2 ms·

No idea about Austin airport. Regarding professionalism and failure, the Austin incident is actually proof of the system working as intended. There was, by the

by hef19898 4y ago

No idea about Austin airport. Regarding professionalism and failure, the Austin incident is actually proof of the system working as intended. There was, by the looks of it, only one real mistake made, maybe two. Training of everyone involved, including the ATC, prevented those mistakes from creating a cascade of failures that could have let to two hull losses and 100+ dead passenger on the Southwest flight. For fatal accidents to happen in aviation and aerspace, more than one thing has to go wrong at the same time. Single, isolated failures are no longer sufficient to cause serious accidents.

piva00 4y ago
I don't think Austin is proof of the system working as intended, the only thing that saved them was the FedEx flight being able to take action at the last moment during their approach, if the fog was a little thicker and they couldn't see the Southwest flight on the runway as early as they did it would be a catastrophe. That's just luck, not a system that's working as intended.
- hef19898 4y ago
  No, that is good training on behalf of FedEx, Southwest (knowing you have a plane above your own during take off and still follow ATC guidance is no easy feat) and the ATC (knowing you fucked up, staying calm and giving the correct instructions and keep everyone alive is again no easy feat). And training of operators absolutely is part of the overall system.
  - michaelt 4y ago
    If the wings fall off my plane mid flight, I jump out with a parachute, and I land without injury then the "overall system" of plane-plus-parachute-plus-training has succeeded. However, the plane component of the system failed, because the wings aren't supposed to fall off.
  - doctor_eval 4y ago
    A safe system is resilient to errors. The controller made a mistake - that happens, the system should deal with it. But in this case, a crash was averted only because the fog lifted. It was pure luck. Ground movement radar, a runway incursion warning system, or a different landing clearance protocol could all have provided the necessary safety buffers. When you’re up to the last “hole” in the cheese, that’s a failure.

piva00 4y ago

I don't think Austin is proof of the system working as intended, the only thing that saved them was the FedEx flight being able to take action at the last moment during their approach, if the fog was a little thicker and they couldn't see the Southwest flight on the runway as early as they did it would be a catastrophe. That's just luck, not a system that's working as intended.

hef19898 4y ago
No, that is good training on behalf of FedEx, Southwest (knowing you have a plane above your own during take off and still follow ATC guidance is no easy feat) and the ATC (knowing you fucked up, staying calm and giving the correct instructions and keep everyone alive is again no easy feat). And training of operators absolutely is part of the overall system.
- michaelt 4y ago
  If the wings fall off my plane mid flight, I jump out with a parachute, and I land without injury then the "overall system" of plane-plus-parachute-plus-training has succeeded. However, the plane component of the system failed, because the wings aren't supposed to fall off.
- doctor_eval 4y ago
  A safe system is resilient to errors. The controller made a mistake - that happens, the system should deal with it. But in this case, a crash was averted only because the fog lifted. It was pure luck. Ground movement radar, a runway incursion warning system, or a different landing clearance protocol could all have provided the necessary safety buffers. When you’re up to the last “hole” in the cheese, that’s a failure.