A second expert report attacking the Civil Aviation Department's (CAD) conclusion that pilot error caused the 1999 China Airlines crash at Chek Lap Kok is to be presented at a public hearing into the accident which starts tomorrow. The report by the Hong Kong Airline Pilots Association's technical and safety committee argues the CAD was wrong to identify a single cause of the accident, in which three people died and more than 200 were injured. The Sunday Morning Post revealed last week how China Airlines, in its own expert report to the Board of Review, accused the CAD of manipulating data to blame Italian pilot Gerardo Lettich, 62. China Airlines' case will now be supported in principle by the second experts' report, which was jointly prepared with the International Federation of Air Pilots Association's accident analysis committee. Qualified accident investigators who drew up the second report say the CAD's finding that the sole, main cause of the crash was Mr Lettich's inability to control the rate of descent of the MD-11 could not be supported, according to industry sources. One source said: 'The report does not go as far as the China Airlines report, which effectively concludes no pilot, however skilful, could have avoided what happened that day. 'But it is critical of the CAD's conclusion in its crash inquiry that pilot error was the cause of the accident. It will argue that at the very least, the inquiry should have attributed the cause to a number of factors as well as the pilot's handling of the plane.' Those factors are believed to include the weather conditions at the time of the accident and mechanical features of the MD-11 aircraft. Mr Lettich, who was not invited to testify at the Board of Review, said from his home in Italy: 'I am the main actor but I would have only unimportant things to say. 'I don't feel guilty because I did everything correctly ... Of course I am responsible, and I feel responsible as a pilot for his passengers. 'But I do not feel guilt.' He said he believed he was subjected to 'something like racism' when the CAD initially refused to let him be interviewed in the presence of a lawyer or union representative two days after the accident. Mr Lettich added that he thought the Board of Review hearing would be 'good for the CAD. It is good for democracy'. CAD spokeswoman Sandra Lai replied that the interview was merely 'deferred while the protocol for this interview was considered'. She said when the CAD tried to contact Mr Lettich for an interview a few days later, 'it was discovered that he had departed Hong Kong without referring to his company or the CAD'. All further attempts to interview him were frustrated, she said. Hong Kong Aircrew Officers Association general secretary John Findlay said he believed Mr Lettich had been badly treated by CAD officials in the aftermath of the crash. But he disagreed with Mr Lettich that there was any racism involved. 'I am quite certain there was no racism,' he said. Mr Findlay contends that the CAD gave Mr Lettich permission to leave Hong Kong through the union before he departed. China Airlines has new technical evidence to present at the hearing which it believes is so compelling it justifies reopening the crash inquiry - a move which could mean opening and adjourning the Board of Review, which is scheduled to sit for two weeks. Ms Lai declined to comment on whether the CAD was prepared to have the inquiry reopened. 'As the Board of Review will consider the application by China Airlines to review the findings and conclusion of the report, any comments at this stage would be premature.' 'I feel no guilt' - Page 11
