Do you have any general thoughts why, after so many years, the two "sides" can't seem to agree?
I agree with ampan on this,
The two sides can't agree because one says the crew was blameless.
-Everyone agrees that the flight planning department made errors.
-I think most people would agree that a cultural precedent had been set of going below 6000ft.
-I think most would agree there was ambiguity regarding the flight path.
-Everyone agrees that Air NZ behaved badly after the event.
Where we can't agree is whether or not the crew could have/should have performed the flight differently and thus avoided the crash.
I sense this thread is getting near its end, but I'm sure there will be more threads on this accident in the future. I would like to thank DozyWannabe, prospector, Ampan, framer and all the others for a civilised and thoughtful discussion. For students of air safety, such as myself, these discussions are invaluable.
I'l second that. You are right, the conversations are worth having. I'd like to know the lessons you guys think are most important from Erebus so I can consider them.
As I've looked more and more into this over the years, for me, one lesson keeps appearing as obvious. I would be interested in hearing the No. 1 lesson you folk have dragged from Erebus.
Mine is
Minimum Safe Altitudes are your last safety net that will protect you from mistakes and errors that yourself and others make.Respect it.
When I say Minimum Safe Altitudes I am not just talking about those on a chart, I am also talking about recommended heights. Anytime someone sees fit to suggest a minimum safe height, it is to keep you from hitting the ground. There are other accidents since Erebus where these heights were not respected, and like Erebus, they ended in disaster because of errors ground personnel had made.
See you in 2019, Framer....... out.