodies could be disposed off
an this was to be by way of burial. The final date for this purpose
was fixed for 3rd August, 1985, but, this date was subsequently
extended to 6th August, 1985, to coincide with the date of the
Civic Commemoration Ceremony.
(s) Bodies of victims for identification were brought individually
to separate viewing rooms, suitably decordated with flowers and
with incense burning. Visual identification was performed in private
by the relatives and moreover, it allowed them to pay their last
respects in their own religious beliefs. An adjoining room was
also made available where they could grieve in private. Subsequently,
it was learnt that these arrangements were much appreciated by
the relatives who articulated this appreciation by commenting
that the arrangements provided were as near as possible to the
funeral rites observed in their domestic communities. The relatives
were of the opinion that the special arrangements made conveyed
a deep personal and individual response to the dignity of each
victim which might otherwise be lost with such a large number
of bodies.
(t) Procedures were laid down which were required to be followed
and observed for the purposes of preventing infection.
(u) On 6th August, 1985 an interdenominational service was held
in the morning. In the evening on that day a Civic Commemoration
Ceremony was held which was attended by a large number of persons.
(v) A formal inquest was held by the Coroner in the Courthouse,
Cork, which commenced on 17th September, 1985 and ended on 23rd
September, 1985. The Coroner's Jury returned a verdict in accordance
withmedical and pathological evidence.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE COURT
1.4.1 Despite the fact that Mr. H.S. Khola had been appointed
as the Inspector of Accidents under Rule 71 of the Aircraft Rules,
the Government thought it proper to appoint Mr.Justice B.N. Kirpal
as the Court to investigate into the circumstances of the accident.
1.4.2 The appointment of the Court was made under Rule 75 of the
Aircraft Rules, which is as follows :-
"75. Formal Investigation - Where it appears to the Central
Government that it is expedient to hold a formal investigation
of an accident it may, whether or not an investigation or an inquiry
has been made under rule 71 or 74, by order direct a formal investigation
to be held and with respect to any such formal investigation the
following provisions shall apply namely
(1) The Central Government shall appoint a competent person (hereinafter
referred to as "the Court"), to hold the investigation,
and may appoint one or more persons possessing legel, aeronautical,
engineering, or other special knowledge to act as assessors, it
may also direct that the Court and the assessors shall receive
such remuneration as it may determine.
(2) The Court shall hold the investigation in open court in such
manner and under such conditions as the Court may think fit most
effectual for ascertining the causes and circumstances of the
accident and for enabling the Court to make the report hereinafter
mentioned.
(3) (i) The Court shall have, for the purpose of the investigation,
all the powers of a Civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure,
1908 and without prejudice to those powers the Court may :-
(a) enter and inspect, or authorise any person to enter and inspect,
any place or building, the entry or inspection whereof appears
to the court reguisite for the purpose of the investigation; and
(b) enforce the attendance of witness and compel the production
of documents and material objects; and every person required by
the Court to furnish any information shall be deemed to be legally
bound to
do so within the meaning of section 176 of the Indian Penal Code.
(ii) The assessors shall have the same powers of entry and inspection
as the Court.
(4) The investigation shall be conducted in such manner that,
if a charge is made or likely to be made against any person, that
person shall have an opportunity of being present and of making
any statement or giving any evidence and producing witness on
his behalf.
(5)Every person attending as a witness before the Court shall
be allowed such expenses as the Court may consider reasonable:
Provided that, in the case of the owner or hirer of any aircraft
concerned in the accident and of any person in his employment
or of any other person concerned in the accident, any such expenses
may be disallowed if the Court, in its discretion, so directs.
(6)The court shall make a report to the Central Government stating
its findings as to the causes of the accident and the circumstances
thereof and adding any observations and recommendations which
the Court thinks fit to make with a view to the preservation of
life and avoidance of similar accidents in future, including,
a recommendation for the cancellation, suspension or endorsement
of any licence or certificate issued under the rules.
(7)The assessors (if any) shall either sign the report, with or
without reservations, or state in writing their dissent therefrom
and their reasons for such dissent, and such reservations or dissent
and reasons (if any) shall be forwarded to the Central Government
with the report. The Central Government may cause any such report
and reservation or dissent and reason (if any) to be made public,
wholly or in part, in such manner as it thinks fit."
1.4.3 The Court, which is appointed under Rule 75, does not act
as a 'Commission of Inquiry' which is usually appointed under
the Commissions of Inquiry Act to inquire into any definite matters
of public importance. The role of the Court, on its appointment
under Rule 75 of the Aircraft Rules, is essentially that of an
Investigator. It is for this
reason that no procedure has been prescribed in the Rules which
the Court is required to follow. While carrying out its functions,
the Court is not only required to comply with the provisions of
the Aircraft Act, and the Rules framed thereunder, but it must
necessarily also keep in view the provisions of ICAO Annex. 13.
1.4.4. As an Investigator, investigating into an accident, the
Court had to perform multi-farious duties and functions. Before
referring to them, it would be pertinent to point out that whereas
an Inspector of Accidents, who is appointed under Rule 71, would
normally be belonging to the Civil Aviation Department and would
have all the machinery available to him for conducting the investigation,
the Court, when it is appointed to hold an investigation under
Rule 75, lacks the basic infrastructure to conduct the investigation
of such a magnitude. Assessors are appointed to assist the Court
but the actual investigation work cannot be carried out by them.
Despite these handicaps, the investigation continued smoothly
primarily due to the fact that whenever directions were issued
by the Court to any of the participants before it or to the Civil
Aviation Department or any other Organisations, the directions
of the Court were readily complied with. On a few occasions it
also became necessary to require the Assessors to conduct the
investigation, which they did with the help of other organisations.
1.4.5 As an Investigator, the first task which was undertaken
was to see that the tapes from the Cockpit Voice Recorder, which
had been salvaged, were recoverd from the recorders and subsequently
analysed. Requisite directions were issued and the tapes were
removed from their respective recorders on 16th July, 1985. This
operation was carried out at the Air India workshop at Santacruz
in the presence of the accredited representatives of Lockheed
(manufactures of DFDR), Fairchild (manufacturers of CVR), Boeing
Airplane Co., Canadian Air Safety Board (CASB), National Transportation
Safety Board, USA (N.T.S.B), Air India and Government of India.
The tapes so recovered were subsequently played and analysed.
1.4.6 On an appointment being made under Rule 75 the Court would
become incharge of overall investigation of the accident. In that
capacity, and in order to effectively discharge its functions,
it became necessary for the Court to undertake the following tasks
:-
(a) For getting first hand information, the Court had to personally
inspect the wreckage which had been recovered and was housed in
a boat yard in Cork. While in Cork opportunity was also taken
to go to the Cork Regional Hospital and to have discussions with
and be briefed by the hospital staff. A trip was also made to
Shannon with a view to see and understand the working of the Secondary
Radar System which was in use there. On this visit the original
ATC tape, which contained communication betwen Kanishka and the
ATC, was also heard.
As it was suspected that there may be a link between the blast
which had taken place at Narita Airport on 23rd June, 1985 and
the accident to Air India's flight 182, it was felt necessary
to inspect the site of the bomb blast at Narita Airport.
On the aforesaid visit to Tokyo, the site where the blast had
taken place was inspected which gave some, though very vague,
idea of the detonating power of the blast. While in Tokyo meetings
and discussions were also held with the police and Aviation Authorities.
The Court also had the advantage of being able to meet members
of the team investigating into the Japan Airlines Flight JL 123
accident which had occurred near Tokyo on 12th August, 1985. Similarities
and dissimilarities between the two accidents were, to some extent,
noticed and some information was exchanged.
Information was received, that some floating wreckage had been
picked on the coast of England and it was possible that some of
the places, which were so received, should be subjected to further
detailed chemical and metallurgical examination. In order to decide
this, it became necessary to visit RADRE, Kent, U.K. As a result
of the inspection and the discussions there, it was decided by
the Court that the pieces so recovered should be sent to BARC
at Bombay for further analysis.
(b) Directions had to be given, from time to time, with regard
to the mapping and salvaging of the wreckage which was being effected.
It had to be decided as to how, and in what areas, the Scarab
should continue to map the wreckage and take video films and still
photographs. Based on the information received therefrom and after
discussions with the experts, both Indian and foreign, a list
was drawn up indicating the items which had to be salvaged. As
the weather was likely to be unpredictable, with a possibility
of its deteriorating rapidly, a priority list of items to be salvaged
had also to be prepared, and this was done. In view of the fact
that the Canadian ship John Cabot and the Scarab had a limited
capacity, with regard to the size and weight of pieces which could
be lifted from the bottom of the ocean, decision had also to be
taken with regard to the deployment of another ship. As a consequence
thereof a ship 'Kreuzturm' was also engaged in salvage operations.
(c) Directions had also to be given assigning work and duties
to different teams of persons. As an Investigator, the Court was
incharge of the entire work of investigation which was being carried
out in different parts of the world. It not being possible for
the Court itself to undertake all the tasks, decisions had to
be taken as to how the investigating work was to progress and
who would carry out the directions issued from time to time. For
example, immediately after reaching Cork on 25th July, 1985 it
was felt necessary that a team should be immediately sent to Canada
in an effort to get relevant information from there in connection
with the flight AI 182. Accordingly, a team of 3 persons headed
by Mr. H.S. Khola was directed to proceed to Canada immediately.
As a result of the efforts put in by this team, and with the considerable
amount of cooperation, help and assistance rendered by the Canadian
Authorities valuable information was received by the Court having
direct bearing on the investigation. Yet another example in this
regard was of requiring Dr. V. Ramachandran, one of the Assessors
and an expert in Metallurgy, to be stationed on board the salvage
ships during the recovery operations. The procedure which had
to be followed by him was also determined. Information about the
progress of the salvage operations was communicated on telephone
to the Court at all times of day and night. On receipt of such
information further instructions, when ever necessary, used to
be issued.
(d) Discussions were held with the Indian experts in order to
understand some of the complicated questions which had arisen
during the investigation.
In an effort to be able to fully appreciate the effect of decompression,
the Court visited the Institute of Aviation Medicine at Bangalore
where explsoive decompression was simulated for the Court's benefit.
Discussions were also held with other experts of aviation medicine
who were also given copies of the post-mortem reports for their
opinion. National Aeronautics Laboratory was also visited in Bangalore
where meeting was held with experts in aerodynamics, structure
and metallurgy. Visits to Bombay where more frequent and necessary
so that the Court could get first hand information with regard
to the work which was being done at BARC.
The investigation involved looking into matters concerning aviation,
electronics, medicine etc. Not being familiar with these branches,
the discussions which were held, were of immense help and assistance
to the Court who had to understand all the evidence and information
which it was gathering.
(e) The accident had attracted world wide attention. Right from
the start of the investigation by the Court when the recorders
were first opened in Bombay on 16th July, 1985 till the conclusion
of the hearing, the Press and the TV were eager for information.
It was felt that rather than the media resorting to speculation
of getting wrong information, the Court itself or its representative
should, as and when necessary, brief the media. In this connection
interviews were given, both in India and abroad, which were broadcast
over the television and printed in the Press. As a result of this,
correct information was disseminated with regard to the progress
of the investigation without disclosing the Court's opinion on
the evidence which had been received.
(f) Finally, the Court had to conduct the formal investigation
in Court. For this purpose it laid down the procedure which would
be followed. Rule 75 of the Aircraft Rules required that the investigation
would be in open court. It was, however, felt that in this particular
case it would be advisable that some evidence should be obtained
in Camera.
The Court, accordingly, recommended that necessary amendment should
be made in Rule 75 so that the Court was given the power to hold
certain proceedings in camera when the circumstances so warranted.
The suggestion of the Court was accepted and that resulted in
Rule 75(2) being amended and, as a result thereof, the Court was
given the power to hold proceedings in camera if the stipulated
conditions existed.
COMMENCEMENT OF FORMAL INVESTIGATION
1.5.1 The object of setting up a court to investigate into an
accident is primarily to find out the causes and circumstances
of the accident and thereafter to make recommendations. Such an
investigation is not in the nature of an adversary litigation
between the participants before the Court. As such it should be
the endeavour of all the participants to assist the Court in arriving
at a correct conclusion.
1.5.2 Under Rule 75 of the Aircraft Rules, the procedure which
has to be followed in the investigation of an accident is to be
determined by the Court itself. While laying down the procedure
which is required to be followed, the endeavour of the Court has
necessarily to be to adopt such procedure which would help the
court in being able to complete its task satisfactorily, and in
the shortest possible time. Whenever an accident takes place,
it is of utmost importance that the cause of the accident must
be ascertained at the earliest so that if any remedial measures
are to be taken then those steps should be taken without any undue
delay.
1.5.3 In the present case, there were a number of factors which
had to be kept in view while determining the procedure whichshould
be followed. The accident had occurred over international waters
and approximately at a distance of about 5000 miles from the place
where the investigation was to be conducted, namely, New Delhi.
The ill fated flight itself had commenced from Canada, and this
meant that most of the evidence would only be available there.
Matters were not simplified by the fact that the debris itself
was lying at the bottom of the ocean, 2 miles under water. It
became apparent, at the very beginning, that to recover the entire
debris would be a superhuman task and it will not be possible
to do so within the limited time span which was available.
1.5.4 It was thought that it would be of assistance if all the
participants got together so as to determine what procedure should
be followed. The procedure had to be such which would give an
effective opportunity of hearing to all the participants, without
in any way unduly prolonging the investigation.
1.5.5 The Court decided that, in order to obtain the views, it
would be necessary and advisable to have a Pre-hearing Conference.
1.5.6 The first decision which had to be taken was as to who were
to be given a participants status. Keeping inview the provisions
of Annex 13, participants status was given to Governments of Ireland,
Canada, USA and India. Similar status was also given to Boeing
Airplane Co. and Air India. As there might have been some similarities
or dissimilarities between the present accident and the accident
of the Japan Airlines Boeing 747-SR and also because there may
have been a possibility of the present accident being linked with
the explosion which had taken, place at Narita Airport, Tokyo
on 23rd June, 1985, an Observer's status was given to the Government
of Japan.
1.5.7 Notices for holding of the Pre-hearing Conference on 16th
September, 1985 were accordingly issued on 29th August, 1985.
The agenda for the Conference was to be as follows :-
a. To make suggestions to the Court for its consideration, regarding
the procedure to be followed in the conduct of the formal proceedings
in the Court.
b. To draw up a tentative list of witness.
c. To draw up a tentative list of exhibits.
d. To determine the areas to be inquired into
e. To fix a date for the commencement of the public hearing.
f. Any other matter with the permission of the Court.
1.5.8 Except for the Government of Japan, all the other participants
were represented at the said Pre-hearing Conference. After discussions
had been held between the Court and the Participants, some decisions
were arrived at regarding different items of the agenda.
1.5.9 Firstly the following points were framed, indicating the
areas to be inquired into by the Court:
a. Whether the accident was caused by a structural failure?
b. Whether the accident was caused by some human effort?
c. Whether the accident was caused by some criminal act?
d. Whether the accident was caused by an external non-criminal
act?
e. Based on the evidence on record, what steps should or can be
taken so as to ensure greater air safety.
1.5.10 It was further decided that, as suggested by all the participants,
at least critical portions of the wreckage should be recovered.
1.5.11 With regard to the recording of the evidence it was decided
that evidence will, in the first instance, be taken by filling
affidavits or by filling statements alongwith affidavits. Copies
of the same were to be supplied to the other participants for
their consideration. These affidavits were to be filed on or before
18th October, 1985 and a second Pre-hearing Conference was to
take place on 30th October, 1985 at New Delhi when it was to be
decided as to which of the persons should be called for cross-examination.
It was determined that it is only thereafter that hearing would
commence in open court.
1.5.12 A tentative list of witnesses was also drawn up and it
was decided that on the next date names of more witnesses may
be added and, furthermore, the participants would be free to file
any affidavits which they deem fit including affidavits in rebuttal.
1.5.13 Another important decision which was taken at the Pre-hearing
Confence was that a Structural Group was formed consisting of
(1) Mr. H.S. Khola or his nominee (2) Representative of the Canadian
Government (3) Representative of NTSB, USA (4) Representative
of Boeing Airplane Co., USA (5) Representative of Air India. This
group was entrusted with the task of examining and analysing,
initially in Seattle, USA, the video films and the still photographs
of the wreckage. This group was also to indicate and decide the
items of priorities of wreckage which had to be recovered. The
report of this group was required to be submitted by 18th October,
1985. The report of the work done at Seattle was in fact submitted
only on 25th October, 1985. This group was also given the liberty
to associate any other experts or persons from Boeing or any other
Authority. The group was also to inspect the floating wreckage
which had already been salvaged and any further wreckage which
would be salvaged.
1.5.14 Although the affidavits by way of evidence had to be filed
by 18th October, 1985, it was only the Government of Ireland who
filed an affidavit by at date. On behalf of the Government of
India, an application was filed asking for more time. The reason
stated was that the affidavit which had to be filed was to be
of Mr. H.S. Khola but he was out of India as he was heading the
structures group which was evaluating the video films and photographs
at Seattle. The Court had no option but to grant further time
to the Union of India to file its affidavits and this necessarily
resulted in the adjournment of the Pre-hearing Conference which
had been fixed for 30th October 1985.
1.5.15 As the salvage operations were reaching a critical point
it became necessary for the Court to go to Cork on 27th October,
1985. Taking advantage of the presence of the Court in Cork, other
participants also came there. Besides them, representatives of
CP Air and Air Canada also arrived. At one of the informal meetings
between the Court and the representatives of the participants,
applications were filed by CP Air and the Air Canada, inter alia,
praying that they should be permitted to participate in the investigation.
It might be mentioned here that CP Air had interlined one of the
passangers from Vancouver to AI-182, while Air Canada was the
handling agents in Canada of Air India. After hearing the participants
it was decided that participant status should also be given to
these two viz., CP Air and Air Canada.
1.5.16 The participant had all filed their affidavits by way of
submissions. The Court indicated that formal hearings would be
held for the purpose of cross-examining some of the witnesses
about three weeks after the receipt of all the reports of the
various groups. While in Cork, in the first week of November,
1985 some of the salvaged pieces of the wreckage were brought
there. After they were inspected by all the participants and their
advisers, who were present in Cork, it was decided by the Court
that further detailed metallurgical and other examination of those
pieces would be done at BARC, Bombay. In order that there should
be no undue delay the Court decided that a Group be constituted
consisting of expert representatives of all the participants and
also the nominees
of the Court. This group was asked to carry out metallurgical
and other examination of some of the critical pieces salvaged
and give its report to the Court. The group consituted as a 'Committee
of Experts' was as under :-
a. Mr. A.J.W. Melson, Canadian Aviation Safety Board, Canada.
b. Mr. R.K. Phillips, Canadian Pacific Air, Canada.
c. Mr. T. Swift, Federal Aviation, Administration, USA.
d. Mr. R.Q. Taylor, Boeing Commercial Airplane Co., USA.
e. Mr. J.P. Tryzl, Boeing Commercial Airplane Co., USA.
f. Mr. J.F. Wildey II, National Transportation Safety Board USA.
g. Mr. S.N. Seshadri, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, India (Coordinator).
1.5.17 The parties were informed in Cork that the report of Mr.
H.S. Khola, Inspector of Accidents, would be available by about
8th November, 1985. It was then decided that the statements of
the first batch of witnesses should be recorded from 20th November,
1985. It was also agreed that if some of the reports of the experts
were not received, further examination of the witness may have
to postponed.
1.5.18 After receipt of the report from Mr. Khola. on the 8th
November, 1985, a notice of the holding of the Public Hearing
was issued to all the participants. This notice indicated that
the hearing would commence on 20th November, 1985. In the meantime,
a Public Notice was also published in the daily "Times of
India" in Delhi and Bombay editions on 21st October, 1985
in which it was stated as follows :-
NOTICE AIR INDIA KANISHKA ACCIDFNT INVESTIGATION
The Government of India, vide Notification dated 13th July, 1985,
appointed Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.N. Kirpal as a Court to investigate
into the accident to Air India's Boeing 747 aircraft VT-EFO (KANISHKA)
near the Irish Coast on 23rd June, 1985, when the aircraft was
engaged on a scheduled passenger flight from Montreal to Bombay
via London and New Delhi.
Any person having direct knowledge, who may desire to make representation
concerning the circumstances or causes of the accident, may do
so in writing in the form of an affidavit duly attested by an
Oath Commissioner or a Notary Public and address the same to the
undersigned so as to reach him within 15 days of the publication
of this Notice.
S.N. SHARMA SECRETARY COURT OF INVESTIGATION COURT NO.10,DELHI
HIGH COURT SHERSHAH ROAD NEW DELHI - 110 003
Pursuant to the aforesaid public notice no affidavit was received
from any one.
1.5.19 The public hearing commenced on 20th November, 1985 and
the first session concluded on 28th November, 1985. During this
period statements of Mr. H.S. Khola, Wing Commander Dr. I.R. Hill
and Sgt. Atkinson of R.C.M.P., Canada were recorded.
1.5.20 Till that date, report on the examination of the salvaged
pieces had not been received. It was anticipated that the report
would be available by mid December, 1985. In order to give the
parties sufficient time to study the reports of all the experts
it was decided that further evidence would be recorded from 22nd
January, 1986.
1.5.21 After the reports were received from BARC; AIB; Farnborrough;
NTSB; USA; and Mr. Bernard Caiger of CASB, Canada and the copies
of the same had also been received by all the participants, recording
of evidence commenced from 22nd January, 1986 and concluded on
30th January, 1986. In all statements of 13 witnesses were recorded.
1.5.22 At this stage it will be pertinent to make a few observations
with regard to the procedure which was laid down for recording
of evidence etc. As already indicated, most of the evidence was
such which was not available in India. As a Court investigating
the accident under the provisions of Aircraft Rules, it had no
jurisdication to compel
attendance of any witness from abroad. The Court also had no jurisdication,
either under the Rules or under the provisions of Annex 13, to
require any witness to be examined in a country other than the
one in which the Court is holding the investigation. The Court
was informed that, if called upon, some of the persons who were
outside India may not be inclined to testify before the Court.
1.5.23 Faced with the aforesaid difficulty it became necessary,
therefore, to evolve a procedure which would enable the Court
to get the requisite information. As long as the Court was satisfied
that the information which was being received was one which had
been truthfully given by a person, it was immaterial as to the
manner in which the information was received. It is for this reason
that it was decided that evidence will, in the first instance,
be given by way of affidavits. It was also provided that the statements
could also be filed along with affidavits. This latter course
was permitted so as to enable some of the statements, which had
been recorded by members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police,
to be placed before the Court. These statements, of course, had
to be accompanied, as they were, with the affidavits of the persons
who had recorded the statements.
1.5.24 At one stage, by a formal application in writing, Air India
had protested against this procedure being followed. By order
dated 22nd November, 1985, an objection by Air India to the filing
of the statements accompanied by affidavits, was dealt with by
the Court in the following words :-
"With regard to the affidavits which have been filed by the
Government of Canada, I would only like to observe in the Pre-hearing
Conference on 16th September, 1985, it was decided that "Evidence
will, in the first instance, 1985 be taken by filing affidavits
or by filling of Statements along with affidavits." It was
understood that if it is not possible to file affidavits of the
persons who are in a position to give information then affidavits
may be filed of other persons who may have recorded the statements
of the persons who are in a position to give information. This
is not an adversary litigation where one of the parties may lose
because of lack of proof. One of the objects of setting up a Court
to investigate into an accident is to find out the causes of the
accident and to make recommendations. It is necessary for this
purpose to get information which may be relevant. It is true that
strictly speaking the statements which are annexed to the affidavits
may not be admissible as evidence in a Court of Law when there
is a litigation between the parties but considering limitations
which we have, namely, where a Court like the present has no jurisdication
to enforce the attendance of any witness who is outside this country
and furthermore, the Court has no jurisdication to compel any
one to give information, the procedure which was adopted was thought
to be the most practical one for obtaining information in connection
with the accident. Under the circumstances, the affidavits which
have been filed along with the statements which have been annexed
thereto which give information with regard to the accident, have
to be taken on record."
1.5.25 Another advantage of following the aforesaid procedure
was that the time which would have been taken in Court in examining
of the witnesses was considerably reduced. After the participants
had filed affidavits, the same were to be secrutinised and it
was then to be decided as to which of the deponents or persons
should be called for examination in Court. Effectiveness of this
procedure which was adopted is apparent from the fact that though
affidavits by way of evidence were filed in Court, ultimately
only 13 witnesses had to be examined in Court and sitings were
held in Court only on 14 days.
1.5.26 Written arguments were filed on the forenoon of the 4th
February, 1986 and oral arguments were heard in the afternoon
of that day. No written arguments or oral submissions were made
by the Government of Ireland, CP Air or Boeing Company.
1.5.27 Mr. I.G. Whitehall, councel for the Government of Canada
took exception to some of the submissions which were contained
in the written submissions filed by Air India. Mr. Whitehall contended
that the Court had opined that it will not go into the question
of responsibility of the unfortunate accident and therefore, there
was no; justification for Air India to include in its written
submissions numberous passages
which tended to fix responsibilities.
1.5.28 By the order dated 4th February, 1986, it was made clear
that it was not the intention of the investigation to apportion
blame if any lapse had been committed and, therefore, the Court
would ignore any written submissions which tended to apportion
blame or responsibility for any lapse of any participants. It
might here be mentioned that such a question had earlier arisen
while the statement of Sgt. Atkinson was being recorded. The Court
had then held that it will not go into the question as to who
was responsible for the accident. It was in view of this order
that no evidence was led by any of the parties on the question
as to who may have been responsible for any possible lapse which
could have led to this accident.
2.1 Flight Preparation
2.1.1. Air India Boeing 747 aircraft VT-EFO 'Kanishka' was operating
flight AI-181 (Bombay-Delhi-Frankfurt-Toronto-Montreal) on 22nd
June, 1985. From Montreal it becomes AI-182 from Mirabel to Heathrow
Airport, London enroute to Delhi and Bombay. The aircraft arrived
at Toronto from Frankfurt at 1830 Z and was parked at gate No.
107 Terminal 2 at L.N. Pearson International Airport. In accordance
with the Canadian regulations, all the passengers and their baggage
were off loaded to complete the customs and immigration checks.
Transit cards were handed out to 68 transit passengers destined
to Montreal who disembarked at Toronto for customs and immigration
checks.
2.1.2. The flight from Toronto to Montreal was made up of the
following:-
(I) Passengers originating at Toronto and their baggage.
(ii) Transit passengers, and their baggage, continuing their flight
to Montreal.
(iii) Two diplomatic bags from Indian Consulate General, Vancouver
via Air Canada Cargo Flight, and some Air India Mail.
(iv) Fifth Pod engine and its associated parts.
(v) Interline passengers and their baggage from connecting flights
as detailed below:-
a) Air Canada flight AC-102
from Sasktoon - 2 Passengers
b) Air Canada flight AC-106
from Edmonton - 4 Passengers
c) Air Canada flight AC-170
from Winnipeg - 1 Passenger
d) Air Canada flight AC-170
from Winnipeg - 4 Passengers
e) Air Canada flight AC-136
from Vancouver - 10 Passengers
2.1.3. One passenger by name 'M. Singh', checked in at Vancouver
on Canadian Pacific flight CP-060 (Vancouver-Toronto) of 22nd
June 1985, and got his one piece of baggage interlined to Air
India flight AI-181
even though he had no confirmed reservation on AI-181. This passenger,
however, did not board the flight CP-060 at Vancouver and also
did not check-in for Air India flight AI-181/182 at Toronto.
2.1.4 The checking-in of passengers for Air India flight AI-181/182
at Toronto began at 1830 Z. The checking-in of the passengers
was carried out by Air Canada personnel who are the handling agents
for Air India, and was supervised by Air India personnel. The
Air Canada personnel indicated the computer sequeritial numbers
(security numbers) on the passenger boarding card stubs. At about
1930 Z announcement was made for the primary security check of
passengers and their hand baggage. The passengers passed through
the Door Frame Metal Detector and their hand baggage was checked
through X-Ray machine. The passengers were also subjected to physical
security check with the help of Hand Held Metal Detectors. The
transit passengers to Montreal and their hand baggage were also
subjected to these security checks, while their checked in baggage,
after clearance by the Canadian Customers authorities was placed
by the passengers themselves on the conveyor belt while they were
still in sterile area. In this way there was personal identification
by the passengers of all checked in baggage, except the baggage
which had been interlined to this flight.
2.1.5 The flight was closed for check-in at about 2150 Z. There
were 10 'NO SHOWS' and 4 'GO SHOWS'. The security checked passengers
remained in the holding area gate No. 107 till boarding was announced
at about 2210 Z. At the boarding gate secondary security check
of the passengers and their hand baggages was carried out. The
passengers were frisked with the help of Hand Held Metal Detectors
and their hand baggages were opened and physically checked.
2.1.6 The security numbers on the stubs were circled on the pre-numbered
Security Control Sheet to ensure that all the checked-in passengers
have boarded the aircraft. Passenger boarding was completed by
2300 Z. Traffic/Sales representative of Air India verified the
Security Control Sheet with the number of stubs collected and
the number of passengers checked-in.
He found that all the 202 passengers, who had checked-in, had
boarded the aircraft.
2.1.7 As stated earlier, 68 transit passengers had disembarked
at Toronto for completing the customs and immigration checks.
However, only 65 of these passengers re-boarded the aircraft as
per transit cards collected at the boarding gate. It is in evidence
that almost every flight of Air India to Canada, two or three
transit passengers do not re-board the flight at Toronto. Some
Toronto passengers travelling to India buy their tickets "Montreal-India-Montreal"
instead of "Toronto-India-Toronto", for which the fare
is higher, and they travel by bus to Montreal to catch the Air
India flight to India. On their return journey, when they get
down at Toronto for customs and immigration checks, they simply
do not re-board the flight even though their reservations are
upto Montrteal. These passengers sometimes inform Air India personnel
at Toronto about their not re-boarding the aircraft. On 22nd June,
1985, however, no such passenger informed Air India personnel.
2.1.8 There was a crew change at Toronto. The flight and cabin
crew members who took over the flight AI-181/182 had been laid
over in Toronto for the week prior to the accident flight and
were scheduled to take the flight upto London where they were
to be relieved by another set of crew. Capt H.S.Narendra was the
Commander of the flight, with Capt S.S.Bhinder as co-pilot and
Mr.D.D.Dumasia as the Flight Engineer. In addition there were
19 cabin crew members. All the crew members reported together
at the airport at 2130 Z. As per the practice existing at that
time, the flight crew and cabin crew members were not subjected
to frisking checks and their hand baggage were also not security
checked. Their checked-in baggage was, howevewr, security checked
along with the other checked-in baggage of passengers.
2.1.9 The interline baggage was brought to the international baggage
make-up area by the Air Canada staff but, as mentioned earlier,
it was not personally identified and matched with the passengers.
2.1.10 The checked-in baggage of the originating passengetrs and
crew members of AI-181/182 was sent on a conveyer belt to the
baggage make-up area. All the checked-in baggage along with the
interline baggage was required to be security checked on the X-ray
machine which was located in the baggage make-up area at the end
of international belt No.4.
2.1.11 It has been reported that the X-ray machine worked intermittently
for some period and at about 2045Z it broke down and there was
no picture on the screen. The Machine could not be repaired on
that day as it was a week-end and no technician could be contacted.
Air India's Security Officer then advised that the rest of the
baggage be checked with a PD-4 explosive detector provided by
him. He also demonstrated the use of the PD-4 detec- tor to the
concerned personnel. It has been reported that about 60 to 70
baggages were checked and cleared by the PD-4 detector.
2.1.12 The security checked baggage was loaded in the containers
by the Air Canada personnel. The loading of the baggage in containers
was over by about 2230 Z. The ramp personnel of Air Canada carried
the container and loaded them in the aircraft.
2.1.13 From March, 1985, after the introduction of Air India flight
AI-181 through Toronto, diplomatic bags from Indian Consulate
General at Vancouver were being sent to India by Air India flight
from Toronto. Accordingly, two diplomatic bags, duly sealed and
escorted, were delivered to Air Canada office at Vancouver on
21st June and they arrived at Toronto by Air Canada flight AC-580.
One of the bags Sl.No. 49 contained 13 empty large diplomatic
bags while the other bag Sl.No.50 contained diplomatic mail. The
total weight of the bags was 13.8 Kgs.
2.1.14 In addition to the above, a few envelopes containing some
flight documents addressed to Accounts Office, Air India, Bombay,
and one envelope addressed to Commercial Headquarters, Air India,
Bombay from Air India Town Office in Toronto, were collected by
Messrs Mega International.
2.1.15 The aircraft was refueled by CAFAS with 14,602 litres of
fuel.
2.1.16 On 8th June No. 1 engine of Air India Boeing 747 aircraft
VT-EGC had failed during take off. The failed engine was to be
ferried to Bombay on flight AI-181/182 of 22nd June.
2.1.17 The failed engine and the associated parts were placed
in Air Canada Engineering Hangar at Toronto airport since June
8,when
the aircraft was brought to the engineering hangar for engine
replacement. Air India had requested Air Canada on 15th June for
preparing the failed engine for installation as fifth pod mounting
of the aircraft on 22nd June.
2.1.18 On 15th June Air India deputed one of their foremen to
Toronto to bring back the failed engine. From 17th to 21st June,
Air Canada technicians prepared the failed engine for installation
as fifth pod. This preparation involved removal of cowlings, fan
blades, locking of compressor rotors etc. Air Canada Engineering/Maintence
personnel loaded the aircraft/engine parts on 4 pallets and one
container. These pallets and container were then delivered at
0100 Z on 22nd June by Air Canada personnel to Messrs Mega International
cargo warehouse at Toronto Airport within restricted airport area.
(Messrs Mega International Cargo Warehouse at Toronto Airport
within restricted airport area. (Messrs Mega International is
the cargo handling agent of Air India at Toronto). The fifth pod
engine was transported by Air Canada directly from their premises
to the 'Kanishka' aircraft for mounting it on the fifth pod.
2.1.19 Installation of the engine on the fifth pod began immediately
on arrival of flight AI-181 at Toronto on 22nd June and the work
was completed by 1930 Z. One of the mechanics of Air Canada installed
the Mach Air Speed Warning Switch in the Main Equipment Centre
as part of the fifth pod engine installation.
2.1.20 The pre-loaded four pallets and one container were brought
to the aircraft by M/s Mega International personnel from their
warehouse in the afternoon of 22nd June for loading them into
the aircraft cargo compartment at positions assigned by the Air
Canada load agent. Difficulty was experienced while loading one
of the pallets having inlet cowl of the pod engine. To enable
loading of the cowl, Air Canada engineering/maintenance personnel
removed door stop fitting from the aft cargo compartment door
cut-out. After removal of the fittings, the cowl could be loaded.
All the removed fittings were then reinstalled.
2.1.21. On account of the delay in loading the cowls, departure
of the flight was delayed by one hour and twentyfive minutes.
2.1.22 Maintenance Manager of Air India, Montreal carried out
the Terminal Transit Check 'E' of the aircraft and no snag was
observed by him. The commander duly accepted the aircraft.
2.1.23 Senior Flight Despatcher, Air India, Toronto did the flight
despatch of AI-181/182 for sectors Toronto-Montreal-London. He
briefed the flight crew members about flight plan, weather, Air
Traffic Control and fuel requirements. The flight plans for the
sectors Toronto-Montreal-London were duly accepted and signed
by the Commander.
2.2 Progress of the Flight
2.2.1. The Aircraft took off from Toronto Runway 24L at 0016 Z
on 23rd June, 1985. The Maintenance Manager, Security Officer
and Passenger Service Supervisor of Air India travelled on board
the aircraft for their duties at Montreal. In all there were 270
passengers on board in addition to 22 crew members.
2.2.2. The route from Toironto to Montreal was V-98/JHL-594/MSS/V
203/FRANX at flight level 290. The flight was uneventful and the
aircraft landed at Montreal at 0110 Z. No snag was reported by
the flight crew. The aircraft was parked at Cluster 1 Bay No.114.
2.2.3 Sixtyfive passengers destined to Montreal along with the
three Air India personnel mentioned above deplaned at Montreal.
The remaining 202 passengers, who had joined the flight at Toronto,
remained on board the aircraft as transit passengers were not
allowed to disembark at Montreal.
2.2.4 Baggage handlers off loaded three containers of baggage,
one valuable container and four cargo containers from the aircraft.
2.2.5 Transit Check 'C' of the aircraft was carried out at Montreal.
The Flight Engineer also carried out his pre-flight inspection
and found that rear latch handle of the fifth pod engine fan cowl
was loose. He informed the same to an Air Canada Technician who
flaired the handle and applied the high speed tape. There was
no other snag observed during the inspection. The personnel of
CAFAS refueled the aircraft with 96,000 litres of fuel. Total
fuel on board at the time of take off from Montreal was 104,000
Kgs. which was adequate for 8 hours 40 minutes of flying. The
commander accepted the aircraft and signed the 'Certificate of
Acceptance' of the aircraft.
2.2.6 At approximately 2130 Z Air Canada personnel opened the
passenger check-in counter for flight AI-182 (The flight AI-181
terminates at Montreal and the flight from Montreal to London-Delhi-Bombay
is designated as AI-182). The checked-in baggage was sent to the
baggage make-up
area. Between 2300-2350 Z, a suspect suitcase was identified as
the X-Ray showed what appeared to be some wires next to the suitcase
opening. The suitcase was placed on the floor next to the X-Ray
machine. Subsequently two more suspect suitcases were located.
These suitcases were also placed next to the X-Ray machine to
await the arrival of the Air India Security Officer who was to
arrive on Air India flight AI-181 from Toronto. The remainder
of the checked-in baggage, which cleared the security check, was
loaded in containers by Air Canada personnel for loading on board
the aircraft.
2.2.7 Two diplomatic pouches from the Indian High Commission,
Ottawa were brought to Mirabel. After the flight arrived, one
of the pouches of Category 'A' weighing 1 Kg. was given to the
Flight Purser. The other Category 'B' pouch weighing 9 Kgs. was
placed in an valuable container 14R.
2.2.8 No other cargo was accepted for this flight except a small
package (weighing less than 1 Kg) containing medicines for cancer
treatment of a patient in New Delhi. This parcel was received
at 1530 Z on 21st June and was loaded in container 14R by Messrs
Mega International on 22nd June, more than 24 hours after its
receipt.
2.2.9 Five baggage containers, one valuables container and two
empty containers were loaded in the aircraft.
2.2.10 The checked-in passengers with their hand baggage went
to the departure sterile area. At the entrance to the departure
sterile area security staff used X-Ray units and metal detectors
to check passengers and their hand baggages.
2.2.11. At approximately 0100 Z, 23rd June, after the primary
security check was completed, the passengers proceeded to boarding
gate No.80. At this lcoation the secondary security check was
done on passengers using hand held metal detectors. Hand baggages
were also subjected to further physical and visual check by them.
2.2.12. A total of 105 passengers boarded the flight AI-182 at
Mirabel Airport. It was determined that all the passengers who
had checked-in, boarded the aircraft. There was no interline passenger.
At Montreal there were five 'NO SHOWS' and two 'GO SHOWS'. In
all 307 passengers were on board the aircraft. The flight plan
and the load and trim sheet, however, indicated 303 passengers
as four of the 6 infants were not included in the passenger list.
2.2.13. The seating distribution of the passengers was as given
below:-
Zone/Class Total number of Seats Occupied seats Zone 'A' -First
Class 16 1 Zone 'B'- Club Class 22 - Upper deck - Club class 18
7 Zone 'C' - Economy Class 112 104+ 2 Zone 'D' - Economy Class
86 84+ 1 Zone 'E' - Economy Class 123 105+ 3 377 301+ 6 (Infants)
2.2.14 The seating distribution of the 19 cabin crew members was
as follows:-
Two at door L1 and two at door R1
Two at door L2 and two at door R2
Two at door L3 and one at door R3
Two at door L4 and one at door R4
One at door L5 and one at door R5
One in crew rest area, Zone 'A'
One in jump seat upper deck
One crew rest area upper deck.
2.2.15 The three suspected suit cases were not loaded on the aircraft
and were detained in the baggage make-up room. After the names
of the passengers to whom the suit cases had belonged had been
identified the same were transferred to the decompression chamber
of E1 A1 Airline where they were examined, with the aid of a Police
Explosive Dog, with negative results. The suit cases were kept
overnight in the said chamber and when they were opened it was
found that they contained no explosive items.
2.2.16. No unclaimed baggage pertaining to the Air India flight
was recovered either at Toronto or at Mirabel or Dorval Airport
in Montreal.
2.2.17. The flight plan for the sector Montreal to London was
filed on telephone by the Air India Flight despatch from Toronto
to Dorval ATC Centre. He requested for route SHERBROOKE-COLOR-NAT
XRAYBUNTY-MERLY-EXMOR-IBLEY-SAMTN-HAZEL-OCKHAM-LONDON at flight
level 290 upto COLOR and flight level 330 thereafter. The reporting
points on Track XRAY on that day were COLOR, 47N/50W, 49N/40W,
50N/30W, 51N/20W, 51N/15W, 51N/08W and BUNTY.
2.2.18 The aircraft took off from Montreal at 0218 Z. Its estimated
time of arrival at London was 0833 Z. The CVR and the ATC tapes
show that the flight was normal and quite uneventful. Suddenly
at about 0714 Z, when the flight was being monitored by the Air
Traffic Controller at Shannon, with the help of secondary surveillance
radar, the aircraft disappeared from the radar scope. Subsequently,
the ATC at Shannon got the know that the aircraft had met with
an accident and its wreckage was sighted about 110 miles west
south-west of Cork, Ireland.
PERSONNEL INFORMATION
2.3.1 Pilot-in-Command (Capt. H.S. Narendra)
2.3.1.1 Cap.t H.S. Narendra (age 561/2 years, date of birth 25th
November, 1928) joined Air India on 1st October, 1956. He held
ALTP Licence No. 247 valid upto 29th October, 1985 and FRTO No.
478 valid upto 23rd October, 1985. He was released as a Co-pilot
on Boeing 707 aircraft on 21st July, 1960 and as a Commander on
Boeing 707 aircraft on 17th September, 1964.
2.3.1.2 For conversion as Pilot-in-Command on Boeing 747 aircraft,
Capt. Narendra had undergone ground training at Boeing Airplane
Company, USA and simulator and aircraft flying training at Bombay
in 1972. He completed his route checks for Pilot-in-Command endorsement
between December, 72 and January, 73. He became a Commander on
Boeing 747 aircraft on 14th February, 1973.
2.3.1.3 Details of Capt. Narendra's flying experience and licence
renewal checks are as given below:
a. Total flying experience : 20, 379:15 hours
b. Flying experience on B-747 as
(i) Pilot-in-Command : 6,364.50 hours
(ii) Co-pilot : 123:45 hours
c. Day flying experience
on B-747 aircraft : 3,980:00 hours
d. Night flying experience
on B-747 aircraft : 2,508:35 hours
e. Flying experience during
(i) last 6 months : 301:45 hours
(ii) last 3 months : 159:40 hours
(iii) last 30 days : 68:45 hours
(iv) last 7 days : 9:00 hours
He had last flown as Pilot-in-Command on flight AI 181 (Frank-
furt to Toronto) on 15th June, 1985.
f. Date of last licence
renewal and IR check : 8 May, 1985
g. Date of last route check : 24 March, 1985
h. Date of last medical
examination at CME,
Delhi : 29 April, 1985
i. Date of last simulator
refresher course : 19 December, 1984
j. Date of ground technical
refresher course : 6/7 May, 1985
k. Date of last flight
safety refresher course : 25 July, 1984
l. Rest period before
operating the accident
flight : 1 week
2.3.1.4 Records indicate that on 29th June, 1966, Captain Narendra
was declared medically unfit for 2 months to reduce his weight
by 10 Lbs. In February, 1973 he was advised to wear corrective
by-focal glasses while flying. In May, 1975 he was again declared
medically unfit for 3 months.
2.3.1.5 Capt. Narendra was earlier involved in the following two
incidents:
(a) On 25th August, 1984, while operating flight AI-1100 from
London to Delhi, there was a deviation of the aircraft by about
170 nautical miles from the track over Rahimyar Khan in Pakistan.
He was given necessary INS refresher and Route checks with particular
emphasis on cross checking procedure.
(b) On 6th December, 1984, while operating flight AI-124 Delhi-Bombay,
the aircraft was observed approaching runway 32 at Bombay Airport
when runway in use was 27. Captain Narendra was given simulator
training for a series of approaches and landings and visual circuits
from right hand and left hands seats for approaches and landings
on runway 27 at Bombay Airport.
2.3.1.6 Captain Narendra was not involved in any accident previously.
2.3.2 Co-pilot (Capt. S.S. Bhinder)
2.3.2.1 Capt. S.S. Bhinder (age 411/2 years, date of birth 30th
November, 1943) joined Air India on 12th October, 1977. He held
ALTP Licence
No. 940 valid upto 25th July, 1985 and FRTO Licence No. 2290 valid
upto 2nd February, 1986.
2.3.2.2 Capt. Bhinder was released as a Co-pilot on Boeing 707
aircraft on 18th November, 1978 and as a Co-pilot on Boeing 747
aircraft on 17th May, 1980.
2.3.2.3 Details of his flying experience and licence renewal checks
are as given below:
a. Total flying experience : 7,489:00 hours
b. Experience on B-747
aircraft as Co-pilot : 2,469:30 hours
c. Day flying experience
on B-747 aircraft : 1,426:15 hours
d. Night flying experience
on B-747 aircraft : 1,043:15 hours
e. Flying experience during
(i) last 6 months : 157:45 hours
(ii) last 3 months : 65:00 hours
(iii) last 30 days : 20:15 hours
(iv) last 7 days : 9:00 hours
He had last flown as Co-pilot on flight AI-181 (Frankfurt to Toronto)
on 15th June, 1985).
f. Date of last licence
renewal check : 25th March, 1985
g. Date of last IR check : 23rd November, 1984
h. Date of last route check : 9 April, 1985
i. Date of last medical
examination at CME
Delhi : 14 January, 1985
j. Date of last simulator
refresher course : 16 July, 1984
k. Date of last ground technical
refresher course : 8/9 October, 1984
l. Date of last flight
safety refresher course : 3 December, 1984
m. Rest period before operating
the accident flight : 1 week.
2.3.2.4 Records indicate that Capt. Bhinder was not involved in
any accident earlier.
2.3.3 Flight Engineer (Mr. D.D. Dumasia)
2.3.3.1 Flight Engineer Mr. D.D. Dumasia (age 57 1/2 years, date
of birth 10th October, 1927) joined Air India on 27th December
1954. He held flight Engineer's Licence No. 37 valid upto 6th
December, 1985. Mr. Dumasia was released as a Flight Engineer
on Boeing 707 airecaft on 16th December, 1963 and on Boeing 747
aircraft on 6th February, 1974. He had a total flying experience
of 14,885 hours out of which 5,512:35 hours were on Boeing 747
aircraft.
2.3.3.2 Last medical examination of Mr. Dumasia was completed
on 1st October, 1984 at CME Delhi. He had completed simulator
refresher course on 14th February, 1985, ground technical refresher
course on 14/15th January, 1985 and flight safety refresher course
on 13th August, 1984.
2.3.4 Cabin Crew
2.3.4.1 A total of 19 cabin crew members were on duty on Flight
AI-181/182 on 23rd June, 1985. Their brief details are as given
below:
Sl.No. Names Designation Flight Safety course completed on
1. Mr. S.L. Lazar Inflight Supervisor 1/2 April, 1985 2. Mr. K.M.
Thakur Flight Purser 18 February, 1985 3. Mr. Inder Thakur Flight
Purser 9/10 May, 1984 4. Mr. Shukla Flight Purser 23 January,
1985 5. Mr. S.P. Singh Flight Purser 15 January, 1985 6. Mr. N.
Vaid Asst. Flight Purser 2/3 May, 1985 7. Mr. B.K. Sena Asst.
Flight Purser 3 December, 1984 8. Mr. N. Kashipri Asst. Flight
Purser 12/13 Sept., 1984 9. Mr. J.S. Dinshaw Asst. Flight Purser
17/18 Dec., 1984 10. Mr. K.K. Seth Asst. Flight Purser 11/12 February,
1985
11. Miss Raghavan Airhostess 13 July, 1984 12. Miss S. Ghatge
Airhostess 10/11 April, 1985 13. Miss R. Bhasin Airhostess 11/12
February, 1985 14. Miss L. Kaj Airhostess 17/18 April, 1985 15.
Miss P. Dinshaw Airhostess 17/18 Dec., 1984 16. Miss S. Lasarado
Airhostess 15/16 April, 1985 17. Miss E.S. Rodricks Airhostess
10/11 June, 1985 18. Miss S. Gaonkar Airhostess 3/4 April, 1985
19. Miss R.R. Phansekar Airhostess 29/30 April, 1985 AIRCRAFT
INFORMATION
2.4.1 General
2.4.1.1. Boeing 747-237B 'Kanishka' aircraft VT-EFO was manufactured
by Messrs Boeing Company under Sl.No. 21473. The aircraft was
acquired by Air India on 19th June, 1978. Initially, it came with
the expert Certificate of Airworthiness No. E-161805. Subsequently,
the Certificate of Airworthiness No. 1708 was issued by the Director
General of Civil Aviation, India on 5th July, 1978. The C of A
was renewed periodically and was valid upto 29th June, 1985. From
the beginning of June, 1985, C of A renewal work of the aircraft
was in progress. The aircraft had the Certificate of Registration
No. 2179 issued by the DGCA on 5th May, 1978. The commercial flight
of 'Kanishka' aircraft started on 7th July, 1978.
2.4.1.2 The aircraft was maintained by Air India following the
approved maintenance schedules. It had logged 23634:49 hours and
had completed 7525 cycles till the time of accident.
2.4.1.3 The aircraft was fitted with four P & W JT9D-7J engines
having thrust rating of 48650 pounds. The hours and cycles logged
by the engines since new till the time of accident are as given
below:
Engine No.1 : P662927-7J - 29,663:26 Hrs (9422 cycles)
Engine No.2 : P695610-7J - 20,810:28 Hrs (6031 cycles)
Engine No.3 : P695602-7J - 21,992:31 Hrs (6564 cycles)
Engine No.4 : P662926-7J - 32,332:15 Hrs (11295 cycles)
2.4.1.4 All the DGCA mandatory modifications and inspections applicable
to the subject aircraft had been compiled with. No major component
installed on this aircraft and its engines had exceeded the stipulated
life period.
2.4.1.5 The last quarter Periodic Check of the aircraft was carried
out on 24th May, 1985, at 23274:53 hours and 7439 cycles. Subsequent
to this check, two Check 'B' schedules were carried out. The last
Check 'B' was carried out on 17th June, 1985, at 23564:14 hours
and 7510 cycles and was valid for 200 flying hours.
2.4.1.6 The aircraft had flown 359:56 hours and 86 cycles since
last quarter Periodic Check and 70:35 hours and 15 cycles since
last Check 'B' till the time of accident.
2.4.1.7 The last Flight Release Certificate was issued on 24th
May, 1985 on completion of quarter Periodic Check and was valid
for 1100 hours or 150 days elapsed time whichever occurred first.
After the last departure from Bombay on 21st June, 1985, the aircraft
had flown for 22:34 hours till the time of crash.
2.4.1.8 Mr. Rajendra, Maintenanace Manager, Air India, Montreal
carried out the Terminal Transit Check 'E' of the aircraft at
Toronto on 22nd June, 1985 and no snag was observed by him. No
snag was reported by the flight crew during the flight from Toronto
to Montreal. Transit Check 'C' of the aircraft for the flight
AI-182 was carried out at Montreal by Mr. Rajendra and three Air
Canada technicians. The flight engineer also carried out his pre-flight
inspection and found that the rear latch handle of the fifth pod
engine fan cowl was loose. He informed the same to Mr. P. Bayle,
Air Canada technician who faired the handle and applied high speed
tape. No other snag was observed during the inspection.
2.4.2 Previous Incidents and Snags
2.4.2.1 A maintenance Group was formed with representatives from
Air India and Airworthiness Directorate with Mr. R.K. Paul, Senior
Air Safety Officer as the Group Leader to scrutinise the maintenance
documents and various defects experienced on this aircraft. The
report submitted by the Group (Attachment 'B') indicates that
the aircraft was involved in six incidents since the last C of
A renewal, details of which are given below
(I) On 13th July, 1984 at Dubai -- flight AI-868 The aircraft
returned after aborting take off due to no rise in the EPR and
N1 on No.1 engine (Sl.No. 695612). The engine front and rear were
checked and found OK. Slight wetness was noticed in the bleed
outlets. No external oil leak was noticed. Oil quantity was topped
up. The chip detectors and oil filter were found OK. EVC Ph filter
was found
OK. EVC linkage wes exercised. The engine was run up and its operation
was found satisfactory. The snag was suspected to be due to lack
of pressurising air at low N1.
(ii) On 18th July, 1984 at Delhi -- flight AI-105 The right hand
side fuselage skin between stations 480 and 500 in line with lower
portion of forward cargo door cut-out was damaged by high lift.
The same was repaired at Delhi. Permanent repair was carried out
at Bombay. The repairs were accomplished using guidelines given
in the Boeing Structural Repair Manual.
(iii) On 12th August, 1984, at Rome -- flight AI-135 The aircraft
landed with No. 2 engine (Sl.No. 662826) shut down in flight due
to oil pressure and oil quantity droping. On motoring the engine,
oil leak was observed from metal line between F C O C and L O
P switch at the switch end. The line was found cracked which was
welded and refitted. The line was subsequently replaced at Bombay.
(iv) On 24th October, 1984, at London -- flight AI-104 There was
total loss of No.1 hydraulic system fluid. The fluid leak was
traced to inlet pressure adapter of flap control module in the
left hand body gear wheel well. Two of the four bolts holding
the adaptor on the flap control module had sheared. The hydraulic
pump, seal, back-up ring and case drain filter were replaced.
The flap control module was replaced when the aircraft arrived
at Bombay.
(v) On 14th February, 1985, at Delhi -- flight AI-164 On arrival
the leading edge honey comb of the left hand aft trailing edge
flap was found damaged about 18 inches in length due foreign object
damage. Necessary repair was carried out at Delhi. The aft flap
was replaced at Bombay.
(vi) On 28th May, 1985, at Dubai -- flight AI-103 On arrival,
the left hand wing to fuselage botton fairing forward rubber seal
with strip was found turn off. Temporary repair was carried out
at Dubai. Permanent repair was carried out subsequently at Bombay.
2.4.2.2 The flight snags recorded in the flight report books of
the aircraft during the 4 1/2 month period prior to the accident
were scrutinised by the Maintenance Group and the only significant
repetitive defect observed was "R2 door not going to manual".
On ground checks by the aircraft maintenance engineers, the operation
of the selector was, however, found normal.
2.4.2.3 Prior to operating the accident flight, the aircraft arrived
at Toronto from Frankfurt. Capt. R.K. Spencer was the commander
of the flight. The flight crew had reported the following three
snags:
(I) HF system No. 2 had a lot of distortion
(ii) E P R L indicator unserviceable in 'Go around' mode
(iii) Hydraulic system No.1 pressure indication unserviceable
(This snag was carried forward from Delhi).
2.4.2.4 The Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) was unserviceable ex-Bombay
and had been released under M E L.
2.4.2.5 For rectification of the above stated snag No.1, Shri
Rajendra, Air India's Maintenance Engineer at Totonto checked
the connections of the transreceiver and reracked the unit. No
snag was reported on this system on Toronto-Montreal sector.
2.4.2.6 Snag No. 2 was carried forward.
2.4.2.7 Regarding the third snag, Mr. Rajendra has stated that
the indicator showed 4000 P S I pressure even with no pump running.
He therefore, interchanged No.1 and No.3 indicators. The snag,
however, persisted. He then replaced transmitter No.1 with a spare
transmitter from the aircraft SE box and the snag was rectified.
No rectification work was however, recorded by the AME in the
Flight Report Book. No snag was reported on this system on Toronto-Montreal
sector.
2.4.3 Installation of 5th Pod Engine
2.4.3.1 On 8th June, 1985, No.1 engine of Air India Boeing 747
aircraft VT-EGC operating flight AI-181 failed during take off
at Toronto. The aircraft returned and the engine was replaced
by a loaned engine from Air Canada. The removed engine was a P
& W JT9D-7Q type (Sl. No. P702353-7Q).
2.4.3.2 Air India had planned to bring back the failed engine
of VT-EGC aircraft to Bombay, as fifth pod on their flight AI-181/182
of 22/23 June, 1985 and had sent an Engineer along with the necessary
kit to Toronto on 15th June, 1985. The engine borrowed from Air
Canada on 8th June, 1985, was flown back to Toronto as a fifth
pod engine on flight AI-181 of 22nd June, to return it to Air
Canada.
2.4.3.3 Shri C.D. Kolhe, Controller of Airworthiness, Bombay examined
the aspects relating to installation of the 5th Pod engine, loading
of its components and certification of the related work. Shri
Kolhe's report indicates that the failed engine and the associated
parts were kept in the Air Canada engineering hanger at Toronto
airport since June 8 when the aircraft was brought to the hanger
for engine replacement. Air India requested Air Canada on 15th
June, 1985, for prepairing the failed engine for installation
as fifth pod engine on 22nd June. Accordingly, Air Canada's technicians
undertook the preparatory work of removing the cowlings, fan blades,
panels, locking of compressor, turbine rotors etc. on 17th June,
1985, and completed the work on 21st June, 1985. The fan blades
(46 in number) from the failed engine were placed in 12 wooden
shipping boxes provided by Air India. These boxes were then loaded
in a container. The other components of the failed engine were
loaded on 4 pallets.
2.4.3.4 Installation of the fith pod engine was carried out by
Air Canada technicians and the individual items on the task card
were certified by the individuals who had carried out the work.
2.4.3.5 Some difficulty was experienced while loading one of the
pallets having inlet cowl of the pod engine. To enable loading
of the cowl, Air Canada engineering/maintenance personnel removed
door stop fittings from the aft cargo compartment door cut-out.
After removal of the fittings, the pallet could be loaded. All
the removed fittings were then re-installed. Removal and installation
of the fittings was certified by Mr. Rajendra.
2.4.3.6 A question arose whether removal of the door stop fittings
could have caused some difficulty in flight. From the video films
of the werckage it was found that the complete aft cargo door
was intact
and in its position except that it had come adrift slightly. The
door was found latched at the bottom. The door was found lying
along with the wreckage of the aft portion of the aircraft. This
indicates that the door remained in position and did not cause
any problem in flight. In the front cargo compartment, there were
16 containers out of which four were empty. Five containers had
baggage of Delhi bound passengers. Container at Position 13L had
baggage of the first class and London passengers and container
at position 13R had crew baggage. The entire baggage of passengers
ex-Montreal was loaded in containers at positions 12R, 21R, 22R,
23R and 24R in the front cargo compartment. Container at position
24L contained fan blades in wooden boxes and the other components
of the pod engine. Valuable container was at position 14R.
2.4.3.7 In the aft cargo compartment, there were four pallets
containing parts of the fifth pod engine and two containers at
positions 44L and 44R containing baggage of Delhi bound passengers.
The bulk cargo compartment contained passenger baggage bound for
Delhi and Bombay. All the baggage and engine parts in the aft
and bulk cargo compartments were loaded at Toronto.
2.4.3.8 The total weight of the fifth pod engine and its items
was about 9000 kgs. As a result of carriage of the fifth pod engine,
the payload of the flight was considerably reduced on London-Delhi
sector.
2.4.3.9 At the time of take off from Montreal the aircraft had
104,000 kgs of fuel on board which was adequate for 08:40 hours
of flying as against sector flying time of 06:15 hours. The flight
plan fuel was calculated taking Paris as the alternate airport
for London.
2.4.3.10 The load and trim sheet from the sector Montreal London
was prepared and was duly counter-signed by the commander. The
take off weight of the aircraft was 317,877 kgs which was within
the maximum take off weight limit of 334,500 kgs. The estimated
landing weight of the aircraft was 237,177 kgs which was also
within the maximum landing weight limit of 256,279 kgs. The centre
of gravity of the aircraft was at 21.3 percent
of MAC at take off and the estimated C G position at the time
of landing at London was 25.8 percent of MAC which was within
the limits.
2.4.3.11 The load and trim sheet and the flight plan of the aircraft
indicated that there was 301+2 passengers on board the aircraft
whereas there were actually 301+6 passengers on board. The error
occured because four of the six infants were not taken into account.
2.4.4 Corrosion Control Measures
2.4.4.1 Boeing Company have recommended various measure to control
corrosion on Boeing 747 aircraft through different documents such
as Maintenance Planning Data Document, Corrosion Prevention Manual
and Service Bulletins. Compliance of these measures on Air India
fleet is accomplished as follows:
(I) Support structure under galleys and lavatories
Boeing Company have recommended repeat inspections of under galley/toilet
structure at intervals of 12000 hours. However, in order to detect
corrosion at an early stage, these inspections are carried out
by Air India at intervals not exceeding 9000 hours.
(ii) Fuselage Lower Bilge Area:
Boeing Company have recommended modifications to provide improved
drainage systems by incorporation of various Service Bulletins.
All the relevant modification have been completed by Air India
on the affected aircraft. In addition to completion of these modifications,
repeat inspection of lower bilge area is being carried out to
meet the requirements of Boeing Service Bulletins.
(iii) Canted Pressure Deck:
In order to prevent water accomulation and consequent corrosion
in the area, Boeing Company have issued SBs 51-2015, 51-2026 and
51-2032. Air India have incorporated Service Bulletins 51-2015,
and 51-2032 on all their affected airplanes SB 51-2026 is being
complied progressively.
(iv) Cargo Compartments:
Inspection of all the cargo compartment interior structures for
corrosion and cracks is being accomplished periodically by Air
India after removal of linings and insulation blankets.
(v) Aft Pressure Bulkhead:
During every equalised Periodic Check routine, the aft surface
of aft pressure bulkhead is being visually inspected for corrosion
condition and security of attachements. The forward surface of
the pressure bulkhead, which is covered by aft toilets, is inspected
after removal of toilets at intervals not exceeding 9000 hours
although the recommended interval by Boeing Company is 12000 hours.
2.4.4.2 Air India has stated that in addition to the above specific
measures, aircraft structure particularly the areas below toilets,
galleys, cargo compartments, outflow valve area etc. which are
prone to corrosion, are inspected for corrosion, cleaned and protected
during every equalised Periodic Check. Air India have further
stated that no serious corrosion problem has been experienced
by them so far on their fleet.
2.4.5 Supplemental Structural Inspection Programme
2.4.5.1 In the case of airplanes which have completed 10,000 flight
cycles as on June 30, 1983, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
U S A and Boeing Company had recommended additional structural
inspections known as Supplemental Structural Inspection Programme.
In the Air India fleet, the first three 747 aircraft, namely,
VT-EBE, VT-EBN and VT-EBO fell in this category and are known
as 'Candidate Airplanes'. The subject aircraft (VT-EFO) had completed
only 7525 flight cycles at the time of the accident on 23rd June,
1985, and therefore, the Supplemental Structural Inspection Programme
was not applicable to this aircraft.
2.4.6 Special Corrosion Inspection of B-747 Aircraft Fleet of
Air India
2.4.6.1 In order to examine whether corrosion to the aircraft
structure of Kanishka aircraft could have contributed to the accident,
a group was constituted by Mr. H.S. Khola, Inspector of Accidents
to carry out special corrosion Inspection of all the Boeing 747
aircraft of Air India.
The group consisted of the following members:
(a) Senior Air Safety Officer of the D.G.C.A.
(b) Senior Airworthiness Officer of the D.G.C.A.
(c) Air India's Representative.
2.4.6.2 The inspection was carried out in the following areas:
(a) Below toilets and galleys
(b) Forward and aft cargo compartments belly areas - internally
and externally
(c) The forward and aft pressure bulkheads
(d) Canted pressure web area from inside the passenger cabin.
(e) Area around outflow valves
(f) MEC area inside and outside.
2.4.6.3 The inspection reports submitted by the Group show that
no corrosion was noticed on the significant primary structural
members of the aircraft. Surface corrosion was, however, noticed
on some of the members below the toilets and galleys. The corrosion
observed during the inspection was of minor nature which is normally
expected on such inspection schedule. The Kanishka aircraft was
subjected to Periodic Check on 24th May, 1985 at 23,274.53 hours/7,439
cycles and no significant corrosion was observed. Among the Nine
747 aircraft inspected for corrosion, 5 aircraft had logged hours
more than the Kanishka aircraft. Three of the aircraft had actually
logged nearly double the flying hours. Taking into consideration
that the corrosion prevention measures recommended by the Boeing
Company were followed by Air India and that even the high life
aircraft (45,000 hours approximately) subjected to corrosion inspection
at the time when Periodic Check was due i.e. 1100 hours since
previous check, had no significant corrosion, it is considered
unlikely that Kanishka aircraft, which had logged only 23,275
hours since new and 360 hours since last Periodic Check, had corrosion
which could have contributed to the accident.
METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION
2.5.1 A report on the Meteorological conditions prevailing en-route
near the location where the aircraft crashed was provided by the
Meteorological Service, Department of Communications, Dublin,
Ireland. This report covers a period of one to two hours before
and after the time of accident (0714 Z).
2.5.2 From the report it is seen that the surface Synoptic Situation
in the vicinity of 51N, 12.50W at 0715 Z on 23rd June was as given
below:
Surface wind : 250/15 knots
Surface visibility : 10 Kms (occasionally 4 kms in drizzle)
Surface temperature : 13C
Cloud conditions : Cloud cover in the area was estimated to have
been layered upto about FL 100 with a base of 600 feet. There
is no evidence of cumulonimbus or thunderstorm activity.
Freezing Level : 700 feet.
2.5.3 With regard to Upper Air situation the report indicates
that a mainly West or West North West airflow covered the area
of FL 310 The Jet stream was centred at about 48N. The estimated
wind and temperature at FL 310 were 270/65 knots and -47C. As
per the report, at FL 310, 51N 12.50W and at 0715 Z any significant
clear air turbulence was not expected.
2.5.4 Sunlight condition was prevailing at the time of accident.
There were no sigmets valid for the area at that time.
AIDS TO NAVIGATION
2.6.1 The aircraft was equipped with Inertial Navigation System
(INS) and was cruising normally at its assigned flight level 310
on track X-ray over Atlantic. It was under the control of Shannon
Upper Area Control and was being monitored on the Secondary Surveillance
Radar (SSR) located at Mount Gabreal. Till the time of accident,
the aircraft was beyond the range of Shannon primary radar.
2.6.2 The aircraft entered Shannon airspace at the correct position
and level and remained on the assigned track and flight level
till it disappeared from the radar screen.
2.6.3. There is no evidence to indicate that AI-182 experienced
any navigational problem during the flight.
COMMUNICATIONS
2.7.1 Two-way communication between the ill-fated aircraft and
the ATS units of Canada and Ireland was maintained during the
flight from Montreal till the time of crash. The communications
were recorded on the ATC tapes. Transcripts of the relevant tapes
were provided by the Canadian Aviation Safety Board and the Director
of Air Traffic Services, Ireland.
2.7.2 From the Transcript of the conversations, it is observed
that two-way communication between AI-182 and the various ATS
units was normal. The last R/T contact with the aircraft was at
0709:58 Z when AI-182 informed Shannon UAC that it was squawking
2005. The tape transcript also shows that the aircraft did not
transmit any information regarding the emergency on frequency
131.15 MHz on which it was last working with Shannon UAC or on
distress frequency 121.5 MHz. Indecipheiable noise was, however,
found recorded on the Shannon ATC tape just at the time of crash
i.e. 0714:01 Z. Thereafter, repeated calls were made by Shannon
UAC to AI-182, but there was no response.
SEARCH AND RESCUE
2.8.1 The report of the Search and Rescue Group gives the details
of the Search and Rescue operations. From the report it is seen
that at 0730 Z, Shannon UAC informed Marine Rescue Co-ordination
centre (MRCC) shannon that AI-182, a Boeing 747 aircraft enroute
Montreal-London had disappeared from the Secondary Surveillance
Radar (SSR) at 0713 Z in position 51N/120W. Shannon UAC requested
MRCC Shannon to take emergency section. At 0740 Z MRCC Shannon
telephonically explained the situation to Valantia Coast Radio
Station (CRS) and requested a PAN Broadcast urgently and to ask
any vessels in area to keep sharp lookout and report to Valantia
Radio. At 0746 Z Valantia Radio transmitted to all stations PAN
message and above advice to ships. The transmission was repeated.
