Hi,
For the regulator (not actually BEA), on the other hand, the question you are asking (and the court too) is should they have forseen that a burst tyre could cause massive fuel tank hole and consequent fatal fire risk, and as a result required tyre and/or tank modifications. The court decided no. I would agree. Unprecedented - see PBLs articles for far better explanation than I could write
Can you tell me from who or from where the regulator can have or receive informations (in this case DGAC ) ?
Methink is from the BEA (recommandations after end of investigations or as the case of Concorde .. during the investigation)
Unprecedented ?
Only the fire and crash was ... fuel leak was not.... (Washington-aircraft scrapped)
What was the recommandations from the BEA to the regulator ?
Why not make the recommandations made in 2000 ? cause no victims ?
When you have fuel leak ... risk of fire is obvious
For an aircraft mechanic, I would say that a tyre burst causing harm should be obvious
But not should be obvious for the experts of the BEA or AAIB ?
Well .. they have seen and investigate some tyres blows on the Concorde before the year 2000 and some were scaring.....