• Before posting anything about COVID-19, READ THIS FIRST! COVID-19 and Misinformation (UPDATED)
    Misinformation and/or conspiracy theories about this topic, even if intended as humor, will not be tolerated!

Betson

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Messages
18,922
It is ghoulish to derive entertainment value from them. If the details of a failure are determined, communicated and rectified then that is the end of the matter.

No more needs to be done.

Turning it via dramatisation into a spectacle is profiting from the victims.

What value does it add to safety to inform you in your armchair that a screw gear failure led to the separation of a horizontal rudder? Accident reports are usually available online and can be read. The outcomes and findings are communicated to the appropriate parties in order that remediation occurs.

To hope that the tragedy be recreated for TV is rubbernecking of the worst kind.

People's lives were. The industry will learn from the lessons derived in the accident report.
They are informative programs that follow the script of the investigation report very closely but lay out in such a way as to make it very understandable for the lay person. The air crash investigators themselves always take part and give their first hand knowledge.

I am sure if they thought it was ghoulish rubbernecking they would not be involved , they see it as a chance to educate people as to the work and methods they use.
 

Orbit v2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
12,548
The investigations page on the AAIU website hasn't been updated since July 2019. You'd wonder what is the point in publishing information like that when they let it go so stale.
 

hiding behind a poster

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
52,828
The investigations page on the AAIU website hasn't been updated since July 2019. You'd wonder what is the point in publishing information like that when they let it go so stale.
They publish reports in full when they're ready, not bits and pieces as they go along. And rightly so.
 

Orbit v2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
12,548
They publish reports in full when they're ready, not bits and pieces as they go along. And rightly so.
The page shows the status of each investigation, not any bits and pieces of the reports. The page currently indicates the status as "under investigation" which is wrong.
 

CatullusV

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Messages
9,088
They are informative programs that follow the script of the investigation report very closely but lay out in such a way as to make it very understandable for the lay person. The air crash investigators themselves always take part and give their first hand knowledge.

I am sure if they thought it was ghoulish rubbernecking they would not be involved , they see it as a chance to educate people as to the work and methods they use.
They add no information whatever to the official reports and often omit details. That the investigators sometimes get involved can in part be explained by human vanity.

It is cheap thrills and crass TV.
 

Dedogs

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 17, 2012
Messages
6,278
Delay in publication of R116 crash report

“The Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport has told RTÉ that it is currently making arrangements to establish a board to review the draft report at the request of "a stakeholder".”

“this is the first time for an AAIU report to be referred to a review board in the AAIU's 25-year history”
theyll do anything bar say she ****ed up.... :( :( :(
 

Dedogs

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 17, 2012
Messages
6,278
They are very informative programs that go through the investigation process and results in a detailed way.

There is one on the Cork Airport crash a few years back which if I remember correctly concluded that although the pilots were at fault for the actually crash by attempting a go around at below decision height , also a contributing factor was the inadequate support and training that the airline gave the pilots which was well below industry standard.
they were lads mate so no bother blamin them!!!!!
 

Betson

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Messages
18,922
They add no information whatever to the official reports and often omit details. That the investigators sometimes get involved can in part be explained by human vanity.

It is cheap thrills and crass TV.

The investigators always get involved , it is first hand info with no important details omitted. You don't think much of them if you think that is down to human vanity and not down to helping people to understand how they came to the conclusions they did and the extensive work that goes into it

And often they can include details that are not in any report , such as the extraordinary case of the NZ couple who refused to accept the official report in an accident that claimed the life of their son , his father was an engineer and him and his wife travelled the world investigating previous crashes similar to their sons , done his own tests on Boeing components and was ultimately able to prove that the accident was down to faulty designed luggage department door hinges and not ground staff operating them improbely as the first report concluded.

Boeing and the FAA accepted the initial report was wrong and updated it to show that faulty hinges was the likely case and not human error of ground staff.

The report does not mention how this update came about , only the technical details.
 

CatullusV

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Messages
9,088
The page shows the status of each investigation, not any bits and pieces of the reports. The page currently indicates the status as "under investigation" which is wrong.
What is "wrong" about it? Do you have an insight as to what you believe to be the alternate status of the investigation?

It should be pointed out that there are very weighty legal issues involved in drawing definitive conclusions, and that the organisation involved does not have the same resources as a body such as the NTSB, which can draw on vast amounts of expertise very quickly. It is a curious and rather unfortunate skillset to have, but the NTSB deals with a nation incidents on a daily basis. Even with their resources it can take a long time for a conclusive report to emerge.

Sadly, it is one those situations where rushing the report won't redress the damage caused. You can be sure that if mechanical or other hardware/software issues had been identified we'd know of that by now. A NOTAM would have gone out at the earliest opportunity. That is, after all, the duty of investigators - to see that no pilot ever finds themselves in that situation in the future.

The report will emerge in time.
 

artfoley56

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
10,264
And often they can include details that are not in any report , such as the extraordinary case of the NZ couple who refused to accept the official report in an accident that claimed the life of their son , his father was an engineer and him and his wife travelled the world investigating previous crashes similar to their sons , done his own tests on Boeing components and was ultimately able to prove that the accident was down to faulty designed luggage department door hinges and not ground staff operating them improbely as the first report concluded.

