4 ms·

A blameless postmortem can apply in some circumstances, especially when there are multiple confounding factors but in the case of the JFK runway incursion it re

A blameless postmortem can apply in some circumstances, especially when there are multiple confounding factors but in the case of the JFK runway incursion it really doesn't. There were many confounding factors but they were all sins committed by the UA crew. The UA crew basically got lost on the ground at JFK and drove onto an active runway without clearance and then argued with ATC about it. They were clearly negligent. ATC gave them clear instructions, there was clear and correct signage, they mistook a runway for a taxiway.

vlovich123 4y ago
> The UA crew basically got lost on the ground at JFK > there was clear and correct signage, they mistook a runway for a taxiway. This would contradictory claims to me. I have 0 experience in aviation, but just running a general post mortem, I would say for whatever reason they got lost and the sins of the UA crew don’t matter. Unless the UA crew was doing this deliberately, either JFK signage isn’t actually as clear as you claim or JFK’s runways are so complicated that they need dedicated training. Them arguing with ATC is also strange and I’d like to better understand why the crew thought they needed to do that and resolve that underlying problem. Basically, devoid of malicious intent, what are situational changes earlier that would have prevented the sins from occurring in the first place. For what it’s worth, that’s the way self driving cars are developing. People worry about the trolly problem when I’m fact software just tries really hard to avoid getting into that situation in the first place.