Originally Posted by
JaxofMarlow
In hazard and risk analysis there are often some hazards that although extremely rare/very very low probability - are totally unacceptable. I believe that this is one of those events. These events must be prevented rather………..
OK, how ? And can we have another example where risk has been totally removed altogether that involves human beings.
"
where risk has been totally removed altogether that involves human beings" Is not the sense of what I wrote.
One argument is that if you can only come up with 5 or 6 cases of pilots causing death out of the millions of flights in the same period then that is such a low risk that we can disregard it and do nothing - which is what is being said by many posters.
My position is that for many people the hazard of being flown into the ground by someone they have trusted their lives to is totally unacceptable, so the normal risk analysis of the case being of such a low probability that we needn't attempt to mitigate it, is no longer true. Despite its low probability as much as possible should be done to reduce the risk of 'rogue' pilots crashing the aircraft.
I can assure you that logical or not - if a similar crash happens again you can rely on an extremely strong, potentially irresistible, push to automate pilots out of the cockpit.