John Mazor wrote:
> "Sylvia Else" wrote in message
> news:4182181d$0$25053$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> >
> > I wrote:
> >
> > > It's probably not just a problem in aviation. There are things that seem
> > > so blindingly obvious to engineers that it's difficult for them to
> > > conceive the notion that a non-engineer might not recognise the truth.
> >
> > Alaska Airlines Flight 261 might be an example. You have a flight
> > control system element that's jammed for no apparent reason.
> >
> > Therefore you have no idea what it might do if you mess with it, so if
> > you can land with it in its current state, then leave the damned thing
> > alone, and land.
>
> Apples and oranges. The crew and the mechanics on the ground thought they
> were dealing with a trim problem, a relatively benign condition. And even
> if they had done nothing, the mechanism probably would have failed before
> they could land, anyway.
>
> There were no engineers before the fact saying "Oh, yeah, we know that if
> you get those symptoms, it's not a trim problem, the screw threads are about
> to strip and fail."
>
> However, 261 did have some precursor events that make you want to mutter
> "don't these engineers and airlines ever talk to each other or apply common
> sense?"
Didn't one Alaskan Capt refuse to fly that plane ?
Graham
|