‘Wrong papers’ used to approve Saitoti chopper
What you need to know:
- Kenya Civil Aviation Authority inspector admits that the wrong papers were used but denies that the oversight “may have compromised the safety of the helicopter.”
- The document that was used, the commission heard, lacked details on the aircraft’s engine and propeller logbooks.
- Some documents that raised eyebrows were sent back to the police but were never returned to him.
A wrong document was used to approve the helicopter that killed Prof Saitoti, his assistant and four police officers, the commission investigating the tragedy has heard.
A Kenya Civil Aviation Authority inspector, Mr George Kilonzo Kiundu, said that they relied on a less detailed document that did not subject the helicopter to serious scrutiny before they issued it with a certificate of airworthiness.
Mr Kiundu said a “renewal checklist” was used in obtaining the certificate instead of an “issuance checklist” which is more detailed.
The document that was used, the commission heard, lacked details on the aircraft’s engine and propeller logbooks.
He said the chopper’s flight manual and an indication of the expiry dates of the tail-rotar batteries were also not in the checklist used.
Pressed by the commissioners on the issuance of the certificate, Mr Kiundu admitted that the wrong papers were used but denied that the oversight “may have compromised the safety of the helicopter.”
He said acceptance documents were brought to his desk by his senior and he had no option but to okay them. They relied on the technical assessment of their inspector, and lack of documents could not stop them as long as his report conformed to design specifications.
The aircraft, he noted, had been registered at an earlier date, January 17, while the acceptance documents were brought to him on January 23, but he still signed because of a note attached by inspector Kingsley Ogaya.
The witness said that a series of documents was missing but on demanding proof, he was told that the police Air Wing was exempted from serious scrutiny by the oversight body.
He said he was interested in checking the correctness of the items indicated as “satisfactory.”
According to him, some documents that raised eyebrows were sent back to the police but were never returned to him. (READ: No papers on Saitoti chopper test)
Tasked by Prof Saitoti’s family lawyer Fred Ngatia, to account for the anomalies, he said he did not take the issue seriously since the certificates had already been issued.
