Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, I WAS Birddog

Post Reply
Widow
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 4592
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 12:57 pm
Location: Vancouver Island

Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by Widow »

Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts
Charles Mandel, Canwest News Service
Published: Friday, August 29, 2008

HALIFAX - A decade after Swissair Flight 111 crashed off the coast of Nova Scotia, the Transportation Safety Board of Canada said more work needs to be done to satisfy the safety deficiencies identified in the 4 1/2 year investigation into the accident.

The McDonnell Douglas MD-11, en route to Geneva from New York City, plummeted into the ocean off Peggy's Cove on Sept. 2, 1998. All 215 passengers and 14 crew members died in the crash.

Since the TSB released its report into the investigation, action is still needed in 18 of the 23 recommendations, said Jonathan Seymour, a TSB board member. Seymour made his remarks at an industry safety seminar last April, but the TSB only recently made those comments available on its website.

"It's sad that Canada spent so much on this investigation and did such a tremendous job and then to have what it recommended only be implemented at glacial speed," Miles Gerety said Friday. Gerety, a public defender in Connecticut, lost his brother in the crash.

Gerety praised the TSB for its work investigating the accident, but added airline manufacturers needed to embrace all the recommendations. "I'm not at all surprised that everything they recommended hasn't been put in place."

The TSB said since the accident, substantive action has not been taken to comprehensively review the remaining types of insulation currently in use on aircraft. "Instead, regulators are relying on in-service performance to (be) the catalyst for further action," Seymour said.

"In other words, a material has to fail before action is taken."

Worn or faulty entertainment-system wiring surrounding highly flammable material led to a fire which is believed to have downed the doomed jetliner. The TSB spent $57 million on the agency's largest ever investigation and its 338-page final report came out in the spring of 2003.

Seymour criticized the failure of regulators to develop a "test regime that evaluates aircraft electrical wire failure characteristics under realistic operating conditions."

Seymour also called for a systematic approach to preventing fires during flights; one that would comprehensively identify fire zones, implement fire detection systems, provide fire-suppression equipment and systems, and require appropriate training.

Wendy Tadros, chair of the TSB, said actions have been taken in a number of areas, including raising awareness among flight crew to land immediately when there's smoke of an unknown origin. As well, all new aircraft now come with two-hour cockpit voice recorders, Tadros said Friday.

"There are still some areas where we'd like to see further improvements," she said.

Tadros acknowledged that as the 10th anniversary of the crash approached, distraught families who had lost members would once again be questioning what actions had been taken since the tragedy. "I think as a result of this thorough investigation, aviation safety has certainly been advanced," she said. "There's still more work to be done, but it's certainly been advanced."

Greg Phillips, an aviation safety consultant with insurance firm Willis Global Aviation in Washington, D.C., said anytime a large-scale investigation such as the Swissair review is carried out, regulatory authorities should carefully consider its conclusions and proposals.

"The recommendations from accident investigations are well thought-out and should be looked at with seriousness," he said.
Ottawa Citizen

Clearly I come from a biased perspective, but TC has not done well acting on it's own recommendations over the years, let alone those of the TSB ...
---------- ADS -----------
 
Former Advocate for Floatplane Safety
Inverted2
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3885
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 7:46 am

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by Inverted2 »

Well when it all boils down to it, maybe we should all just stop flying and ground all airplanes if we want to make flying 100% safe.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DEI = Didn’t Earn It
Widow
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 4592
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 12:57 pm
Location: Vancouver Island

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by Widow »

What's the point of making a comment like that? Do you really think I, or anyone else "here", expect things to ever be 100% safe?

What I do expect, and so should everyone "here", is that when a government agency (be it TCCA, TSB or any other) spends hundreds of thousands of dollars and more (our dollars, let's remind ourselves) to do studies and make recommendations for safety reasons - those recommendations ought to be adopted as quickly as possible, and not delayed and further studied until someone else dies or initiates a lawsuit.

Do you need examples? I've got plenty.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Former Advocate for Floatplane Safety
b1ngnx33
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 387
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 3:10 pm

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by b1ngnx33 »

Didn't you read the last "safety" headline?

Life jackets have been rejected by JAZZ due to money/gas/etc.

SAFETY costs money. How much are you willing to pay for safety?

Are you really surprised no one takes "recommendations" seriously? Especially if they cost MORE money.

Why spend money you don't have to?

If people really wanted SAFE flying, the costs would be astronomical.

I can design a plane, in the event of an emergency, of absolute failure.

1. The wings fall off.

2. The fuselage breaks away completely.

3. Each seat deploys wings/glider/gps tracking system/parachute system eventually.

4. Each seat is designed to go in a different direction. 10 parachutes within "x" feet will fail.

5. First class seats will have full biometric data sent to the nearest hospital.

6. Each ticket for this flight would cost 1 million, one way.

7. Being in your seat is important. So during this flight you are held in place.

8. Boy, would this be fun to make. All I need is infinite money.

Probably include a full body shield, air bags, 2 days of food, etc, in each chair as well.

OH, and a life jacket, and a life boat, and life buoy.

Oh, lets go even further. 2 million per ticket, one way.

A fully deployable biosphere to keep you safe while your being tracked by SAR.

A mini-nuclear power source for 5 days at 1 KW / day.

A computer program that acts like a friend to keep you company.

Or if you want MORE than that, get the 3 million dollar ticket package.

The absolute safe way to fly.

Price does not include meal, peanuts, fresh air, foot massage, a real KNIFE with that medium rare steak, etc.

This was fun.

:)
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by Cat Driver »

This was fun.
What do you do when you are not mocking a woman who lost her husband in an airplane crash and is only trying to improve the safety factor in aviation?

Torture stray cats?
---------- ADS -----------
 
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no


After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
CD
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2731
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 5:13 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by CD »

---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Right Seat Captain
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 1237
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 7:51 pm
Location: Various/based CYOW

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by Right Seat Captain »

b1ngnx33, you really have no class.

Nearly 230 people paid their lives to teach the rest of us a lesson. We've learned that lesson through a very well thought out investigation process, yet we choose to ignore some of the more important methods to prevent a similar incident from happening in the future? We're not talking about recommended actions that are beyond our means, we're talking about replacing wiring.

Aviation history is full of reactive risk mitigation. Nearly every law we have was paid for by someone's life. But maybe we're at a point now where we're willing to accept people's deaths as a reality of this business, as b1ngnx33 suggests? I surely hope not, otherwise I'm out of here.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Newwave
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 7:17 am
Location: Qoobec

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by Newwave »

Definately, I think a lot of companies are becoming more and more pro-active about accident/incident avoidance rather than learning from experience. But there is obviously a lot of work to be done. Everyone has to do their part in this and not point fingers. No matter what you fly or who you do it for safety should be #1!
---------- ADS -----------
 
E-Flyer
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 985
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:43 pm

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by E-Flyer »

Widow wrote:What's the point of making a comment like that? Do you really think I, or anyone else "here", expect things to ever be 100% safe?

What I do expect, and so should everyone "here", is that when a government agency (be it TCCA, TSB or any other) spends hundreds of thousands of dollars and more (our dollars, let's remind ourselves) to do studies and make recommendations for safety reasons - those recommendations ought to be adopted as quickly as possible, and not delayed and further studied until someone else dies or initiates a lawsuit.

Do you need examples? I've got plenty.
Agreed !

Goes to say how when you hear "safety is our number one priority" on all passenger briefs how they're all crap :) If safety was our number one priority, a lot of things would have been changed. But a lot of changes causes the company's to make less of a revenue; thus pay less tax, and make the senate have to actually work for his dollars. :lol:
---------- ADS -----------
 
foxmoth
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 164
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 2:36 pm

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by foxmoth »

Certinly some dumb and rotten remarks on here.
SHAME!!!!

