KOTA KINABALU: It has to be noted that the Australian report consists of two reports:- One report is by the Department of Transport (government). Another report is by the Government Aircraft Factories GAF (a commercial company under the Department of Industry and Commerce). GAF is the manufacturer of the Nomad aircrafts that Sabah Air had bought in 1975.
A press release by Datuk Yong Teck Lee Ex-Chief Minister of Sabah stated that reading the GAF report, we have to bear in mind that GAF is the Nomad aircraft manufacturer.
“This distinction in role” between the Department of Transport and the company GAF was beautifully illustrated by the Australian Department of Transport in the report (page 58, para 8). This is the context that we have to read the GAF report.
The statement went on to say that the Australian Department of Transport report contained internal communications (telegrams, memos, some hand written notes).
But the Malaysian report contained mainly the Investigator’s findings and conclusions. None of the internal communications among Government officials (Federal and Sabah State) and Sabah Air was provided in the Malaysian report.
*It was Malaysia which wanted the reports classified*
The Australian report at Folio 13 dated 3 January 1978 (Australian) disclosed that “the Malaysian authorities requested that the report be treated as Confidential”.
Hence, the onus is now on the Malaysian government to explain why Malaysia had requested the report be classified in the first place.
*Ku Li’s version missing*
Both the Malaysian and Australian reports made no mention of the final moments before the ill fated Nomad 9M-ATZ took off from Labuan, namely what Tengku Razaleigh (in April 2010 at Kota Kinabalu) publicly said about he and two others disembarking from the Nomad to board another Nomad (9M-AUA), which was bound for Kudat before proceeding to Kota Kinabalu.
The Malaysian report said that some of the luggage of passengers in the Nomad 9M-AUA (flight to Kudat) were found in the wreckage of the Nomad 9M-ATZ at Sembulan, Kota Kinabalu.
This fact itself would require investigation of what happened at Labuan airport. For instance, who had loaded the non-passenger luggage to the Nomad 9M-ATZ?
The Malaysian report also stated that the Nomad 9M-ATZ had remained “in Labuan overnight”, having been flown to Labuan “by another Penerbangan Sabah pilot on the previous day.” Was this pilot called to give evidence to the Investigation Committee?
*No overloading*
The Malaysian report was definitive that there was no overloading as the “calculated take off weight was 8065 lbs. This was below the maximum take off weight of 8500 lbs. The aircraft was loaded within the prescribed weight limit” (finding no. 6) in the Conclusions (page 14).
Hence, Malaysian Ministry of Transport needs to explain why, in its answers to Parliament in the past, that overloading of the aircraft was said to be the cause of the air crash.
*325 lbs or 415 lbs?*
A potentially relevant divergence between the two reports is that the Malaysian report found that Rear Baggage area had 325 lbs of luggage. But the Australian claimed that Rear Baggage is 415 lbs. This 27.7% in discrepancy needs to be explained.
More information is needed on “an unusual failure” (the inboard flap hinge flapside”) mentioned in page 8 of the Malaysian report. At the same page 8 , the report indicated a few contradictory technical concerns.
*The Australian report was released in full*
The Australian Report was recorded as having been sighted internally at the National Archives of Australia on 14.3.2012. This was the exact date of the reply of the Archives given to me in 2012.
That reply said that 110 folios were withheld in the report that was still classified. I can now say, after perusing the Australian report, that the 110 folios are included in the Australian report that was released on 26 April 2023. In other words, the release of Australian report itself is in full.
*Was that Nomad plane made to wait?*
The Australian report contained a news report (“LAST MOMENTS OF NOMAD”) by Herald on 11 June 1976 from Kuala Lumpur that “The Nomad plane crash that killed Sabah State Chief Minister Mohamed Fuad occured after the plane had been turned away on its first landing approach. It had to make way for another plane, officials said today.”
This version of the final moments should have been explained in both reports
*Inquest records should be released*
“In view of missing information, I believe that the government should release the records, including witnesses statements and evidence, of the Inquest that was conducted in Sabah by a judicial Magistrate into the deaths of the persons in the Double Six air crash tragedy. The inquest was held in the months after the air crash.”
Of relevance is, why was that Nomad aircraft allowed to fly when the Civil Aviation Department had not approved it for flying passengers at the time? -pr/BNN
