BryceM: .... After all, that user feedback is what the Flight Safety dept of any airline should focus on, surely? (I mean, they don't work harder only if they've had an accident, do they?)
definitely they do work harder! Incidents and accidents are the moments of the truth for any security system - it is only then that all assumptions and SOP have met the real-life, real-time combinations of inputs that has proven to be not accounted for and has to be carefully scrutinized and used as guidance for new set of SOPs. This is called continuous improvement process.
BryceM: ... just pointing out that the statistical 'evidence' being touted for a decline in AF safety isn't very meaningful.
statistics is sometimes misleading as for money it can show different face of the same reality. The arguments put up by Me_Myself (years between accidents) seems to be more objective - definitely for passengers who prefere to not to be on the wrong side of the statistics.
I am observing this thread for the last 4 weeks. I have learned a lot on intricacies of the planes and procedures. Many hypothesies were proposed and some seem to look more probable than the others. Yet without more hard facts from FDR/CVR we are left in the dark.
At the same time the thread has reached a point where it started scratching the surface of the delicate subject of the pilots being humans spending part of their time flying the planes and the other part being a part of the big commercial corporation. These two lives do mingle and this
may influence safety.
And without any prejudice what or who has played an important role in critical sequence this
may be important factor towards understanding what has caused AF477 down.
For all the AB automation it is the PF who is called for when there is a problem. And for any foreseeable future passengers will prefer to fly with qualified pilots onboard
Wojtek