3Ten
You cannot call it a cause, there are thousands of landings in that rwy that are not accidents.
In my last post, I spoke about causes, but I suggested that the correct term should be factors, because I consider the word cause misleading. Moreover, for 3Ten and others, with reference to the Aristotelian schema, the true cause is only the efficient one (i.e. a cause that should be a direct action). Following this way of thinking, in the case of the SR111, for example, the electrical arc in the IES faulty cable was “the” cause, and every other issue (flammable blankets, circuit breakers, inadequate standards for material flammability, etc. ) only “contributing factors”, because “there are thousands of flights” operated by MD11 without problems. As stated correctly by PBL, this argument is fallacious, like Hume pointed out some centuries ago.
PK-KAR
The primary cause is the primary cause which made the occurence an EVENT. Whether the event is an accident or an incident, is a different matter.
The fact that a plane does a safe landing is without doubt an event. PK-KAR, could you please state which is the primary cause of this event?
Aviadornovato
As a consequence of PBL's theories:
A murderer should not be punished... Without the life he took from the guy he killed there wouldn't be that specific murder...
It is an elementary thing that even children do - correlate things and weigh the importance of an event in the materialization of another one -
This is how science is done by the way. It is the essence of the scientific method.
I think that Aviadornovato is speaking of a curious type of science. Firstly, it is acknowledged in all research fields that correlation doesn’t by itself show the direction of causality; second, it needs to be stressed that there is a big difference between legal judgements and models trying to explain the reality i.o. to improve the reliability of some procedures. In particular, in the latter there is no space for the concept of guilt, since the most important objective is to implement some important features for the safety of the people concerned by aviation transport. Sincerely, I wonder that anything like what occurred at CGH didn’t take place before, because actually the fact isn’t only that the runway is short, but that at his end there are a lot of buildings. It is important to create EMAS, but the question of the presence of phisical obstacles near the end of the runways deserves some more attention. Beside the question of primary and secundary causes, that is in fact not much useful, at least if the aim is safety, it is out of doubt that whatever improvement will be done should concern not only the particular event at CGH, but similar others, too: in fact they are not only A320 with TL in the wrong position that overrun runways.