2.8.2 At 0750 Z, an Irish Naval Vessel AISLING reported on R/T
to Valantia Radio that it was 54 miles from site of accident and
was proceeding to the site. Valantia Radio passed on this information
by Telex to MRCC Shannon. Between 0740/ 0750 Z MRCC briefed the
Irish Naval Service (INS) Haulbowline, MRCC Swansea, RCC Plymouth
and Irish Army Air Corps (IAAC) on the situation. At 0754 Z MRCC
relayed a distress message to Shannon Aeradio via the Aeronautical
Fixed Telecommunication Network (AFTN)
2.8.3 At 0803 Z Valantia Radio again transmitted the PAN message
and the advice to ships. At 0840 Z Cargo vessel M W Laurentian
Forest/HBWP (Registered in PANAMA and owned by Federal Commerce
of Montreal, Canada) at position 51.09N/12.18W reported that it
was 22 miles away from distress area and was proceeding there.
Laurantian enquired if there were other ships in the area and
was informed about position of Aisling. At 0813 Z Valantia Radio
informed MRCC Shannon by telex about Laurentain Forest.
2.8.4 Between 0815/0820 Z, MRCC Shannon updated RCC plymouth and
they advised that a Nimrod Rescue Aircraft would depart shortly
for the area and that SEA KING helicopters were already enroute
the Cork Airport initially. Edinburgh RCC advised MRCC Shannon
that a Nimrod Rescue Aircraft was also being prepared at Kinloss.
At 0820
Shannon Aeradio informed Valantia Radio that there was message
from Shanwick Oceanic Control that aircraft were picking up ELT
signal in position 51N/15W and 51N/08W and the actual position
was beleived to be 51W/1250W. At 0833 Z, Valentia Radio sent message
giving the above information and requesting ships in the area
to report to Valentia Radio.
2.8.5 At 0842 Z, Ali Baba informed Valentia Radio that it was
at position 5125.5N/0825.4W and was listening on 121.5 MHz. At
0850 Z Western Arctic informed Valentia Radio its position 5207N/1151W
and that it would proceed in about 20 minutes after bringing in
cable. At 0857 Z, High Seas Driller informed Valentia Radio that
Vessel Kongstain could be released, ETA 51/2 to 6 hours and they
would standby. At 0858 Z, Valentia Radio informed MRCC Shannon
about reports from Ali Baba Western Arctic and High Seas Driller.
2.8.6 At 0905 Z, Laurentian forest reported to Valdentia Radio
that it was 5 miles from SOS position 51N/12.5 W and it had not
sighted anything. Between 0905/0908 Z, three more vessels viz.
Atlantic Concern, MV Norman Amstel and MV Tasman reported their
positions to Valentia Radio. At 0908 Z, Swansea advised MRCC Shannon
that four Seaking helicopters and two Nimrod Aircraft were enroute.
2.8.7 At 0913 Z, Laurentin Forest reported to Valentia Radio that
they had sighted what looked like 2 rafts about 2 miles away.
At 0914 Valentia Radio informed MRCC Shannon about the report
from Laurentian Forest.
2.8.8 At 0918 Z, Laurentian Forest reported to Valentia Radio
that it had sighted wreckage in water at position 5101.9N/1242.5W
and the liferafts were not inflated. Valentia Radio passed the
message to MRCC Shannon at 0920 and also sent transmission about
wreckage sighting. Lifeboats Valentia and Baltimore reported to
Valentia Radio that they were proceeding to the position of wreckage.
2.8.9 At 0937 Z, Laurentian Forest reported that it had sighted
3 bodies in water. Valentia Radio informed the same to MRCC Shannon
at 0940 Z. At 0945 Z, MRCC Shannon and MRCC Swansea decided that
for security and operational reasons Cork Airport would be the
primary operational base and ATC Cork were informed of this decision.
2.8.10 At 0953 Z, S MYROLI informed Valentia Radio that it was
80 miles north of position and had a group of 10 to 20 French
vessesls and desired to know if they should proceed to site. After
consulting Laurentian Forest, S MYROLI was advised that it was
not necessary. Valentia Radio kept on giving Mayday relay frequently.
2.8.11 At 1045 Z, a prohibited flying area was established with
a radius of 40 N Miles from the datum point from sea level to
5000 feet. Falmouth Coast Guard reqested Valentia Radio the position
of all ships in the distress area and those proceeding so that
each vessel could be designated to search a particular area.
2.8.12 At 1126 Z, Laurentian Forest reported Valentia Radio that
it had located numerous bodies in water and Seaking helicopter
was hovering there. Valantia Radio Transmitted this information
to all stations.
2.8.13 At 1133 Z, Valentia Radio informed Coast Guard Falmouth
the position and ETA of various ships and also of the Lifeabouts
Valentia and Beltimore. At 1150 Z, RRC Plymouth requested MRCC
Shannon that "Le Aisling" assume duty as "On Scene
Commander Surface Unit". At 1204 Z, information was received
by Valentia Radio that 8 Spannish Trawlers were proceeding to
distress position of AI-182 and their ETAs were between 1630/2000
Z. At 1246 Z, Star Orion informed Valentia Radio that it would
be able to refuel any vessel in medium or small quantities at
the accident site. Valentia Radio informed MRCC Shannon and Falmouth
about the Spanish Vessels and Star Orion.
2.8.14 Falmouth requested Valentia Radio at 1303 to advise Laurentian
Forest to inform Aisling that 8 Spanish trawlers would arrive
in search area between 1600 Z and 2000 Z and Aisling should deploy
trawlers in conjunction with lifeboats to recover bodies as it
would be easier to recover than from large vessels. Valentia Radio
sent the above message.
2.8.15 Laurentian Forest informed Valentia Radio at 1307 Z that
10 bodies were on Aisling, 4 on Helo, and they had some alongside
and had launched lifeboats to pick them up. Valentia Radio informed
the same to MRCC Shannon and Falmouth. At 1338Z, MRCC Shannon
requested Valentia Radio to include the following in their broadcast:
"Vessels within 100 N Miles of datum 5101.9N/1242.5W are
requested to proceed to search area and contact Aisling/EIYP.
Any vessels recovering bodies or wreckage are requested to retain
them on board and inform MRCC Falmouth of total number of bodies
recovered."
2.8.16 Valentia Radio transmitted the above message at 1340 Z
to all stations and also informed MRCC Shannon. At 1503 Z Aisling
informed Valentia Radio that they had recovered 56 bodies. MRCC
Shannon requested Valentia Radio to advise Aisling that if they
could locate "Black Box", they should drop buoy. Valentia
Radio advised Aisling accordingly. At 1530 Z, on advice from MRCC
Shannon, Valentia Radio asked Baltimore, Courtmaesherry and Ballycotton
lifeboats to return to base. At 1633 Aisling requested Valentia
Radio to inform Falmouth that they were unable to transfer bodies
to Valentia Lifeboat as latter was returning to base owing to
fuel shortage. At 1659, Laurentia Forest informed Valentia Radio
that 66 bodies had been picked up by then. Aisling advised Valentia
Radio that Valentia lifeboat was returning with four bodies.
2.8.17 At 1721 Z Falmouth requested Valentia Radio to relay following
to all surface units at scene:
1. One mimrod remaining on scene overnight.
2. All other air units will be recalled at 2200 Z. One Helo remains
at 15 minutes notice at Cork
3. Air Search recommences at 240400 Z.
4. All Civil surface units will be released by 2200 and may proceed
on passage. Bodies should be landed at Irish Post for transfer
to receiving station at Cork Airport.
5. Warship Challenger, Emer and Aisling acknowledge".
2.8.18 At 1723 Z Aisling informed Valentia Radio that they saw
3 Spanish vessels approaching and they were using Ch.16 which
Aisling was using for co-ordination with RESCUE 52 and requested
that Spanish Vessels be asked to stay outside 5 miles radius.
Spanish Agent was told about Aisling request.
2.8.19. Valentia lifeboat informed Valentia Radio that they were
heading for home (Valientia) at reduced spead of 11 knots and
they had five bodies on board. At 1822 Z, Aisling requested Valentia
Radio information on 'Black Box' that might help its location.
Aisling was advised of ELT signal on 121.5 MHz. At 1840 Z Cork
ATC Advised MRCC Shannon that a total of 64 bodies were in Cork.
2.8.20 At 1920 Z, MRCC Shannon downgraded the 'MAYDAY' Broadcast
to 'PAN' (Urgency) Broadcast, Aisling informed Valentia Radio
that 79 bodies had been recovered. At 1958 Z Laurentian Forest
informed Valentia Radio that they were proceeding to Dublin. Valentia
Radio thanked them for assistance.
2.8.21 At 2000 Z, MRCC Swansea advised MRCC Shannon that main
air search would cease at 2200 Z and would recommence at 240400
Z. The overnight search would continue with one Nimrod providing
air cover for the surface search by three warships. Vessels transiting
the area were requested to keep a sharp look out and to report
to HMS Challenger.
2.8.22 By 0300 Z on 24th June, four Seaking helicopters had deported
from Cork to resume the airborne search. At that time the search
area covered a six nautical mile radius of position 5059.2 N/1225.3W
and the vessels Le Emer and HMS Challenger were requested to search
this area. HMS Challenger was the coordinator of the surface search
and Nimrod Rescue 02 was on-Scene-Commander.
2.8.23 At 0450 Z Rescue 02 reported sighting of wreckage in position
5101 M/1245 W. Between 0505 and 0543, three USAF Chinook helicopters
departed from Cork Airport to join the search. At 0556, MRCC
Swansea confirmed that there were 329 people on board the aircraft
(Earlier reportes had idicated 325 people on board).
2.8.24 A continuous search was maintained throughtout the day
(24th June) but only one further body and numerous pieces of wreckage
were recovered. An extensive surface search was also maintained
throughout the day and instructions were passed by MRCC Shannon
to Valentia Radio requestiong all shipping to recover any wreckage
or bodies sighted.
2.8.25 At 0900 Z, Capt. G Mc. Stay of Department of Communications
advised MRCC Shannon that Aisling was bound for Cork, ETA 1300
Z and he (Capt. Mc Stay) was assuming responsibility for collection
of wreckage. MRCC were also advised by Mr. Gregory of Britoil
that their two vessels 'Constine' and 'Star Orion' were enroute
to Foynes having picked up quantities of wreckage.
2.8.26 At 1740 Z, SRCC Plymouth advised Shannon that the Search
will terminate at 242200 Z, at 1800 Z Falmouth MRCC advised MRCC
Shannon to direct the Portisheal and Valentia Radios to concel
Urgency Broadcast from 242000 and to release HMS Challenger and
Le Aisling from the search at 242000 hours. All the aircraft were
released at 24000. It was also decided that Le Emer would remain
at the area. At 242003 Z, a message was transmitted to all stations
on R/T and W/T that air and sea search was being terminated at
242000 Z and all the participant were thanked for their assistance.
INJURIES TO PERSONS
3.1.1 Post mortem examination was carried out by Irish Authorities
at Cork. At that time Wing Commandor Dr. LR. Hill was also present.
Subsequently Air Vice Marshall Kunzru also reached Cork. Both
of them were members of the Medical Group which had been constituted
by Mr. H.S. Khola.
3.1.2 By then 131 bodies had been recovered. None of the bodies
of the flying crew were revocered. The bodies which were recovered
represented 39.8 per cent of the victims. The exact seating position
of passengers is not certain, because it is known if the passengers
had changed their seats after the take off of the aircraft from
Montreal. On the information which is available, the passengers
were supposed to have been as follows:-
Passengers: Seats Occupied Bodies Available identified Zone A
16 1 0 Zone B 22 0 0 Upper Deck 18 7 0 Zone D 112 104 + 2 29 Zone
D 86 84 + 1 38 Zone E 123 105 + 3 50 Sub-Total 377 301 +(6 infants)
117 Crew: Flight Deck 3 3 0 Cabin 19 19 5 Total 399 329 122
3.1.3 The Post-mortem reports were examined by Wing Commander
Dr. Hill. He submitted two reports being Exhibits H-1 and H-2.
He was also examined in Court as Witness No. 2. Dr. Hill who had
developed a system which would indicate the severity of the accident
and the injuries suffered. He used a scale from 0 to 4, with naught
being no injury and 4 being a fatal lesion. Though there is some
amount of subjectivity involved in the system, nevertheless categorising
the injuries according to the sacle does give an overall picture
of what had happened to the victims. After adding up all the injury
scale for a particular body, Dr. Hill in his Report Exhibit H-1
divided the injuries as under:-
No. of victims Mild injury (0-49) total 34.4% 45% Moderate injury
(50-99) 38.9% 51% Severe Injury (100-149) 25.2% 33% Catestrophic
Injury (150 +) 1.5% 2 Total 100.1% 131 3.1.4 A further break up
showing the overall injury score of the recovered victims is as
follows:
Minor Moderate Severe Zone No. % % No. % % No. % % Total C
8 6.1 17.8 9 6.9 17.7 4 3.1 11.4 21 D 9 6.9 20 15 11.5 29.4 9
6.9 25.7 33 E 15 11.5 33.3 15 11.5 29.4 14 10.7 40 44 Unknown
13 9.9 28.9 12 9.2 23.5 8 6.1 22.9 33 Total 145 34.4 100 51 39.1
100% 35 26.8 100% 131 3.1.5 The reports submitted by Dr.Hill further
indicted as follows
(a) There were 30 children recovered and they showed less overall
injury. The average severity of injury increases from zone C to
E and is significantly less in C than in Zones D and E.
(b) Flail pattern injuries were exhibited by eight bodies, five
of these were in Zones E, one in Zone D, two in Zone C and one
crew member. The significance of flail injuries is that it indicates
that the victims came out of the aircraft at altitude before it
hit the water.
(c) There were 26 bodies that showed signs of hypoxia (lack of
oxygen), including 12 children, 9 in Zones C, 6 in Zone D and
11 in Zone E. There were 25 bodies showing signs of decompression,
including 7 children. They were evently distributed throughout
the zones, but with a tendency to be seated at the sides, particularly
the right side (12 bodies).
(d) Twenty-three bodies showed evidence of receiving injuries
from a vertical force. They tended to be older, seated to the
rear of the aircraft (4 in Zone C, 5 Zone D, 11 inZone E, 2 crew
and 1 unknown), and 16 had little or no clothing.
(e) Twenty-one bodies were found with no clothing, including three
children. They tended to be seated to the rear and to the right
(3 in Zone C, 5 in Zone D, 11 in Zone E and 2 unknown).
(f) There were 49 cases showing signs of impact-type injuries,
including 19 children (15 in Zone C, 15 in Zone D, 15 in Zone
E, 1 crew member and 3 unknown).
(g) There is a general absence of signs indicating the wearing
of lap belts.
(h) Pathological examination failed to reveal any injuries indicative
of a fire or explosion.
3.1.6 In his testimony in Court, Wing Commander Dr. I.R. Hill
further stated that the significance of flail injuries being suffered
by some of the passengers was that it indicated that the aircraft
had broken
in mid-air at an altitude and that the victims had come out of
the aeroplane at an altitude. He further explained that if an
explosion had occurred in the cargo hold, it was possible that
the bodies may not show any sign of explosion. It may here be
mentioned that the forensic examination of the bodies do not disclose
any evidence of an explosion. Furthermore, the seating pattern
also shows that none of the bodies from Zone A or B was recovered,
in fact as per the seating plan Zone B was supposed to have been
unoccupied. This Zone is directly above the forward cargo compartment.
3.1.7 Dr. Hill further stated that the pattern of the accident
as suggested by the injuries indicated that it was a complex affair
and there were at least two phases of injuries, one in the air
and the other at water impact. In answer to a specific question
that if there was an explosive device in the cargo hold then could
the passengers who were seated have suffered such injuries, the
answer of Dr. Hill was that "it is possible". According
to him, the pattern of injuries indicated that if there was an
explosion in the aircraft it was more likely that the explosion
had occurred in the rear cargo compartment than in the front cargo
compartment. This conclusion was apparently based on the fact
that, according to him, in zone E of the aircraft there were larger
vertical load type injuries. Dr. Hill was also asked if he had
to make any suggestions which would minimise injuries to passangers
in the event of an accident. In answer, the witness made his suggestion
in the following words
"There are very complicated things one would have to do such
as rearward facing seats; having safety belts which incorporated
restraint for the upper part of the body; increasing the space
between aircraft seats; incorporating shocks absorbing system
within the seat and using materials which do not break easily
like plastic. We would also need fuel systems which would not
immediately set on fire and furnishing which would be resistant
to burining, and also passengers should not carry into the aeroplanes
large amount of hand bags which only get in way in the event of
evacuation, and I personally feel that the carriage of large amount
of alchohol both in the passengers and in the aeroplane is a hazard
to flight and safety. Finally the passengers
should take heed of the flight safety instructions given to them
by the crew of the aeroplane".
3.1.8 Air Vice Marshal Kunzru, witness No. 10 in his report dated
14th November, 1985, Ex.A-48, gave his comments not only on the
post-mortem reports but also on the statement of Wing Commander
Dr. I.R. Hill. With regard to the post-mortem examination, the
comment of AVM Kunzru was as follows:
"All victims have been stated in the PM reports to have died
of Multiple injuries. However two of the dead, one infant and
one child, are reported to have dies of Asphyxia. There is no
doubt about the asphyxial death of the infant. In the case of
the other child (Body No. 93) there could be doubt because the
findings could also be caused due to the child undergoing tumbling
or spinning with the anchor point at the ankles. Three other victims
undoubtedly died of drowning. There was no evidence of significant
Lap-belt injuries.
Considering rupture of the ear-drum, without injury to skull,
as a criterion to indicate rapid decompression, two cases may
be considered to fall in this category.
Histological examination has been carried out only in 57 bodies
out of 131. Lung examination on almost all of them showed decelerative
changes. Six bodies (Nos. 6,22,70,103,121 and 131) showed presence
of Bone Marrow Embolism in Lung Sections. Though not of much significance
in this accident, this finding does indicate survicval after a
bony injury for an undefined period of time No evidence of fire
burns or explosive material, other than Kerosene burns on some
bodies, which I had myself seen at Cork, could be found. Kerosene
burns in such acidents is a fairly common findings and is of no
significance".
AVM Kunzru generally agreed with the crash injury analysis on
the victims which had been furnished by Wing Commander Dr. Hill.
He, however, gave the following comments with regard to hypoxia,
decompression and decelerative changes:
"Hypoxia : The main Post Mortem findings in hypoxia is generalised
congestion if the hypoxia is of the type described as "hypoxic
hypoxia". In other causes of hypoxia of more severe degree
such as "histotoxic hypoxia", "asphyxia" or
"drowning" additional histological findings such as
petechial haemorrhages and generalised congestion, and lung findings
such as haemorrhage and extrusion of alvoolar phagocytos are seen.
Decompression : The term used by Dr. Hill is "Decompression".
It is presumed that he means "Rapid/Explosive Decompression"
which occurs within one Sec. and not "decompression sickness"
which takes a minimum of 5 to 7 mnts to occur even at 31,000 ft.
altitude and which in this case can positively be ruled out.
The Post-Mortem and histological signs of rapid Decompressions
are :-
(a) Possibility of rupture of Ear drums without any injury to
the skull.
*(b) Patchy Lung Haemorrhages
*(c) Emphysomatus changes
*(These occur more commonly in those cases where the individual
was in the phase of breathing-in at the time of decompression.
3.1.9 If it is assumed that the aircraft suddenly broke up in
Mid-Air at an altitude of 31,000 ft. the bodies will be at once
exposed to hypoxia and rapid decompression and as a consequence
will suffer body changes as mentioned above. As the aircraft/occupants
start descending, they will be exposed to increasing amounts of
Oxygen and as soon as ;they come down below 15,000 ft. and then
below 10,000 ft. the effect of hypoxia rapidly diminishes. Finally,
the aircraft/individuals come down and hit the ground/water with
a very heavy impact, thus submitting the individuals to extremely
severe G-loads of decelarative type.
Decelerative Changes : Decelerative impact brings about well established
changes in the lungs besides many other associated injuries. It
is relevant to note the decelerative lung changes which are :-
(a) Patchy haemorrhages in Lung.
(b) Marked Emphysomatus Changes.
(c) Extrusion of alvoolar Phagocytes
(d) Desqummation of bronchcolar epitherium.
"Comparative study of the PM/histological findings of hypoxia,
Decompression and Decelerative Lung injuries reveal that they
are more or less similar. Decelerative injury being the most severe
of the three and last to occur tends to so modify the Post-Mortem
and Histological findings that it becomes extremely difficult
and some times impossible to isolate one from the other."
3.1.10 AVM Kunzru was, therefore, of the opinion that in this
accident evidence of hypoxia/decompression (except in 2 cases)
had not been confirmed or established.
3.1.11 The difference of opinion between Wing Commander Dr. hill
and AVM Kunzru, with regard to evidence of hypoxia and decompression,
is of no significance in the present case. What is important to
note, however, is that they have agreed that the injury pattern
does indicate break up of the aircraft in mid-air and that the
occupants of Zone E had suffered the greatest amount of injuries
as compared to the occupants of the other zones.
MAPPING, WRECKAGE DISTRIBUTION AND SALVAGE
3.2.1 Introduction
3.2.1.1 Oceanographic charts indicated that the depth of sea in
the crash area was about 6700 feet and the site appeared to be
a flat sea bed, without any valleys or hills. The immediate necessity
after rescuing/searching crash victims, was to locate and recover
the digital flight data recorder (DFDR) and the cockpit voice
recorder (CVR). The operation was unique of its kind and had never
been undertaken earlier in the world at this depth of the sea.
It required an equipment which could home on the transmitted signals
from the underwater locater acoustic beacons fitted on DFDR/ CVR,
identify the units, clear them from attachments/wreckages, grab
them and bring them to the surface.
3.2.1.2 The pressure exerted by the water at 6700 feet below mean
sea level is extremely high and the temperature is very low. No
light penetrates to that depth and it is pitch dark. Scarab I
fitted on French Ship "Leon Thevenin" which had undertaken
the challenging job of locating DFDR and CVR, and recovering the
same, was not designed to operate at 6700 feet depth. Its maximum
design operating depth was only 6000 feet. However, it was decided
to exceed the design operating depth for this emergency operation.
3.2.1.3 By using the preliminary information of probable area
of location OF CVR and DFDR as indicated by ship 'Gardline Locator',
the Scarab I was Lowered in the sea to locate and recover these
units which it accomplished on 10.7.85 and 11.7.85 respectively.
3.2.1.4 Prior to recovery of DFDR/CVR by the ship 'Leon Thevenin',
sufficient spade work was done by the ship 'Gardline Locator'
(A ship provided by Accident Investigation Branch, U.K.) and 'Le
Aoife' (an Irish Naval Ship). The survey of the crash area, carried
out with the help of side-scan sonars fitted on these ships, had
indicated a general distribution of the wreckage and a rough idea
about the sizes of the parts. Each part of the wreckage was called
a target. The method used for survey was triangulation with multiple
passes through the crash site.
3.2.1.5 Next phase was the task of :
(a) Locating hundreds of pieces of wreckage by the combined use
of sonar and video monitors.
(b) Video and still photography of the pieces of wreckage.
(c) Plotting the distribution of the wreckage.
All this was to be carried out under the directions of the Court.
3.2.2 Scarab
3.2.2.1 The means (vehicles/equipment) proposed to be used in
the locating, mapping and video photography of the wreckage were
the CCGS John Cabot and SCARAB II.
3.2.2.2 The John Cabot is an ice breaker of the Canadian Coast
Guard. Since utilisation as an ice breaker is seasonal, the John
Cabot is also equipped for submarine cable laying. In order to
enlarge its capabilities in this regard, the John Cabot is equipped
to have on its deck the Scarab and to operate it. Thus the John
Cabot can be used for repair of submarine cables. The John Cabot
has complete facilities for operation, maintenance and repair
of the Scarab. This includes a Control Hut, a Test Room, Workshop,
Stores etc. The John Cabot has considerable experience in work
on deep sea bed.
3.2.2.3 The SCARAB II is a submersible craft assisting repair
and burial of cables. As will be clear from the following details,
the Scarab is not ipso facto a submarine. It is a total system
for carrying out its complex functions.
3.2.2.4 The SCARAB II is a state-of-the-art system designed and
built for tethered unmanned work at ocean depths of upto 6000
feet. Scarab's standard equipment are :
Two rugged manipulators.
A complete optical suite.
Six thrusters of 5 hp each.
CTFM Sonar.
Navigation System.
3.2.2.5 The manipulators have a choice of grippers/claws/cutters
etc. of any required description and size. The Scarab has three
TV cameras mounted on separate pan/tilt mechanism to allow real
time observation and video tape documentation. A 35 mm still camera
was also installed and used in the present work. There was a choice
of quartz-iodide flood lights to provide illumination.
3.2.2.6 The location and control of the Scarab is accomplished
through a phased array navigation system.
3.2.2.7 The Scarab was equipped with a 360 high resolution Sonar
with a range of 1000 meters. The Sonar was also capable of interrogating
and detecting 37 KHz and 27 KHz pingers. It can function independently
of the ship's facilities and is equipped with power generators
and semiautomatic handling equipment.
3.2.2.8 The John Cabot can salvage items, but it is not a salvage
ship as it does not have the specialised high capacity cranes,
derricks etc. required for salvage of large objects. Further,
it does not have deck space for keeping large salvaged items like
the wings, fuselage or tail surfaces of an aircraft as large as
a 747. The John Cabot was, therefore, adequate and fully satisfactory
for the work envisaged in this phase of the programme, as salvage
of large items was not planned in this phase. The task was, as
mentioned earlier, locating, mapping and photography of the hundreds
of pieces of wreckage. (The salvage work was part of the next
phase of the programme).
3.2.3 Control and Monitoring of Operations
3.2.3.1 It was realised that the operation proposed would pose
problems of control, monitoring and logistics.
3.2.3.2 Consider : A ship operating on the high seas in international
waters on the task of locating, mapping and video photographing
the hundreds of pieces of wreckage. The state of art system for
Sonar location and photography (Scarab) used by the ship for handling
this task. The group located on shore in charge of the operations.
Finally, the Court in Delhi was in overall charge of the operatins.
3.2.3.3 It was realised that a proper line of control and communication
was essential if the operations were to be smooth and successful.
3.2.3.4 Therefore it was decided that the following would be the
chain of command :
Court Investigating the Accident
(Mr. Justice B.N. Kripal)
Control Centre at Cork
(Court's representative)
CCGS John Cabot
(Commanding Officer)
Scarab
(Project Manager)
3.2.3.5 Because of the multiplicity of agencies involved in the
operations, the need was felt for a proper delineation of power
at all levels. It was, therefore, decided that :
a. Overall responsibility for the operations would rest with the
Indian authority viz. the Court. This would cover the identification
and definition of assignment of the overall tasks, laying down
of the priorities, overall control of the coverage of the operation
and, finally, the time schedule for the operation.
b. Decisions taken at the Control Centre, flowing from the above,
were to be taken solely by the Court's representative. The experts
from CASB, NTSB and Boeing were free to give their views and recommendations,
but the final decisions were to be left to the Court's representative.
Examples of such matters are : Track of the survey, areas to be
covered by John Cabot, assignment of priorities for specific tasks,
amount of time to be devoted to any piece of wreckage, whether
any item of wreckage is to be picked up, etc.
c. Operation Control of John Cabot would be in the hands of the
Canadian Coast Guard Officer in the Control Centre,
who would co-ordinate with the Commanding Officer of John Cabot.
This would cover decision on feasibility or otherwise of operations
under adverse weather conditions, manner of covering the area,
method of retrieving any wreckage, etc.
d. Decisions relating to the Scarab (i.e. whether the weather
was suitable for Scarab operations, whether the size, weight etc.
of an item would permit its being picked up by Scarab, etc.) would
be left to the Scarab Project Manager on Board John Cabot.
3.2.3.6 It might appear at first sight that in the above system
excessive power was delegated at certain levels to the detriment
of overall control. Any such impression would not be correct.
In actual fact, because of proper delegation of responsibility
and power at different levels, the operations were carried out
with extraordinary efficiency, smoothness and coordination, In
this connection, it is relevant to point out that the operations
were not a uni-disciplinary one. The operation (aircraft accident
investigation) was totally dependent on experts from other disciplines,
like naval (coast guard) operations, deep sea photograph, salvage
from sea bed etc. It was therefore, decided that for smooth and
efficient operations, adequate power and responsibility should
be delegated at all levels, particularly to specialists engaged
in the different areas of work as above.
3.2.3.7 It was also considered that adequate communication was
a sine qua non for smooth operation. Therefore, the following
communication facilities were established :
Control Centre at Cork Airport
Telex
Telephones (2)
3.2.3.8 The ship John Cabot had both telex and telephone facility.
These links were through satellite (IN MARSAT). The Control Centre
was in continuous communication contact with John Cabot through
telex and telephones. In order to establish a reliable and satisfactory
line of communication it was decided that instructions or communication
from Control Centre to the Indian experts on John Cabot would
follow the path as under :
Control Centre
Court's representative --- Canadian Coast
Guard Officer
John Cabot
Indian experts --- Commanding Officer
3.2.3.9 It was felt that this would eliminate any possibility
of inconsistent or contradictory orders/messages going to John
Cabot.
3.2.3.10 With a view to have an ordered system of communications
between the control centre and John Cabot (which is essential
for proper control and monitoring of the operations), it was decided
that John Cabot would sent to the Control Centre daily Situation
Reports (SITREPS) at specified times viz. 0800 hrs, 1200 hrs,
1600 hrs and 2000 hrs. This however did not preclude the despatch
of telexes by both Control Centre and John Cabot at any other
time.
3.2.3.11 In order to inform all agencies of the above system of
Control and Communication a number of meetings were held. These
were on 12.8.85 and 3.9.85 on board John Cabot and on a number
of occasions at the Control Centre. The purpose of these meetings
was not only to inform all concerned about the specific task,
the programme and the line of control and communication but also
to sort out differences and to understand the technical and operational
difficulties faced by the personnel on the spot and to find a
way out.
3.2.4 Daily Monitoring of Progress
3.2.4.1 It may be relevant to point out here that search, location
and video photography work was to be carried out round the clock.
Thus a considerable volume of data would be coming into Control
Centre. This required regular, almost hourly, monitoring, study
and analysis for
(a) proper understanding of the data collected and (b) advising
John Cabot of any changes in its programme, such as additional
photography on an item etc. For this purpose (i) SITREPS were
filed in the Control Centre (ii) all data (description, latitude
and longitude) obtained on every target was tabulated and the
cumulative list updated daily.
3.2.4.2 The location of the targets was plotted on charts every
4 hours. This was in addition to the plotting of targets carried
out on John Cabot.
3.2.4.3 Every day (including holidays and week ends) all the officers
posted at Control Centre assembled at about 0900 hrs. They studied
the SITREPS received at 0800 hrs and any other telexes received
from John Cabot in the night. The lists of targets were updated
and the new targets plotted on the charts. John Cabot generally
also sent brief remarks such as description, nature of failure/damage,
dimensions etc. Discussions were held on the significance of the
targets and their implications. Instructions if any to be telexed
to John Cabot were also discussed. Similarly SITREPS received
at 1200 hrs and 1600 hrs were studied.
3.2.5 Monitoring at Cork
3.2.5.1 The Scarab provided video tapes and still photographs.
In the initial stages (upto 9.8.1985) the John Cabot was operating
in peripheral areas and therefore few targets were found. Hence
the output of videotapes was small. In fact upto 9.8.85, only
about 10 targets were found and only 3 video tapes were used up.
But later, when John Cabot came close to and into the crucial
areas, video tapes were recorded at a fast rate. Further, still
photography facility on the Scrab was activated at about this
time. Therefore, arrangements were made periodically to obtain
the video tapes and films from John Cabot. Video tapes and still
photographs (these required to be processed) were transported
from John Cabot to Cork Control Centre.
3.2.5.2 About 50 video tapes and nearly 3000 still photographs
(positives and transparencies) provided the visual information
on the targets.
Arrangements had to be made at Cork for such viewing and study
of the video tapes and still photographs. Video equipment (TV
monitor plus VCR) suitable for viewing the video tapes had to
be arranged.
3.2.5.3 The still photography used special professional quality
colour film (35 mm), each roll having 800 frames. The film was
diapositive. These had to be developed and transparencies obtained
from them. Thereafter negatives and prints had to be made. Special
equipment for viewing the transparencies had to be provided for
continuous work. The video tapes, transparencies and prints provided
the principal means of monitoring of the results of the operation.
3.2.6 Operations
3.2.6.1 The Charts prepared by 'Gardline Locator' were on a different
type of grid system, and had to be translated into LAT-LONG system,
for use by John Cabot. For the convenience of search/mapping operation
the search area was divided into 4 blocks viz. Block 1, Block
2, Block 3 and Block 4.
3.2.6.2 The navigation system used by John Cabot is PULSE-8 system.
This system needs the transponders to be placed on the sea bed.
These transponders help in getting the correct fix of a target
and in obtaining relative positions of the targets on the sea
bed which is highly useful for revisit for the purpose of rephotography
or recovery. Initially 4 transponders were placed, and subsequently
the number was increased as the search operation was continued.
The strategic locations for placing the transponders was decided
by considering :
(a) frequencies of relative transponders,
(b) distances required between relative transponders,
(c) wreckage distribution suggested by side scan sonar plots of
Eithena and Garline Locator, and
(d) size of search area.
These transponders were calibrated to match the navigation system
of the ship.
3.2.6.3 In order to obtain the maximum information from search,
it was decided that the Scarab search paths should be as follows
:
(a) Normally the search paths should be east to west, or west
to east within the individual blocks.
(b) The pattern of search should be a parallel search method.
(c) Distances between the parallel paths to be 1,200 feet (i.e.
2 cable widths), for effective use of sonar fitted on the Scarab.
(d) If Scarab deviates from its planned path for photography or
recovery, it should return to its planned path for further search.
(e) In each block, the search was to be made, at least 1/2 mile
(North or South) beyond the last target sighted, so as to ensure
no target is missed out from the given block.
3.2.6.4 However, when there was a need to modify the search pattern,
due to wreckage distribution in particular areas, the following
changes were made:
(a) Expanding box type search pattern was used in Block 1.
(b) Some North to South and South to North passes were made in
Block 3.
(c) In Block 3 northern end, the distances between the search
passes was reduced to 600 feet i.e. 1 cable width.
However, these deviations were made basically to improve the reliability
of search in specific areas, as demanded by peculiar distribution
of aircraft wreckage.
3.2.6.5 To facilitate identification of the wreckage located by
Scarab it was necessary to position aircraft maintenance personnel
on board the ship. As the aircraft structure was badly torn, mutilated
and distorted, serious difficulty was anticipated in identification
of small pieces of structure. It was therefore essential that
these maintenance personnel were provided with aircraft photographs,
manufacturing drawings, parts catalogue, wiring diagram manuals
and maintenance manuals. Since carriage of such voluminous literature
was not praticable, 3M micro film reader printer
machines with micro film cassettes of the above literature were
produced and installed on the ship. In case of difficulty of locating
any particular information, the engineers were advised to contact
Cork Search Centre by telex or telephone who, in turn, could seek
the desired information from the manufacturers.
