Quote:
Originally Posted by
tdracer
I know things that I'm not allowed to make public. Oftentimes it's considered [X] proprietary/sensitive, in the case of air safety investigations
Could these things kill again?
The are rules and procedures during an investigation regarding the release of information - for several reasons. As we noticed on the recent Asiana crash there is a certain media frenzy that occurs - release of information that has not been properly vetted can have far reaching effects (even if it's a joke about the pilots names
). There can be potential liability concerns - releasing partial or out of context info could result in slander and lawsuits (I've been the target of a slander lawsuit - it's no fun even when you can document what you said was accurate). So there is a process to release information in a controlled manner via the investigating agency (e.g. NTSB in the US). If there is something that poses an imminent threat to other aircraft, then it's the responsibility of the investigating agency to make that information public so that appropriate measures can be taken.
After the 787 Heathrow fire, many on here where complaining that Boeing wasn't forthcoming with information - short answer is the manufacturer is effectively gagged during the investigation - ALL public information is supposed to come from the investigating agency. For Boeing to release information could have gotten them in big trouble.
I was involved in the investigation of the BA 777 that 'landed short' at Heathrow (I was in a Boeing Safety Review Board meeting on an unrelated subject when a co-working showed me a picture of the crashed 777 on his laptop and said 'just happened!'
). Anyway, within about a week we had a pretty good idea that ice had blocked the fuel/oil heat exchanger. But it took a couple months to validate that theory (rig testing and the such). If we'd released information implicating the Trent fuel system, and that turned out to be wrong - there would have been hell to pay
. The good news is that the designers were able to work on the fix even before the cause had been firmly established.
Some of you certainly remember the fiasco after the Chicago DC-10 engine separation and crash - when everyone though it was because of a broken bolt instead of damaged structure?
It's certainly good to get information out quickly, but you need to make sure it's the correct information.
