DW, in utter denial mode, wrote:
"Obviously the overkill has been to not treat the situation seriously enough before."
Your opinion, to which you are both welcome and entitled. In an ideal world I'd agree - but this isn't an ideal world. As I said, the risk posed by the Thales AA pitot tubes strikes me as considerably less than that posed by the 737 rudder PCU issue, and yet the latter was never deemed worthy of an AD with grounding to take effect immediately or otherwise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CONF iture
"No need to look, that's the first thing that will jump in your face : 2 yokes in that very unusual full aft position as soon as you enter the flightdeck."
Again with the presentation of your opinion as fact. A few posts back I listed four accidents just off the top of my head where the yoke cue was not acted upon. I'm not disputing that it *might* have helped, but it's a considerable stretch to claim it as a certainty (or an "elephant in the room").
IMO, the 737 should have been grounded. This was a (poorly-decided) risk/benefit equation. There were, arguably, more than the three well-known accidents/incidents of rudder hardover/reversals. In hindsight, given the particulars of AF447, the Thales-equipped planes, too, ought to have been grounded. The crash sequence began there and ended hundreds of lives.
"...risk...less serious"??? Oy veh! Here's how worried I am about airlines' profits: not one bit. If they can't be safe, they can jolly well fold their tents and get outta the business.
As for CONFiture's opinion, I (as well as others far more qualified) fully agree. Some opinions are more informed than others. It Just Make Sense. Your opinion seems to me to be arbitrary and capricious, with no offense intended, sir. Once more, with feeling, just because it didn't prevent some accidents proves nothing. As we all know, one cannot prove a negative.