If not, the industry will have to accept rare accidents such as AF447 – limitations of design and human judgement in certification, and as with TK1951 – limitations of the operating human and the certification process.
What's so wrong with industry treating this acceptance as the desired outcome rather than a hinted at tragedy?
Stated in economic terms: at some point in time the marginal utility of the next incremental improvement in safety becomes negative.
I find PBLs instance on the math curious because it's Bayes Theorem that says that when presented with statistically rare events we are better off just ignoring those events than trying to solve for them. I guess when those rare events involve the deaths of many human beings then all of a sudden the math goes right out the window and industry has to look like it's doing something. What it tells me is that underneath all the hardheaded talk about math and volumes of proofs lies a warm and beating heart that is ultimate decision maker.