Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The root cause does not appear (at this stage) to be the same: incorrect maintenance in AA191 as opposed to fatigue cracking here.

Where does this report say proper maintenance would have prevented the incident?



The report doesn't say that because it's just reporting the facts not drawing conclusions. In my opinion, if a catastrophic failure happens that is a maintenance failure. Either the inspections failed to notice the fatigue or the inspection guidelines were too optimistic.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: