Special Hearings — Helderberg Flight Special Hearing — 1998-06-01

DAVID JOSEPH KLATZOW: That journey to Mauritius would have taken about eight or nine hours.   The aircraft took off from Taipei, as I said, about an hour and some minutes late, and it took off at 14:23, if my memory serves me correctly, from Chan Kai Shek Airport in Taipei, and you must bear in mind all along that there is a six hour difference approximately between the time which we are dealing with here and the time on the ground in Taipei, so whatever the time in Taipei was, it was six hours later here.
 Now, just after two o'clock in Taipei would make it just after seven o'clock in South Africa, which was just about the time that the shift changed at ZUR and just about the time that the tapes were changed, that the new tape came into operation and the old tape was put in the filing cabinet.   
 Now what is very interesting is that there is another tape recording which is of crucial importance, and that tape recording is the cockpit voice recorder, which I shall refer to as the CVR.   The cockpit voice recorder is a wire recorder, instead of using the plastic magnetic tapes today, these recorders in aircraft are usually wire recorders, and this one was located in the rear of the aircraft and recorded continuously the last half hour of conversation in the cockpit.   
 That cockpit voice recorder was recovered from the depths of the ocean and was transcribed at great expense, and an official version of the CVR, which is almost 30 minutes long, exists and was available to the Margo Inquiry at the time.   It records a conversation in the cockpit along the normal lines of what men will normally talk about during period of long inactivity and often substantial boredom, and it comes as no surprise to learn that the first 20 odd minutes of the tape were involved in discussing inter alia women.   Nothing surprising and nothing at all particularly upsetting to anybody, even close family members, who might have chosen to listen to that tape.   There was no embarrassing component, there was no obscene component, there was idle chit-chat about an attractive woman, and what is more important, there was the discussion on the cockpit voice recorder which is in the official version of a dinner being served in the cockpit.
 Now, the cockpit voice recorder takes it input from the cockpit and that input runs along the crown of the aircraft, in the roof, to the back of the aircraft, along the power supply, and that power supply enables the tape recorder to function.   We know that the tape recorder stopped functioning because a fire burnt through the cable supplying it and cut off both the input from the cockpit... (intervention).

CHAIRPERSON: If I can interrupt you just a little?
TAPE GOES DEAD FOR A PERIOD

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Dr Klatzow.

DAVID JOSEPH KLATZOW: Right.   As I was saying, the cockpit voice recorder records the last half hour of conversation and included in that half hour of conversation was discussion of a dinner, I'll allude further to that after I've told you this, the cockpit voice recorder stopped functioning because of the effects of a fire.
 Now it comes as no surprise to know that the normal way in which a flight operates is as follows:  after take-off and after the cruising altitude has been attained, it is invariable on overseas flights that a bar service, followed by a hot meal, is then served to the passengers.   That bar service, on a 747, could take anything between half to three-quarters of an hour, and the subsequent serving of dinner could take about the same amount of time.   Depending on the amount of administrative work in the cockpit, the crew, once they had settled down to the flight, would be served a meal from the first class lounge and would enjoy that meal.   There are several aspects which lead me to believe, and incidentally not alone, that a meal was being served.    
 The first is that Captain Uys refers to something and says, "I should rather not try that, because I'm going to have troubles afterwards".   This probably refers to a seafood meal and probably refers to the fact that Captain Uys, who was the captain of the Helderberg, was allergic to seafood and it caused him to have intense problems with his skin as a result of a medical condition.
 The second comment made in the cockpit, shortly before the fire bell goes off, is the normal disparaging comments that people make about an official meal.   Somebody says they're hungry and they wish they were about to get dinner.  Somebody else looks at what has been served out and refers to it as the same old junk food, and comments of that nature.
 Now the importance of that is that, if the tape recorder stopped functioning, and if the tape recorder stopped functioning as a result of a fire, that fire must have been within a half an hour, or the meal must have occurred within the half hour of the tape recorded conversation.
 I have never been on a flight, nor do I know of any flight where a meal is served immediately prior to descent into the port of call, so it would be extremely unlikely that the meal being referred to on the cockpit voice recorder was being served at the top of descent into Mauritius, and so inadvertently at that point, because we are led to believe that the fire occurred just outside Mauritius and therefore inadvertently the meal occurred just before the fire bell sounded outside Mauritius, in my view that is extremely unlikely.
 The unlikeliness of this being the case is given further impetus and support by the attitude of both South African Airways and the staff with whom I have spoken, as well as the attitude evinced by Mr Justice Margo at the original inquiry.
 If I could read to you the exact transcript of Margo at the original inquiry, you will see what it is that I am referring to, so if you will bear with me - do you have a copy of the original inquiry?

MS TERREBLANCHE: I have a copy.   We can make it available.

DAVID JOSEPH KLATZOW: If you turn to page 55 of the original Margo report, the following interchange between the chairman, a pilot by the name of Tony Viljoen and the prosecutor leading the evidence, one Mr Southwood who is now a judge of the supreme court, takes place
"Mr Chairman..."
says Mr Southwood:-
"...I have been informed that Captain Van Heerden (sic) of the South African Pilots Association is present.   He omitted to announce his presence and would like the opportunity to do so.

CAPTAIN VILJOEN: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I am Tony Viljoen and I represent the International Federation of Airline Pilots Association, known as IFAPA.

CHAIRPERSON: We are about to hear an excerpt from the CVR tape, not from the tape itself, but from a transcript.   Have you any submissions to make about that tape?

CAPTAIN VILJOEN: Sir, the reading of the tape into the record we do not object to.

CHAIRPERSON: The whole of the tape?

CAPTAIN VILJOEN: As far as pertinent conversation between the pilot and the air traffic control, as far as it applies to the full accident investigation, we have no objection at this stage.

CHAIRPERSON: Well what are you objecting to?

CAPTAIN VILJOEN: Nothing at all, not at this point.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, can the whole of the cockpit voice recorder be played in open court, because you're objecting to nothing?

CAPTAIN VILJOEN: Sir, I would agree to that.