4 ms·
While it would be more correct to call it the proximate cause, I don't know if I would call it "severely misleading". Maybe mildly clickbait-y. It definitely wa
by nightpool 6y ago
While it would be more correct to call it the proximate cause, I don't know if I would call it "severely misleading". Maybe mildly clickbait-y. It definitely was a cause, and as far as I can tell from the report, they didn't change the system that identified passengers with 'Miss' as children—they just changed it so that 'Miss' as a title for adults was autocorrected to 'Ms'. So to some extent, it seems like they disagree with you on what the root cause was
- Grustaf 6y agoThere is no indication that the people checked in as "miss" were not in fact miss:es. The error was elsewhere. The reason they found a workaround was that it was simpler than changing the software, not that they thought it was correct. Even if they thought it correct, it obviously isn't.
- rectang 6y agoI interpreted the title as a cheeky anti-woke poke. The double meaning, being that referring to an adult female as "miss" rather than "Ms" has long been frowned upon (because of defining women by their marital status), and because it was offensive it caused a "serious incident".
- Pick-A-Hill2019 6y agoI'm with you on that one. I also assumed that the the title had been editorialized/was click-bait until I read the pdf and the incident was filed and issued by the AAIB as a 'Serious Incident'. Which is understandable given that the flight was 1,244 kg overweight at take off due to a programming error that assumed a 'Miss' = 35 kg / passenger instead of the correct average weight of an adult female of 69 kg. True that the actual incident was a lot different than the title suggested (and I assumed) but taking off a ton heavier than what the manifest stated is a ‘bit of a problem’ to use the English art of understatement.