Aviation authority, department silent on SAA safety scandal

South African Airways, the South African Civil Aviation Authority and the department of public enterprises went into an effective “no comment” laager yesterday as the national airline’s safety procedures came under the spotlight.

At the centre of the growing standoff between the airline, aviation regulator and government on the one hand and pilots and aviation experts on the other, is the much-publicised SAA flight SA 4272 from Johannesburg to Brussels and back, to collect Covid-19 vaccines from Belgium in February.

The aircraft, an Airbus A340-600, had a safety-related incident on takeoff from OR Tambo when it almost stalled because air crew allegedly miscalculated its gross weight.

Only the onboard automatic emergency systems prevented a crash, it is claimed. Then, the crew also allegedly violated noise abatement regulations and procedures on takeoff from Brussels airport on the return flight.

While the three organisations closed ranks yesterday, an experienced SAA pilot said: “The truth must come out.”

The pilot previously shared details about the flight management system glitch on the Airbus A340-600, the fact that it was noted on a compulsory checklist and that the crew clearly did not go through this list prior to takeoff.

The incident on departure from South Africa is only half of the issue. The one in Brussels is considered serious because European regulators could ban SAA flights if they believe crews are not properly trained in such procedures. Noise abatement rules determine at what altitude the flight deck may increase speed.

After takeoff, the aircraft slows down first, after which it again accelerates as it starts the climb. “Normally this speed, at fairly low altitude, is limited to 250 knots,” said the pilot.

There are instances, for example at maximum takeoff weight, that slightly faster speeds can assist with lift.

“But on a cold European night, at sea level, with only a ton or two of vaccine and related goods on board, the aircraft would have been very light.”

However, according to reports in international media, SA 4272, with two of the airline’s most senior crew in command, must have left the runway “like a raging bull”.

According to a report on the industry site Aviation Herald, the aircraft was travelling at excessive speed over ground and at 457m exceeded the limits of noise abatement.

“It may have been an unfamiliar airport,” added the pilot, “but the crew would have received the necessary regulatory data to input into the flight management system.”

SAA’s business rescue practitioner, who speaks on behalf of the airline, refused to comment on the Belgian incident, again referring to the outcome of the investigation.

“If it was me, and perhaps the SAA of a few years ago, I would have been fired,” added the SAA pilot. The SA Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA) did not answer questions sent to it.

On Thursday, the authority issued a vitriolic press release accusing the media and interested parties of politicising the incident.

Yet, on Thursday, during a meeting of the standing committee on public accounts, Public Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan accused the pilots’ association at SAA of attempting to “sabotage” SAA and the flight.

When asked for clarification on what Gordhan meant by “sabotage”, the department of public enterprises referred Saturday Citizen to a press release issued on 23 February in which it said it would not be held to ransom by disgruntled airline pilots.

The SACAA statement also claimed it did its work so well that there have been no commercial fatalities of SA-operated aircraft in three decades.

Yet there have been a number of fatal crashes in that time, including in 2003 when cricket legend Hansie Cronje died when an HS-748 cargo aircraft on which he was hitching a ride crashed into a mountain on approach to George airport.

news@citizen.co.za

For more news your way, download The Citizen’s app for iOS and Android.