|

AfavTAM Issues, 3 Years After TAM Airlines Flight 3054


From the desk of AfavTAM president Dario Scott

After nearly three years of sorrow, of missing our loved ones, we still struggle for truth, justice and life!

The facts: Information extracted from www.globo.com 08/24/2007

  • 7 month before the TAM tragedy, in a meeting with ANAC, Captain Gilberto Schittini, ANAC’s manager of evaluation standards for aircrafts, warned INFRAERO and AIR COMPANIES technicians, TAM’s technicians among them, that “… the three incidents we recently had could be considered as ‘warning signs of more serious incidents, involving the overrunning of the runway…’”, referring to Congonhas Airport, under certain conditions. The same statement was given before the Aerial Blackout Parliamentary Inquiry Committee.

  • On 07/17/2007, TAM flight JJ3054 overran the Congonhas runway, hitting a TAM building, and 199 people lost their lives. Hundreds of families were destroyed and are still struggling for justice. WHAT HAPPENED?

State and Federal inquiries were already concluded. The state inquiry, as disclosed by the press, identified a number of people from ANAC, INFRAERO, TAM and even AIRBUS to be held accountable.

Although working from the same facts, the federal inquiry came to a different conclusion, only identifying the pilots as responsible for the tragedy, exasperating us all.

Now, AFAVITAM awaits and relies on an independent and solid analysis by the Federal Prosecutor’s Office. AFAVITAM and rest of Brazil count on the indictment of the real wrongdoers that are responsible for this foreshadowed tragedy. Time elapsed is a disturbing factor; we don’t have a closure, even after three years. Due to the statute of limitations, time works on behalf of the guilty. We believe that, in order to get the proper measures taken and to PREVENT NEW TRAGEDIES, to compel and awaken society, an exemplary punishment is a valid mechanism.

We have monthly meetings because we believe we can make a difference. WE LOOK FOR:

  • TRUTH AND JUSTICE;
  • PUNISHMENT FOR THOSE RESPONSIBLE;
  • SOLUTIONS FOR THE PROBLEMS FOUND, so we can avoid another tragedy.

NO MORE IMPUNITY IN BRAZIL.
HOW LONG OUR SAFETY WILL HAVE TO WAIT?
YOU CAN’T PUT A PRICE ON A HUMAN LIFE!!!

Estamos completando três anos de saudades. São três anos de caminhada pela VERDADE, pela JUSTIÇA e pela VIDA !!!! (www.afavitam.com.br)

Dos fatos: (Informações extraídas do G1, Globo.com, de 24/08/07)

? “O Comandante Gilberto Schittini Gerente de Padrões de avaliação de aeronaves da ANAC, alertou 7 meses antes da tragédia, em reunião em que estavam presentes técnicos da ANAC, INFRAERO E AS COMPANHIAS AÉREAS, dentre elas a TAM, que “ … os três incidentes ocorridos recentemente poderiam ser considerados indícios de que “há um potencial de ocorrências mais graves, com ultrapassagem do final da pista (VARAR A PISTA) …”, referindo-se ao aeroporto de Congonhas, quando ocorridas algumas condições.” Declaração fornecida por este em depoimento, posteriormente, à CPI do apagão aéreo.

? O QUE ACONTECEU? No dia 17/07/07 a aeronave da TAM, vôo JJ3054, VAROU a pista do aeroporto de Congonhas, bateu no prédio da TAM e 199 pessoas perderam suas vidas. Centenas de famílias foram destruídas e encontra-se em reconstrução atrás de JUSTIÇA.


