Originally Posted by
Phalanger
The question is still not answered. It does not matter if it came from this mistake, an engine defect, another vehicle around the airport, blown into the grounds etc. The designers of the aircraft and the operating procedure for the aircraft must take into account the chance of the occurrence. Materials of this type have been, and will be, found on the runway. The aircraft must be designed to either survive such occurrences or methods implemented to stop them occuring.
100% agreed.
Originally Posted by
Phalanger
This was not the first time the tyres of the Concorde has damage from impact, nor the first time this type of metal had been found on a runway. It was not unreasonable for them to foresee such an occurrence. It was negilant to operate an aircraft in such a manner knowing it was susceptible to this issue but not take action to avoid it.
Yes.
But as I noticed in my previous posts, "Not taking action to avoid it" is not what occured.
"Not taking action efficient enough about the whole problem" would be a correct/honnest description about what occured.
It's not a judgement. It's facts.
Originally Posted by
jcjeant
The Washington event is pierced F.O tank and fuel leak and no fire and no victims (good luck)
The Gonesse event is pierced F.O tank and fuel leak and fire and victims (bad luck)
Good luck/Bad luck: Yes.
Is that all? Are you sure the analysis should stop here? In the next Café du Commerce, maybe.
I for myself feel more confortable with a more torough analysis. And I'm
not trying to find "excuses" for AF/French by doing so, whatever you may (seem to) think. It's of no use to try to convince me that AF/French side did wrong, I'm already convinced of that, thank you
What about other incidents/accidents from both AF & BA planes, involving tyres events & fuel leakages? Why "only" concentrate on Washington '79? Because it was the first/most impressive? Or because it suits the view that (all) the wrong doings lie on only the east side of some narrow sea?
"It's not me, it the other". Oh yeah. Sure. (that partly true; but partly only).