marciovp;
But after three accidents when landing with one reverser locked, should the AB look at it and see if it could help some?
I guess the same would happen if there were three accidents with one particular car by the motorist pusahing the brake and accelerator at the same time (where they too close? etc, etc).
Common sense, no?
No. And to frame the question only in terms of "is it or is it not" [common sense] precludes alternative (and more interesting) thinking and consequent appropriate responses.
I suspect there are literally millions of rear-end collisions caused by hitting either the clutch pedal or the gas instead of the brake and more than likely both, even using both feet. It's a car. What do should designers do with that? Build "protective" shields against stupidity or incompetence? We all know that both characteristics exist on our roads no matter where each of us are drivers. In fact, let me pose the question to anyone who thinks that designers should take full responsibility in fool-proofing machinery whether through sophisticated software or mechanical latches: What are
they [vice us] prepared to do about the 46,000 people killed on the roads in the US each year, (a full 747 crashing about every 3 days)? Is the question realistic? Are the highway engineeers doing their job? Are all accidents caused by pedal confusion? Sorry...I digress.
What level of training, consequent awareness and address must be assumed in design before it is the participants and not the designers who must accept increasing levels of responsibility?
In aviation, a designer has every right to expect a level of competence and specialized, intensive training and even directs it when airlines/corporations buy their products. It is a proven fact that where training falls well short of these goals, accidents are going to happen*. Shall designers pick up the slack? Again, I don't think so. The fact that this regime exists in such strict processes and regulatory requirements is sufficient support for this point; these requirements exist to ensure that the designer's job is reasonable and affordable while at the same time a product is produced which does not take test-pilot skills, a photographic memory or Olympian dexterity to operate.
For consideration....
PJ2
*Please note that I am not implying anything regarding the TAM crew here but am making these points generically. The argument nevertheless is valid.