Os inquéritos nas esferas Estadual e Federal já foram concluídos. No primeiro, conforme divulgado pela imprensa, várias pessoas foram apontadas como responsáveis, tanto da ANAC como da INFRAERO e da TAM, tendo referido ainda a empresa AIRBUS. O segundo, em que pese analisar os mesmos fatos, indicou apenas os pilotos mortos como culpados, o que indignou a todos. Agora a AFAVITAM aguarda e confia na análise firme e independente do Ministério Público Federal e espera, junto com a sociedade brasileira, que haja a denuncia e o apontamento dos verdadeiros culpados dessa tragédia anunciada. Estamos preocupados com a demora, porque já se passaram 3 anos e ainda não temos uma definição. Sabemos que o tempo beneficia o culpado, porque pode ocorrer a prescrição da pena. Acreditamos que a punição exemplar dos responsáveis pela tragédia é um mecanismo de coerção e conscientização para que medidas sejam tomadas e novas tragédias NÃO SE REPITAM.

Nos reunimos todos os meses porque acreditamos que podemos fazer a diferença e
BUSCAMOS:
– VERDADE E JUSTIÇA;
– PUNIÇÃO PARA OS CULPADOS;
– SOLUÇÕES PARA OS PROBLEMAS ENCONTRADOS, para que outra
tragédia anunciada não ocorra;
CHEGA DE IMPUNIDADE NESTE PAÍS.
A SEGURANÇA DE TODOS VAI ESPERAR ATÉ QUANDO? VIDA NÃO TEM PREÇO!!!

To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

Similar Posts

  • | |

    Fuss over Nothing Desensitizes: Bomb cries wolf

    What: Air Mauritius A340 en route from Melbourne to Perth
    Where: Melbourne
    When: May 22, 2012, 2.55pm
    Who: 181 passengers, 13 crew
    Why: While flying north of Millicent, a soft drink can with a spelling similar to BOMB was found on a drink tray. Initially police said the can was wrapped with paper apparently scribed with the word “bomb” and taped with masking tape; but later it was revealed the mixup concerned foreign lettering directly on the can.

    Pilots returned to Melbourne and made an emergency landing. Passengers were questioned about the can, then were provided overnight accommodations in Melbourne.

    At 11.30am after the aircraft was cleared, the passengers were able to board the plane and continue their flight.

    In George’s Point of View


    My concern here is that a rash of fake bomb scares could precede an event. Paranoia vs Vigilance. Foolish or not?

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
  • | | | |

    Dana Air Returns to the Sky


    Dana Air is returning to “service” six months after killing 153 in the notorious crash on Sunday, 3 June 2012. Dana Air Flight 992 crashed into two Lagos buildings. Poor maintenance and bad aviation safety practices led that Dana Air MD-83 to a dual engine failure that killed 153 aboard, 10 on the ground and caused many other injuries (on the ground.)

    We might ask why Dana Air is returning to so-called service when it had the highest number of aviation fatalities in 2012 and the world’s highest McDonnell Douglas MD-83 death toll.

    Should they really be offering flights when they have not explained away the cause of the Dana Air Crash? Perhaps they will keep flying until their remaining five McDonnell Douglas MD-83 have crashed, people grow more sense than to choose Dana Air on flights between Lagos and Abuja or LENDERS and LEASEHOLDERS choose to write better safety controls in their contracts.

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

  • Ethiopia Flight 409: Dubious Claims Circulate the Blognet

    There’s a general consensus among the people who deal with terrorists that terrorists like to take credit for disasters, even when they’re not responsible for them. Ownership of violence is part of the whole extremist “psych-you-out “ ideology. To claim responsibility for an act one did not do to is to “claim” one for the malevolent gipper, to make one appear more powerful, especially when actually helpless, and/or to appease whomever one is confessing to with false collateral by churning out false confessions.

    But consider this: if I say I am Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny, it does not mean I am Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. Legally, it’s going to take more than tall talking and word of mouth to establish that claim in court. It will take heavy duty concrete proof to make that claim stand up in a court of law. The head of the Engineering Department at the BEA (France’s version of the NTSB, the Investigation and Analysis Bureau) Christophe Ménez said in an interview … that evidence shows that last month’s Ethiopian plane crash was not a result of an explosion. “The fuselage and other heavy parts, such as the engine, all sank together, and the plane’s wreckage was in close proximity, which indicates that the airliner did not explode. ”

    The investigation of Ethiopia Airlines Flight 409 so far does not develop a case for terrorism having anything to do with causing the crash. But even if it were true (and we don’t think it is), the primary liability rests with the operator, Ethiopia Airlines. This is not a legal opinion, just my own opinion.