3.2.7 Wreckage Distribution
3.2.7.1 The wreckage distribution as determined by the mapping
of the sea bed provided some distinct distribution patterns. The
depth of the wreckage varies between about 6000 and 7000 feet,
and the effect of the ocean current, tides and the way objects
may have descended to the sea bed was not determined, thus some
distortion of an object's relationship from time of water entry
to its location on the bottom cannot be discounted. In general,
the items found east of long 1243.00'W are small, lightweight
and often made of a structure which traps air. These items may
have taken considerable time to sink and may have moved horizontally
in sea currents before settling at the bottom. Marks left on the
sea bed beside some wreckage does indicate horizontal movement
of the wreckage as it settled. Although badly damaged, sections
41, 42 and 44, and the wing structure were located in a relatively
localized area centred about lat 5103.30'N and long 1247.80'W,
and the wreckage scatter was oriented north/south. The wreckage
scatter in this area was so dense that it is probable that some
of the wreckage may not have been mapped or photographed. Section
46 and 48, including the vertical fin and horizontal stabilizer,
extended in a west to east pattern with the western most identified
aircraft component located at lat 5102.90'N and long 1250.1'N.
The wreckage extended in a line about 110 degrees to an eastern
position of lat 5102.04'N and long 1241.26'W, a distance of approximately
6.5 nautical miles. The aircraft structure had a random scatter
pattern. That is, items such as the aft pressure bulkhead were
broken into several pieces, and these pieces were located throughout
the pattern. A third area which had some distinctive pattern was
that of the engines, engine struts and components and was localized
about lat 5103.25'N and long 1247.4'W in a northwest/southwest
orientation. One of the operating engines was displaced 0.5 nautical
mile to the north of this area, and it was also geographically
separated from the wing structure. The number 3 engine nacelle
strut was also separated from the rest of the engine components
and was located about one nautical mile to the west-southwest
at lat 5102.87'N, long 1248.05'W. The reasons for the displacement
of the number 3 engine nacelle strut and one of the operating
engines from the other engines are not known.
3.2.7.2 Details of the various targets which were identified by
the Structures Group is contained in Appendix 1 of this Report.
3.2.8 The Break up Pattern
3.2.8.1 The forward fuselage section of the aircraft was found
inverted and badly broken into many pieces, the major pieces being
:
(I) Section of fuselage right side below cockpit windows containing
part of the name 'Kanishka' (in Hindi) and 3 passenger windows
(Target No. 192)
(ii) Portion of upper skin between B S 360 and B S 520 below window
belt right side, up and over crown. This portion includes the
crew door and last letter of the "Air India" (in Hindi)
logo (Target No. 192).
(iii) Section of fuselage between B S 510 to B S 700, including
the passenger window belt right side, up and over crown to include
upper deck windows left side (Target No. 218).
(iv) Section of fuselage between B S 720 to B S 840 including
left side passenger window belt, up and over crown to right side
passenger window belt. Forward and upper edges of L H No.2 door
cutout can be seen (Target No. 193).
(v) Large section of fuselage between B S 1000 to B S 1460 including
left side passenger window belt, up and over crown to right side
passenger window belt. This section was found lying on its right
side (Target No. 137).
(vi) The lower portion of the fuselage skin/frame between the
nose and B S 1000 was damaged past recognition except for a small
portion with the forwarded cargo door (Target No.204) and another
portion containing the aft access door cutout at B S 810 (Target
No. 362).
3.2.8.2 The aft fuselage was found in the following major pieces
:
(I) Section of RH fuselage skin between B S 1640 and B S 1940
below the window belt up to the crown (Target No. 321).
(ii) The RH fuselage bottom skin between B S 1820 (forward edge
of C2 door) and B S 2060 and between two stringers above the door
cutout to just below stringer 46 lap joint (Target No. 40).
(iii) The lower fuselage skin with stringers between B S 1480
and B S 1846 about 100 inches wide approximately (Target No. 7).
(iv) The LH fuselage skin panel between B S 1740 and B S 1880
about 110 inches wide (Target No. 11).
(v) The LH fuselage skin between B S 1460 and B S 1800 width 80
inches including No. 4L door and passenger windows (Target No.
28).
(vi) The RH fuselage skin between B S 1660 and B S 1920, from
below window belt up to the crown including the 4R door cutout
(Target No. 321).
(vii) A fuselage lower skin panel (containing out flow valve)
between B S 2120 and B S 2240 and 120 inches wide (Target No.
320).
(viii) A fuselage LH skin panel (containing 5 windows with "T
-" part of registration) between B S 1980and B S 2080 between
stringers 19L and 24L (Target No. 369 and 26).
(ix) A fuselage LH skin panel between B S 1460 and B S 1800 with
8 stringers below the bottom of the door and 3 stringers above
the top of the door (Target No. 28).
3.2.8.3 The tail portion of the fuselage was found in the following
pieces:
(I) The lower fuselage skin between B S 2412 and B S 2598 about
20 stringers wide (Target No. 371).
(ii) The vertical fin with rudders attached was lying on the ground
by itself with a portion of B S 2517 frame. This includes a small
portion of the aft pressure bulkhead (Target No.37).
(iii) The horizontal tail with elevators attached was lying on
ocean floor with the jack screw and drive motor attached (Target
No. 31).
(iv) The fuselage tail cone aft of B S 2669 was found basically
intact and lying separately (Target No. 27).
3.2.9 Extent of Damage
Photographic and Video Interpretation of Wreckage
Photographic Interpretation
3.2.9.1 All wreckage sighted was recorded on video tapes and all
major items were recorded on 35 mm positive film. During the course
of the investigation, several members of the investigation team
had the opportunity to view the tapes and photographs. Subsequently,
when some items were recovered, it became apparent that the optical
image presented on video and still film had some limitation with
respect to identification of damage or damage pattern. For example,
the sine wave bending of target 7 appeared in the video and photographs
as a sine wave fracture, and some of the buckling on target 35
was not evident in either the video or photographs. The interpretation
of damage through photographic/video evidence without the physical
evidence might be misleading, and any interpretation should take
this into acount.
3.2.9.2 Engines
The four operating engines were all extensively damaged. A view
of the fan blades did not show signs of any rotational damage,
and it could not be determined whether any pre-impact failures
had occurred. The external damage to the engines varied, and at
least one engine appeared to be attached to part of the nacelle
strut. Except for the non-operational fifth engine, the engines
could not be matched with their original positions on the aircraft.
3.2.9.3 Landing Gear
The nose, wing, and body landing gear were all located. Photographic
examination indicated that all the gears were in the 'up' position
at the time of impact.
3.2.9.4 Flaps and Spoilers
Positive identification of all the flap and spoiler surfaces was
not made. All the flap jackscrews indicated that the flaps were
retracted at impact. Of the spoilers identified, six had actuators
attached. The actuators were in the fully retracted position.
3.2.9.5 Section 41
Section 41, consisting of the cockpit, first-class section, and
electronics bay and identified as target 192, was found in a near-inverted
attitude. This section was severely damaged. The electronics bay
and cockpit areas could not be located within the wreckage. The
first officer's seat was found on the sea bed near section 41
wreckage.
3.2.9.6 Section 42
Portions of Section 42, consisting of the forward cargo hold,
main deck passenger area, and the upper deck passenger area, were
located near section 41. This area was severely damaged and some
of section 42 was attached to section 44. Some of the structure
identified from section 42 was the crown skin, the upper passenger
compartment deck, the belly skin, and some of the cargo floor
including roller tracks. The right-hand, number two passenger
door including some of the upper and aft frame and outer skin
was located beside section 44. Scattered on the sea bed near this
area were a large number of suitcases and baggage as well as several
badly damaged containers. All cargo doors were found intact and
attached to the fuselage structure, except for the forward cargo
door which had some fuselage and cargo floor attached. This door,
located on the forward right side of the aircraft, was broken
horizontally about one-quarter of the distance above the lower
frame. The damage to the door and the fuselage skin near the door
appeared to have been caused by an outward force. The fractured
surface of the cargo door appeared to have been badly frayed.
Because the damage appeared to be different from that seen on
other wreckage pieces, an attempt to recover the door was made
by CCGS John Cabot. Shortly after the wreckage broke clear of
the water, the area of the door to which the lift cable was attached
broke free from the cargo door, and the wreckage settled back
on to the sea bed. An attempt to relocate the door was unsuccessful.
3.2.9.7 Section 44
Section 44 containing the aircraft structure between B S 1000
and B S 1480 including that area where the fuselage and wings
were mated
was located and identified. This section was severely damaged
but maintained its overall shape and was lying on its right side.
Part of the left wing upper skin was attached to the fuselage
and a large portion, about one third of the upper wing skin, separated
and was lying against the fuselage crown skin. Some of the body
and wing landing gears were found beside this section of the aircraft.
The gear was detached from the main structure. The interior of
the fuselage was extensively damaged.
3.2.9.8 Wing Structure
The wing structure was located near the forward area of the aircraft
structure and towards the northern most area of the wreckage pattern.
The wings showed extreme damage patterns with the top and bottom
surfaces separated and the wing surfaces broken into segments.
3.2.9.9 Sections 46 and 48
Sections 46 and 48 contain that part of the aircraft structure
aft of B S 1480 and, for purposes of this report, will include
the horizontal stabilizer and vertical fin. This section of the
aircraft was scattered in a west to east pattern about 6.5 nautical
miles in length and exhibited severe break-up characteristics.
3.2.9.10 The aft cargo and bulk cargo doors were found in place
and intact, and 5L, 5R and 4R entry doors were identified. Four
segments of the aft pressure bulkhead were positively identified
(targets 35, 37, 73 and 296). Much of the fuselage which was forward
of the number five door and above the passenger floor area was
not located, or if located was not recognisable as having come
from a specific area of the aircraft.
3.2.9.11 Sections of the outer skin below the cargo area were
located as was some of the cargo floor structure. Generally, the
stringers and stiffeners are attached to the skin; however, the
lower frames, which provided the cargo floor support, were detached
from the skin. The rear cargo floor from B S 1600 to B S 1760
was located and was found to have little or no distortion; however,
the lower skin and stringers were missing. A second portion of
the aft cargo compartment floor containing cargo drive
wheels and cargo roller trays was located. This structure was
severely damaged and mangled.
3.2.9.12 The tail cone and the auxillary power unit (APU) housing
were located and had received relatively minor damage; however,
the APU had broken free and was never located.
3.2.9.13 A large portion of the outer skin panels showed signs
of a force being applied from the inside out. On several pieces
of wreckage, the skin was curled outwards away from the stringers
and formers. This could have been the result of an overpressure.
3.2.9.14 The vertical tail was found in good condition, in a single
piece with both rudders attached. The top cap was partially separated
and a small dent was noticed in the middle of the leading edge
at the bottom. A curved broken portion of fuselage was observed
with a portion of the "Y" ring and pressure bulkhead
attached. Another small segment of the pressure bulkhead was leaning
on the lower section of the tail.
3.2.9.15 The horizontal stabilizer tail section was located and
was one unit with the elevators attached. The actuator jackscrew
was attached to the assembly. The stabilizer jackscrew ballnut
was observed to be located at the upper jackscrew stop. This equates
to a full deflection of elevator trim. Since there is nothing
on the DFDR or CVR to indicate a malfunction of the trim, it is
deduced that this was not the lead event. It is not known if the
position of the ballnut resulted from a pilot trim selection,
a result of the initial event or if it rotated to the observed
position under the influence of gravity. Two-thirds of the leading
edge of the right horizontal stabiliser was missing and the auxilliary
spar was exposed. There was localized damage to the right-hand
root of the loading edge through about a span of five ribs. The
leading edge skin and part of the leading edge ribs were torn
downwards. Some localized damage to the root of the left leading
edge was visible with the remainder of the leading edge undamaged.
There was minor damage to the trailing edge of the outboard left
elevator, and a major portion of the inboard left elevator was
missing.
3.2.9.16 Passenger Seats
Many of the passenger seats located among the wreckage pattern
and identified as having come from section 46 and 48 appeared
to have the aft support legs buckled with little or no damage
to the forward support legs. Seats located in the wreckage containing
sections 41, 42 and 44 appeared to have varying types of damage,
that is, aft support legs only buckled, and all legs buckled.
One consistent feature noted was that in the majority of seats
located it was possible to ascertain that the seat belts were
not fastened.
3.2.10 Salvage Operations
3.2.10.1 During recovery operation the video tapes as well as
photographs of the wreckage to be recovered, were supplied to
the personnel on board the ship for facilitating identification
and recovery of correct targets.
3.2.10.2 Whenever any component/part of the aircraft wreckage
was salvaged it was essential to immediately subject the same
to inspection and to identify the damage sustained during recovery
operation. In order to oversee this critical operation, the Court
deputed one of its Assessors, Dr. V. Ramachandran, to be on board
the ships. Under his supervision, the components/parts were thoroughly
washed with fresh water, dried and treated with corrosion inhibiting
compounds. A detailed inspection was thereafter carried out, observations
recorded and the targets were appropriately labelled and their
numbers were painted thereon. A laboratory microscope was taken
on board by Dr Ramachandran. With that, fragments of significance
were segregated for further investigation. Indeed some of these
fragments did give important clues.
3.2.10.3 All the investigating personnel on board the ship were
provided with leather gloves, fisherman's shoes, raincoat, life
floating suits, writing and labelling material, camera with coloured
films, etc. Sufficient number of "body bags" were positioned
on each ship to cater for the eventuality of recovery of bodies
with the wreckage. This precaution helped when a body did come
along with wreckage on 25.10.1985.
3.2.10.4 The ship John Cabot completed the operation of locating,
mapping and photography of the wreckage and returned to Cork on
1.10.85 at 2020 hours. The next phase of operation was to recover
the significant wreckage parts which would be useful for deciding
the cause of the crash.
3.2.10.5 Subsequent to the accident to Japan Airlines Boeing 747
aircraft, suspected to have been caused by failure of the repair
to the rear pressure bulkhead, NTSB and FAA decided to fund the
U.S. Navy for a two week operation over the seas for recovery
of significant pieces of wreckage. For this purpose, U.S. Navy
appointed Commander J.R. Buckingham, a deep sea salvage expert,
to head the recovery operation. An offshore supply vessel M.V.
Kreuzturm, of Canada was hired by U.S. Navy to recover the wreckage
with the help of Scarab on John Cabot. One nylon lift line together
with winch and ram were installed on the ship prior to its sailing
to Cork where it arrived on 4th October, 1985. One crane was installed
on the ship Kreuzturm in Cork.
3.2.10.6 One inch dia Kevlar lines coated with black plastic for
abrasion resistance and braided with Dacron lining were used by
John Cabot as primary lift lines.
3.2.10.7 The structure group after studying the photographic data,
had formulated a list of 32 targets for recovery on 3.10.85. A
systemwise priority list proposed by the Court of Inquiry was
received through Dr V. Ramachandran on 4.10.85. Using these two
lists, and taking into account the operating restrictions imposed
by two ship operation, a final list of targets was prepared for
recovery by the ships, assigning a priority number to each target.
However, as the recovery operation progressed, changes in priority
list were made to achieve optimum utilisation of the ships.
3.2.10.8 A meeting was held at 1400 hrs. on 4.10.85 on board CCGS
John Cabot to establish/clarify the priorities for the wreckage
recovery operation and coordination between John Cabot, Kreuzturm
and Cork Search Centre. All the personnel involved in the recovery
operation were shown the slides and photographs of the targets
which were chosen for recovery on priority basis. The method and
procedure of the recovery operation was discussed in detail and
finalised. Another meeting was convened on 6.10.85
to clarify the doubts and to present the picture albums containing
various photographs of targets to be recovered. The mode of attaching
grippers/grabbers to the targets at strong points was clarified.
A serialised list of priorities was prepared based on the mode
of operation indicated by the the crew of John Cabot and Kreuzturm.
Dr Ramachandran was given the authority to make on-the-spot decisions
during the salvage operations.
3.2.10.9 A detail log of the activities of the ships John Cabot
and Kreuzturm which started the recovery operation of 10.10.85,
reveals the following :
(a) The Scarab working independently recovered the following
(1) Basket at target 192 containing copilot's chair, 2 suitcases
and radar antenna (12.10.85)
(2) Target 8 - Lower fuselage skin of aft cargo compartment. (11.10.85).
(3) Target 245 - Forward belly skin just aft of radome (16.10.85).
(4) Target 350 - Economy class seats and carpet (23.10.85).
(5) Target 296 - Piece of aft pressure bulkhead.
(b) The Scarab after attaching the grippers, bridal cable and
lift line to the targets buoyed off the same to Kreuzturm which
recovered the following targets :
(1) Target 362/396 - Forward cargo fuselage skin from station
700 to 840 and STR 41L to 43R. (16.10.85).
(2) Target 193 - Fueselage skin from station 720 to 860 and passenger
door 2L (17.10.85)
(3) Target 223 - Nose landing gear pressure deck web and stiffeners,
container pieces (staion 260-340)(19.10.85).
(4) Target 181 - Wing skin with forward cargo compartment SLIPPED
OFF WITH GRIPPERS (21.10.85) AND WAS LOST.
(5) Target 399/358 - Fuselage skin from station 780 to 940 and
STR 7R to 35R with 2R door (25.10.85). A body entrapped in target
399/358 was recovered. Another body which came upto surface with
the wreckage fell
off into sea and was lost while hauling the wreckage on board.
The recovered body was identified as of Dr. Mathew Alexander,
a Canadian passenger and was brought to Cork by Fisherman's vessel
"Orion" at 0130 hrs. on 28.10.85 and was sent for Post
Mortem etc.
(6) Target 7 - Aft cargo compartment fuselage skin from station
1480 to 1860 (26.10.85).
(7) Target 47/50 - Aft cargo floor structure with roller tracks,
frames, latch etc. from station 1600 to 1760 (27.10.85).
(8) Target 117 - Three rows of coach class seats with passenger
cabin floor boards, broken floor beam (28.10.85).
(9) Target 35 - Aft Pressure Bulkhead piece (30.10.85).
3.2.10.10 The Scarab experienced malfunctions with its arms, Sonar
equipment, multiplex system, junction box, microprocessor unit,
etc. off and on during the above period of operation. Fouling
of lift line with umbilical cord was also experienced in the early
stages of operation. Since the assigned recovery by Kreuzturm
was over by 30.10.85, and as the Scarab became unserviceable due
to breakdown of its power suppluy, the OSV MV Kreuzturm was directed
to return to Cork to off-load the recovered wreckage and its operation
was terminated, (Indian Government had funded the cost of operation
of M.V. Kreuzturm from 21.10.85 onwards).
3.2.10.11 Since the Scrab continued to remain unserviceable, the
ship John Cabot was called back to Cork. It anchored in Cork at
1100 hrs. on 5.11.85. All the wreckage on board the ship was transported
to the boat yard, in the afternoon.
3.2.10.12 After detailed macro photography of the recovered wreckage,
the experts group mentioned in section 1.5.16 prepared a detailed
factual report after carefully inspecting each of the targets
recovered. It was decided to send the wreckage to Bombay for which
necessary crates were then prepared and the large pieces of wreckage
were cut along the lines indicated by the experts group to facilitate
their packing.
3.2.10.13 RCMP investigators carried out a close visual and microscopic
examination of the fragments recovered with the wreckage, suitcases,
seats and cushions, etc. For further laboratory analysis. Dr A.D.
Beveridge collected a few samples.
3.2.10.14 The Scarab appeared to be serviceable on 19.11.85 and
the ship John Cabot sailed for completion of recovery of left
over targets, on 20.11.85. However, the serviceability of Scarab
proved elusive, it became inoperable on 21.11.85 and the ship
returned to Cork at 1700 hrs on 25.11.85.
3.2.10.15 Efforts were made to repair Scarab so that the ship
John Cabot could sail again in order to salvage as many pieces
as possible. It was fortunate that the weather had not deteriorated.
Some of the important but small pieces which had to be recovered
had been placed in a basket at the bottom of the ocean. The ship
sailed out again after Scarab had been repared. The basket was
sought to be lifted, but, unfortunately, when it reached near
the surface of the sea it overturned and the contents of the basket
spilled and were never traced again.
3.2.10.16 At this juncture it was decided that the salvage operations
should be terminated. The ship returned and sailed for home in
the first week of December 1985.
3.2.11 Examination of Wreckage
3.2.11.1 Floating Wreckage
Soon after the accident, a number of light weight parts of the
aircraft were found floating over a wide area at the crash site.
These were picked up by the ships engaged in rescue operations
and were brought to Cork where they were kept in the boat yard.
The floating wreckage recovery continued for four days i.e. upto
26th June.
3.2.11.2 Some of the wreckage items were subsequently washed to
the west coast of Ireland. These were picked up by the Irish Police
and were brought to Cork. Some wreckage items were taken by a
ship to Halifax, Canada. These were flown to Cork by the Canadian
Aviation Safety Board. With the assitance of Air India engineers,
the wreckage items were
identified, labelled, photographed and laid out in the boat yard
hangar for examination.
3.2.11.3 The wreckage was initially examined at Cork by the Structures,
Power Plant and Systems Group. It was subsequently transported
to Bombay for further examination. A few wreckage items which
were taken by the Spanish trawlers to Madrid were also transported
to Bombay. Some wreckage items had washed to the west coast of
England. These were collected by the Accident Investigation Branch
of UK and were transported to Cork and then to Bombay.
3.2.11.4 The floating wreckage recovered constituted approximately
3 to 5 per cent of the aircraft structure. The major items of
the wreckage recovered were :
Various leading edge skin panels of LH nd RH wing, LH wing tip,
spoilers, leading edge and trailing edge flaps, engine cowlings,
flap track canon fairings aft end pieces, landing gear wheel wall
doors, pieces of elevator and aileron, toilet doors, cabin floor
panels, cabin overhead and upper deck bins, passenger seats, life
vests, slide rafts, hand baggages, suitcases etc. and three empty
oxygen bottles.
3.2.11.5 The Structures Group which had been constituted by the
Court examined the floating wreckage and submitted its report.
From the report the following significant information about the
damage to major items of the floating wreckage is noted :
(I) VT-EFO aircraft was carrying a -7Q engine on 5th pod and a
-7Q 5th pod kit in the aft cargo compartment. It had therefore,
in all 14 engine fan cowls (eight working engine fan cowls plus
two 5th pod engine fan cowls plus two -7T engine kit fan cowls
in the aft cargo compartment plus two -7Q engine fan cowls in
the aft cargo compartment). Out of these 14 fan cowls, 9 cowls
(6 of working engines plus 2 of -7J kit plus one of 7Q kit) and
two additional pieces of fan cowls were found. Five of the fan
cowls of working engines show
folding damage lines at approximately 3 O'Clock and 9 O'Clock
positions. The number 3 engine inboard fan cowl has severe impact
damage on its leading edge and has small inward to outward puncture
holes (not penetrating through outer skin) in the lower centre
region. The two fan cowls of -7J 5th pod kit stowed in the aft
cargo compartment exhibit severe damage. One of these cowls is
broken in two pieces. One of the pieces is cut at one corner in
an arc of about 20 inches diameter and its external skin is pealed
back. The external surfaces of all the three pieces have considereable
scratches, tears and holes from outside to inside. None of the
punctures penetrates the inner skin. Some punctures are also present
from inside to outside but none of these penetrates the outer
skin.
(ii) Out of the 12 spoilers, seven (number 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9 and
12) have been retrieved. Of these, six have their actuators attached
to them in fully retracted position. Six spoilers have splits
in their lower skin with split edges curled into the cores of
honeycomb. Number 8 spoiler (located just inboard of number 3
engine) has a concentrated local impact damage on front spar and
trailing edge beam from forward to aft and up direction over a
span of 2 feet starting from outboard of spoiler actuator.
(iii) The left hand wing tip assembly with a part of H F Antenna
was retrieved. No burning/discolouration marks around lightning
arrester of H F system were noticed. The rib inboard of the lightning
arrester was found intact. There were no burn marks anywhere on
the panel.
(iv) The right hand wing leading edge top panel inboard of number
3 engine with a position of kruger flap frame along with bull
nose attached was recovered. The bull nose was found crushed from
top in the area just below the stay rod and the lower surface
of stay rod has scratch marks from front to rear.
(v) The right hand wing root leading edge (inboard of W S 268.81)
shows an impact damage at the leading edge. Bottom skin and internal
structure are torn away. The leading edge skin is caved in over
a span of about 3 feet and shows signs of heavy body impact in
air. The impact damage shows signs of downward and backward movement
of the impacting body.
(vi) A 3' x 2' piece of right hand inboard trailing edge fore
flap with accordian seal was recovered. The inboard 8" portion
of leading edge was found damaged by impact of an object going
from lower forward to upper aft.
(vii) All the floor panels recovered from upper deck and main
cabin indicate that these were detached from their attachments
in an upward direction from all sides.
(viii) One main deck blow out door located between B S 2040 and
2140 left hand side was available. Out of its four metal clips,
one clip was broken off with 2 nylon rivet heads sheared.
(ix) The cockpit entry door and the side bulkhead panel were found
fairly intact but had come out of their attachment.
(x) Twelve toilet doors, out of a total of 16, were available
and were found fairly intact, but had come out of their attachments.
(xi) The available cabin interior panels and overhead bins of
the main deck and upper deck have only minor damage.
(xii) The woodent boxes which contained the fan blades of 5th
pod engine and were loaded in container at position 24L in the
forward cargo compartment were found broken apart with no burn
marks.
3.2.11.6 Wreckage Salvaged from Sea
The wreckage salvaged from the sea was visually examined at Cork
by the Committee of Experts as mentioned in section 1.5.16 and
the observations thereon recorded. Subsequently detailed metallurgical
examination was carried out at the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre,
Bombay by
Dr. M.K. Asundi and Dr. G.E. Prasad of B.A.R.C., Mr. S. Radhakrishnan
and Dr. R.V. Krishnan of National Aeronautical Laboratory and
Mr. B.K. Athawale of the Explosives Research and Development Laboratory,
under the guidance of Dr. V. Ramachandran. During this examination,
representatives of CASB, CP Air and Boeing were present in the
first week. These represntatives left Bombay while the metallurgical
examination was being carried out. The metallurgical examination
was continued and the aforesaid group submitted the metallurgical
report to the Court in December, 1985.
3.2.11.7 Although all the recovered wreckage was examined, only
those items exhibiting characteristics which provide some evidence
as to what may have happened to the aircraft during its final
moments of flight are discussed herein below :
3.2.11.8 Target 7 - Lower Fuselage Skin Panel
This skin panel was located below the aft cargo area and contained
the keel beam. Target 7 extended from B S 1480 to 1850 and was
about eight feet in width and 32 feet in length. The left edge
had a full length rivet line tear and the torn edge was buckled
in waves, like the trace of a sine wave. One the right side, between
the one quarter and midway segment, a large flap of skin was attached.
The skin was folded aft, diagonally underneath, from right to
left and the paint was scoured off the leading edge. The forward
break was at the joint at B S 1480. The skin tear located at about
B S 1860 was irregular in nature. The forward keel joint splice
plate was bent, and the keel joint bolt holes were distored and
elongated.
3.2.11.9 This panel was examined by the committee of experts at
BARC and according to their report the keel beam trunnion fitting
beneath the outer chord of the station 1480 bulkhead had fractured
at the aft set of bolt holes. The fracture surface of the right
side of the trunnion fitting was clean. As per the report, it
was typical of overload failure in tension. The fracture surface
of the left side of the trunnion fitting was covered with corrosion
products, especially, at one corner, due to sea water. After cleaning
this area by the recommended techniques, scanning electron microscopy
revealed morphology of overload fracture consisting of dimples.
Away from this corner also the fracture was similar as being due
to overload. There was no evidence of there having been any fatigue
failure.
3.2.11.10 At B.A.R.C., a sample was cut from the corroded corner
of the failed left side trunnion fitting and metallographic examination
was carried out on the same. The said examination showed on a
face perpendicular to the corroded fracture surface, pits due
to corrosion by sea water. The basic microstructure was however
free from intergranular cracking. It was thus concluded by the
experts that the material in the region corroded by sea water
had not suffered stress corrosion cracking which generally manifests
as intergranular cracking.
3.2.11.11 A piece of the trunnion fitting was cut and the hardness
and electrical conductivity values were measured by the said experts.
As per their report, the electrical conductivity values were within
the specified limits.
3.2.11.12 Target 8 - Lower Fuselage Skin Panel
This skin panel was located below the aft cargo area and extended
from B S 1860 to 1960 and from stringer 46L to 46R. The forward
end of target 8 matched with the aft end of Target 7. A region
of fracture along the rivet holes near stringer 46L was marked
for SEM examination. SEM examination after cleaning revealed that
the fracture was characterised by dimples along its length, including
areas adjacent to the edges of the rivet holes. These features
are consistent with an overload mode of failure.
3.2.11.13 According to the metallurgical report, there was no
evidence of fatigue failure on this target.
3.2.11.14 Target 35 - Portion of Rear Pressure Bulkhead
Looking forward from behind the aircraft, this segment of pressure
bulkhead occupied the 9 to 1 O'Clock position, the piece from
12 to 1 O'Clock position had the flange from the outer ring attached.
The web below the outer ring flange had areas of buckling. From
the 11 to 12 O'Clock position the outer edge showed sinusoidal
buckling, and the edge sector at 9 O'Clock position was partially
collapsed and its edge was turned under. Samples taken for optical
stereo microscope and SEM examination revealed that the fracture
characteristics were consistent with an ovrload mode of failure.
3.2.11.15 According to the metallurgical report, there was no
evidence of fatigue or any other mode of failure.
3.2.11.16 Target 296 - Portion of Rear Pressure Bulkhead
Looking forward from the rear of the aircraft, this segment of
the bulkhead occuped the 7 to 9 O'Clock position. Optical and
SEM examination were undertaken on this item.
3.2.11.17 The fracture alont the left-hand edge of target 296
(viewed from the rear) was examined optically prior to removing
any representative samples. The fracture was at the rivet line
at a skin splice, except for a length of fracture about 15 inches
long near the forward end, which was through the skin away from
the rivet line. Most of the rivet holes along the fracture path
showed some slight elongation and skin deformation.
3.2.11.18 Representative fracture samples were cut from the left-hand
side and circumferential fracture edges of the fracture surfaces.
Optial and SEM examination revealed that the fracture characteristics
are consistent with an overload mode of failure.
3.2.11.19 Target 47 - Aft Cargo Floor Structure
This portion of the aft cargo compartment was located between
B S 1600 and B S 1760. No significant observation was noted. There
was no evidence to indicate characteristics of an explosion emanating
from the aft cargo compartment.
3.2.11.20 Target 117 - Floor with Seats Attached
These seats were right-section doubles, located between B S 1880
and 1980 and were from rows 46, 47 and 48, F and G (Zone E). The
seats were displaced to the left with the rear legs buckled to
the left. The front leg supports exhibited only minor damage.
The middle and rear doubles had aisle-side seat arms bent to the
right. There was no impact damage to the seat backs or seat pans,
and all life vests except one were gone from the underseat container
bags.
3.2.11.21 In the metallurgical report it is stated that on an
examination of this target it was also found that on the underside
of this
floor near the forward end, a number of dents and impact marks
were observed. This region appeared to have suffered shrapnel
penetration. This area was radiographed but no metallic fragment
was detected.
3.2.11.22 Target 193 - Fuselage Side and 2L Entry Door
The fuselage segement was located between B S 720 and 840. The
door and fuselage skin were buckled outwards, approximately in
line with the buckling on the fuselage and 2R entry door directly
opposite.
3.2.11.23 Target 399 - Fuselage around 2R Door
This target is shown in Fig. 399-1. A detailed description is
given below :
TARGET 399 Fuselage Station 780 to 940 in the longitudinal
direction and stringer 7R down
to stringer 35R circumferentially.
This piece contained five window frames, one in the 2R passenger
entry door. Three of the window frames, including the door window
frame, still contained window panes. Little overall deformation
was found in the stringers and skin above the door. The structure
did contain a significant amount of damage and fractures in the
skin and stringers beneath the window level. In the area beneath
the level of the windows, the original convex outward shape of
the surface had been deformed into an inward concave shape. Further
inward concavity was found in the skin between many of the stringers
below stringer 28R. The skin at the forward edge of the piece
was folded outward and back between stringers 25R and 30R. Over
most of the remaining edges of the piece a relatively small amount
of overall deformation was noted in the skin adjacent to the edge
separations. Twelve holes or damage areas were numbered and are
further described.
No.1 : Hole, 5 inches by 9 inches with two large flaps and one
smaller curl, all folded outward. Reversing slant fractures, small
area missing.
No.2 : Hole, 2 inches by 3/4 inch, one flap folded outward, reversing
slant fractures, one curled sliver, no missing metal.
No.3 : Triangular shaped hole about 2 inches on each side. One
flap, folding inward, with one area with a serrated edge. No missing
metal, extensive cracking away from corners of the hole, reversing
slant fracture.
No.4 : Tear area, 8 inches overall, with deformation inward in
the centre of the area. Reversing slant fracture.
No.5 : Fracture area with two legs measuring 14 inches and about
24 inches. Small triangular shaped piece missing from a position
slightly above stringer 27R. Inward fold noted near the joint
of the legs. An area of 45 scuff marks extend onto this fold.
No.6 : Hole about 2.5 inches by 3 inches with a flap folded outward,
reversing slant fracture. Approximately half the metal from the
hole is missing.
No.7 : Hole about 3 inches by 1 inch, all metal from the hole
is missing. Fracture edges are deformed outward.
No.8 : Forward edge of the skin is deformed into an "S"
shaped flap. Three inward curls noted on an edge.
No.9 : Inwardly deformed flap of metal between stringers 11R and
12R at a frame splice separation. No evidence of an impact on
the outside surface.
No.10 : Door lower sill fractured and deformed downward at the
aft edge of the door.
No.11 : Frame 860 missing above stringer 14R. Upper auxilliary
frame of the door has its inner chord and web missing at station
860. A 10 inch piece of stringer 12R is missing aft of station
860.
No.12 : Attached piece of floor panel (beneath door) has one half
of a seat track attached. The floor panel is perforated and the
lower surface skin is torn.
3.2.11.24 Much of the damage on this target was on the skin and
stringers beneath the window level, i.e., on the starboard side
of the front cargo hold. The inside and outside surface of the
skin in this region are shown in Fig. 399-2 and 399-3 respectively.
There were 12 holes or damaged areas on the skin as described
above, generally with petals bending outwards. The curl on a flap
around hole no.1 shown in Figh 399-4 has one full turn.
