I thought it was appropriate that these facts should appear on the new site:

FACT 1:IFEN system was
connected to an essential bus on SR111 (and 15 other MD11
sisterships).

FACT 2:IFEN is in question as an ignition source on
SR111. Mark called the TSB about 6 weeks ago to verify that.

FACT 3:IFEN could not be successfully deactivated by
the crew, given the checklist procedure, since it was
connected to an essential bus instead of a cabin bus (which
is how it is normally done because an IFE is
obviously a non-essential item for flying an a/c.)

FACT 4:Wiring for the IFEN was improperly mixed with the harder
Kapton insulated wire in the installation and bent at 90
degree angles against the recommendations of the
manufacturer, McDonnell Douglas.Patrick Price said it's also
evident installers used pliers to bend the wires, another
faux pas. "You don't dare do that with insulation
material -- you might damage it," said Price(Canadian
News)

FACT 5: It was reported in a 1997 swissair
internal newsletter that swissair was in a hurry to have
this IFEN/IFE installed on their MD11 aircraft.
(Source; David Evans, Air Safety Week)

FACT 6 In late
October of 1998, Swissair disconnected the entertainment
system on their remaining fleet of MD11s (15
sisterships)because the investigators found the wiring to this system
(tefzel) as well as Kapton wiring in the forward section
of the plane to have traces of electrical arcing.

FACT 7 The FAA has issued an AD prohibiting the use of
this IFEN/IFE ( unique to swissair), to be used on
commercial a/c.

FACT 8 The FAA (see Evans/Wojnar
interview), stated that the IFEN/IFE was incompatible with
the electrical design philosophy of the airplane.*

FACT 9 SBA was both the STC applicant and the
approving organization under their DAS.*

FACT10 Santa
Barbara Aerospace who issued the certification for this
system, surrendered the DAS on July 1, 1999. The latest
status is that SBA has declared bankruptcy and shut the
doors.*

FACT11 Within hours after the crash, before the burnt
wiring was discovered by the investigators, the FAA was
looking at the supplemental type certificate (system)
installed on the accident aircraft.*

FACT12:The FAA stated (Wojnar) that the installers of this system
(Hollinsead) 'didn't use good industry practices for the
installations on the wiring'.*

FACT 13:"The entertainment setup, whose power
supply runs through the cockpit, was identified as one
system with sufficient electrical energy to disrupt
power to the affected flight deck units and with
components in a position to feed smoke into the cockpit, but
not the cabin. TSB officials said they have no
evidence that the smoke infiltrated the passenger cabin."
(Source Aviation Week)

FACT 14: Qantis elected not to
purchase the IFE system from IFT because they determined
that the system required too much power usage.(Source;
FACTS)

FACT15: Though pulling the IFEN circuit breakers (the only means
Swissair flight crews had of removing power to the IFEN)
was a part of the 'parking checklist', it was not
added onto the emergency checklist. It should be noted
that aircraft circuit breakers (CBs) should not be
used as switches. They were not designed to be used
that way and constant use will increase the failure
rate of their primary function. 'Frequent action of
the circuit breaker can lead to 'floppy' action and
CBs so used may fail to pop when they should. When
the circuit protective device fails to open a faulty
circuit, one can reasonably expect electrical fireworks to
result. Fireworks may occur at the distribution bus, the
loss of which means loss of systems en masse.'
Source:Air Safety Week.

FACT16: The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA)proposed 14 airworthiness directives
(ADs) that would ensure flight crews have the
ability to shut off in-flight entertainment systems
on several transport aircraft models when necessary.
An extensive review of current in-flight
entertainment systems revealed that these systems can
remain powered despite current flight crew
procedures.(source:FAA)<br>

FACT17 “During the introduction to service of the
MD-11 IFEN, in the spring of 1998, numerous problems
with overheating of the IFEN had been experienced. The
SR MD-11 Chief Pilot later admitted (in an Air
Safety Week interview) that they had had to vary the
operating range of the MD-11's air-conditioning control
selections in order to overcome this.” (Source:Tim van
Beveren)

*Source: David Evan's(Editor of Air Safety Week)Wojnar(deputy
director,
aircraft certification service,FAA)interview

FACT 3:IFEN could not be successfully deactivated by
the crew, given the checklist procedure, since it was
connected to an essential bus instead of a cabin bus (which
is how it is normally done because an IFE is
obviously a non-essential item for flying an a/c.)

I wanted to note that in fact #3 it is not clear that if the IFEN had been deactivated after an electrical arc had occurred that it would have prevented the ensuing fire. It might have already been too late once the tragic chain of events had started on it's terrible path of destruction.

The way that the IFEN was installed was IMHO criminal. It defied ANY practiced standards. i have my doubts about the qualifications of the installers. House electricians do bend wires with a plier, but I do not know of anyone else in the wiring world of any 'transport means', be it car, tank, plane or ship.
The certification was a sham, and the physical install used criminal (IMHO) methods. The only excuse I can come up with is for the so-called engineers and mechanics, that they were mentally challenged, which would make it unvoluntary (wo)manslaughter.
I shudder at the thought, that those so-called engineers and mechanics might be working on planes again. With the USA as it is (no offense intended), they might be. A scaring thought.

hank@ster

Another no-brainer was using a breaker as a switch.
Proof, that the 'designers, engineers, supervisors and mechanics' had no clue or experience on wiring in/of an aircraft. To put it mildly, they must have been dumb. A breaker is there to pop, when it is hit by an overload, which should rarely happen. And before pushing it back, the cuse for it being tripped has to be investigated and corrected before it being pushed back (or better a new one installed, just in case. Breakers are cheap, life is not! I do not refer to US lawyers talk. Life is the most precious gift we enjoy, and it can never be 'compensated' by any amount of money). I regard it as cynical, when a lost life is 'calculated' in $$$ (against possible gains in stock, the insurance, and in the end us, will take care of that). A life IS priceless.
If safety in air travel should be improved, the individual law suits, that only benefits the lawyers are not the right approach. Neither having the insurance companies (and us) cover it (as with the lawyers, we are lining their pockets with every ticket we buy). Air;ines and their employees must feel responsible, and must be geared and prodded into the right direction. Making sure, that everything is ok and as safe as possible, never minding the costs (at least at the technical and maintainance level). 'After installs', they should be more scrutinized. IFEN could only be installed by the unhealthy 'free market, free to do attitude [stressed 1st amandment]' and Swiss banks greed.

Open the flak, start to shoot me down.
You can get away in the USA with many a things. Think about cars and where safety devices and regulations were and are enforced by law, and independent bodies look after it. In Germland, the ADAC (General German Automobil Club) has been crashing cars and pointing the weaknesses. A private institution. They do give a ratons behind, if it is a Chevy Nova (Spanish No Go) or a fat Merc. The industry listens.

Ok, throw bananas

hank@ster

Hank, You are so right in all you have said. I can't even think of anything to add to it. Thanks so much for caring.

Barbara