Boeing and the FAA accepted the initial report was wrong and updated it to show that faulty hinges was the likely case and not human error of ground staff.

The report does not mention how this update came about , only the technical details.
absolutely fascinating story

 

Betson

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Messages
18,922
Safety-board investigators say they aren't yet convinced. They also noticed the scorch marks, but they don't think an arc could have triggered the door's opening. The door is designed, they say, so that power to its electrical system is cut off before the aircraft leaves the ground. Based on what Boeing has told them, investigators say four independent systems would have had to have failed for the door to open in flight.

The safety board believes a more likely scenario is that the door simply wasn't closed properly on the ground, or that the locks had been damaged previously.
Fascinating story alright. And the Campbell's were ultimately able to prove the Safety boards theory wrong and Boeing replaced all those door types no doubt saving other people from going to through the grieving process they had to.
 

CatullusV

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Messages
9,088
It
Fascinating story alright. And the Campbell's were ultimately able to prove the Safety boards theory wrong and Boeing replaced all those door types no doubt saving other people from going to through the grieving process they had to.
It is, of course, a fascinating story. It also shows how major vested interests can pressure investigators - along with political concerns. The investigators find themselves immediately faced with phalanxes of high-paid lawyers pointing at each other.

Look at the mess Boeing are in right now.
 

Betson

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Messages
18,922
It

It is, of course, a fascinating story. It also shows how major vested interests can pressure investigators - along with political concerns. The investigators find themselves immediately faced with phalanxes of high-paid lawyers pointing at each other.

Look at the mess Boeing are in right now.

Yes , that is why it is good to hear investigators own words about the investigator , often in the programs investigators talk about how they job was hindered by in political inference in certain investigations.

One such one could be topical now as it involved the 1988 accidental downing of a commercial aircraft over Iranian territory by a US Navy ship , the American initial military investigation into that absolved the Navy crew of all responsibility , subsequent investigations were not so clear cut and is now accepted that the Plane was over Iranian territory when shot down , something that was initially disputed by the US crew.

Also the documentaries are not all about disasters , sometimes no one dies due to extraordinary piloting etc in getting a distressed plane down in one piece , those stories are equally as fascinating.
 

Orbit v2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
12,548
What is "wrong" about it? Do you have an insight as to what you believe to be the alternate status of the investigation?
What is "wrong" is that the accident is not still under investigation, as a draft report has been issued.
It should be pointed out that there are very weighty legal issues involved in drawing definitive conclusions, and that the organisation involved does not have the same resources as a body such as the NTSB, which can draw on vast amounts of expertise very quickly. It is a curious and rather unfortunate skillset to have, but the NTSB deals with a nation incidents on a daily basis. Even with their resources it can take a long time for a conclusive report to emerge.

Sadly, it is one those situations where rushing the report won't redress the damage caused. You can be sure that if mechanical or other hardware/software issues had been identified we'd know of that by now. A NOTAM would have gone out at the earliest opportunity. That is, after all, the duty of investigators - to see that no pilot ever finds themselves in that situation in the future.

The report will emerge in time.
Who is asking for the report to be rushed?
 

Orbit v2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
12,548
I see they have updated their list of investigations, but no mention of the draft final report, or the review board. Sloppy.
 

Pabilito

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
5,973
I see they have updated their list of investigations, but no mention of the draft final report, or the review board. Sloppy.


"Regulation 15 (1) of the Air Navigation Regulations 2009 allows for a re-examination of “any findings and conclusions in that report that appear to reflect adversely on the person’s reputation or on the reputation of any person, living or dead, whose executor, administrator or other representative he or she is”.

Imminent General Election & Review of Draft Final Report into Rescue 116 Helicopter Crash May Further Delay "Urgent Reform" of Irish Aviation Regulation - IALPA Pilots' Union
 

Orbit v2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
12,548
"Regulation 15 (1) of the Air Navigation Regulations 2009 allows for a re-examination of “any findings and conclusions in that report that appear to reflect adversely on the person’s reputation or on the reputation of any person, living or dead, whose executor, administrator or other representative he or she is”.

Imminent General Election & Review of Draft Final Report into Rescue 116 Helicopter Crash May Further Delay "Urgent Reform" of Irish Aviation Regulation - IALPA Pilots' Union
What's your point?
 

CatullusV

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Messages
9,088
What is "wrong" is that the accident is not still under investigation, as a draft report has been issued.

Who is asking for the report to be rushed?
The whole concept of a draft is that it is not final, and amenable to revision on foot of further facts. The investigation continues until all facts are safely housed. The investigation is ongoing until a final report is issued.

As for the report being rushed, several posters on this thread appear to be stamping their feet in impatience.
 

Orbit v2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
12,548
It's a relatively minor/secondary point. But, the AAIU updated their investigations status document today on their website. This is what it says about R116

"A second Interim Statement was published on www.aaiu.ie on 01 Mar 2019. Investigation Ongoing."

Why doesn't it mention that a draft final report was circulated late last year? Strange is it not?
 

New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom