3 ms·
This airport is basically already complying with the highest possible standard [1]; so in your analogy the crash barrier already exists, the equivalent argument
by ricardobeat 2y ago
This airport is basically already complying with the highest possible standard [1]; so in your analogy the crash barrier already exists, the equivalent argument would be for the track to have a 200m run-off area all around.
It's not feasible to plan for every possible freak occurrence, an accident like this is only possible after a long list of other safety procedures have failed (as is often the case for aviation).
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runway_safety_area https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runway_safety_area
- xmodem 2y agoPerhaps the standard is flawed and needs to be updated.
- DrFaggotMD 2y ago[dead]
- wlll 2y agoStandards are the minimum, not the maximum. Planes sometimes overshoot the runway, building an unecessary wall at the end of it might comply with a standard, but that doesn't make it a good idea.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- __m 2y agoNot at all. Highest standard would have been a engineered materials arresting system, which the airport didn’t have.