3 ms·

As I said, I do acknowledge that a near miss still needs to be taken seriously, but the point is that in terms of actual harmful consequences (not "might be cou

As I said, I do acknowledge that a near miss still needs to be taken seriously, but the point is that in terms of actual harmful consequences (not "might be could have been" hypothetical ones) from this incident, there was either basically nothing, or absolutely nothing. It definitely was a failure in the sense of "we need to do failure analysis and make sure we don't get this close again", but it also was a success in the sense of "ultimately, something prevented a catastrophic outcome" (and studying that, and potentially trying to replicate those positive aspects at other airports, is also something that should to happen).

toss1 5y ago
>>"ultimately, something prevented a catastrophic outcome" The most likely "something" was Pure Dumb Luck, just a random combination of factors that happened to work out favorably. Of course, on the chance that there was some particular factor/event/action that could be replicated and reliably prevent the disaster, then sure, we should have a look. I'd definitely make a good survey for that, but the focus really needs to be further back in the chain of events to find out what thing(s) failed. And of course to be in any way relaxed about this because they weren't scraping up parts from 300+ bodies this time is folly.