This curl is in the outward direction. Cracks were also noticed
around some of the holes. Part of the metal was missing in some
of the holes. The edges of some of the petals showed reverse slant
fracture. In one of the holes, spikes were noticed at the edge
of a petal.
3.2.11.25 When this target was recovered from the sea, along with
it came a large number, a few hundreds, of tiny fragments and
medium size pieces, All of the fragmets were recovered from the
area below the passenger entry door 2R. One of the medium size
pieces recovered with this target was a floor stantion, about
35 inches long, shown in Fig. 399-5. It is a square tube. It had
the mark station 880 painted on its inner face, i.e. facing the
centre line of the cargo hold. The part number printed on this
station is 69B06115 12 and the assembly number is ASSY 65B06115-942
E3664 1/31/78*. It was confirmed that this stantion belongs to
the starboard side of the forward cargo hold. The inner face of
the stantion had a fracture with a curl at the lower end, the
curl being in the outboard direction and up into the centre of
the station. Fig. 399-6 is a print from the radiograph of this
station. The inward curling can be seen clearly in this figure.
Curling of the metal in this manner is a shock wave effect.
3.2.11.26 A piece near the fracture edge of this stantion was
cut, and examined metallographically. Fig. 399-7 and 399-8 show
the micro-structure of this piece. Twins are seen in the grains
close to the fracture edge. The normal microstructure of the stantion
material is free from twins as shown in Fig. 399-9.
3.2.11.27 Fig. 399-10 shows a collection of small fragments recovered
along with target 399. There were some curved fragments with small
radius of curvature (A). Reverse slant fracture (B) was noticed
in some of the skin pieces. A piece 3/4" x 1/2" and
3/16" thick was found to have three blunt spikes at the edge
(C). This piece was metallographicaly polished on the longitudinal
edge. The microstructre of the piece is shown in Fig. 399-11.
It may be seen that the grains in this fragment also contain a
large number of twins.
3.2.11.28 Target 362/396 Forward Cargo Skin
This piece indluded the station 815 electronic access door,
portions of seven longitudinal stringers to the left of bottom
centre and five longitudinal stringers to the right of bottom
centre. The original shape of the piece (convex in the circumferential
direction) had been deformed to a concave inward overall shape.
Multiple separations were found in the skin as well as in the
underlying stringers. Further inward concavity was found in the
skin between most of the stringers.
3.2.11.29 The two sides of this piece are shown in Fig. 362-1
and 362-2. This piece has 25 holes or damaged areas in most of
which there are multiple petals curling outwards. These holes
are numbered 1 to 3, 4a, 4b, 4c and 5 to 23. These are described
below. Unless otherwise noted, holes did not have any material
missing :
No.1 : Hole with a large flap of skin, reversing slant fracture.
No.2 : Hole with multiple curls, reverse slant fracture.
No.3 : Hole with multiple flaps and curls, reversing slant fracture,
one area of spikes (ragged sawtooth)
No.4A : One large flap, reverse slant fracture, one area of spikes.
No.4B : Hole with two flaps.
No.4C : Hole with two flaps, one area of spikes
No.5 : HOle with two flaps.
No.6 : Braching tear from the left side of the piece, reversing
slant fracture.
No.7 : Hole, with one flap, one curl and one area of spikes.
No.8 : Very large tear from the left side of the piece with multiple
flaps and curls, reversing slant fracture and at least two areas
of spikes.
No.9 : Hole with multiple flaps, one curl.
No. 10 : 2.5 inch tear
No.11 : One flap
No. 12 : Grip hole, plus a curl with spikes on both sides of the
curl.
No.13 : "U" shaped notch with gouge marks in the inboard/outboard
direction. Three curls are nearby with one are of spikes. Gouges
found on a nearby stringer and on a nearby flap.
No. 14 : Nearly circular hole, 0.3 inch to 0.4 inch in diameter.
Small metal lipping on outside surface of the skin. Most of the
metal from the hole is missing.
No. 15 : Hole in the skin beneath the first stringer to the left
of centre bottom. Small piece missing.
No. 16 : Hole in the stringer above hole No. 15. Most of the metal
from this hole is missing.
No. 17 : Hole through the second stringer to the left of centre
bottom, 0.4 inch in diameter. The hole encompassed a rivet which
attached the stringer to the outer skin. Small pieces of metal
missing.
No. 18 : Hole at the aft end of the piece between the third and
fourth stringers to the left of centre bottom. The hole consisted
of a circular portion (0.4 inch diameter), plus a folded lip extending
away from the hole. The metal from the circular area was missing.
No. 19 : Hole with metal folded from the outside to the inside,
about 0.6 inch by 1.5 inch. Flap adjacent to the hole contained
a heavy gouge mark on the outside surface of the skin.
No. 20 : Hole containing a piece of extruded angle.
No. 21 : Hole containing a piece of extruded angle.
No. 22 : Hole with one flap.
No. 23 : Hole about 0.3 inch in diameter, with tears away from
the hole. Small piece missing.
3.2.11.30 Fig. 362-3 to 362-7 show a few of these holes. There
were also cracks or tears around some of the holes. The curls
around some of the holes had nearly one full turn. In the large
tear between body stations 700 and 740 and stringers between 41L
and 45L, there were many pronounced curls as shown in Fig. 362-8.
On the edges of the petals around
several holes, reverse slant fracture was seen at a number of
places. This slant fracture is at an angle of about 45 to the
skin surface, the fracture continuing in the same general direction
but with the slope of the slant fracture reversing frequently.
3.2.11.31 Sharp spikes were observed at the edges of the holes
or at the edges of the petals around the holes No. 3, 4A, 4C,
7, 8 (at two locations), 12, 13 and 16. Some of the spikes are
shown in Fig. 362-9 to 362-12. One of the holes, No. 14, on the
skin was nearly elliptical with metal completely missing, as shown
in Fig. 362-13. On the inside surface of the skin, paint surrounding
this hole was missing. Hole No. 16 was through the hat section
stringer, as shown in Fig. 362-14. In this, most of the metal
was missing. On the inside of the hat section, the fracture edge
of this hole had spikes, as shown in Fig. 362-15. Hole No. 17
was through the stringer and the skin, as shown in 362-16.
3.2.11.32 Through holes No. 20 and 21, extruded angles were found
stuck inside, as shown in Fig. 362-17 and 362-18 respectively.
In the petal around hole No. 20, there was an impact mark by hit
from the angle as seen in Fig. 362-19 photographed after removing
the angle. Such a mark was not present in the petals around other
holes.
3.2.11.33 On the skin adjacent to hole No. 13 gouge marks were
noticed, Fig. 362-20. These marks were on the inside surface of
the skin. To check whether these could be due to rubbing by the
bridal cable of Scarab during the recovery operations, a sample
of bridal cable was obtained from "John Cabot" and gouge
marks were produced by pressing this cable against an aluminium
sheet. The gouge marks thus produced, as shown in Fig. 362-21,
appear to be different from those observed near hole No. 13.
3.2.11.34 A piece surrounding hole No. 14 was cut out and examined
in a Jeol 840 scanning electron microscope at the Naval Chemical
and Metallurgical Laboratory, Bombay. Fig. 362-22 and 362-23 are
the scanning electron micrographs showing the inside surface and
outside surface of the skin around this hole. Flow of metal from
inside to outside can be seen from these figures. Energy dispersive
x-ray analysis was carried out on the edges of this hole. Only
the elements present in this alloy and sea water residue were
detected.
3.2.11.35 A portion of the skin containing part of hole No. 14
was cut, polished on the thickness side of the skin and examined
in a metallurgical microscope. Fig. 362-24 shows the microstructure
of this region. The flow of metal along the edge of the hole can
be seen from the shape of the deformed grains near the hole. This
can be compared with the bulk of the grains shown in Fig. 362-25,
away from the hole. In addition, in Fig. 362-24, a series of twin
bands can be seen in some of the grains near the hole. Fig. 362-26
shows these bands at a higher magnification. Normal deformation
rates at various temperatures do not produce such twinning in
aluminium or its alloys. It may be noted that this microstructural
feature is absent in the microstructure of the skin, away from
hole No. 14, Fig. 362-25.
3.2.11.36 Metallography was also carried out on a petal around
hole No.7 and on a curl with spikes around hole No. 12. The microstructures
indicate twins, however they could not be recorded due to their
poor contrast.
3.2.11.37 Small pieces containing the spikes around holes No.
12 and 16 were cut and energy dispersive x-ray chemical analysis
on the region of spikes in both was carried out in the Jeol 840
SEM. Only elements present in the alloys and sea water residue
were detected.
3.2.11.38 A number of small fragments were found along with the
forward cargo skin in target 362. Amongst them was a piece from
the web of a roller tray. This has pronounced curling of the edges
towards the drive wheel, Fig. 362-27.
3.2.11.39 Another small fragment was found from the above target.
This piece, identified as specimen No. 12 in box No. 1, target
362, has a number of spikes along the edge. A scanning electron
micrograph of the spikes is shown in Fig. 362-28. The sides of
the spikes on SEM examination revealed elongated dimples as shown
in Fig. 362-29, characteristic of shear mode of fracture. Metallography
was carried out on the thickness side of this specimen. Fig. 362-30
and 362-31 show the microstructure near the apex of the spike
and at the root of the spike respectively. Extensive twinning
can be seen in these regions of the spikes.
3.2.11.40 Another fragment recovered with target 362 and identified
as specimen No. 8 in box No. 1, also showed extensive twinning.
The microstructure is recorded in Fig. 362-32.
3.2.11.41 Reference has also to be made to two other reports concerning
wreckage.
3.2.11.42 The floating wreckage recovered was initially examined
at Cork. On 25th June, Mr. Eric Newton a retired investigator
of AIB, UK, was requested to examine the floating wreckage recovered
and other materials with specific reference to the possibility
of explosive sabotage having taken place. Mr. Newton examined
the floating wreckage, passenger clothings and the other materials
recovered from the crash victims The findings of Mr. Newton on
the material available at that time are summarised below:
a. Taking the scatter of the wreckage and bodies into consideration
and the condition of the limited wreckage recovered indicates
that the aircraft had broken up in flight before impact with the
sea.
b. Detailed examination of the structural wreckage recovered did
not reveal any evidence of collision with another aircraft. Nothing
was found suggestive of an external missile attack.
c. There was no evidence of fire internal or external.
d. There was no evidence of lightning strike.
e. Examination of all available structural parts recovered, did
not reveal any evidence of significant corrosion, metal fatigue
or other material defects. All fractures and failures were consistent
with overstressing material and crash impact forces
f. Examination of clothing from the bodies did not show any explosive
fractures or any signs of burning. The seat cushions and head
cushions also did not show any explosive characteristics.
g. The damage to the suitcases (14 large and 29 small) which were
examined was due to impact crash forces. The presence of 14 large
suitcases could, however, indicate that one of the baggage containers
had been broken to permit these suitcases to escape.
h. A number of lavatory doors and structure also did not show
any damage consistent with explosion. The flight deck door showed
no explosion damage inside or outside.
i The circumstatnial evidence strongly suggests a sudden and unexpected
disaster occurred in flight.
j. There was no significant fire or explosion in the flight deck,
first and tourist passenger cabin including several lavatories
and the rear bulk cargo hold.
3.2.11.43 The other report dated 30th November, 1985 is of Mr.
V.J. Clancy. Mr. Clancey had examined the wreckage and had also
taken part, though only for a few days, in the metallurgical examination
which was being conducted at BARC, Bombay.
3.2.11.44 Mr. Clancey examined practically all the items of wreckage
which had been brought to BARC and in his report he has dealt
with all of them. His report contained a description of the recovered
items and also his comments thereon.
3.2.11.45 With regard to the aforesaid target 362, he observed
that there were about 20 holes in it clearly resulting from penetrations
from inside.
3.2.11.46 He further stated that:
"In addition to the fact that perforation was from inside
there are certain features which suggest that they were made by
high velocity fragments such as are produced by an explosion.
These features are:
(a) Presence of toothed or spiked edges at some parts of the metal
which had petalled out from the perforations.
"Tardif and Sterling (Canadian Aeronautics and Space Journal,
1969, 16, 1, 19-27) obtained spiked fractures in fragments from
sheet alloy subjected closely to an explosion. They stated that
they had not obtained this effect in fractures otherwise produced.
(b) Presence of marked curling, in some cases of more than 360,
of some of the petals.
Tradif and Sterling stated that such curling was a feature of
explosively produced fragments.
(c) The virtual absence of scratches or score marks on the petals
such as might be expected if something were slowly forced through
the metal.
(d) The virtual absence of other impact marks on the inside surface
such as might have been produced by a massive impact with a substantial
object. This suggested that the production of at least many of
the perforations were separate independent events.
(e) One perforation (identified as No. 14) resembles a "bullet
hole", that is cleanly punched out - a type of hole usually
associated with a high velocity missile.
"There is evidence that the forward part of this item had
been folded back inwards along the line of station 760 and then
bent back again along a line slightly forward of this station.
"Such folding, may be violently produced on impact with the
water, could have brought broken metal of stringers or stiffeners
into forceful contact with the internal surfaces producing perforations
outwards. The overlap of such folding would conceivably have covered
the area up to station 800 and thus included most of the perforations.
"One hole identified as No. 13, was almost certainly caused
by a slipping wire rope used as a sling.
"Part of the inner surface, aft of station 780 was superficially
blackened as if by soot from a fire. Swabs were taken by me of
this area
and are being examined by R.A.R.D.E. for evidence of fire or explosives".
3.2.11.47 There were several hundred small fragments which were
recovered from the same general area as Target 362. While dealing
with these Mr. Clancey observed that the production of a large
number of small fragments is generally regarded as indicative
of an explosion. One piece out of this was isolated, which was
about one inch square of sheet alloy, and it was noted by Mr.
Clancey that this piece had characteristic spikes on one edge
similar to those described by Tardif and Sterling. (This piece
is the same as shown in Fig. 362-28).
3.2.11.48 Mr. Clancey also examined a few suit cases which had
been recovered. One particular suit case to which reference was
made by him was of red plastic material with blue lining. With
regard to this he stated that the damaged lining, severely tattered,
resembles that of one found after an explosion in an aircraft
in Angola. In that case microscopic examination showed definite
evidence of damage by an explosion.
3.2.11.49 The later part of the report of Mr. Clancey contained
his opinion. With regard to Target 362 his opinion was as follows:
"The features discernible to a careful close visual examination
point towards the possibility of an explosion but taken alone
do not justify a firm conclusion.
"Curling of petals and spiked or toothed fractures may be
observed in other events than explosions despite the failure by
Tardif and Sterling to obtain them in their limited number of
attempts. It is probable that these features indicate a rapid
rate of failure but not necessarily of a rapidity which could
only be produced by an explosion.
"A more detailed study, metallurgical and fractographic,
is required.
"The studies by Tardif and Sterling were done on fragments
produced from aluminium alloy in contact with the explosive. Very
little information is available on the behaviour of aluminium
alloy some distance
from the explosive and subjected to attack by secondary fragments.
To determine this some trials will be necessary, to obtain reference
samples for comparison.
"The single "bullet hole", No. 14, strongly supports
an explosion hypothesis but, being the sole example of its kind,
is not, by itself determinative.
"If the forward part of this item was forcefully and rapidly
folded back to impact on the other part it might explain the other
features apparent to visual examination. It would require detailed
laboratory examination and tests to eliminate this possibility".
3.2.11.50 The opinion of Mr. Clancey about the small fragments
was as follows:
"The production of a large number of small fragments is generally
regarded as a pointer towards an explosive cause but cannot be
relied upon unless it is clear that they could not have been produced
by some other means. It is known that the break-up of an aircraft
at high speed may produce great fragmentation.
"The single spiked fragment must be regarded as important
but a single specimen is not, by itself, determinative."
3.2.11.51 It appeared to the Court that the report of Mr. Clancey
required certain clarifications. It was suggested to Boeing Commercial
Airplane Company by the Court that Mr. Clancey should appear as
a witness. The Court received a message to the effect that Mr.
Clancey felt that he could not add anything useful to his report.
3.2.11.52 A close examination of the report of Mr. Clancey shows
that the opinion expressed by him in the later part of the report
is at considerable variance with the observations contained in
the earlier part of the report. Particularly with regard to Target
362 and the small fragments, Mr. Clancey has stated in his observations
that there was strong
evidence of explosion. In his opinion, however, he has stated
that more detailed study is required. It is interesting to note
that though Mr. Clancey has referred to the opinion of Tardif
and Sterling, he has not chosen to contradict the conclusions
arrived by them. Mr. Clancey has also not stated as to what could
possibly have caused the special features which were noted on
Target 362.
3.2.11.53 We find the metallurgical report inspires more confidence.
Not only is reference and reliance made in the report to other
expert opinions contained in various articles written by experts
all over the world, certain explosion experiments were also carried
out by the experts which led them to the same conclusion.
3.2.11.54 The particulars of the experiments so carried out and
the results obtained therefrom have been stated in their report
as follows:
EXPLOSION EXPERIMENTS
"To determine the damage by high velocity fragments or shock
waves on a structure similar to the one in aircraft cargo hold,
the following experiments were conducted on November 30 and December
1, 1985 at the Explosives Research and Development Laboratory,
Pune, using plastic explosive (PEKI) and different mixtures of
plastic explosive and TNT. The explosive was kept in a box made
of sheet metal of 6" x 6" x 6" of 1/16" thickness.
This box was kept inside another box made of sheet metal 2' x
2' x 2' of .04 or .06" thickness. The boxes were made of
2024 aluminium alloy sheets used for aircraft skin. To the inner
surface of the outer box, hat section stringers similar to those
used in the aircraft were riveted. The quantity of explosive used
in the inner box was varied from 60 g to 100 g. The explosive
was detonated with an electrical detonator. After the explosions
the fragments and the panels were collected and examined.
"Experiments were also conducted to produce explosive damage
on skin panels, individual hat section stringers and individual
stantion tubes. In the case of stantion tubes experiments were
carried out placing the explosive charge both inside and outside.
The quantity of explosive used was varied from 5 g to 50 g.
"Various types of damages were recorded on all the targets.
These include punched holes, petaling and curling around holes,
spikes at fracture edges, curved fragments with small radius of
curvature and reverse slant fracture. Fig. EXP-1 shows a collection
of fragments. The features mentioned above are shown in Fig. EXP-2
to EXP-7. It may be noticed that the features produced by experimental
explosion were similar to the features observed largely in target
362 of the wreckage. The small fragments had features similar
to those in the fragments from targets 362 and 399.
"Metallography was carried out in (a) a specimen surrounding
a punched hole in the skin (b) a specimen surrounding a hole in
the stringer, (c) a curl in the stantion and (d) spikes in a fragment.
In all these cases, the grains adjacent to the area of explosive
damage are having twins. Two typical microstructures are shown
in Fig. EXP-8 and EXP-9. Away from these areas the microstructure
is normal. Thus it is confirmed that twinning in the microstructure
of these structural members is a unique feature of explosive fracture,
not produced by any other measns known so far."
3.2.11.55 The findings in the said metallurgical report are also
strengthened by the observations of Eric Newton in the article
"Investigating Explosive Sabotage in Aircraft" published
in the International Journal of Aviation Safety, March 1985, p.
43. Mr. Newton is an acknowledged authority in the detection of
explosive sabotage in aircraft. The conclusions contained in the
article are based on his review of incidents of explosion between
1946 and 1984 which were known to him. Some of the conclusions
arrived at by him which were relevant in the present case are
when he states "Generally speaking, the smaller the fragment,
higher the velocity of the detonation. Minute fragmentation is
indicative of high explosive having been used, and provides clues
to the focal point or region of the explosion. The mode of break
up of the aircraft itself and its sequence of failure is usually
very complicated and quite without the logic dictated by normal
aerodynamic overstressing".
3.2.11.56 Mr. Newton has also observed that curling, cork-screwing,
and saw tooth edges may also be indicative of an explosion though
such fractures by themselves may not be conclusive evidence that
an explosion was involved. Firmer evidence, according to him,
was of fusing
of metal, scorching, pitting and blast effect. He further states
that "Perhaps the most conclusive material evidence to be
found on metal specimens is cratering, very often in groups, often
minute and numerous".
3.2.11.57 Mr. Newton also refers to the positive explosive signatures
which remain on a detonation in an aircraft. These positive singatures,
according to him, are as follows:
"(a) The formation of distinctive surface effects such as
pitting or very small craters formed in metal surfaces, caused
by extremely high velocity impacts from small particles of explosive
material. Such craters, when viewed under the microscope, have
raised and rolled over edges and often have explosive residue
in the bottom of the crater.
"(b) Small fragments of metal, some less than 1 mm in diameter,
which, under the scanning electron microscope, reveal features
such as rolled edges, hot gas washing (orange peel effect, surface
melting and pitting and general evidence of heat; such features
have been proved and observed following explosive experiments
with known explosives). Supporting strong evidence would be if
such fragments (normally found embedded in structures, furnishing
or suitcases) were found embedded in a body where evidence of
burning of tissue is present at the puncture entry and where the
fragment came to rest.
"(c) As well as surface effects on metal fragments produced
by explosives there are deformation mechanisms which are peculiar
to high rates of strain at normal temperature. At normal rates
of strain metals deform by usual mechanism associated with dislocation
movement. However, because this process in an explosion is thermally
activated at very high rates of strain, there is insufficient
time for the normal process to occur. In some metals such as copper,
iron and steel, deformation in the crystals of the metal takes
place by 'twinning', that is to say by parallel lines or cracks
cutting across the crystal. Such a phenomenon can occur only if
the specimen has been subjected to extreme shock wave loading
at velocities in the order of 8000 m/sec. Such specimens, usually
distorted must be selected with care, prepared in a metallurgical
laboratory, polished, mounted
and microscopically examined. Where such twinning of the crystals
is found it establishes (a) that the specimen was close to the
seat of the explosion and (b) that a military type explosive had
been used with a detonating velocity of 8000 m/sec or more. Twinning
is rarely produced when shock impact loadings are below 8000 m/sec.
"The above features, singly or combined, are considered to
be proof positive evidence of a detonation of a high explosive;
they could not be produced in any other way."
3.2.11.58 The metallurgical report indicates that the microscopic
examination (conducted by them) discloses such features being
present which had been described as positive signatures of the
detonation of an explosive device in an aircraft by Mr. Newton.
Furthermore, twinning effect has also been noticed at a number
of places - around holes and in fragments. These have been categorised
by Mr. Newton as positive signature of an explosion.
3.2.11.59 In the primary zone of explosion, metallic structures
disintegrate into numerous tiny fragments and usually these fragments
contain the above mentioned distinct signatures of explosion.
In the present case the explosive damage had occurred at an altitude
of 31000 feet when the aircraft was flying over the ocean. The
fragments that formed due to explosion must have been scattered
over a wide area and it is impossible to locate and recover all
of them from the ocean bed. Nevertheless, some of the fragments
which were recovered along with the targets 362 and 399 do contain
signatures of explosive fracture.
3.2.11.60 From the aforesaid discussion it would, therefore, be
safe to conclude that the examination of targets 362 and 399 clearly
reveals that there had been a detonation of an explosive device
on the Kanishka aircraft and that detonation has taken place not
too far away from where these targets had been located.
FIRE
3.3.1 There is no evidence that there was any fire on board the
aircraft before it met with the accident.
3.3.2 Amongst the floating wreckage, however, was found, what
was later on identified as, a spares equipment box belonging to
this aircraft. This box was charred on one side and partially
on the bottom. The depth of charring suggested that the burning
time was three to four minutes. This box contained some sand and
small shellfish. The flesh from the shelfish appeared to be charred,
indicating that the box was subjected to fire after the occurrence.
FLIGHT RECORDERS
3.4.1 Recovery of Flight Recorders
3.4.1.1 Recovery of the flight recorders was a very difficult
and challenging job. At the site of accident, depth of water is
about 6700 feet. The job involved fixing the location of recorders
and then retrieving them. For this purpose three ships viz. Guardline
Locator (a ship provided by Accident Investigation Branch of U.K.),
Le Aoife (an Irish Naval Ship) and Leon Thevenin (a French Cable
laying ship, charterd by the Government of India) were utilised.
Guardline Locator and Le Aoife were solely for fixing the positions
of recorders and also had the capability to lift the recorders
with the help of its scarab.
3.4.1.2 Both the Cockpit Voice Recorder and the Digital Flight
Data Recorder were fitted with Dukane Underwater Acoustic Beacons
(Pingers) which enabled establishing the location of flight recorders
under water. The Beacons are designed to provide a signal at 37.5
Ò 1 Khz frequency that can be heard for approximately 2
miles in any direction for 30 days after water entry. Its high
strength case permits operation in water depth to 20,000 feet.
Its pulse repetition rate is not less than 0.9 pulse per second.
3.4.1.3 On 4th July, 1985, Guardline Locator reported strong possibility
of two separate sound sources of frequencies between 39 KHz and
42 KHz. On 5th July, Guardline Locator gave coordinates of an
area, which it believed contained the pinger. Guardline Locator
later reported that using a Dukane Hand Locator, it had located
pinger (2) at 5102.6N, 1248.6W. Leon Thevenin then concentrated
its search in this area for retrieving the recorders.
3.4.1.4 In response to a query, Messrs Dukane Corporation advised
that Pinger transducer is made of ceramic and if cracked during
impact, its frequency could be elevated. The pulse rate should,
however, be uneffected. Keeping this in mind, the Leon Thevenin
increased its Sonar Band one upper frequency limit from 40 KHz
to 45 KHz.
3.4.1.5 On 9th July at about 2300 hours the Scarab of Leon Thevenin
located the Cockpit Voice Recorder at 5102.67N, 1248.93W and the
recorder was brought on the deck at 0747 hrs on 10th July. The
CVR was kept in a drum filled with water. The scarab was again
lowered on 10th July in the same area and at about 2130 hours
faint signals were picked up on Sonar. By about 2200 hours the
signals became louder and the pulse rate frequency was calculated
to be 72 transmissions per minute. At about 2230 hours the DFDR
was also located at 5103.10N, 1249.59W and it was brought on deck
at 0245 Z on 11th July.
3.4.1.6 The DFDR was also placed alongside the CVR in the drum
filled with water. Leon Thevenin was then advised to return to
Cork with the Flight Recorders. Leon Thevenin reached Cork on
the morning of 12th July and the flight recorders were placed
in two specially fabricated water tight steel containers filled
with water. The recorders were then carried to Bombay on the same
day by Mr. Satendra Singh, Reginal Controller of Air Safety, Bombay,
accompanied by Mr. Vishwanath of Air India for preparing read-outs
and transcript of the recorders. Necessary precautions were taken
to ensure that the data recorded was not affected during transportation
to Bombay.
3.4.1.7 Both the recorders reached Bombay on the morning of 13th
July and were kept in the office of the Regional Controller of
Air Safety under Armed Police Guard.
3.4.2 Description of Flight Recorders
3.4.2.1 Kanishka was equipped with a Fairchild A-100 Cockpit Voice
Recorder Serial No. 5809 and a Lockheed 209E Digital Flight Data
Recorder Serial No. 1282. These were each equipped with Dukane
Underwater Acoustic Beacons and were installed adjacent to each
other in the cabin on the left side near the rear pressure bulkhead.
3.4.2.2 The CVR records all crew communications and sounds in
the cockpit on a continuous tape loop which has a tape speed of
1-7/8 inches per second. The Recorder has two heads, one head
which erases the previous recording and the second which records
the current information and thus the last 30 minutes of recorded
signals are retained, the previous being automatically erased.
It continuously records convervations/sounds from 4 different
sources on the following four separate channels:
Channel 1 : Radio channel of pilot
Channel 2 : Radio channel of flight engineer
Channel 3 : Cockpit Area Mike
Channel 4: Radio channel of co-pilot.
3.4.2.3 The serial digital signal recorded by the DFDR was generated
by a Teledyne Flight Data Acquisition Unit installed in the forward
electronics bay below the cabin floor. Adjacent to this unit was
a Lockheed Model 280 Quick Access Recorder that recorded the same
serial digital signals on to a 50 hour cassette.
3.4.2.4 The DFDR records 52 basic parameters on a magnetic tape.
The tape preserves records of the last 25 hours. The serial digital
signal has a bit rate of 768 bits per second and is recorded at
a tape speed of 0.37 inches per second.
3.4.3 Examination of Flight Recorders and Tapes
3.4.3.1 General
The recorders brought to Bombay from Cork were opened on 16th
July, 1985 at the Air India's Facilities in Bombay in the presence
of the Court and Assessors. A team of foreign experts including
one each representatives from both the Recorder Manufacturers,
three from National Transportation Safety Board, one from Canadian
Aviation Safety Board and one from NRC Flight Recorder Playback
Centre, Canada were present when the tapes were taken out of the
recorders. Apart from them, representatives of the Government
of India and Air India were also present.
3.4.3.2 Cockpit Voice Recorder
When the unit was removed from its shipping and storage container,
some mechanical damage was immediately evident. The top of the
cover had been deformed inwards, probably due to initial external
strong attachments for the horizontally mounted Underwater Acoustic
Beacon. The plate had torn away from the light structure behind
it. The cause of the damage was not obvious. The light outer cover
was removed by cutting it open with hand shears and pliers.
3.4.3.3 When the armoured and insulated containment was opened,
the tape transport was found to be in relatively good condition
and the tape physically undamaged. Eighteen inches of the tape
was pulled from the centre of the tape stack and the tape cut
near the stack well clear of the end of recording. The tape was
then removed from the recorder, transferred to standard tape reels,
laboriously cleaned several times with distilled water and dried
with lint free absorbent material.
3.4.3.4 Digital Flight Data Recorder
When the recorder was removed from its shipping and storage container,
it was noted that there was very little external damage. A cover
on the rear section was removed and it was observed that, when
viewed from the front of the recorder, the right hand edges of
the four rearmost printed circuit cards were displaced towards
the front of the recorder. The left hand edges were restrained
by plug-in connectors to the boards. The rearmost card, that controls
track selection on the tape, and the one in front of it, had bowed
along the right-hand edges and popped out of their plastic guides
in the top and bottom of the recorder. Deflection of the other
two cards had occurred following failure of the attachments of
the right hand ends of the plastic guides to the chassis. The
damage could have been caused by a high lontitudinal decelaration,
as would occur if the front face of the recorder impacted the
water.
3.4.3.5 When the tape deck was opened, it was found that the tape
was intact but had become dislodged from the last tape guide when
the tape was moving in the direction of the odd-numbered tracks
and had also jumped out of the adjacent end-of-tape sensor. One
edge of the tape had been streteched in this area. The drive belt
to the tape transport was still in its correct position. The tape
was stuck to the third tape guide in the odd-numbered track direction
and suffered some damage
when it was finally detached from it. This was repeaired with
a splicing tape.
3.4.3.6 The location of the record heads was marked on the back
of the tape with a waterproof felt pen. It was noted that there
was slightly more tape on the supply reel for the odd tracks than
on the other reel. The tape reels and tape were removed from the
recorder, keeping the tape wet with distilled water, and the tape
transferred to the standard reels for meticulous cleaning. During
the cleaning process, it was found that the edge of the tape had
also been stretched locally 336 inches down- stream from the splice
repair in the odd track direction. The tape was dried by patting
it with absorbent lint-free material before loading it into a
serviceable recorder as this was the only means by which it could
be replayed at the Air India base.
3.4.3.7 The circuit card controlling track selection was removed
from the accident recorder and the status of the latching relays
checked to determine the last track on which recording was being
made. It was found that the relay states indicated Track 1, but
since this requires all relays to be set in the same condition,
it was considered possible that they had been mechanically set
on water impact. The card was subsequently inserted to another
recorder and the Track 1 setting confirmed on a test bench.
3.4.3.8 When a change in track selection was attempted, it was
found that the relays would not switch, probably due to the effects
of salt water corrosion or high water pressure. It was decided
that Track 1 would be considered as the most likely one to contain
the accident data with the possibility that it could have occurred
on any of the other tracks. When the data was recored, the accident
information was found some distance past the mid-point of Track
1.
3.4.4. Recovery of Information
3.4.4.1 Cockpit Voice Recorder Tape
The spool was removed from the CVR and was washed with distilled
water, dried and loaded on to another spool. The cleaned and dried
tape was taken to the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), and
a copy
of the tape was prepared which was used for preparing transcript
and carrying out further analysis. The transcript of the CVR conversation
is given in Appendix 2.
3.4.4.2 Shannon Air Traffic Control Tape
A copy of this tape that contains all radio communications between
the aircraft and Shannon was provided to the Indian Authorities
by the Air Traffic Control Authorities, Shannon. The recording
also included the short series of unusual sounds that occurred
about the time of the accident.
3.4.4.3 When the CVR and the ATC tapes were played it was found
that some adjustment in speed was necessary so as to synchronize
the two. This adjustment was independently carried out by different
experts who analysed the CVR tapes.
3.4.4.4 Digitial Flight Data Recorder Tape
The Lockheed representative had brought a Lockheed Model 235 Copy
Recorder from his plant. This unit copies all the 25 hours of
data from the recorder by running it at high speed for only two
passes of the tape, an operation lasting only 16 minutes. A copy
tape was made by this procedure before embarking on the standard
Air India recovery procedure to serve as a back-up tape in the
event of physical damage to the original tape in subsequent playback.
3.4.4.5 Air India playback equipment for the DFDR required that
the tape be re-installed in another DFDR in which it was driven
at high speed. In the standard playback procedure, the tape was
first run to the beginning of Track 1 through 6 sequentially on
to a computer tape followed by a repeat of Track 1. The computer
tape was then taken to Air India's main computing facility where
selected information was printed out in engineering units.
3.4.4.6 The first printouts showed that the accident was recorded
on Track 1, as indicated by the latching relays, and suggested
a rather abrupt end to the recording. There was a loss in bit
synchronization in word 26 of the last Subframe 3 of data that
was followed by a normal Subframe 4. Prior to the loss in bit
synchronization, all measurements appeared normal. Plans were
made to borrow the high speed oscillograph recorder previously
used to studythe final CVR signals from BARC to examine the end
of the recorded serial digital signal in detail.
3.4.4.7 Meanwhile, the critical section of the tape and the heads
of the playback recorder were re-cleaned and a second transfer
of data on to the computer tape was made. Printouts from this
computer tape showed no significant difference from the first
one.
3.4.4.8 The recorder was then opened and the tape positioned about
1.5 inches before the final resting place of the tape that was
clearly indicated by head imprints on the magnetic oxide coating
side. A high speed oscillograph record of a few seconds of data
was made and visually decoded. It was found that the recorded
GMT was 21 hr 16 min. This time corresponded to 15 min or about
333 inches of the tape after start of the oldest recording downstream
of the accident.
