Errors and miscalculations blamed for 2018 Havana plane crash
Authorities of the Institute of Civil Aeronautics of Cuba (IACC), in a press conference in Havana on May 16, pointed to the actions of the crew and weight miscalculations as probable causes for the 2018 Boeing-737-200 accident, one of the worst in Cuban history. The plane, along with its crew, had been leased by Cubana de Aviación from the Mexican airline Damojh SA less than a month before the crash.
“The Investigative Commission determined, according to the aircraft data provided by the flight recorders (black boxes) and the results obtained from the aeronautical standards for this flight, that the most probable cause of the accident were the actions of the crew and its errors in the weight and balance calculations, which led to the loss of control and the collapse of the aircraft during takeoff,” said IACC president Armando Daniel López.
The incident left 112 people dead and only one survivor, Mailén Díaz Almaguer, a 20-year-old woman, who has survived after numerous surgeries and a leg amputation. She continues to slowly recuperate.
One year after the fatal accident, relatives of the victims and the Cuban people still await details of the investigation that sheds light on this sad story. Cuban authorities briefly reported the two probable causes.
The investigation
Global Air, as the Mexican airline is also known, and its Spanish owner, Manuel Rodríguez, were questioned immediately after the accident. Media outlets such as El Universal and Milenio published numerous irregularities about the event. According to these press reports, it was revealed that Global Air aircraft, even before the accident in Havana, are not allowed to fly over US airspace. They do not comply with the maintenance requirements of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and therefore they cannot be maintained at any of Boeing’s plants, located in Seattle, Wichita and Dallas. Other contradictory testimonies also came to light and always featured the mysterious Spanish businessman, Rodriguez.
In June 2018, Adys Sánchez Agüero, head of the Legal Advisory Department of the IACC, announced new findings about the ongoing case, things such as that the investigation of the black boxes would be conducted in the United States, because, as she stated, “Cuba does not have the technical equipment needed for this model aircraft.”
On that occasion, Mercedes Vázquez González, Director of Air Transport and International Relations of the IACC “stated that the imputation of responsibilities in labor, administrative or criminal matters, will be carried out in correspondence with the provisions of current legislation and the results of the investigation.”
The inquiring commission was composed, according to the official reports, by experts from different fields of the Ministry of the Interior, experts that include all aeronautical specialties, two officials from the Cilvil Aeronautics Board of Mexico, two researchers from the National Transportation Safety Board of the United States, and representatives from Boeing, maker of the aircraft in question.
A month later, in July 2018, Global Air, without the authorization to reveal details about the investigation, said that the accident was due to “human failure” of the pilots, who took off with “a very pronounced angle of ascent.” Criticized at the international level for interfering in an ongoing investigation, the move was interpreted as an affront to the Mexican authorities, who had already temporarily suspended the company’s operations.
In March of this year, according to Cubadebate, the Cuban commission that investigated the cause of the plane crash of May 18, 2018, in Havana, had completed the modeling of the flight profile of the accident.
A report that month by Armando Daniel López to Cuban Television “states that the total deciphering of the two black boxes allowed the experts to determine with accuracy elements such as speed, height, turns, power of engines and possible technical failures of the Boeing 737-200 that Cubana had leased from the Mexican company, Global Air.”
The final report of the investigation has not been released, and according to the international protocols in use, it could take months to be completed.
The lawsuit
According to a report by the newspaper El Nuevo Día, “Relatives of the victims of the Havana plane crash last year filed a class action lawsuit against the Mexican airline Global Air, also known Damojh Airlines, as well as against its owner, the Spanish businessman Manuel Rodríguez Campo, and the insurance company Ve por Más SA, and the Financial Group Ve por Más.
The firm’s lawyers participated in the November 2014 signing of the collaboration agreements between the University of Santiago and the University of Burdeaux Mointaigne, through the mediation of the French Alliance in the eastern Cuban province. It has also been reported that the firm specializes “in representing family members and victims of air accidents in different parts of the world.”
“The action is aimed at the recognition and exaction of all civil liabilities that may arise and arising from the loss, in favor of the relatives of the deceased,” explained Carlos Villacorta, a lawyer with more than 20 years of experience in litigation related to international air accidents.
The lawsuit seeks to “clarify the criminal acts against the victims of the plane crash, so that the accused be summoned and then defend themselves before the facts and the criminal action brought before the district judge at the time,” he added.
The number of relatives involved in the lawsuit filed on May 17 is not known which would be added to a criminal complaint filed before the Attorney General of Mexico against the same defendants charged with homicide.
Final report
On the National Transportation Safety Board website there are several final reports of accidents of lesser and greater scale than the incident of May 18, 2018, in Cuba. Also on the Aviation Safety Network one can find this documentation, and explanations like this:
“When an accident occurs it is investigated by the government with jurisdiction over the area where the plane falls. The only objective of the investigation is the prevention of accidents. Its purpose is not to distribute faults or responsibilities. While the initial phase of an investigation can be completed in weeks or even days, the final report and the recommendations of the researchers often take years to complete.”
Some of these reports were issued more than two years after the accidents occurred. If anything, the international protocol for this type of research is that they takes time to reach conclusions.
These reports contain factual information about the specific flight (airports, airplane models, number of victims, weather conditions, details of audio recordings, height, etc.); detailed information about the crew and their professional credentials, including their rest hours before the flight; all the characteristics of the aircraft, procedures established in different situations, records of maintenance, electrical systems, emergency, communication, navigation, etc .; information about the companies involved and their history in the world of civil aviation; and above all, interviews with all the people involved in a flight — from the person who dispatches the luggage, to witnesses and the families of the crew and passengers.
All the details are important; it is too great a responsibility to be summarized in two simple paragraphs that define two probable causes. “Actions of the crew” does not clarify who is to blame.
The “errors in the calculations of weight and balance” point to specific persons who are responsible. A pilot signs the documentation in which it is established that this protocol was carried out successfully, but he or she does not get involved in the procedure. There are companies who offer this service when the airline does not have personnel in the country in which it operates. It is still unclear who assumed this aforementioned responsibility.
So why not at least publish the technical results of the investigation?
During the judicial processes ongoing in Mexico City, these results could be part of the discussions between plaintiffs and defendants. In other words, that information will, sooner or later, be divulged anyway. As a result, Cuban authorities should already have this information. It should be released to the public.
