Rumour has it now that the BEA might make a finding of ‘excessive workload’ on the flight crew as a result of the Airbus 330’s computers defaulting to ‘Alternate’ mode when the airspeed sensors became ice-clogged. There was a lot of confusion in the cockpit. That much we know from the beginning when the CVR and FDR were finally recovered from a depth of 4 km (nearly 6,000 feet).

   The BEA (France’s equivalent to the American NTSB) might go as far as stating that the workload was excessive on the crew to the point of creating ‘unsafe conditions’, as a contributing factor in the AF447 crash. This finding, if confirmed by public authorities, would throw the ball back in Airbus’ court, as well as Air France and the Pitot tube manufacturer, all of whom were aware of the defective design of the Pitot tube and attendant consequences years before the fatal crash.

 Despite outward appearances (as publicized in the damaging book on the AF447 flight crew performance released last week), the flight crew might not likely have to shoulder significant blame for the crash.

  The point is the AF 447 flight crew was facing excessive workload from the aut0-pilot disconnect onward during the fatal crash of flight AF447.

  Airbus Industries (now EADS) and Air France should have alledgedly been aware, long before the AF447 crash, of such foreseable consequences of ice-clogged Pitot tubes then in use on this model of Airbus aircraft.

The rule-making powers of the EU Commission will be expanded from its present focus on aircraft certification to include the power to set new rules governing aviation accidents and incidents across the EU, and to administer the new rules.

So far, the investigation of aviation safety breaches is performed by the civil aviation authorities of member countries. By consolidating and regulating the investigation and prevention of such breaches, the EU Commission will ensure that this important task is performed in a standardized manner in order to achieve enhanced independence and efficiency of the investigation and prevention processes.

The purpose of this proposed major change in the civil aviation regulatory framework in EU countries is well explained in this press release. Suffice it to say that economies of scale are expected from the new centralized process together with the need to maintain an arm’s length relationship between investigative authorities and other civil aviation interests in EU countries.

According to the press release linked above,

The proposed regulation aims to create a modern regulatory framework for air accident investigation. The centrepiece of this proposal is the establishment of a European Network of Civil Aviation Safety Investigation Authorities. It will coordinate and strengthen cooperation between the Member States, the Commission and EASA, and implement a number of central functions, such as coordinating training activities or sharing investigation resources available in the EU.