In an airline environment something like an emergency AD is not distributed with a new issue of the FCOM.
They would have a formal process either via paper and/or electronically to distribute timely operational information to all crew and aircraft.
Airlines are very fluid environments with lots of changes on a daily basis. There is a formal process on how this is distributed.
I agree Zeke, but I just re-read the AD. Unless I'm missing something, the AD's only directive was to update the flight manual in a very specific way. Within 3 days the manuals needed to be updated and redistributed. Simon is implying that that didn't happen, and thus Ethiopian didn't comply with the AD.
Please let me know if I've missed a bit.
Having had a deeper look at Simons narrative compared to what is in the ET302 Preliminary Report, it would seem there is some discrepancy.
Simons assertion is the FCOM dated 30th Nov 18 was the current version as of 10th Mar 19 and did not include the EAD/TBC-19 insertion, and further more, that this is supportive of the hypothesis that pilots not having been adequately advised of the instructions in case of MCAS activation under fault condition.
This is in direct conflict with Preliminary report statement viz:-1.16.2 OPERATION MANUAL EXTRACTS
22.214.171.124 ETHIOPIAN AIRLINES AIRCRAFT FLIGHT MANUAL (AFM)
A check of the AFM provided by Ethiopian Airlines showed that the airline had incorporated the revisions A180625 on November, 11 2018 required by Airworthiness Directive 2018-23-51. The two pages from the AFM are in Appendix .
126.96.36.199 FCOM BULLETIN ISSUED BY BOEING TO ETHIOPIAN AIRLINES An FCOM bulletin issued by Boeing to Ethiopian Airlines (ETH-12) regarding uncommanded nosedown stabilizer trim required Ethiopian Airlines to insert the bulletin in their B737MAX FCOM. The US Ops/hp technical advisors were provided an electronic copy of the Airline’s B737MAX FCOM, and the bulletin was found to be incorporated per Boeing directions.
The bulletin is shown in Appendix 4
Further 'Appendix 4' holds the following footer information 'February 21, 2019 D6-27370-MAX-ETH' implying inclusion of the relevant instructions in a formal issue of the ETH FCOM 21 February 19. Is this the actual latest version?
Whilst Simon does not directly say so, his implication is the Preliminary report is 'incorrect' although he does, at least partially, relay on the veracity of other parts of the Preliminary Report. Well, there is something smelling fishy somewhere?
I don't think the veracity of either or other statements actually proves or disproves the pilots being adequately informed or not but is does seem to illustrate the miss-trust surrounding this investigation.
NB. If the Preliminary Report is indeed incorrect, has the NTSB been hoodwinked?