    Now let’s speculate. If it were a terrorist act, it might derail a law suit against component manufacturers in the United States, but an experienced lawyer would tell us that if an act of terror downed the plane, it would not budge legal claims against Ethiopia Airlines. Under the various treaties that govern air travel, the operator has the primary responsibility for that innocent passenger who paid good money to get on that plane.

    The big news services are not the source of this claim; it looks like it is coming from a blog network, so it appears to be a rumor rather than fact, or a rehash or repost of an earlier theory. There is no plausible evidence of sabotage.

    But we are still hoping for more evidence, and for the families, more remains, to be discovered by the Odyssey Explorer in the ongoing marine search for definitive evidence.

    The terrorism theory has already been postulated and discarded once so I don’t give much credence to it. But more than anything, I regret seeing these things crop up to stress the victims families even more. They’ve already been through too much; and the investigation is going to take a long time. They have a long way to go.

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.

  • Hudson Crash May Provide AF477 Answers

    The one thing that stands out the most in today’s NTSB statement [about the US Airways Airbus A320 that crash-landed on the Hudson River] is that there is nothing but praise and admiration for the crew, whose quick reflexes, cool heads and complete professionalism saved the lives of everyone aboard.

    The NTSB is NOT so positive regarding Airbus, the manufacturer of the plane involved in that crash. See the NTSB’s Executive Summary

    There was no appropriate checklist for the event in the manual; and some procedures were so precise they could not be carried out.

    Ingesting birds into an engine is rarely so dramatic, mostly because it doesn’t usually happen to both engines. The circumstance allowed experts to examine cause and effect on the plane and a number of surprising things were concluded. Certainly more than I am talking about here.

    Some of the concerns conceivably could have applied to Air France Flight 447…if it had landed intact (although we are assuming it did not.)

    That the cockpit instrumentation did not reflect the status of the engines.
    Did the pilots of AF 447 also not have inaccurate reportage of the status of the engines? We think this is true. How can a pilot in the middle of the Atlantic in the midst of a storm with inoperable speed sensors know what the fly by wire engines are doing of the operating system doesn’t tell him something is wrong? The answer is: he can’t.

    That the rate of descent in the manual is unrealistic (claiming a safe 3.5 feet per second when in reality 13 feet per second caused damage.)
    Although there’s no telling what the rate of descent was for AF447, it appears likely that neither did the pilots. Also, 447 was not guided/glided down by Sully; if AF447 came down intact at all, it probably fell at a high rate of speed with only limited awareness of the pilots when it was too late.

    That in the Hudson event, slides were not flotation devices; wings did not float; and there were no rafts over these wings although the passengers scrambled out there.
    In the Hudson crash, the passengers exited to the wings, expecting flotation resources. Fortunately rescue came quickly before they sank. There were no “wing rafts.” Could AF passengers, had they survived the landing have exited, and been able to access rafts? We think not. Of course this is a moot point as we doubt they survived hitting the water–whether or not the plane was intact.

    Given that the NTSB called the Airbus manual unrealistic and inappropriate, that Airbus’s claim that for the Hudson crash “LaGuardia Runway 13 was technically feasible from an aircraft flight performance point of view” seems equally unrealistic. In fact, Airbus has a lot of nerve to extend a pseudo-panglossian commendation to Captain Sully for appropriately considering the high urbanization of airport surroundings. At this point, any statement from Airbus is highly suspect.
    At this point I consider Airbus itself, “theoretically feasible” but highly unlikely.

