Lop-sided version?

• This is in reference to the report, ‘ONGC chopper was grounded, repair on until day of crash’ (IE, May 29). It is an extremely lop-sided version of the confidential report. The headline in itself is extremely misleading, biased and false. The first two paras in Ritu Sarin’s report state facts in a misleading manner. Grounding is a terminology used in aviation for even when the helicopter is put down for maintenance. That means the helicopter can be considered grounded every night if it is not permitted to fly at night. However, in layman’s terms, grounding comes across as a term used to describe an unserviceable helicopter, which was not the case at all.
The aircraft was not grounded but it was a routine change to components and servicing, which was completed one day before the crash. On the day of the crash, the engineers rechecked the servicing carried out and the aircraft was cleared for flying. All servicing actions were done as per laid down rules.
Sarin has chosen to publish only those parts of the report pertaining to Mesco Airlines. While the report finally gave eight recommendations to the ONGC and 11 to the DGCA, it has recommended only two general recommendations hinting at Mesco Airlines. The report found no faults in the technical aspects of the machine. Life limitation is another way of looking at the aspect in a damaging manner. The article states that “there is no evidence to show that the requisite checks were carried out before allowing the take off with passengers”. Mesco Airlines would like to clarify that after the change of the components like the TGB and the IGB, the FOM (flight manual) of the Mi-172 clearly states that the hover check must be carried out as a mandatory requirement. This was a requisite test or check done before the helicopter took off with passengers and was carried out between 08:48 hrs—08:52 hrs on the day of the accident.
The article states that “the report submitted to the DGCA is a wealth of details on poor maintenance compounded by the pilot error”. The ‘Finding’ and ‘Conclusions’ of the report however state the opposite. There is no remark whatsoever in the report regarding “poor maintenance & shoddy checks”. However, certain references to some routine lapses are not remotely responsible for the crash.
The rudder control adjustment is disturbed during change of these components and all adjustments were completed as per the laid down procedures by the Russians when the aircraft was offered for flying. As mentioned earlier, the documentation was yet to be completed. This can be done 72 hours after the maintenance and was in place within the period.
The reporter’s contention of (only) a three-minute hover check is misleading. There’s NO specified period for hover check or check of controls.

— Natasha Singh Sinha CEO, Mesco Airlines Ltd

Ritu Sarin replies: Our report was based entirely on the DGCA’s findings, which are in our possession. It is, of course, within our rights to summarise from the 51-page report and to characterise the maintenance lapses revealed in it as “poor maintenance”. There’s no question of the Express carrying out a campaign against the airline. We had done a story earlier in which we had raised the point of faulty rigging in the plane’s rudder which Mesco denied. The inquiry report has now brought this aspect of “improper rigging” as a contributory factor to the accident.
Grounding is a term used not by the Express but by the DGCA’s inquiry officer. We quoted an exact para from the report which talks about how the helicopter was grounded. Despite this severe indictment, Mesco is still taking the line that these were “routine lapses”. We stand by our report which is based entirely on the DGCA’s findings.