At, I agree that legal debate does little to enhance safety, thus my question - 'what contributes to being safe'.
A Socratic debate (seeking truth) about the contributing factors in this accident, without judgement, would better benefit the industry.
What entails a “properly conducted flight”, where is this defined; - not an individual’s version, but that of the crew’s at the time, and in the circumstances of the accident. All of these aspects require definition – establishing a local ‘truth’ about them at that time, not one of an idealistic operation.
You appear to dismiss the ‘complex science’ (FRAM). I agree that the scientific outcome is not necessarily relevant, but the process or similar, might enable the identification of additional contributions or re-evaluation of the effective magnitude of the existing factors, this could enhance safety.
Re non-pertinent conversation; this appears to be a personal judgement. How can we judge (in hindsight) what was or not relevant to the human behavior in that situation, as seen (perceived and understood) by the crew. We were not there, all that we might do is surmise the human thoughts and behaviour, but even this would have some bias – our experience, culture, personality, etc, etc.
I don’t argue for right or wrong; instead I seek a wide view to identify potential contributors which any organization could consider in their safety programmes – could this happen to us.
Blaming the crew does nothing to help maintain / improve safety.
PJ,