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
  • |

    Famílias acionarão Airbus nos EUA

    Famílias acionarão Airbus nos EUA

    Consultor americano que atuou no caso da TAM afirma que “projeto do jato é defeituoso”

    Marcelo Ambrosio

    Ainda que as causas do acidente com o A330 da Air France jamais venham ser realmente conhecidas, para as famílias das vítimas os caminhos para minorar a dor das perdas que sofreram estão abertos. Isso porque para o direito, em qualquer país, não há distinção sobre o motivo do desastre quando o que conta realmente é a morte de quem era transportado. Um dos maiores estrategistas do mundo nesse tipo de processo judicial esteve ontem no Rio para discutir com parentes de vítimas do voo AF447 e deixou claro esse recado: não importam as causas, o fabricante tem o ônus. O mexicano George Hatcher integra a equipe de um escritório de advocacia (Masry & Vittoe), cuja expertise mundial é a de arrancar de empresas de transporte somas altíssimas, a maioria das vezes, em acordos judiciais, como indenização por danos morais.

    Hatcher costuma fazer extensas investigações particulares antes de se decidir por recomendar que o escritório atue nesse ou naquele incidente. No caso do desastre do Atlântico, cujo montante de pagamentos pode alcançar o valor recorde de US$ 700 milhões de dólares, o veredito já foi dado.

    – Vamos processar a Airbus. Tenho uma lista de 700 pilotos com os quais costumo discutir. Dois deles são comandantes da ativa do A330 e, embora não se conheçam, disseram a mesma coisa: foram os computadores defeituosos os responsáveis pela perda da aeronave. O Airbus, na avaliação deles, é um projeto defeituoso – definiu o consultor, cuja atuação junto às famílias de vítimas do acidente com o Airbus da TAM em Congonhas o levou a um processo em fase adiantada em uma corte da Flórida, nos EUA. São 77 famílias representadas pelo escritório e uma vitória já alcançada, que foi o acordo com a companhia aérea.

    O que define o caso é o fato de que algo falhou e que o passageiro nada podia fazer para alterar esse quadro. As companhias tem noção disso e tentam jogar com o tempo e com a possibilidade do menor dispêndio de dinheiro possível. A escolha dos tribunais americanos, especialmente na Flórida, segue a lógica da possibilidade de sucesso.

    O consultor garante que lá, em casos como o do AF447 ou do A320 da TAM, decisões são mais céleres e rígidas. A idéia de ingressar com uma ação na França não está descartada, mas os EUA seguem como a 1ª opção. A justiça brasileira é séria, na avaliação do especialista, mas demorada. A remuneração do escritório segue as mesmas regras das demandas trabalhistas, com o cliente arcando com custos após a sentença. Os advogados ficam com 30%.

    – As cortes da Flórida são rigorosas, tem uma simpatia pelo drama das famílias e não perdem tempo. Os acordos nos EUA são os mais altos no por isso. No caso do acidente de Congonhas são processos que somam US$ 100 millhões e a audiência na corte já está marcada, para março de 2010. Fizemos um acordo parcial com a TAM, mas há outros réus, como a BFGoodrich, responsável pelos freios, e a Pratt&Whitney, fabricante das turbinas, uma das quais estava com o reverso quebrado.

    A ação relativa ao caso da Air France deve ser aberta também na Flórida, onde há um centro de treinamento do consórcio europeu e um escritório comercial.

    – Incluiremos também a Honeywell, que fabricou os computadores e os produtore dos softwares. Desde 2001 há alertas sobre essa questão nos aviões e nada mudou. Foram feitos 5.200 jatos pela Airbus até hoje e eles já tiraram 2.600 vidas, 600 em três desastres – acrescenta.

    O mais complicado é calcular o valor de cada indenização, valor que leva em conta fatores, como idade, expectativa de vida ativa, etc.

    – Para a Justiça americana, não há limite para esse valor – completa Hatcher, que conhece todos os representantes nos 77 processos relativos à TAM. – Conversei muito com todos eles esse tempo.

    Terça-feira, 21 de Julho de 2009 – 00:00

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.