3.4.4.9 The tape was then re-positioned using a Lockheed analogue
playback unit, that had a display of the recorded time and a stopwatch
was used to locate the accident timing. Two oscillograph copies
of the end of the serial digital data were made, the second one
having more data preceding the end. Visual reading of the traces
confirmed that recording became erratic and irrecoverable at the
end of Word 26 in Subframe 3 at the recorded time of 07 h : 14m
: 35s. The erratic signal continued for about 0.27 inches of the
tape before switching back to the data recorded 25 hours earlier.
3.4.4.10 Examination of the printouts confirmed a suspicion that
the complete Subframe 4 of data following the partial Subframe
3, was data from 32 seconds earlier that had not been cleared
from the data buffer in the computer and that Word 26 of the Subframe
3 was the last normal measurement provided by the recorder.
3.4.4.11 The end of recording occurred at the point on the tape
at which some damage had been observed during the cleaning process.
It was apparent that, after the end of the recording, the tape
had run on for 336 inches before finally coming to rest.
3.4.4.12 A copy tape of the DFDR tape was made at Bombay and taken
to Ottawa. Data from the accident flight, the preceeding Toronto-to-Montreal
flight and part of the cruise conditions of the earlier flight
to Toronto were transcribed on to the computer tape. The tape
was edited to minimize errors and converted to engineering units
using standards calibration. Time histories of all parameters
for periods of interest were plotted. In addition, chart records
were made of all parameters in raw data form for the total duration
of the last lap of the flight.
3.4.4.13 The DFDR read out shows that the aircraft was cruising
at an altitude of 31,000 ft. and a computed air speed of 296 knots
till it suddently stopped recording at 07:14:35 GMT recorded time.
3.4.5 Reports received by the Court
3.4.5.1 The CVR was taken to B.A.R.C. This tape was played by
the CVR group a number of times and hard copies of the time information
were also prepared using an ultra violet (UV) Recorder. The group
consisted of Mr. Satendra Singh, Regional Controller of Air Safety
of D.G.C.A., Mr. S.N. Seshadri of BARC, Mr. Paul C. Turner of
NTSB, USA, Mr. John G. Young of NTSB, USA and Mr. P. dE Niverville
of CASB, Canada. On 18th July, 1985 this group made the following
observations after playing the aforesaid tape (UV recording of
CVR is at Fig. 1) :-
"The first visible rising signal volume was observed on channel
number three the CAM channel It reaches a maximum in about 50
milliseconds. At this time noticeable disturbances are observable
on the other three channels. A smaller disturbance is observable
on channels 2 and 4 earlier than observable on channel 1. A major
disturbance is observed to begin approx. ninety milliseconds following
the initial observation on channel number 3 (CAM), on channels
1,2 and 4. Following this point
at 75 milliseconds the CAM signal subsides to a lower level but
much higher than observed ambient (prior to disturbance) where
it remains for approximately 375 milliseconds from initiation
when it ceases. Channel four goes off at the same time. Channel
1 goes off twenty five milliseconds earlier. Channel two is inconclusive
and had a different pattern. All four channels exhibit a disturbance
at approx. 450 milliseconds. The cockpit voice recorder power
then shuts off at 650 milliseconds.
The Shannon area control centre tape made the night of the accident
was examined and printed. It shows a signal was received at approximately
the time the aircraft disappeared from radar. It isn't conclusive
at this time that the signal originated from the accident aircraft.
The signal was received in pulses for approximately five seconds."
3.4.5.2 The tape was again played on 19th July, 1985 and a further
report was prepared which was signed by the aforesaid persons
and Mr. B. Caiger of NRC, Canada. In this report it was stated
as follows:-
"The Shannon area control centre tape was again printed at
.05"/second per inch speed from approximately 22 sec. before
the first broadcast from the accident aircraft at 0709.58 until
Radio carrier with indecipherable modulation can be heard at 0714:01.
The print contains a time encoded signal.
A similar print was made from the CVR channel 4 (Co-Pilot's) of
the same audio as received on the ATC tape. Although the tape
speed is different, the events when corrected for tape speed errors
occur at the same time. It appears that the ATC recording contains
the beginning of the aircraft breaking until power is lost to
the transmitter since channel one and channel four (Capt + Co-pilot's
radio) appear to contain a transmitted signal on the CVR. It is
probable that the ATC signal at 0714:01 coincides with the final
quarter second of CVR radio channels".
3.4.5.3 On the date i.e. 19th July, 1985, Mr. Paul Turner of NTSB
also gave an additional report which is to the following effect
:-
"During my observations of numerous cockpit voice recorders
I have heard and observed a number of aircraft breakages due to
various causes. In this case the explosive sound on the CAM channels
occurs prior to any electrical disturbance observable on the selector
panel signals. Electrical disturbances can generally be seen prior
to audio signal when explosive sounds originate at any significant
measureable distance from the microphone (15 feet) and in the
area where there is significant electrical systems. It is my opinion
that an explosive event occurred close to the cockpit. The CAM
signal which follows the explosive event shows a very much higher
noice level than cockpit ambient 85 db, indicating to me the cockpit
area was penetrated and opened to the atmosphere. The selector
panel signals show signatures similar to those of an aircraft
breaking up and are apparantly caused by electrical systems disturbance
(circuit breaker blowing, fuse switching etc.). The lack of Mayday
call and apparent inadvertant signal from the cockpit crew incapacitation.
The transmitter coming on due to breakup is phenomena observed
previously.
This contains only my personal opinion and in no way should be
considered a final determination of cause without corroborating
evidence".
3.4.5.4 Copies of the tapes were also sent to some of the participants
who wanted to carry out independent analysis.
3.4.5.5 With regard to DFDR the Court received reports from Dr.
Caroll Roberts of NTSB and report dated 11th November of Mr. B.
Caiger.
3.4.5.6 With regard to CVR the Court received reports from Mr.
B. Caiger dated 11th November, 1985, report dated November, 1985
of Mr. R.A. Davis, Head, Flight Recorder Section, Accidents Investigation
Branch, Farnborough, U.K., report dated 31st August, 1985 of Mr.
S.N. Seshadri of BARC, Bombay.
3.4.6 Court Observations
3.4.6.1 Digital Flight Data Recorder
The reports of Dr. Caroll Roberts and Mr. Caiger which also coincide
with the report submitted by Mr. Satendra Singh disclose that
the DFDR showed no evidence of abnormal values of any of the many
parameters being monitored upto a point at which the recorded
data signal became irregular for a fraction of a second and recording
ceased. Both the DFDR and the CVR stopped at the same time.
3.4.6.2 The short period of irregular digital data that occupied
only 0.27 inches of tape, most probably indicates that the recorder
was subjected to a sharp angular acceleration in the left wing
down sense about the aircraft longitudinal axis.
3.4.6.3 According to Mr. Caiger's report the possibility that
the digital recorder was subjected to a sharp disturbance more
rapid than violent motion of the aircraft lends some credence
to the possibility of a detonatiaon of an explosive device in
the aircraft. The other alternative, according to Mr. Caiger,
which could have led to this was that the Flight Data Acquisition
Unit in the main electronics bay .or its power supply were suddenly
disturbed. As the Lockheed Quick Access Recorder was not recovered
from the wreckage, this possibility could not be investigated
further. A perusal of the DFDR print out, however, shows that
whereas there was a speed limit of 290 knots (.81 Mach) of the
aircraft due to carriage of the 5th pod engine, in actual fact
the aircraft's speed during cruise varied from 287 to 296 knots.
Mr. H.S. Khola asked the Boeing Airplane Company to examine the
effect of aircraft cruising at a speed of 296 knots with a 5th
pod engine installed on it. The Boeing company sent a reply, inter
alia, stating as follows:
"The operating speed limit of Air India 747-237B, JT9D-7J
with fifth engine pod was 290 knots indicated airspeed, with an
altitude limit of 35,200 feet. Flight testing of this model airplane
configuration was successfully accomplished to a dive speed of
386 knots calibrated airspeed and 0.92 Mach number, with no adverse
effects.
In the event that the operating speed placard was exceeded an
increase in perceptible vibration levels would be felt. As the
dive Mach number (0.92) is approached the buffet vibration would
increase to level that could become objectional to the flight
crew, but would not he bazardous".
3.4.6.4 It would thus be clear that if no adverse effects could
have been noticed with a dive speed of 386 knots calibrated airspeed
and 0.92 Mach number, there was little likelihbood of the aircraft
having been subjected to any adverse effect by reason of the speed
varying from 287 to 296 knots while it was cruising at a height
of about 31,000 feet.
3.4.6.5 Cockpit Voice Recorder
The Court received four reports of the CVR tape analysis. These
reports were of Mr. B. Caiger, Mr. R.A. Davis, Mr. S.N. Seshadri
and Mr. Paul C. Turner. Whereas the first three experts appeared
and deposed in Court, Mr. Paul Turner did not come.
3.4.6.6. There were certain aspects of the report of Mr. Turner
which required clarification. After the Court had failed to secure
his presence, it sent a questionnaire to Mr. Turner for his answers
thereto. It is indeed unfortunate that till now no reply has been
received. It is in this background that the report dated 13th
November, 1985 of Mr. Turner and the reports of other experts
have to be judged and analysed.
3.4.6.7 Mr. B. Caiger's Report and Deposition
Mr. Caiger has said in his report that the Cockpit Area Microphone
signal was studied in detail. According to him, in an aircraft,
sound can be transmitted by multiplicity of paths. If an explosive
device was located close to the microphone then the short wave
from the disturbance would cause a sharp rise in pressure which
was not noticed. From more remote location, however, structurally
transmitted sounds could reach the microphone first and induce
more complex signals. According to Mr. Caiger, at this time he
did not have any evidence from occurrences of this nature that
would permit any meaningful comparisons or conclusions.
3.4.6.8 Mr. Caiger obtained from the manufacturers details of
Automatic Gain Control (AGC) on the cockpit area microphone. According
to the information so provided it was indicated that the decrease
in amplitude of the recorded noise over about 33 msec after the
peak level was reached 40 msec from the start of the disturbance
is most probably due to the AGC and that the actual envelope of
the pressure levels at the microphone continued to increase until
90 msec from the start before establishing at about four times
the recorded level until the 160 msec point when the recorded
amplitude started to decrease rapidly. Mr. Caiger could not find
any explanation for this marked reduction. Mr. Caiger further
recorded that the large amplitude lower frequency signature, that
immdediately followed this reduction, is similar to signatures
observed by the manufacturer when there was an abrupt break in
the line from the cockpit area microphone pre-amplifier output
to the voice recorder. No similar signature was observed in tests
on the crew audio channels when the appropriate lines to the recorder
were similarly interrupted.
3.4.6.9 The observation of Mr. Caiger with regard to ATC tape
was as follows :-
"The ATC recording that followed the cockpit area microphone
sounds appears at first to contain a series of short intermittant
sounds. Closer study reveals that the background noise only returns
to its steady level for about 160 msec immediately after the first
low level noise and again for about 85 msec just over halfway
through the 5.4 sec duration of the recordings. At the end of
all routine radio transmissions, a damped sine wave transmitter
keying signature is observed with a frequency in the region of
450 Hz. In the accident recordings, only two of these are observed".
"Listening to the sounds, it also appears that a human cry
occurs near the end of the recordings. Spectral analysis of these
sounds and comparison with voice limitations reveals that the
accident sounds do not contain all the pitch harmonic frequencies
normally associated with such voice sounds. The origin of all
the sounds has not been identified."
3.4.6.10 From the aforesaid investigation Mr. Caiger concluded
that :-
"From the voice and data recorders, Air India Flight 182
was proceeding normally enroute from Montreal to London, England
at an altitude of 31,000 feet and a computed airspeed of 296 knots
when the cockpit area microphone detected a sudden loud sound
the cause of which has not yet been identified. The sound continued
for about 0.35 seconds, and then almost immediately, the line
from the cockpit area microphone to the cockpit voice recorder
at the rear of the pressure cabin was most probably broken. This
was followed by a loss of electrical power to the recorder".
"The initial waveform of the cockpit area microphone signal
is not consistant with the sharp pressure rise expected with detonation
of an explosive device close to the flight deck but, with the
multiplicity of paths by which sound may be conducted from other
regions of the aircraft, we cannot at this time exclude the possibility
that it originated from such a device elsewhere in the aircraft".
"Within 1 to 2 seconds of the first detection of the loud
sound on the cockpit area microphone, a series of unidentified
noises were recorded on the Shannon ATC tape. These extended over
a period of 5.4 seconds and are assumed to have origniated from
VT-EFO. They gave the impression of abnormal conditions on the
flight deck".
3.4.6.11 In his evidence in court, Mr. Caiger explained about
Automatic Gain Control. He stated that the CAM channel of the
CVR had an Automatic Gain Gontrol in a pre-amplifier that is installed
close to the microphone. This AGC is designed to prevent excessively
loud signals from saturating the microphone and the associated
electronics. He further stated that from the tests conducted by
the manufacturers it could be concluded that most likely at 45
msec. point the AGC came into effect which gradually reduced the
signal over the next 33 msec. before letting it stabilise at a
roughly constant value. This figure of 33 msec. was taken by Mr.
Caiger not by carrying out any experiment himself but it was provided
to him by the manufacturers. He also stated that there was no
positive indication of structural failure being evident from the
flight
recorders. Mr. Caiger was asked to explain as to what was the
reason for loud sound to which reference had been made in his
report. In answer to the said question from the Court he said
that there could be a number of reasons. The detonation of an
explosive device not close to the microphone was one possibility,
the occurrence of some type of structural failure was another
possibility. He was further of the opinion that at the present
stage of development in structural acoustics, he did not think
it was possible to come up with any reasonable estimate of the
location of either explosive device or some type of possible structural
failure. When asked for his opinion about the sequence of events
which he could determine by looking at the sound spectrum, he
said as follows:
"From the study that we have made which have of course been
augmented by studies done by several other groups it would appear
that there was a very sharp bang that was detected by the CAM.
Approximately one-third of a second after this happened the line
from the CAM to the CVR was disconnected but intermitant power
supply was still being sent to the voice recorder for approximately
one and a half seconds. During this 1-1/2 seconds period sounds
were being transmitted from the 'Kanishka' aircraft that tend
to suggest that the aircraft was in some distress. Though it is
difficult to be specific about the basis on which we assesss the
state of the aircraft, this signal ceased after a period of 5.4
seconds and we have no more audio information concerning the aircraft
from that point onwards."
3.4.6.12 Mr. R.A. Davis's Report and Deposition
Mr. R.A. Davis in his report on the analysis of CVR has stated
that he did not have with him a faithful copy of the original
CVR tape. The tape supplied to his contained signals which warranted
investigation but any measurement could be hampered by a decreased
signal to noise ratio due to the copying process. Mr. Davis however
analysed the tape which admittedly according to him was not of
good quality. Mr. Davis in his report states that he carried out
a spectrum analysis of the different channels of the CVR. The
spectra did contain the sound of a bang. He however, could not
find any significant low frequency content in the spectrum which
according to him, would have been expected if the sound was of
a high explosive detonation.
3.4.6.13 While carrying out detailed study of the tape he also
looked out for any evidence of various audio warning signals which
may have been buried in the noise. One such audio warning which
could have been detected was that of pressurisation warning. Mr.
Davis stated that this warning possessed a very defined frequency
spectrum which was not present in the signal of the CVR of Kanishka.
With regard to this he, however, stated that absence of this signal
was not surprising as any decompression would take a finite time
before reaching the warning level. Mr. Davis further observed
that the presence of warnings due to attititude display disagreement,
excessive speed and fire were investigated but with negative results.
3.4.6.14 During the course of investigations, Mr. Davis had compared
Kanishka CVR recording with the recordings of an explosive decompression
on a DC-10, a bomb in the freight hold of a B-737 and a gun shot
on the flight deck of a B-737. According to Mr. Davis the spectrum
of VCR tape of B-737 showed a much low frequency content with
very little content at upper frequencies. This bomb, in the forward
baggage hold of B-737, had exploded while the aircraft was at
a low level and therefore the CVR did not have the sound accompanied
with that of depressurization. That aircraft had landed safely.
Mr. Davis, however, observed that if Kanishka's accident was caused
by detonation of a high explosive device, then the spectra should
have shown large low frequency content, but this was absent. He
further opined that, even if there was a possibility of a bomb
remote from the flight deck and of a low power, even then the
characteristics of a bomb would still be apparent in the time
record. He also analysed the spectrum of the sound of the hand
gun shot on a B-737 flight deck and according to him the said
signal was sharp edged and did not compare with that of Kanishka's
signal.
3.4.6.15 Mr. Davis also analysed the sounds recorded on the ATC
tape. He concluded that the sounds emanated from Air India's Kanishka
aircraft. According to him the transmission from the ATC is "chopped"
until at approximately 2.7 seconds into the transmission a loud
noise lasting about 200 milliseconds is heard. This is followed
about 0.5 seconds later by a sound which increases in volume.
This sound was similar to that heard in other accidents where
there had been a rapid increase in airspeed.
In the noise which continues until the end of the transmission
is heard a crying sound. This was originally thought to be a human
cry. He, however, noted that a human cry would contain more harmonics
than was noticed in this case. It was also reported by Mr. Davis
that knocking sounds which were heard during the transmission
were initially thought to be due to hand-held microphone vibration.
This was discounted because of the frequency of the sounds. He
noticed that almost identical sounds were heard on the DC-10 CVR
after the decompression had occured and the source of that sound
had not been identified. On the DC-10 the pressurization audio
warning commenced 2.2 seconds after the decompression. Analysing
the ATC tape Mr. Davis observed that no such warning was identified
during the open microphone transmission.
3.4.6.16 In conclusion, Mr. Davis reported as follows :-
"It is considered that from the CVR and ATC recordings supplied
for analysis, there is no evidence of a high explosive device
having detonated on AI 182.
"There is strong evidence to suggest that a sudden explosive
decompression occurred but the cause has not been identified.
"Although there is no evidence of a high-explosive device,
the possibility cannot be ruled out that a detonation occurred
in a location remote from the flight deck and was not detected
on the microphone. Such a situation would be most unusual, if
not unique, in that we have never failed to detect sounds of structural
failure, decompression, explosives etc., on any accident CVR,
even though the event occurred at the rear of the aircraft. If
such a device was used on AI 182 it is considered that it would
have to be a very small device in order not to be detected (unlikely
in itself). Such a device would be unlikely to cause the sudden
total destruction which occurred in this instance. It is considered
that a device of sufficient power to produce this effect could
not fail to be detected on the CVR. The B-747 explosions referred
to earlier, blew holes several feet wide in the structure but
the crew were still able to control and operate the aircraft.
"It must be concluded that without positive evidence of an
explosive device from either the wreckage or pathological examinations,
some other cause has to be established for the accident".
3.4.6.17 In reply to a question it was stated by Mr. Davis, when
he was examined in Court, that it was true that there was no evidence
that rapid decompression was caused by any structural failure.
In an answer to another question, as to whether in his opinion
there is a low frequency content present in every situation whereever
there has been a high explosive device detonated, Mr. Davis answered
in the affirmative, he however added that "But we do not
have sufficient numbers to indicate that that would always be
the case". Mr. Davis, however, agreed that DC-10 aircraft
was quite dissimilar to Boeing 747, and the sound of an explosive
decompression in the aft cargo hold of a DC-10 would not be identical
to an explosive decompression in the aft cargo hold of a Boeing
747.
3.4.6.18 Mr. Davis further agreed that he was looking for low
frequencies in Kanishka tape, but he did not know what type of
low frequencies should be looked out for because there was no
available data anywhere in the world for the sound of a bomb explosion
in a Boeing 747. Mr. Davis was however emphatic in saying that
he could not measure the distance of the origin of the sound from
the cockpit area mike. In his report, and also in the earlier
part of the examination, Mr. Davis had referred to the absence
of low frequency component in the spectrum and had sought to conclude
that such absence showed that there was no detonation of a high
explosive device. In an answer to the question put by the Court
however, Mr. Davis appeared to have altered his stand. This is
evident from the following deposition of Mr. Davis :-
"Court Ques Am I to understand that there must necessarily
be a low frequency whenever an explosion occurs?
Ans. No. What we thought was there would be. There was only one
sample of explosion in B-737. But we would need more accidents
of that nature to able to say that yes we must have a low frequency
component.
Court Ques: Am I to understand that the absence of a low frequency
component would not therefore necessarily mean that the sound
was not that of an explosion?
Ans. Because of the absence of a low frequency component we would
not be able to say positively that there was an explosion or it
was not explosion."
Court Ques : Would the frequency of a particular type of sound
change depending upon the environment in which that sound occurs?
Ans Yes.
Court Ques If an event results in low frequency sounds in one
type of environment, can it mean that the same event can result
in a high frequency sound in a different environment?
Ans. That must be possible".
3.4.6.19 Mr. S.N. Seshadri's Report and Deposition
A detailed analysis of the CVR and the ATC tapes was also carried
out by Mr. S.N. Seshadri at BARC. For the purposes of comparison,
CVR tapes of Iranian Air Force Boeing 747 accident as well as
that of Indian Airlines Boeing 737 accident were also analysed
at BARC.
3.4.6.20 The original CVR tape of Kanishka was played on a 4 channel
tape recorder modified to run at 1-7/8" per second. The output
of this tape recorder was copied faithfully on an eight channel
HP 3968A instrumentation tape recorder. Channels 1 to 4 were used
for recording the CVR data and channels 5 for recording a time
marker. For further processing and signal analysis this copy of
the original tape was used.
3.4.6.21 The observations of the data so recorded, as contained
in the said report inter-alia are as follows :
"Repeated and careful listening to all the four channels
revealed the presence of explosive sounds on all these channels
occuring nearly
at the end at the same time. Speech information is present on
channels 3 and 4 during the last few minutes. Channel 1 does not
contain any speech data during this period. Channel 2 contains
indecipherable speech data about 20 to 25 seconds before the explosive
sound".
"It was decided to analyse in detail the tape data during
the final few seconds within which significant audio and electrical
changes were observed to be present. Data from all the four channels
were displayed on a Tektronix 2-channel storage oscilloscope Model
466 for initial observations. Based on this study the relevant
portion of the tape was selected for more intensive snalysis.
Simultanious ultraviolet recording of all the four channels on
this portion of the tape was next carried out". The following
observations are relevant.
1. Channel 3, which corresponds to the area mike shows the first
indication of a rising audio signal. This instant is termed, for
conveniece, as zero time reference. The signal level rises from
the ambient level in the cockpit by about 18.5 db in approximately
45 milliseconds. The signal then starts falling and stablises
at a level about 10 db higher than the ambient level before zero
time. The signal continues to remain at this level for about 275
milliseconds. The total duration of the signal from zero reference
is thus about 360 milliseconds.
2. Channels 1 and 2, which are the radio channels of the pilot
and the flight engineer respectively, show start of electrical
disturbance signals 45 milliseconds from zero time at which the
audio signal on channel 3 is at its maximum. These signals, which
have do minant frequencies in the range of 70 to 210 Hz, persist
for about 100 milliseconds on both channels. Subsequent to this,
channel 1, shows an audio burst lasting about 200 milliseconds.
Channel 2 shows a delayed audio burst lasting 25 milliseconds,
220 milliseconds from zero time, or in other words, 175 milliseconds
after the peak signal from channel 3. A low amplitude tail appears
after this burst and lasts around 40 milliseconds. Channel 4 which
is the co-pilot's radio channel shows an electrical disturbance
commencing at 85 milliseconds from zero time and lasting around
60 milliseconds. The frequency distribution during this period
is similar to those on channels 1 and 2. This is followed
by an audio burst of 230 milliseconds duration. The frequency
spectra of the audio portions of channels 1,2 and 4 are reasonably
similar."
3.4.6.22 "Correlation of Events of ATC Shannon Tape and Channel
4 of CVR tape :
"It was observed that during the last few minutes before
the stoppage of the CVR, information recorded on the ATC tape
and channel 4 of the CVR tape are identical. However, the ATC
tape contains a series of audio bursts approximately corresponding
to the instant at which a single explosive sound is recorded on
channel 4. Thus a doubt arose whether the series of audio bursts
recorded on the ATC tape had originated from channel 4 of Kanishka
CVR since these are not recorded on the CVR tape. In order to
obtain an answer to this it was necessary to check with very good
accuracy the simultaneity of the explosive sound on channel 4
and the series of audio bursts on the ATC. The procedure followed
for the same is given below.
"The ATC Shannon tape and the CVR tape were run on two independent
tape recorders. It was found that the speeds of the two tapes
were mismatched. In order to match speeds the earliest speech
signal on both the tapes.
"Seven seventy that checks maintain three five zero"
was used as the reference point. The speech signals which mostly
contain the conversation between the co-pilot and ATC Shannon
lasts for about 146 seconds. Channel four was kept ready for starting
exactly at the reference point. The ATC was next played starting
well before the reference point. The tape recorder playing channel
4 was started manually exactly at the time when the reference
point on the ATC was audible. By noting the time of ending of
the conversation on both the tapes which corresponds to
"Right Sir squaking two zero zero five one eight two"
the speed of the recorder playing the ATC tape was corrected by
pitch control to approach the speed of CVR tape. The process was
repeated a number of times till audibly the speeds were matched.
The two tapes were next synchronously played and both the channels
were simultaneously recorded on a third recorder to a point well
after the explosive sound on channel 4. This tape was used for
all further analysis.
"The first significant observation was that the explosive
sound on channel 4 coincided with the beginning of the series
of audio bursts on the ATC tape as heard by the ear. It was thus
clear that both the recordings correspond to those generated by
Kanishka during its last moments.
"To confirm this preliminary conclusion which was judged
solely by the ear, accurate instrumented tests were carried out.
The two channels were simultaneously recorded on an ultraviolet
recorder at the four speeds, 0.1"/sec, 1"/sec, 10"/sec
and 160"/sec for study of synchronism as well as frequency
details. It was noticed that the two waveforms were not exactly
suynchronised though by the ear they appeared to be so. In order
to find out exactly the difference in synchronisation the following
tests were done:
UV recordings at 16" per second were taken at three representative
points relating to the communication of ATC with Kanishka. These
points correspond to speech portions at 070838 "Five eh Squawking
and eh Air India", at 070958 "Right Sir Squawking"
and near the blast on channel 4. It was found that the ATC was
running slightly faster. At the first point the ATC was leading
by 90 milliseconds, and at the second point by 130 milliseconds.
The time interval between these points is about 80 sec. By extrapolating
this lead to the time of the blast which occurs about 243 sec.
from the second point, it is clear that the lead of the ATC with
respect to channel 4 at this point will be given by 130 + (130-90)
(243/80) which is approximately 250 milliseconds. This error is
very small."
"Thus one can conclude that the sounds recorded on the ATC
Shannon tape are those which emanated from Kanishka during its
last seconds."
3.4.6.23 "Frequency Analysis:
Mr. Seshadri also carried out frequency analysis of the CVR and
the ATC tapes. His opinion with regard to the same was the follows:
"Significant audio and electrical disturbances were observed
in the final few seconds of the CVR tape. It was therefore decided
to analyse all the four channels for their frequency contents
at the various places
in this pertinent region. For Fourier analysis of each signal,
digitized time data of 200 milliseconds duration was processed.
The frequency analysis was carried out using Bruel & Kjaer
model 2033, high resolution signal analyser. Frequency spectrum
was computed over a base band of 2 KHz with a resolution of 5
Hz.
3.4.6.24 "The frequency analysis of electrical disturbances
in channels 1,2 and 4 indicate presence of low frequencies in
the region of 20 Hz to 600 Hz. The dominant frequencies are in
the range of 70 Hz to 210 Hz.
3.4.6.25 "The frequency spectrum of the background noise
in channel 3 just before the explosive sound has a broad band
spectrum with some dominant frequencies in the region of 650 Hz
to 1550 Hz. At the bang, many additional frequencies appear. The
frequency spectrum of bang on channel 3 indicates an increase
in the bandwidth.
3.4.6.26 "The frequency spectrum of channel 1 at the bang
position indicates a fairly broad spectrum with dominant frequencies
in the range of 150 Hz to 1 KHz. Channel 2 displays a frequency
spectrum at the bang position in which low frequencies are dominant.
It has a significant frequency range between 20 Hz to about 1
KHz. The frequency spectrum of channel 4 at the bang is wide-band
with a broad peak in the range of 150 Hz to 800 Hz.
3.4.6.27 "At the beginning of the crackling sound, the frequency
spectrum shows narrow band peaks around 1.6 KHz. About 90 and
300 milliseconds later, the spectrum changes with additional peaks
appearing around 400 Hz, 600 Hz and 1150 Hz. Frequency analysis
was also carried out at 600, 800 and 1000 milliseconds before
the start of the crackling sound."
3.4.6.28 The conclusions which were arrived at by Mr. Seshadri
on the basis of what he had heard and after studying the various
spectra were as follows:
"The signal in channel 3 of the CVR which corresponds to
the cockpit Area Mike shows the first signs of an audio disturbance.
The signal
time data of 200 milliseconds duration was processed. The frequency
analysis was carried out using Bruel & Kjaer model 2033, high
resolution signal analyser. Frequency spectrum was computed over
a base band of 2 KHz with a resolution of 5 Hz.
3.4.6.24 "The frequency analysis of electrical disturbances
in channels 1,2 and 4 indicate presence of low frequencies in
the region of 20 Hz to 600 Hz. The dominant frequencies are in
the range of 70 Hz to 210 Hz.
3.4.6.25 "The frequency spectrum of the background noise
in channel 3 just before the explosive sound has a broad band
spectrum with some dominant frequencies in the region of 650 Hz
to 1550 Hz. At the bang, many additional frequencies appear. The
frequency spectrum of bang on channel 3 indicates on increase
in the bandwidth.
3.4.6.26 "The frequency spectrum of channel 1 at the bang
position indicates a fairly broad spectrum with dominant frequencies
in the range of 150 Hz to 1 KHz. Channel 2 displays a frequency
spectrum at the bang position in which low frequencies are dominant.
It has a significant frequency range between 20 Hz to about 1
KHz. The frequency spectrum of channel 4 at the bang is wide-band
with a broad peak in the range of 150 Hz to 800 Hz.
3.4.6.27 "At the beginning of the crackling sound, the frequency
spectrum shows narrow band peaks around 1.6 KHz. About 90 and
300 milliseconds later, the spectrum changes with additional peaks
appearing around 400 Hz, 600 Hz and 1150 Hz. Frequency analysis
was also carried out at 600, 800 and 1000 milliseconds before
the start of the crackling sound."
3.4.6.28 The conclusions which were arrived at by Mr. Seshadri
on the basis of what he had heard and after studying the various
spectra were as follows:
"The signal in channel 3 of the CVR which corresponds to
the cockpit Area Mike shows the first signs of an audio disturbance.
The signal
peaks to its maximum of 18.5 db above ambient level in about 45
milliseconds. A loud audible blast is heard when this channel
is played at this point. An analysis of the frequency spectra
before this loud blast and during the blast shows a definite change
in the frequency composition. From all the above results it can
be concluded that an explosion occurred in the aircraft. The exact
position in the aircraft at which the explosion occurred is likely
to be about 40 to 50 feet from the Cockpit judging from the rise
time of 45 milliseconds.
3.4.6.29 "Explosive sounds on all the four radio channels
preceded by electrical disturbance reinforce the evidence provided
by channel 3.
3.4.6.30 The synchronised recording and detailed analysis of the
ATC and channel 4 confirm that the sounds recorded in the ATC
Shannon tape are undoubtedly attributable to the transmissions
from AI 182 Kanishka during its last moments. The sounds indicate
possible breaking up of the aircraft in mid air and the air blast
which follows a decompression. A very detailed UV recording does
not indicate the presence of a second explosion."
3.4.6.31 "Copies of CVR tapes of well understood air crashes
pertaining to an Indian Airlines Boeing 737 in 1979 and Iranian
Air Force Boeing 747 in 1976 were analysed for possible reference
in connection with the analysis of the CVR tape of Kanishka.
3.4.6.32 "A definite explosion near the Cockpit was the cause
of the crash of the Indian Airlines Boeing 737. An explosive sound
recorded on the Cockpit Area Mike shows a rise time of about 8
milliseconds which corresponds to a distance of about 8 feet.
This indicates that the rise time is a measure of the distance
from the Cockpit Area Mike at which an explosion has occurred.
3.4.6.33 "The Iranian Air Force Boeing 747 broke up in mid
air. Analysis of the CVR tape clearly indicates that the frequency
spectra of the electrical disturbances are similar to those obtained
for Kanishka. Thus the series of audio bursts recorded on the
ATC Shannon tape have been most probably generated by the break-up
of kanishka in midair.
3.4.6.34 Mr. Seshadri was also examined in Court on 27th January,
1986. In his deposition he very succintly explained some aspects
of the work which was done by him. He also dealt with the aspect
of AGC to which reference has been made by Mr. R.A. Davis and
Mr. Paul Turner in their reports. The relevant part of the testimony
in this connection is as follows :-
"We wanted to make sure that the CVR recording and the ATC
corresponded to the same aircraft Kanishka. When we played the
tapes for the first time we found that there was a difference
of about 1 second. Though this figure may be tolerable because
of the accuracy of the tape speeds, we wanted to investigate further
to make really sure that the ATC corresponded to Kanishka. For
this purpose we had simultaneously "recorded channel 4 of
the CVR and the ATC on a single tape on 2 channels after synchronising
the common speech signals to the best of our ability by the ear.
We started with the first speech which was available on both the
tapes, namely, "770 that checks maintain 350". This
was a conversation with the TWA aircraft which is available on
both channel 4 and the ATC. The last sound which is recorded common
to CVR and ATC is the speech of the co-pilot who says "right
Sir, squaking 2005 182". After this recording though by the
ear the explosive sounds on the ATC. as well as the CVR seemed
to match, we wanted to check it in more detail. For this purpose
we had detailed UV recordings of different portions of the synchronised
tapes pertaining to the conversation between ATC and Kanishka.
This was done and we noticed that the ATC was running slightly
fast. We had about 80 seconds reference time of conservation from
Air India Boeing Kanishka and the ATC for reference and we had
to extrapolate the information in this section for another 243
seconds at which time the explosive sound occurs. During the beginning
of this 80 seconds reference period, we find that the ATC was
leading by 90 milli-seconds and at the end of 80 seconds the lead
of ATC was 130 milli-seconds. Thus, in 80 seconds, the ATC had
gained 40 milliseconds.
"This extrapolated to 243 seconds and gives a figure of 250milliseconds.
This is how we arrived at the conclusion that both are synchronised
within 250 milliseconds. I would like to bring to the notice of
the Court that we have taken great pains to confirm this information
by reapeating the tests a number of times. We did not take the
400 cycle signal available on the tape as the time reference.
