Truthfulness in Western Airlines after an incident
Just seen this thread..
and this post:
"I never said that the airplanes that went into the WTC were Arab owned. The issue is what happens when you fly on an Arab carrier and something goes wrong.......do you get the truth? no!
The point in my posting was that, if given the choice, passengers flying to Arab or third world countries should chose for western carriers. At least, if something goes wrong, they can rely on truthful investigation".
er..in my own very small experience I remember the Airtours 767 departing from the Canaries which (after a Monarch mechanic had left a very large torch in a wing inspection compartment) found itself unable to turn left. After a wings vertical moment or two when both pilots tried the breakout procedure (didn't work. no-one explained why), they continued back to Manchester (no left turns on the way).
Airtours sat heavily on the incident, which they (after the press got wind of it) decribed as a minor malfunction ably handled by the crew. I could never find any signs of an investigation, or an incident report, or any attempts by a seemingly inert CAA to pass on useful information to other users.
In the end the captain (Ray Cockerton) went to a national broadsheet and it waas given half a page of shock/horror..and then....nothing happened as far as I know.
In a responsible airline everyone would have learned a lot from the whole thing. In the air force, the incident report would have been an inch thick and still be being read in crewrooms.
are there any , um, middle-eastern aspects to any of this ?
Last edited by waketurb; 10th Jan 2004 at 21:04.