We took for reference the bunching of signals produced by the
conversation and the gaps in between the convervation which are
very clear on both tapes. Hence we are sure that our results are
right. The UV recording which was made has been filed along with
my report.
"The main channel which was examined was the CAM channel.
This was agreed to by all the experts who were present during
the first analysis of the tape at the BARC between 16th and 20th
July, 1985. One of the most noticeable things is that channel
3 which corresponds to cockpit area shows the first sign of disturbance.
Let us say for reference that the disturbance starts at 0 time.
In about 45 milliseconds the signal rises to a peak value which
is approximately 18.5 db above the ambient level before the commencement
of the signal. After this point the signal decays roughly exponentially
in about 40 milliseconds to be almost a steady level which is
10 db above the ambient level before the explosive sound. From
this we could draw conclusions. Assuming that an explosion occurred
on the aircraft. The explosion produces a shock wave with a steep
wave front which travels in air as well as through the aluminium
body and the speed of travel will depend upon the distance of
the explosive from the point of observation. It will depend on
the cube root of the explosive and it will also depend on the
ratio of the distance to the cube root of the weight of the explosive.
The shock wave is very fast. It can travel at about 10 times the
speed of sound. Also when the shock wave hits the aluminium body
of the aircraft the vibrating panels which are defined by the
stringers and longerons transmit the sound to the CAM location.
Because the speed of sound in aluminium is about 19,200 feet per
second which is 16 to 18 times that of the speed of sound in air
and the shock velocity is also about 10 to 12 times. This signal
will be received
"first by the CAM. Nevertheless the shock wave gets attenuated
diffracted and refracted during its travels to the cockpit. Hence
the signal received at the cockpit will be an attenuated signal
and this small signal we have taken as instantaneous with the
time of explosion. As the time passes the sound waves travel from
the explosion site reinforcing the sound in the cockpit area thereby
there is a rise time. Then when all the complete sound information
is transmitted we get the peak of the signal and thus the rise
time corresponds to the delay between the first rise in signal
to the peak as compared to the speed of sound. One may ask the
question what is the speed of sound because the aircraft has an
explosion and is exposed to the outside environment but since
the de-pressurization of the aircraft through the explosive fracture
will take a minimum of a few seconds, we can reasonably assume
that the pressure of the air in the aircraft corresponds to about
5000 to 6000 feet of altitude. At this presure and temperature,
the sound velocity is roughly 1000 feet per second and from the
45 milliseconds delay we concluded that the explosion should have
occurred about 40 to 50 feet from the cockpit. A question may
be asked that the decay of the signal might be due to the AGC
of the CVR coming into action. Mr. Turner, who is an acknowledged
expert in the field of CVR has reported that Messrs Fairchild
tested the cockpit voice recorders with a 10 db rise and fall
of signals at the threshold of AGC and they got a result indicating
a decay time of 33 milliseconds. The fall in the waveform of Channel
3 is about 40 milliseconds and is well near 33 milliseconds, so
an argument may be advanced that the sound continued to remain
steady and the fall in the signal level was effected by the AGC.
In order to confirm this we tested the Cockpit Voice Recorder
which was identical to the one which was on Kanishka by applying
1 KHz waveform of rectuangular modulation. To our surprise, we
found that the decay time roughly was 130 milliseconds as compared
to 33 milliseconds given by Mr. Turner. We repeated the tests
with an initial background and without any background at all.
We further tested with ramp waveforms, in other words, "slowly
rising and falling waveforms of triangular shape with modulations
of 1000 cycle carrier. This also confirms our finding. In order
to clarify how the tests were performed so that others can judge
whether it was a realistic test, I will explain the procedure.
The modulated waveform was produced by a signal generator. This
was fed to an amplifier. The amplifier output was fed to a loudspeaker.
The output of the amplifier was checked to ensure that there was
no distortion. Thus the signal going into the loudspeaker is the
same modulated signal which has been applied at the input of the
amplifier. This sound coming from the loudspeaker was recorded
on the CVR through the CAM in the laboratory. This is how the
test was performed. We were given a CVR tape by the Department
of Civil Aviation purported to be that of an explosion which occurred
on a Boeing 737 aircraft which crash- landed at Madras. We did
the CVR analysis of this aircraft. We first recorded the output
of the CVR of Indian Airlines CAM channel on a UV recorder. We
found the rise time to be very small. This was of the order of
a few milliseconds, about 8 milliseconds or so. We have been told
that the explosion occurred just by the side of the front toilet
i.e. just behind the cockpit. This to some extent confirms that
the rise time is related to the distance of the explosion from
the detecting CAM. The next thing that we did was the frequency
analysis of this waveform. Mr. Davis has indicated in his report
that if an explosion occurs on board the aircraft there should
be low frequencies present. When we analysed the frequencies of
the Kaniskha aircraft Channel 3, we did not find very low frequencies
in case of an explosion abroad the aircraft. When we analysed
the Boeing 737 tape we did not find any low frequencies in the
signals. The report of Mr. Davis also provides the frequency analysis
of a pistol shot which has been fired in the cockpit of the aeroplane.
This also shows no low frequency components. So our conclusion,
that it is not essential for low frequencies to be present in
case of an explosion abroad an aircraft, was confirmed. I will
go a step further to say that the frequency received by an area
mike which responds to an explosive action abroad the aircraft
will contain frequencies of the structure of the defracted "
and dragging shock wave, the resonant frequencies of the aluminium
panels defined by the longerons and the stiffening channel members
and also some frequencies which may be of objects that the shock
wave encounters in its path. It is, therefore, impossible to calculate
the frequency spectrum that one would expect in the cockpit due
to an explosion taking place in the aircraft".
3.4.6.35 In answer to a question Mr. Seshadri categorically stated
that the word "explosion" in his report meant "a
bomb, a very fast device".
3.4.6.36 Mr. Paul C. Turner's Report
Lastly, a reference may be made to the report dated 13th November,
1985 of Mr. Paul C. Turner. The evaluation of Mr. Turner of the
analysis done by him of the CVR and the ATC tapes, as contained
in the said report, was as follows:-
"With the foregoing as background, we can make several observations.
The CVR record on the CAM channel, captain's channel and flight
engineer's channel show that they were all affected at about the
same time; the copilot's perhaps 20 milliseconds later. Major
disturbances which are recognized as electrical system disturbances
can be seen to begin about 60 milliseconds after the initial disturbance.
This approximates the time it would take for the electrical system
protective circuitry to become active.
3.4.6.37 "A steep wave front which would be indicative of
a shock wave cannot be seen on the CAM channel sound spectrum;
however, the spectrum analaysis shows that impulse type sounds
occurred at the beginning of the event recorded on the CAM channel
of the CVR. Since audio signals propagate through aluminium approximately
16 times the speed of sound in air, the CAM channel would probably
have been affected by structurally transmitted noise before being
affected by airborne noise. The geometry of the aircraft was such
that structure borne disturbances could be recorded before the
airborne transmitted information appeared at the cockpit microphone
and an air transmitted shock wave or steep wave front may not
be evident on the CVR.
3.4.6.38 The captain's and copilot's selector box channels recorded
signals which appeared to be electrically inducted and similar
to those seen on the Huete Boeing 747 breakups. These are then
followed by a signal resembling audio frequency noises similar
to an open microphone in a noisy environment or the opening of
a receiver squelch. Both effects have been seen during aircraft
breakups. The audio noise on the captain's and copilot's channels
appears to have come from a different source. The flight engineer's
channel does not contain audio noise. A spectral diagram of the
copilot's and captain's channel noises just show broad band noise
across the spectrum. The signal frequncies extend beyond the frequency
range of a microphone both on the high and the low end. It does
not fit the normal microphone envelope. Spectral diagrams of the
event on the CAM channel show the normal microphone preamplifier
envelope summed with wide band signal of unspecified origin. Since
the signal quits abruptly with a doublet, it indicates that the
interference was added upstream of the CVR and was not just reflected
in the CVR power supply.
3.4.6.39 "The CVR record shows a signal stayed on for about
200 milliseconds when it appears that the power may have been
interrupted to both the radio channel and the CAM channel of the
CVR at the same time. It further appears that the signals to the
CVR were probably interrupted at 360 milliseconds from the initial
disturbance possibly by severance of the signal wires. It further
appears from the action of the erase head and record that the
main electrical system began to fail at this point and the CVR
bus voltage value dropped to a value below 70 volts but not below
20 volts. This fluctuating voltage continued intermittently for
a minimum of 1-1/4 seconds at which time the voltage evidently
dropped to some value below 20 volts and the recorder ceased to
operate. The power for operation of the No. 1 VHF transmitter
can be explained by the operation of the standby bus and battery
and connection of the No. 1 VHF radio to this standby bus.
3.4.6.40 "The necking down of the signal to a low value shows
that no signal was coming to the CVR from the CAM preamplifier.
The lack of a signal on the radio channels, which do not need
to be erased before being recorded, further suggest that the wires
were severed or
"that the transmission to Cork began after what appeared
to be the loss of the primary electrical system approximately
1-1/2 seconds following the event. Standby power would have become
available upon loss of the primary power, the number one VHF would
have become available, and CVR would have ceased to operate.
3.4.6.41 "The action of the erase circuitry in the CVR suggests
that the fluctuating voltage seen was coming from the main electrical
system bus. Anything else causing this fluctuating voltage down
stream of the CVR circuit breaker would probably blow it.
3.4.6.42 "The signal received in Ireland indicated that a
radio, most probably this aircraft's No. 1 VHF transmitter, stayed
operational for about 5.4 seconds following the event at which
time the entire aircraft electrical system ceased to function.
This assumes that the No. 1 transmitter ceased to operate due
to standby bus failure.
3.4.6.43 "In the conclusion, it appears that a catastrophic
event occurred on Kanishka. It was reflected in all channels of
the CVR and the CVR power supply at the same time. The main electrical
bus began to fail within 0.35 second and the standby bus survived
for only 6 seconds more at which time the aircraft's electrical
system ceased to function. It appears that the event occurred
in a manner to affect the cockpit area microphone operation severely
and to force operation of the automatic gain control on the CVR.
This loud noise continued for the life of the aircraft's main
electrical system as reflected in the CVR.
3.4.6.44 "The mechanism of how the ATC transmission was made
from Kanishka to Cork is unclear. The sound was not recorded on
the CVR, indepentent studies by Canadian and British investigators
have the Cork ATC call originating approximately 1-1/2 seconds
following the event on the CVR. This is about the time that standby
power would have become available to the No. 1 VHF.
3.4.6.45 "This report should be viewed as an accident investigation
tool only and used in conjunction with other evidence gathered
during the investigation.
3.4.6.46 "The United States Noard/Space Command has confirmed
that there was no incoming space debris in the vicinity of Ireland
on June 23, 1985."
3.4.6.47 It is pertinent to note that according to Mr. Turner
there was "catastrophic event" which had occurrred on
Kanishka. He has, however, not elucidated as to what this event
was.
3.4.6.48 After the receipt of the report, the Court requested
the NTSB that Mr. Turner should come and depose. It is unfortunate
that permission was not granted to him. Faced with this situation
and as it was thought necessary that some clarification was called
for, the Court sent a telex to Mr. Turner whereby he was asked
to give replies to the queries contained therein. He was requested
that the reply be sent by 27th January 1986. A copy of the telex
was also forwarded to the American Embassy at New Delhi for sending
the same to NTSB by way of confirmation. Previously all communications
addressed to NTSB were being routed through American Embassy.
No reply has been received by the Court till this day either from
NTSB or from Mr. Paul Turner. According to paragraph 5.14 of Annex
13 the State is required, on request from the State conducting
the investigation of an accident, to provide to that State with
all the relevant information available to it. It was, therefore,
obligatory on the NTSB to have seen that the information sought
for by the Court by way of answers to the queries was supplied.
3.4.6.49 Court Evaluation
From the reports of all the experts and the testimonies of M/s
Caiger, Davis and Seshadri it is clear, and it is agreed to by
all of them, that there was a breakup of the aircraft in mid-air.
The experts also agreed that the sounds recorded on the ATC Shannon
tape at 0714:01 Z emanated from the Kanishka aircraft.
3.4.6.50 Mr. Caiger has not said either in the report or in his
statement as to what was the cause of the bang. Mr. Davis, on
the other hand, is categorical in stating in his report that there
was explosive decompression (meaning rapid decompression) on the
aircraft. He has, however,
stated in the report that there is no evidence of an explosive
device. The main reason for his coming to this conclusion is that
he had not been able to find low frequencies in the spectra of
the CVR of Kanishka. Mr. Seshadri, on the other hand is equally
vehement in concluding that an explosive device had detonated
in the front cargo hold of Kanishka.
3.4.6.51 It may be that the frequency spectrum of Kanishka CVR
did not contain low frequencies but, as has been admitted by Mr.
Davis himself in answer to a Court question, it is not necessary
that in the case of every detonation there must necessarily be
low frequencies in the spectrum. Frequency spectra of 'Kanishka
CVR before 'bang' and at the 'bang' position are shown in Figs.
2 & 3, indicating presence of additional high frequncies at
the bang. Indeed in the case of Indian Airlines Boeing 737, which
admittedly was a case where there was an explosion of a device
within about 8 feet of the CAM, the frequency analysis showed
absence of low frequencies. Frequency spectrum of Indian Airlines
Boeing 737 CVR is shown at Fig. 4. Merely, because therefore,
there were no low frequencies present would not mean that there
was no detonating device on board the Kanishka. The CVR of Indian
Airlines Boeing 737 has not been analysed either by Mr. Caiger
or Mr. Davis. The analysis was, however, conducted by Mr. Seshadri
and as is evident from his report, there were marked similarities
between the spectra of Indian Airlines 737 and Air India's Kanishka
CVR. One of the important reasons for coming to this conclusion,
which has been indicated by Mr. Seshadri, is the rise time of
the bang signal. From the analysis of the Indian Airlines Boeing
737 tape it was observed that it had taken 8 milliseconds for
the peak to be reached. It was also seen that the explosive device
was approximately 8 feet away from the cockpit area mike. Keeping
this in view Mr. Seshadri observed that in the case of Kanishka
the peak of the bang signal was reached in about 40 milliseconds.
He, therefore, concluded that the origin of the bang sound was
about 40 feet away from the cockpit area mike.
3.4.6.52 It would be pertinent to note that even according to
the report of Mr. Davis the rise time in the case of Kanishka,
which has been given for the peak is about 40 milliseconds. He,
however, does not attach much importance to this because according
to him after about 40 ms automatic gain control would become effective.
3.4.6.53 Mr. Davis has no personal experience of the time which
it would take for the Automatic Gain Control to take effect. He
has got the figures from the manufacturer. Mr. Davis admitted
that the time which it will take for the AGC to be effective is
not indicated in any published document of the manufacturer.
3.4.6.54 Mr. Seshadri, however, personally carried out the experiments
on a Boeing 747 by using an instrument similar to what was on
board Kanishka. From the testimony of Mr. Seshadri it is apparent
that the results which he got were different. As per his testimony,
for the AGC to be effective it will take 130 ms. If this be so
then it may be possible to conclude that in the case of Kanishka
the peak was reached in 40 ms. and thereafter the signal decayed
and the signal was in no way effected by the AGC.
3.4.6.55 A reference may also be made, at this stage, the frequency
spectrum of the sound of the hand gun which was fired on a boeing
737 flight deck. Frequency spectrum prepared by Mr. R.A. Davis
is shown at Fig. 5. He has stated that the rise time for reaching
the peak is almost instantaneous. Same is the case with regard
to the frequency spectrum prepared by him of a bomb in a B-737
aircraft where the bomb had been placed in the freight hold which
is shown in Fig. 6. A perusal of that spectrum also shows that
the peak was reached in approximately 5 ms. The forward freight
hold compartment of Boeing 737 is much more than five feet away
from the cockpit area mike. If the theory of Mr. Seshadri was
to be applied then as per the frequency analysis of this Boeing
737 bomb, the distance from the area mike could not have been
more than 5 ft. It is, however, known, as per the report of Davis,
that the bomb was actually in the freight hold which would mean
not nearer than about 25 feet.
3.4.6.56 From what has been stated in the various reports, as
well as in the testimony of the 3 experts who apperared in the
Court, the only safe conclusion which can be drawn is that possibly
enough study has not been done, due to lack of adequate data,
which can lead one to the conclusion as to the exact nature of
the sound and the distance from which it originated.
3.4.6.57 The fact that a bang was heard is evident to the ear
when the CVR as well as the ATC tapes are played. The bang could
have been caused by a rapid decompression but it could also have
been caused by an explsoive device. One fact which has, however,
to be noticed is that the sound from the explosion must necessarily
emanate a few milliseconds or seconds earlier than the sound of
rapid decompression because the explosion must necessarily occur
before a hole is made, which results in decompression. In the
event of there being an explosive detonation then the sound from
there must reach the area mike first before the sound of decompression
is received by it. The sound may travel either through the air
or through the structure of the aircraft, but if there is no explosion
of a device, but there is nevertheless an explosive decompression
for some other reason, then it is that sound which will reach
the area mike. To my mind it will be difficult to say, merely
by looking at the spectra of the sound, that the bang recorded
on the CVR tape was from an explosive device.
3.4.6.58 There are various hypothesis and theories which the experts
have to investigate before any acceptable conclusions are arrived
at. It so happens that in the present case we have the opinions
of four experts, but they do not agree with one another on some
material aspects. Two of the experts, namely, Mr. Caiger and Mr.
Davis are categorical in saying that it is not possible to measure
the distance of the origin of the sound on the cockpit area mike,
whereas Mr. Seshadri has come to a different conclusion. Mr. Paul
Turner in his report dated 13th November, 1985 in silent on this
aspect, though in his earlier report dated 19th July, 1985 he
had categorically said that there was an explosive device close
to the cockpit.
3.4.6.59 With regard to the nature of the sound also we have 3
different opinions. Mr. Caiger is unable to give the nature of
the sound, Mr. Davis says it is rapid decompression while Mr.
Seshadri says it is a sound of an explosive device followed by
decompression.
3.4.6.60 In the absence of any other technical literature on the
subject, it is not possible for this Court to come to the conclusion
as to which of the Experts is right. The only conclusion which
can, however,
be arrived at is that the aircraft had broken in midair and that
there has been a rapid decompression in the aircraft. Just as
it is not possible to say that the spectrum discloses that the
bang is due to an explosive device similarly, and as has also
been admitted by Mr. Caiger and Mr. Davis, it is not possible
to say that the bang is due to break up of a structure.
3.4.6.61 The bang could have been due to either of the aforesaid
two causes i.e. a bomb explosion or the sound emanating due to
rapid decompression. The advantage of carrying out the said analysis
is that a number of possible causes of the accident are eliminated.
On the other hand, if the analysis is viewed in conjunction with
other evidence on the record it is further possible to determine
the exact nature or cause of the bang. In the present case the
bang, as already noticed, could have been due to the sound originating
from the detonation of a device or by reason of rapid decompression.
Other evidence on the record, however, clearly indicates that
the accident occurred due to a bomb having exploded in the forward
cargo hold of Kanishka. The spectra analysis and the conclusions
of Mr. S.N. Seshadri are corroborated by other evidence.
TESTS AND RESEARCH
3.5.1 During the course of investigation a number of groups were
formed to study and analyse evidence and data which was available.
Materials like CVR, ATC and DFDR tapes were also given to the
various participants.
3.5.2 The groups as well as other experts studied and analysed
the material with them and submitted their reports which have
been referred to earlier.
3.5.3 The experts examining the CVR tapes did carry out a number
of tests. Different graphs and traces were prepared and the sound
was analysed by them. The result of their analysis has been referred
to in Chapter 3.4 on Flight Recorders.
3.5.4. The metallurgical examination of some of the recovered
pieces was carried out at BARC. The examination of some of the
pieces showed different types of damages having been recorded
on the targets such as petalling and curling round the holes,
spikes etc. The said team carried out certain explosion experiments.
Their report on the experiments so carried out has already been
set-out in paragraph 3.2 above.
3.5.5 The Indian Air Force has set up an Institute of Aviation
Medicine at Bangalore. The Court visited the said Institute on
9th December 1985. During that visit an experiment was conducted
in the explosive decompression and high altitude chamber to demonstrate
what actually happens during explosive decompression and subsequently
on exposure to hypoxia.
3.5.6 Subjects were taken to 8,000 feet in the explosive decompression
chamber with oxygen. They were exposed to an altitude of 25,000
feet within one second. During the course of this explosion a
loud bang was heard and inside the chamber there was misting and
drop in temperature. After this the chamber was allowed to run
at 22,000 feet for roughly two minutes and an experiment to show
the adverse affects of hypoxia on the subjects was done. In this
experiment, subjects were asked to write a given sentence while
their oxygen supply was cut off. It was observed that initially
the subjects kept on writing the sentence correctly and then
after about 120 seconds they started making errors while writing
the sentence and finally they stopped writing. At this stage oxygen
was re-started and within a few seconds, the subjects started
writing their sentence once again. The experiment was completed
at this stage and the altitude chamber was brought down to ground
level.
3.5.7 The subjects were taken out and were asked questions as
to what did they feel. They explained that at the time of explosive
decompression, they heard a loud bang, felt cold and saw misting
inside the chamber. They also found air escaping from their lungs.
On further enquiry about the experiment pertaining to hypoxia,
they said that they felt light headed and after that they did
not know what happened till they once again noticed that they
were writing on a piece of paper.
SECURITY
3.6.1 The evidence and the statements filed on record show that
Canadian Security arrangements in place prior to 23rd June, 1985
met the international requirements for civil air transportation.
However, before this date, the emphasis was on preventing the
boarding of weapons including explosive devices in hand baggage.
Hence, the screening of checked baggage was only undertaken in
conditions of a heightened threat as was the case with respect
to Air India flights.
3.6.2 Air India, as required by Canadian regulation, had a security
programme. Because of the threat level assessed against the Airline,
Air India had more extensive security measures than almost any
other Canadian or international airline. These measures were generally
in accordance with the recommended procedures of the ICAO Security
Manual for special risk flights. Air India had also requested
and had received and arranged for extra security for the month
of June, 1985. For Air India flight 181/182, Air India provided
a security officer from its New York Office to oversee the security
at Toronto and Montreal.
3.6.3 As it became apparent during the course of investigation
that security would be an important aspect whilch would require
the attention of the Court, Mr. Rodney Wallis, Director, Facilitation
and Security, International Air Transport Association was good
enough to appear in Court on 24th January, 1986. His testimony
on certain aspects of security was recorded in camera by the Court
on that date. The expert evidence has been taken into consideration
while formulating some of the recommendations.
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION
3.7.1 The manner in which persons and organisations from five
different countries combined their resources and efforts in connection
with this accident is an object lesson in international cooperation.
3.7.2 From the time the accident occurred, till the conclusion
of the investigation proceedings by the Court in Delhi, there
has been a consistent interplay amongst different persons and
organisations. When all the persons got together, for the first
time, at Cork the group was very heterogeneous. Each one had his
own point of view, which did not necessarily coincide with that
of another. At times, the atmosphere was charged with a bit of
tension which continued even when the Court was constituted to
investigate into the accident.
3.7.3 It was noticed that not only were the participants a bit
apprehensive and suspicious but, during the course of investigation,
there were also occasions when there appeared some acrimony between
a few of them.
3.7.4 In such a sensitive situation, careful handling was called
for. The participants' honesty of purpose could not be doubted.
All that was wanted was that there should be an effort to try
and understand the point of view of all the persons. This is precisely
what the Court tried to do.
3.7.5 It is indeed fortunate that the efforts of the Court, in
this regard, succeeded. After the Court had decided that it was
not the purpose or the function of the investigation to affix
responsibility for any lapse which may have been committed, one
could see the general relieving of tension. With the passage of
time there was a gradual building up of the confidence of the
participants in the conduct of the investigation. The participants'
interest for air safety transcended all barriers and any apprehension
or suspicion, which was present in the minds of some, was soon
dispelled. In its place there grew a deep sense of urgency, anxiety
and cooperation in an effort to see that all the participants
rendered utmost assistance for the satisfactory completion of
the task in hand.
3.7.6 The main beneficiary of this international cooperation was
not only the Court investigating the accident but it was the cause
of air safety which benefited the most. Countries and Organisations
went out of the way to help each other, financially and otherwise,
even when they were not obliged to do so. Money and services were
readily and voluntarily offered and usually the requirements of
the Court were always fulfilled.
3.7.7 As the accident had occurred only about 100 miles off the
coast of Ireland, the centre of activity, initially, was centred
at Cork. The Government of Ireland, and the Irish people in particular,
acted as though they regarded this as a national disaster. Not
only did they render every assistance with regard to the search
and rescue operation, hospital facilities, police etc. but the
people acted as if one of their own kith and kin had died. In
the situation which existed they were pillars of strength to the
relatives of the deceased. Not only did complete strangers comfort
such relatives but, more often than not, they even joined in their
grief. The residents of Cork did everything possible to try and
mitigate the sorrow of the victims' relatives. Everyone did their
small bit, even the children of Cork queued up to place flowers
at the coffins of the victims.
3.7.8 The Representatives of the Government of Canada also came
to the scene, at the initial stages itself, and rendered full
help and cooperation till the last. The major brunt of the mapping
and the salvage operations was borne by Canada. Willingly and
without any demur it incurred huge expenses, which must have been
to the tune of a few million dollars, in carrying out these operations.
It rendered full help and assitance to the Court whenever called
upon to do so. For example, it offorded full facilities and help
to the team which had been sent to Canada by the Court in August,
1985. It was only with the help of the Canadian Government, and
the CASB and RCMP in particular, that the Court was able to obtain
evidence and information relating to the accident. Without Canadian
help the conduct of the investigation would have only been speculative
in nature.
3.7.9 On their own, and without any request from the Court or
from the Government of India, the Government of United States
decided to lend a helping hand in the salvage operations. This
was done
at a very critical juncture when financial help and expertise
were required so as to salvage the important critical pieces of
the wreckage. It arranged for the services of a salvage expert
and it also made necessary arrangements for the deployment of
a second ship, duly fitted with necessary equipment to enable
it to salvage some of the heavier pieces of the wreckage. The
Court understands that the amount which was contributed in meeting
the expenses by the United States was to the tune of U.S. $ 700,000.
3.7.10 The Government of United Kingdom also provided ship and
helicopters in connection with the search and rescue operations.
Even during the time when salvage operations were being carried
out it was the British Helicopters which assisted in transporting
personnel to and from the ship which were engaged in the salvage
operations. The A.I.B. at Farnborough, on being asked by the Court
to do so, carried out a very detailed analysis of the CVR and
the ATC tapes.
3.7.11 Being the state of Registry of the aircraft and also the
state holding the investigation, the major brunt of the work fell
on the shoulders of officers of the Government of India and BARC.
They acted as coordinators who had to oversee the work being carried
out by persons belonging to diverse organisations and coming from
different countries. Young engineers of Air India took turns in
going aboard the ships and manning the Control Centre at Cork.
They worked in conjunction with the engineers of Boeing and CASB
and the crew members of the ships during the salvage operations.
Without their enthusiastic participation the progress of the salvage
operations would have been severely hampered.
3.7.12 The Scientists from BARC and National Aeronautical Laboratory,
Bangalore were ever ready and willing to work together with the
experts from abroad. Whenever called upon to do so, they rendered
whatever assistance which was desired by the Court and the other
participants.
3.7.13 It was seen that when the persons, coming from different
countries and backgrounds, worked together with sincerety and
honesty of purpose then they functioned smoothly and harmoniously,
and usually arrived at an agreed solution or finding. These days
it is indeed rare to see such a degree of international cooperation
between different persons, organisations and countries.
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS
4.1 From the evidence which is available what has now to be determined
is as to what caused the accident.
4.2 Finding the cause of the accident is usually a deduction from
known set of facts. In the present case known facts are not very
many, but there are a number of possible events which might have
happened which could have led to the crash.
4.3 The first task is to try and marshal the facts which may have
a bearing as to the cause of the accident.
4.4 It is undisputed, and there is ample evidence on the record
to prove it, that Air India's Kanishka had a normal and uneventful
flight out of Montreal. The aircraft had been in air for about
five hours and was cruising smoothly at an altitude of 31,000
feet. The readout from the CVR shows that there was no emergency
on board till the catastrophic event had occurred. This is corroborated
by the printout available from the DFDR. The event occurred at
approximately 0714 Z and that brought the aircraft down, and it
probably hit the surface of the sea within a distance of 5 miles.
The time within which the plane came down at such a steep angle
could not have been more than very few minutes. There was a sudden
snapping of the communication between the aircraft and the ground.
The aircraft had also suddenly disappeared from the radar.
4.5 It is evident that an event had occurred at 31,000 feet which
had brought down 'Kanishka'. What could have possibly happened
to it? The aircraft was apparently incapacitated and this was
due either to it having been hit from outside; or due to some
structural failure; or due to the detonation of an explosive device
within the aircraft.
4.6 Evidence indicates that after the event had occurred, though
the pilots did not or were not in a position to communicate with
the ground, they nevertheless appeared to have taken some action.
According to Mr. Laflamme, witness No. 12, the examination of
the wreckage showed that spoilers had been deployed and this must
have been done
with a view to enter into emergency descent. He has further speculated
that such an emergency descent would support or perhaps cause
a rupture in the forward area or a partial damage to the hydraulic
system or damage to the control system which created such a condition
that the pilots were not able to control the flight. The wreckage
fruther showed that the jack screw for the stabilizer trim was
found in the nose-up position and it was hard to explain how this
got there merely as a result of impact with the water. The trim
being in that position could only have been due to the pilot selecting
it or as a result of a situation created by an explosion. In that
position, and at a high aircraft speed, there would have been
an extremely high g-loading on the aircraft.
4.7 It can further be speculated that if an explosion takes place
in the forward cargo compartment, the oxygen stream might have
been damaged so that when the pilots donned their masks as part
of the emergency drill for explosive decompression, they were
not breathing enriched oxygen and the time of useful consciousness
at about 31,000 feet would be significantly less than 30 seconds
under high stress and if the pilots became unconscious as a result
of this, then the aircraft would have got out of control which
would explain the subsequent events.
4.8 None of the participants have produced any evidence which
could lead one to the conclusion, that there was any external
hit to the aircraft. In fact in the report dated 13th November,
1985, Mr. Paul Turner has stated as follows:
"The United States Norad/Space Command has confirmed that
there was no incoming space debris in the vicinity of Ireland
on June 23, 1985."
4.9 Thus we are left with only two of the possibilities viz.,
structural failure or accident having been caused due to a bomb
having been placed inside the aircraft.
4.10 After going through the entire record we find that there
is circumstantial as well as direct evidence which directly points
to the cause of the accident as being that of an explosion of
a bomb in the forward cargo hold of the aircraft. At the same
time there is complete lack of evidence to indicate that there
was any structural failure.
4.11 The circumstantial and direct evidence which leads to the
aforesaid conclusion is as follows :
A. Connection with an explosion at Narita Airport :
On 23rd June, 1985 there was an explosion at the Narita Airport.
The explosion occurred when a bomb exploded in a suit case which
was to be interlined to Air India's Flight No. 301 from Tokyo
to Bangkok. The following events, which had occurred prior to
this explosion, clearly establish the connection between the two
incidents :
(i) On 19 June 1985, at approximately 1800 PDT (0100 GMT, 20 June),
a CP Air reservations agent in Vancouver received a telephone
call from a male with a slight Indian accent. He identified himself
as Mr. Singh and informed the agent that he was making bookings
for two different males also with the surname of Singh. One booking
was made in the name of Jaswand Singh with CP 086 from Vacouver
to Dorval on 22 June 1985 to link with AI 182 departing from Mirabel.
The other booking was to Bangkok using CP 003 from Vancouver to
Tokyo and AI 301 from Tokyo to Bangkok. This booking was made
in the name of Mohinderbel Singh. A local telephone contact number
was given and the call lasted about one-half hour.
(ii) On the same date at approxmimately 1920 PDT (0220 GMT), another
reservations agent for CP Air was contacted and requested to change
the booking for Jaswand Singh. The confirmed flight on CP 086
was cancelled and a reservation was made on CP 060 from Vancouver
to Toronto, and a request to be wait-listed on AI 181/182 from
Toronto to Delhi was made.
(iii) On 20 June, 1985 at about 1210 PDT (1910 GMT), a male appearing
to be of Indian origin purchased the tickets with cash from a
CP Air Ticket office in Vancouver. The booking in the name of
Mohinderbel Singh was changed to L. Singh and the booking using
the name of Jaswand Singh changed to 'M. Singh'. The telephone
contact number was also changed. The final itinerary was as follows
:
(a) M. Singh - CP 060 Vancouver - Toronto Confirmed Scheduled
to depart Vancouver at 0900 PDT, 22 June 1985
- AI 181 Toronto - Montreal Wait-listed Scheduled to depart Toronto
at 1835 EDT, 22nd June, 1985
- AI 182 Montreal - Delhi Wait-listed Scheduled to depart Montreal
at 2020 EDT, 22nd June, 1985
(b) L. Singh - CP 003 Vacouver - Tokyo Confirmed Scheduled to
depart Vancouver at 1315 PDT, 22 June, 1985
- Air India 301 Tokyo - Bangkok Confirmed Scheduled to depart
Tokyo at 1705 time in Tokyo, local 23 June, 1985
(iv) On 22 June, 1985 at about 0630 PDT (1330 GMT), a caller identifying
himself as Mr. Manjit Singh called the CP Air reservations office.
The caller spoke with a heavy Indian accent and wanted to know
if his booking on AI 181/182 was confirmed. The caller was informed
by the agent that the was still wait-listed out of Toronto and
offered to make alternate arrangements to Delhi. The caller stated
that he would rather go to the airport and take his chances. The
caller also asked if he could send his luggage from Vancouver
to Delhi and was told he could not check his baggage past Toronto
unless his flight was confirmed.
(v) On Saturday morning, 22 June, 1985, a CP Air passenger agent
worked check-in position number 26 at the CP AIR ticket counter,
Vancouver International Airport, and recalls dealing with a passenger
of Indian origin booked on CP 060 and then on to Delhi. The passenger
stated that he wanted his bag tagged right to Delhi from Vancouver.
After checking the computer, the agent explained that since he
was not confirmed past Toronto his baggage could not be interlined.
The passenger insisted and, as the line-up were long, the agent
relented and interlined his suitcase. The flight manifest for
CP 060 shows that 'M. Singh' checked in through this passenger
agent, was assigned seat 10B, and checked one piece of baggage.
(vi) The flight manifest for CP 003 shows that on the same day
the person using the name of 'L. Singh' with an interline ticket
to Bangkok also checked through the same counter, was assigned
seat 38H, and checked one piece of baggage.
(vii) A check of CP Air's records and interviews with passengers
on flights CP 003 and CP 060 indicates that the persons identifying
themselves as 'M. Singh' and 'L. Singh' did not board these respective
flights.
(viii) In a statement of William Long, annexed to the affidavit
of I.G. Pole, Police Officer, City of Toronto, he has stated that
on 22nd June, 1985 he was employed as a driver whose responsibility
was to deliver interlined baggage between terminal 2 to Terminal
1 and vice versa at Toronto. He has further stated that he had
picked up 4 bags from Terminal 1 which were destined for terminal
2 Air India. Three of these bags were from U.S. Air originating
from New York city. Regarding the last bag he stated as follows
:
"The fourth bag destined for Air India was, I distinctly
remember looking at the baggage tag and it was pink with the CP
logo in blue and
letters saying CP on it there were also numbers but I can't remember
the number, from CP Air and I remember it was from Vancouver.
On the bottom of the tag it said vancouver using the initials
YVR and the flight number which I can't remember. The bag was
destined for India. When I arrived at the CP Air belt there were
a number of bags from other airlines on the belt included in these
were the three U.S. Air bags destined for Air India. As I was
finishing loading the carts, a CP Air station attendant who had
been unloading bags from containers, I noticed as I checked once
more for anymore bags, drop another bag on the conveyer belt.
This was the bag destined for Air India. It was dark brown Samsonite
Hard sided Type 01A on the Baggage Identification Chart. After
they were loaded onto the cart I took them over to Air Canada
domestic belt at Gate 89-91".
To further questions posed to him, Long stated that this bag from
CP Air weighed approximately 70 lbs and there was something which
rattled inside the bag. He could not say what it was but he said
that "it sounded small". When specifically asked whether
he thought there was something big inside the bag, he answered
in the affirmative, and added that he did not know what was in
it but it was heavy. There was discrepancy in the time when he
is alleged to have picked up the bags which he had indicated in
his schedule when compared with CP Air Vancouver flight which
had arrived at 1622 hours. When this was pointed out to Long,
he answered "I could have may be got the time wrong, it was
during the busy period. It could have been an estimate time. But
I do remember the bag came off CP air. It could have been 16:34
Hrs. I don't know."
(ix) The aircraft departed from Toronto for Mirable and London
with the suitcase unaccompained by the passenger who had checked
it in at Vancouver. Similarly, CP Air 003 departed Toronto for
Tokyo with the baggage of one passenger 'L. Singh' to be interlined
to Air India flight AI 301 to Bangkok even though 'L Singh' had
not boarded that flight.
(x) The linking of the two occurrences namely the blast at Narita
Airport and the Air India accident becomes startingly evident
if we look at the following chronology of events:
CPA 003 (VANCOUVER-TOKYO) CPA 060 (VANCOUVER-TORONTO) Connection to Connecting to Air India 301 Air India 182 WESTBOUND EASTBOUND All Times GMT Thurs 20 June, 1985 0057 A male called C.P. Air Reservations in Vancouver and after discussing a number of routings, booked a one-way ticket and CPA 060 to Toronto with connections to Air India 182 under the name of Jaswand SINGH. A return ticket was also booked on CPA 003 to Tokyo connecting with Air India 301 to Bangkok in the name of Mohinderbel SINGH.
1912 A male attended the CP Air Ticket Office in Vancouver.
He paid $ 3005.00 in cash for the above tickets after changing
the ticket of Mohinderbel SINGH to L. SINGH and changing
from a return to a one-way ticket. He changed the Jaswand SINGH
ticket to M. SINGH.
Saturday 22 June A Mr. SINGH called Reservations and got 1330
confirmation on his one-way ticket to Toronto with luggage to
be sent through to India. M. SINGH checked in with seat 10B confirmed
to 1550 Toronto. Wanted suitcase interlined to AI 182. Agent relents.
1618 CPA 060 departed Vancouver 18 minutes late. M. SINGH not
in assigned seat. L. SINGH checked in for CPA 003 and one suitcase
interlined to Air India 301. Assigned seat 38H. CPA 060 arrived
Toronto 2022 12 minutes late. Some passengers and baggage interlined
to AI 181.
CPA 003 departed 17 min. late for Tokyo. L. SINGH not in 2037
assigned seat. Sunday 23 June Air India 181 departed 0015 Toronto
for Mirabel 1 hour 40 minutes late. 0100 Air India arrived Mirabel.
0218 Air India 182 departed Mirabel 1 hour 38 minutes late. CPA
003 arrived Narita Airport, Tokyo. Arrived 14 minutes early 0541
Baggage cart explodes in transit area. 2 killed, 4 injured, 0619
0714 Air India 182 disappeared from Radar
Air India 301 departed Narita. 0805 0815 Air India 182 Scheduled
arrival Heathrow (fuel stop).
(xi) It would indeed to too much of a coincidence that two persons,
whose tickets were bought at the same time and who had checked
in under the names of 'L. Singh' and 'M. Singh' missed their respective
flights, more so when 'M. Singh' had insisted at the check in
counter at Vancouver that he should be interlined, even though
his seat from Toronto on AI 181/182 was not confirmed, and his
baggage (one suitcase) accepted and be routed through to Delhi.
If there had been some reason for 'gate no-show' by both of them,
one would ordinarily have expected both, or at least one of them,
to have made efforts, at that time or thereafter, either to ask
for refund of money or they should have contacted the airline
staff at the Airport and asked that they should be put on another
flight.
(xii) A large amount of money had been spent on the purchase of
the two tickets and a question which comes to mind is as to why
was this money spent if both the tickets were to be wasted and
no one was to travel on them, after having checked in and obtained
boarding cards. Furthermore, no effort has been made by any of
these two persons to try and lodge a claim for the baggage which
they had checked in.
(xiii) The aforesaid facts clearly indicate the connection between
the travel plans of so called 'L. Singh' and 'M. Singh'. In fact
the manner in which the reservations were changed to the names
of 'M. Singh' and 'L. Singh' shows the anxiety of some one to
hide behind the identity of persons who bore notorious names.
(xiv) The interlined baggage exploded at Narita Airport and there
is strong probability that the suticase from Vancouver, which
was interlined to AI 182, contained a device similar to the one
which had exploded at Narita Airport on 23 June, 1985.
B. CVR and DFDR both stopped simultaneously:
There was simultaneous interruption of electrical power to the
flight recorders. The electrical supply could have been interrupted
either because of the cables being cut or because of total electric
failure. Power supply wires to the CVR and the DFDR run under
the passenger cabin ceiling on the left and the right hand side.
The supply of electricity through these cables originates from
the MEC compartment, which is in front of the forward cargo hold.
If the CVR and the DFDR had stopped due to the breakage of electrical
supply wires as a result of possible explosion in the aft cargo
hold there would have had to be an instantaneous break of almost
the entire section of fuselage, because both these recorders had
stoped simultaneously. In such a catastrophic event it is not
possible that the bottom skin panels of the aft cargo compartment
would remain undistorted, or would have no rupture or holes in
them. Furthermore, in such an event the tail portion of the aircraft
would have been found in the beginning of the wreckage trail,
but this was not so. On the other hand, and explosion in the forward
cargo compartment would have resulted in damage to the electrical
buses located in the MEC and that would, in turn, result in cutting
off the electrical power supply causing simultaneous stoppage
of the recorders.
C. The ATC Transponder Stopped Transmitting :
The transponder is located at the bottom of the one of the
forward rakes immediately forward of the front cargo compartment.
Signals from this also stopped being received by the secondary
radar at Shannon. Keeping in view that the CVR and the DFDR had
stopped simultaneously at about the same time, when the signals
from ATC transponder had also ceased, it is reasonable to presume
that there must have been a complete breackdown of electrical
supply which had affected all the three units. The only event
which could have caused such a damage to paralyse the entire MEC
compartment could only have been an explosion in the forward cargo
hold. It was not possible that any rapid decompression caused
by a structural failure could have disrupted the entire electricl
power supply from the MEC compartment. In known cases of aircraft
being subjected to rapid decompression there has never been such
an instantaneous and total stoppage of electrical power and in
fact aircrafts have been known to have continued to fly and communicate
with the ground even after decompression.
D. Non-supply of Oxygen :
Oxygen supply cylinders are located in the ceiling of the forward
cargo compartment. Any rupture of the only pipeline which supplies
oxygen to the passengers would result in there being no surge
of oxygen flow, which alone drops the oxygen masks. The inspection
of the wreckage shows that there is no indication of the oxygen
masks ever having dropped. A rupture of this pipeline, simultaneously
with power rupture, could only have been caused if there had been
a detonation of the explosive device in the front cargo hold.
E. Damage in air :
The examination of the floating and the other wreckage shows that
the right hand wing leading edge, the No. 3 engine fan cowl, right
hand inboard mid flap leading edge and the leading edge of the
right hand stabilizer were damaged in flight. This damage could
have occurred only if objects had been ejected from the front
portion of the aircraft when it was still in the air. The cargo
door of the front cargo compartment was also found ruptured from
above. This also indicates that the explosion perhaps occurred
in the forward cargo compartment causing the objects to come out
and thereby damaging the components on the right hand side.
F. Evidence of Overpressurization :
The examination of the structural panels and the other parts of
the forward cargo compartment and the aft cargo compartment, recovered
from the sea bed, indicates that overpressure condition had occurred
in both the cargo compartments. The failure of the passenger cabin
floor panels in upward direction also indicates that overpressure
was created in both the compartments. It cannot be disputed that
whenever an explosive detonates very high pressure shockwaves
are formed which travel in all directions and high speed fragments
of the container, or the loose material, also move away from the
source of explosion. It is, therefore, clear that there was overpressurization
in the cargo compartments which resulted in such rupture of the
cabin floor panels.
G. Holes in the front cargo hold panels
While the skin panels of the aft cargo compartment are fairly
straight and undamaged, the panels of the front cargo compartment
are ruptured and have a large number of holes. This shows that
there was occurrence of an event in the front cargo compartment
and not in the aft cargo compartment.
H. Buckling of Seats :
The seats towards the rear of the aircraft had only the aft legs
buckled, whereas the seats towards the front had both the front
and the aft legs buckled. This indicated that the whole floor
was subjected to a vertical force and was more severe towards
the front. Moreover, the upper deck storage cabin was found among
floating wreckage. The bottom of this cabin was pushed up in the
shape of a dome with no evidence of impact damage. This deformation
was indicative of having been caused, possibly, as a result of
a shockwave.
I. Metallurgical Examination Results :
A metallurgical examination, especially of Targets 362 and 399,
clearly confirms that there was an explosion in the forward cargo
compartment. Microscopy around some of the holes discloses that
they have such characteristics like twinning which can be present
only if the holes had been puntured due to the detonation of an
explosive device.
J. CVR Tape Analysis :
The report of CVR tape analysis by Mr. S.N. Seshadri also corroborates
the aforesaid evidence i.e. that there was a bomb in the forward
cargo hold of the aircraft.
RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 ICAO, IATA and the States should :-
(a) undertake an ongoing review of established aviation security
standards to prevent the placement of explosive substances on
board commercial aircraft;
(b) establish a programme of monitoring the implimentation of
security measures in airports around the world, in cooperation
with the Governments concerned. For each airport studied, it should
report its findings and recomend any improvements that may be
required;
(c) consider establishing a group of civil aviation experts to
investigate serious breaches of security. The purpose of these
investigations would be to determine the facts of an incident
so that necessary measures could be developed and implemented
world wide to prevent similar breaches in the future.
Note : As it may take some time for ICAO and IATA to implement
these recommendations, at least those countries which have international
air traffic should take up effective measures without delay.
5.2 ICAO should :-
(a) develop a model clause on security that could be used in the
bilateral air agreements that govern the exchange of air traffic
rights between countries;
(b) consider establishing standards for the training of security
personnel.
5.3 IATA should develop practical procedures for reconciliation
of interlined passengers and their baggage at intermediate airports.
5.4 Interlining of checked-in baggage should not be done if a
passenger does not have a confirmed reservation on the onward
carrier flight.
5.5 The baggage of interlined passengers should be matched with
passengers by the onward carriers before loading the baggage on
the aircraft.
5.6 Whenever a Government becomes aware of particular high risk
security threat it should notify not only the airline at risk,
but also all connecting airlines in order that extra precaution
can be taken at potential points of introduction of interline
baggage into the system.
5.7 When an Airline is aware of a high security threat it should
communicate the same to the host state as well as, if possible
and prudent, to the other airlines operating there.
5.8 Passenger count should be done at boarding gate and in case
of 'no gate show' of a passenger, his baggage must be off-loaded.
5.9 All checked-in baggage, whether it has been screened by X-ray
machine or not, should be personally matched and identified with
the passengers boarding an aircraft. Any baggage which is not
so identified should be off-loaded. This is advisable as examination
of the baggage with the help of an X-ray machine has its own limitations
and is not fool proof. Some explosives hidden in Radios, Cameras
etc. may not be readily detected by such a machine. In fact an
explosive not placed in a metallic container will not be detectable
by an X-ray machine. Similarly, a plastic explosive can be given
an innocuous shape or form so as to avoid detection by an X-Ray.
Reliance on an X-Ray machine alone may in fact provide a false
sense of security.
5.10 Effectiveness of the instrument known as PD-4 is highly questionable.
It is not advisable to rely on it.
5.11 All unaccompanied baggage should be placed on the aircraft
after their contents have been physically checked. In the alternative,
it should be loaded only after it has been placed in a decompression
chamber and the host state is satisfied that the baggage is clean
and the shipper has been identified.
5.12 Airlines should have effective backup security equipment
or procedures available in case of machanical break down of security
equipment.
5.13 All hand baggage, including that of the crew, should be opened
and the contents physically checked even if the said baggage has
been x-rayed. This will no doubt be a bit time consuming and laborius
but if security is to be meaningful, then slight inconvenience
has to be endured in order to ensure a safer flight.
5.14 The manufacturers of aircraft should take effective steps
for protecting sensitive parts of the aircraft from explosive
damage.
5.15 Studies should be undertaken to determine the feasibility
of physically separating the avionics bay and emergency oxygen
systems from the cargo area in aircraft so that these sensitive
and essential areas of the aircraft cannot be damaged or destroyed
by a relatively small explosive deivce concealed in luggage.
5.16 The seats should have safety belts which can act as restraint
for the upper part of the body e.g. like a shoulder harness with
inertial restraint.
5.17 The seats in the aircraft should be so designed so as to
incorporate shock absorbing systems within the seat and they should
be manufactured by using material which does not break easily.
5.18 In addition to the cockpit voice recorder, there should be
in the cockpit a video/scanning camera which would record the
movements and the audio sounds in the cockpit. This will not only
assist in ascertaining as to how the pilots act during as emergency
but, in the case of hijacking, would also assist in the identification
of the hijackers.
5.19 The CVR should record all the conservation and sounds in
the cockpit for the entire duration of the flight, and not merely
for the last 30 minutes.
5.20 The CVR and the DFDR should be powered from two alternative
sources of energy.
5.21 The oxygen for the flight crew should be supplied from two
different sources i.e. in the event of an emergency the pilot
and the co-pilot must don the oxygen mask and the oxygen must
be supplied from different source.
5.22 Suitable provisions should be incorporated in Annex 13 which
would give power to an Investigator to record evidence outside
the country of investigation and also to summon witness from abroad.
It should also be mandatory on the contracting States to give
information sought for by an Investigator.
(B. N. KIRPAL)
February 26, 1986 COURT
We agree with the conclusions and recommendations stated above.
ASSESSORS
(V. Ramachandran) (J.S. Gharia)
(J.S. Dhillon) (J.K. Mehra)
(B.K. Bhasin)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
When I was appointed as the Court to investigate into the accident,
the magnitude of the task involved was known. With the help, assistance
and cooperation of a team of dedicated workers, the work was,
however, completed in not too long time. The assistance received
from those who helped me cannot be too highly praised.
From amongst my Assessors, Captian B.K. Bhasin was the only one
who was permanently stationed in Delhi. We met for the first time
on 15th July, 1985 and little did I realise then that, by the
time our work would be over, how much I would be depending upon
him. Not only was his advice on the technical aspects of flying
and air safety invaluable but, whenever any difficulty or a problem
arose, I invariably turned to him for assistance and advice which
I readily got. I found him having a very practical and positive
approach to all the problems but, at the same time, he very rightly
was not prepared to compromise on any principal issues.
The only interest Dr. V. Ramachandran appeared to have was to
do his work to perfection. No praise can be too high for the manner
in which this Metallurgist from landlocked Bangalore volunteered
and boarded the salvage ships which were carrying out operations
in the cold and choppy waters of Atlantic Ocean. He sarificed
all comforts and went to sea with a view to be present on board
the ships at the time when salvaged pieces of wreckage were brought
on board. His deep knowledge of metallurgy greatly assisted the
examination of the salvaged pieces of wreckage. In this connection
the entire metallurgical examination was planned and organised
by him.
Whenever any information was required concerning explosives, Mr.
J.S. Gharia was ever eager and in a position to provide the information.
Mr. J.K. Mehra looked into the engineering aspect of the accident
and he spent a lot of time in going through various Air-India
Maintenance Manuals. He always made discussions very lively and
interesting.
Captain J.S. Dhillon came out of his retirement and provided useful
information to the Court on some aspects of flying.
This work would never have been satisfactorily completed without
the help and assistance received by the Court from late Mr. S.N.
Seshadri of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre. From the time when
the CVR was first played by him at BARC on 16 July, 1985 till
the very end, he most willingly and pleasantly undertook any assignment
which was given to him by the Court. It was a great national loss
when he suddenly passed away on 2nd February, 1986, only a few
days after he had deomonstrated his brilliance when his testimony,
regarding the analysis of the CVR tape, was recorded by me in
the Court.
I am also grateful to the other Scientists and staff of B.A.R.C.
who rendered considerable assistance to the Court. The facilities
made available by Dr. P.K. Iyengar, Director, B.A.R.C. with regard
to the finalisation and completion of the report cannot be easily
forgotten. In the absence of late Mr. S.N. Seshadri, with whom
I had developled a personal rapport, Dr. Ashok Mohan and Mr. V.K.
Chadda met with all our requirements in the finalisation and preparation
of the Report. Dr. Asundi of BARC and the other Metallurgists
of that Organisation and of the National Aeronautical Laboratory
also spent a considerable amount of their time and energy in successfully
carrying out metallurgical tests and examination of the salvaged
pieces.
During the investigation I had to visit Ireland on two occasions.
I immediately realised the extent of help, assistance and guidance
which was being rendered to all of us by Mr. Kiran Doshi, the
Indian Ambassador to Ireland. There was no problem to which he
did not have a solution. On my visit to Dublin not only did I
enjoy the hospitality of Kiran and his wife Razia but it also
gave an opportunity to personally meet Mr. Mitchel, the Minister
of Communications, and senior officials of his Ministry, and to
express my gratitude to them for all the help and assistance which
the Government and people of Ireland had, most willingly, rendered.
At Tokyo the Indian Ambassador and members of his staff looked
after all our needs and arranged meetings with the Japanese officials
whom we wanted to meet.
As representatives of the Court in Cork, Mr. P.R. Chandrasekhar
and Mr. C.D. Kolhe did a commendable job. They kept me informed
of the progress which was taking place at Cork and, whenever required
to do so, they took vital decisions while coordinating the mapping
and salvage operations.
Mr. H.S. Khola, Director of Air Safety, New Delhi willingly carried
out all the directions of the Court. Special mention must also
be made of Mr. Satendra Singh, Regional Controller of Air Safety,
Bombay, who worked day and night when the flight recorders were
first opened and the copies of the tapes made and the data analysed.
I have also to express my gratitude to the Counsel who assisted
the Court in the Investigation. Without their help and cooperation,
it would not have been possible to complete the work in 7-1/2
months.
On my trip to Bombay, the Staff and Management of Centaur Hotel
made my stay very comfortable. It was like a home away from home.
The work done during the salvage operarations by four young engineers
of Air-India was highly commendable and valuable. All of them
namely, Mr. Balasubramanium, Mr. L.S. Carvalho, Mr. G.D. Nayar
and Mr. A.K. Sheode, worked round the clock even during adverse
climatic conditions.
The Registrar of the Delhi High Court, Ms. Usha Mehra spared no
efforts in rendering every assistance whenever the same was required.
She ably marshalled all the resources available in the High Court
in order to ensure the smooth and efficient functioning of my
office. My own personal staff in particular, headed by Mr. V.P.
Ahuja, Court Master and Mr. Balram Chopra, Private Secretary,
as usual, rose to the occasion. While Mr. Ahuja kept complete
control of hundreds of documents and affidavits which had been
filed, Mr. Chopra besides bearing the brunt of the typing work,
very ably supervised the work of other Stenographers.
It was most fortunate that I was able to persuade Mr. S.N. Sharma
to accept the trying job of being the Secretary to the Court.
His vast experience in such Investigations, he had been a Secretary
in three such Investigations earlier, made my task much lighter.
Moreover, as an Aircraft Engineer, he was always ready to explain
technical intricacies involved in the case. Without his help I
could not have completed my work within the stipulated time.
(B. N. KIRPAL)
26th February, 1986 COURT
POSITIVELY IDENTIFIED DEBRIS AIR INDIA 747 VT-EFO KANISHKA AIRCRAFT
SECTION TARGET LAT LONG DESCEIPTION 41 DOOR 192 51 03.28 12
47.74 FIRST CLASS AND COCKPIT AREA (+ UPPER DECK DOOR) 41 131
51 03.21 12 47.93 LEFT HAND UPPER DECK SLIDE MECHANISM 41 134
51 03.28 12 47.81 NOSE LANDING GEAR 41 265 51 02.37 12 44.51 LANDING
GEAR DOOR (NOSE GEAR) 41 244 51 03.56 12 48.19 UPPER DECK WINDOW
TRIM (REVEAL) 41 63 51 02.51 12 47.37 2 FIRST CLASS SEATS 41 77
51 02.59 12 47.83 2 FIRST CLASS SEATS 42 DOOR 193 51 03.30 12
47.85 PIECE OF FUSELAGE, WING PLUS LANDING GEAR (#2 LEFT DOOR)
42 138 51 03.37 12 47.77 SMALL PIECE OF WRECKAGE (BS 800) 42 200
51 03.347 12 47.831 Dual Heat Exchanger 42 DOOR 204 51 03.33 12
47.87 FORWARD CARGO DOOR + FLOOR 42 255 51 03.72 12 48.01 GALLEY
COMPLEX (UPPER DECK) 42 232 51 03.49 12 47.92 'P93' RACK MARKED
'DANGER HIGH VOLTAGE' (BS 670) 42 327 51 01.62 12 43.03 NACA SCOOP
42 DOOR 358 51 03.39 12 47.86 MASS OF DEBRIS (#2 RIGHT DOOR) 42
361 51 03.384 12 47.848 BOX MARKED "FAN BLADES" 42 362
51 03.372 12 47.840 MASS OF DEBRIS FUSELAGE SKIN 42 383 51 03.32
12 47.81 MASS OF DEBRIS WITH UPPER DECK FLOOR 44 DOOR 137 51 03.30
12 47.80 CENTER FUSELAGE SECTION WITH #3 LEFT DOOR 6 WINDOWS AFT
OF DOOR AND 13 WINDOWS FORWARD. LEFT UPPER WING SKIN AND ONE MAIL
LANDING GEAR ATTACHED. 44 103 51 02.86 12 46.37 LANDING GEAR DOOR
44 105 51 02.81 12 46.04 LEFT WHEEL WELL LANDING GEAR DOOR 44
186 51 03.32 12 47.825 KEEL BEAM 44 195 51 03.32 12 47.78 WING
STRUCTURE 44 224 51 03.46 12 48.49 TWO WHEELS FROM MAIN LANDING
GEAR 44 239 51 03.62 12 47.38 MAIN BRAKE UNIT WITHOUT AXEL, PLUS
EQUALIZING ROD 44 240 51 03.62 12 47.44 MAIN TIRE AND RIM 44 241
51 03.62 12 47.40 MAIN TIRE AND RIM PLUS AXEL 44 242 51 03.61
12 47.40 MAIN BRAKE UNIT 44 267 51 03.35 12 44.45 PART OF LANDING
GEAR DOOR 44 275 51 02.13 12 44.10 BODY LANDING GEAR DOOR 44 279
51 02.30 12 44.64 MAIN LANDING GEAR DOOR 44 280 51 02.26 12 44.61
SECTION OF MAIN LANDING GEAR DOOR 44 343 51 03.285 12 47.809 MAIN
LANDING GEAR DOOR 59 51 02.57 12 45.73 SECTION OF LANDING GEAR
44 218 51 03.41 12 47.86 STEP WELL AREA (STA 1250-1480)
46 6 51 02.79 12 49.44 SMALL MOTOR 10" x 8" (FAN) 46
7 51 02.90 12 49.92 LOWER SKIN OF CARGO AREA 4' x8' (BS 1480))
46 #11 51 02.04 12 45.44 PIECE OF OUTER SKIN BODY STATION #1760
PART NO. 65B04325-403 46 25 51 02.21 12 46.27 BODY FRAME (BS 1660-1680)
46 26 51 02.20 12 46.72 CABIN SECTION WITH 4 WINDOWS (ABOVE 'T'
IN REG No.) 46 28 51 02.31 12 47.02 SKIN PANEL 1460-1800 46 33
51 02.49 12 48.28 AFT FUSELAGE SKIN PANEL 'YOUR PALACE IN THE
SKY' (AFT OF #5 DOOR) 46 34 51 02.49 12 48.29 RIGHT HAND FUSELAGE
SKIN PANEL AT DOOR #5 46 DOOR 40 51 02.47 12 47.41 CARGO DOORS
C2, C3 46 47 51 02.39 12 46.61 REAR CARGO FLOOR 46 50 51 02.38
12 46.60 CARGO FLOOR (STA 1500) 46 DOOR 74 51 02.49 12 47.71 FIVE
FRAMES AND DOOR-PORT SIDE AFT (#5 LEFT DOOR) 46 78 51 02.52 12
47.95 FRAME SECTION (SHEAR WEB STA 2000-2020) 46 87 51 02.58 12
48.43 BUILT UP STRUCTURE (STA 2412) 46 DOOR 97 51 02.52 12 47.38
FUSELAGE SKIN SECTION WINDOW BELT AREA WITH DOOR FOLDED UNDER
FRAME 46 DOOR 101 51 02.84 12 47.14 5 WINDOWS AND DOOR (#4 RIGHT
DOOR) 46 292 51 01.81 12 44.24 FRAME (STA 2240) 46 321 51 02.39
12 46.61 '4R' DOOR ENTRANCE WITH NO DOOR AND 10 WINDOWS (BS 1700)
320 51 01.84 12 44.59 FUSELAGE BOTTOM SKIN NEAR OUTFLOW VALUE
46 336 51 01.34 12 42.03 BULK CARGO COMPARTMENT FLOOR AND STRUCTURE
46 369 51 02.17 12 46.20 FUSELAGE PANEL SECTION, 4 WINDOWS 48
31 51 02.37 12 48.43 HORIZONTAL STAB 48 37 51 02.47 12 47.99 VERTICAL
TAIL FIN (+ PRESSURE BULKHEAD SECTION) 48 35 51 02.50 12 48.08
AFT PRESSURE BULKHEAD ( 25%) 48 22 51 02.19 12 45.68 ELECTRICAL
PANEL (RUDDER RATIO JUNCTION BOX) 48 27 51 02.20 12 46.83 APU
HOUSING 48 66 51 02.59 12 47.54 BODY FRAME (BS 25XX) 48 67 51
02.55 12 47.50 FUSELAGE SKIN (3 FRAMES FORWARD OF APU BS 2638)
48 68 51 02.57 12 47.55 FUSELAGE SECTION (BS 2598) 48 73 51 02.51
12 47.70 PART OF PRESSURE BULKHEAD 48 75 51 02.47 12 47.63 FRAME
FOR OVERHEAD LUGGAGE COMPARTMENT (ROW 46 F-G) 48 88 51 02.90 12
48.84 CONTROL LINKAGE FROM TAIL OF AIRCRAFT (ELEVATOR CONTROL
QUADRANT) 48 99 51 02.71 12 47.92 FUSELAGE SKIN SECTION (BS 2598)
48 296 51 02.03 12 43.17 PART OF PRESSURE BULKHEAD 48 314 51 01.84
12 44.19 APU AIR DUCT 48 371 51 02.51 12 48.28 AFT FUSELAGE SKIN
10'x15' (HORIZ. STAB CUTOUT)
SECTION TARGET LAT LONG ENGINES 7.13 108 51 02.97 12 47.12 AIRCRAFT
ENGINE (WITH STRUT) 149 51 03.26 12 47.38 ENGINE AND STRUT 154
51 03.32 12 47.75 ENGINE SECTION (5th ENGINE) 171 51 03.16 12
47.16 TURBINE SECTION OF ENGINE (POSSIBLY COMPLETE ENGINE) 235
51 03.63 12 47.07 AIRCRAFT ENGINE ENGINE PARTS 106 51 02.98 12
46.41 ENGINE COWLING (INLET) MARKED 'A124' (5th ENGINE) 109 51
02.97 12 47.11 STARTER FOR AIRCRAFT ENGINE 111 51 03.02 12 47.20
ENGINE COWL 116 51 02.99 12 47.80 ENGINE DEVICE 124 51 02.85 12
48.47 FIFTH ENG CENTER DOME 150 51 03.25 12 47.36 PART OF ENGINE
151 51 03.29 12 47.42 SMALL PART OF ENGINE 152 51 03.31 12 47.44
LOWER PORTION OF ENGINE 153 51 03.31 12 47.44 LOWER ENGINE COWLING
155 51 03.32 12 47.44 FAN INNER EXIT AREA 156 51 03.32 12 47.43
PART OF ENGINE 158 51 03.23 12 47.35 PART OF ENGINE COWLING 159
51 03.25 12 47.29 ENGINE COWLING 161 51 03.26 12 47.29 PORTION
OF ENGINE COWL 165 51 03.20 12 47.21 THRUST REVERSER SLEEVE 166
51 03.20 12 47.21 UNIDENTIFIED ENGINE PARTS 167 51 03.21 12 47.24
UNIDENTIFIED ENGINE PARTS 168 51 03.20 12 47.22 UNIDENTIFIED ENGINE
PART 169 51 03.18 12 47.20 UNIDENTIFIED ENGINE PARTS 170 51 03.19
12 47.19 PART OF DIAPHRAM (OIL COOLER) 172 51 03.25 12 47.21 ENGINE
EXHAUST CONE 173 51 03.27 12 47.38 ENGINE EXHAUST CONE AND EXHAUST
237 51 03.690 12 47.10 ENGINE PARTS CASE 238 51 03.72 12 47.10
ENGINE INLET COWL 206 51 03.34 12 47.50 SECTION OF ENGINE EXHAUST
STAGE #7 207 51 03.35 12 47.49 ENGINE HOT SECTION AREA 208 51
03.37 12 47.51 ENGINE TAIL CONE 214 51 03.19 12 47.36 CASCADE
VANE
STRUTS 7.12 4 51 02.87 12 49.05 #3 ENGINE NACELLE STRUT 157 51
03.23 12 47.36 STRUT (SIMILAR TO 149) 110 51 03.15 12 47.16 NACELLE
STRUT WING PARTS 17 120 51 03.01 12 47.98 OUTBOARD AILERON (50%)
16 135 51 03.28 12 47.81 TRAILING EDGE FLAP AND DRAG JACK 16 136
51 03.31 12 47.81 TRAILING EDGE FLAP JACK SKREW 12 140 51 03.35
12 47.83 LEADING EDGE SECTION OF WING 14 145 51 03.34 12 47.85
WING LEADING EDGE VARIABLE CAMBER FLAP 16 177 51 03.34 12 47.91
TRAILING EDGE FLAP 12 181 51 03.38 12 47.87 LOWER CARGO COMPARTMENT
AND WING LOWER SKIN 16 183 51 03.38 12 47.87 SECTION OF FLAP SKIN
16 188 51 03.33 12 47.81 TRAILING EDGE FLAP WITH JACK SKREW 16
189 51 03.32 12 47.80 TRAILING EDGE FLAP WITH SKREW JACK 16 191
51 03.32 12 47.78 FLAP ACTUATOR AND FLAP TRACK 16 194 51 03.32
12 47.77 TRAILING EDGE OF FORE FLAP 16 253 51 03.32 12 47.86 PIECE
OF TRAILING EDGE FLAP 16 254 51 03.40 12 47.86 PIECE OF TRAILING
EDGE FLAP 16 264 51 02.47 12 44.74 TRAILING EDGE FLAP FAIRING
16 277 51 02.18 12 44.40 WING FLAP 16 344 51 03.294 12 47.802
TRAILING EDGE FLAP AND FLAP TRACK 16 384 51 03.33 12 47.80 T/E
FLAP TAPER AND DRIVE SHAFT 16 398 51 03.325 12 47.85 PIECE OF
TE MID FLAP 15 190 51 03.32 12 47.79 SPOILER ACTUATOR 14 187 51
03.34 12 47.81 LEADING EDGE FLAP SECTION 14 387 51 03.33 12 47.853
PIECE OF L/E FLAP MECHANISM
12 54 51 02.38 12 45.86 LE FROM WING 12 202 51 03.33 12 47.86
WING LOWER SKIN 12 221 51 03.39 12 47.89 UPPER EDGE LEFT WING
12 225 51 03.38 12 48.78 SMALL PIECE OF WING LEADING EDGE PANEL
12 222 51 03.38 12 47.94 WING FILLER & WING PARTS 12 243 51
03.59 12 47.85 PIECE OF LEADING EDGE FLAP 12 252 51 03.38 12 47.84
LOWER WING SECTION 12 262 51 03.85 12 46.92 MID LOWER WING SKIN,
ONE AFT FLAP TRACK WITH JACK SKREW 12 266 51 02.36 12 44.46 LANDING
GEAR DOOR 12 297 51 01.91 12 43.18 PART OF WING TIP 12 345 51
03.28 12 47.842 'REAR WING SPAR' 12 365 51 03.338 12 47.842 REAR
SPAR RIB WITH SPOILER ACTUATOR 12 379 51 03.315 12 47.785 WING
REAR SPAR AND SPOILER STA 1150 12 381 51 03.40 12 47.88 LE OF
WING SECTION 12 182 51 03.38 12 47.87 POSSIBLE REAR SPAR, (WING
STA 802 I.D. ON PART) 17 274 51 02.19 12 43.57 LEFT INBOARD AILERON
PAGE i
ii