Of corse Jazz does not need lifejackets from Calgary to Winnipeg. Alredy explaned on another thread.
Wire insulation needs upgraded for aircraft.
A Comet crashed of Italy years ago. The investigate lesson learned was built into all new airliners.
No, you cant make aircraft 100% safe but you can at least pay atention and not make stupid remarks about it.
at least have some respect for the people who died to make things as safe as they are.
---------- ADS -----------
 
mcrit
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1973
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 9:01 pm

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by mcrit »

Mmmmmm...fine line here. The requirement to mitigate risk is axiomatic. The question is how, and to what degree. No one will argue when a change involves little cost or trouble, or when the risk of not making that change is a high probability of catostorophic failure, ie, don't reset a popped CB in flight. At the other end of the scale is spending a large amount of effort and trouble to mitigate against something that is not likely to occur, such as extending 24L to the 410 at YYZ. And there are of course all the shades of grey in between.
---------- ADS -----------
 
____________________________________
I'm just two girls short of a threesome.
Widow
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 4592
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 12:57 pm
Location: Vancouver Island

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by Widow »

Minister Cannon issues statement on the 10th anniversary of Swissair 111 accident
OTTAWA, Sept. 2 /CNW Telbec/ - September 2, 2008 marks the ten-year
anniversary of the tragic accident involving Swissair flight 111 at Peggy's
Cove in Nova Scotia. The Honourable Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Transport,
Infrastructure and Communities, today released the following statement:
"It's a day to remember the victims of one of the most tragic air
accidents in Canadian history. My thoughts go out to all the families and
communities affected by this tragedy. They will not be forgotten.
"I would also like to commend the Transportation Safety Board for its
final investigation report into the accident, released on March 27, 2003. The
Board's thorough work resulted in considerable improvements to aviation safety
around the world. In response to this report, Transport Canada notably
improved fire safety on planes by mandating the removal of flammable
insulation on all Canadian aircraft. Since the accident, Transport Canada has
improved safety in the areas we regulate - and Canadians can feel confident
that the current aviation system is safe.
"Transport Canada took an important step forward with the introduction of
safety management system regulations. The International Civil Aviation
Organization and the Auditor General of Canada have both applauded our country
as a leader in safety management systems
.
"These additional regulations require aviation organizations to identify
safety issues before they become bigger problems. It's focusing on what we do
to prevent accidents from occurring. I am confident that safety management
systems will help save lives by preventing accidents."

... duh, did he read the Auditor General's report???
---------- ADS -----------
 
Former Advocate for Floatplane Safety
User avatar
x-wind
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2005 10:23 pm
Location: Around

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by x-wind »

:roll: no kidding, thats some serious bs.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by Cat Driver »

what else besides B.S. do you expect from this person?

Minister Cannon

How much do you really think he knows about the subject?
---------- ADS -----------
 
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no


After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Widow
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 4592
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 12:57 pm
Location: Vancouver Island

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by Widow »

Only what his lackeys tell him ... :wink:
---------- ADS -----------
 
Former Advocate for Floatplane Safety
Four1oh
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2448
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 9:24 pm

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by Four1oh »

I know my world is safer. I have a switch on the flight deck that will turn off the TV's anytime I want.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Drinking outside the box.
yycflyguy
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2786
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:18 am

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by yycflyguy »

Four1oh wrote:I know my world is safer. I have a switch on the flight deck that will turn off the TV's anytime I want.
Out of curiousity Four1oh, what is WJ SOP on resetting the entertainment system? Maybe it doesn't fail as frequently as the IFE system that AC has but there was always differing opinions on when and how the Captain would do a system reset. One guy I flew with drew a direct analogy to resetting the IFE to the SwissAir accident and yet I saw nothing difinitive written in SOP.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Four1oh
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2448
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 9:24 pm

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by Four1oh »

oh man, are you going to make me pull the books out!? ;) There's 'soft' resets and then there's 'hard' resets. The Lead FA takes care of the soft reset all by herself/himself in the back, and all they have to do is get our approval to do it. A hard reset involves the pilots turning off the IFE switch(after getting approval from maintenance) and then back on again, and the FA starts the system on their side like it's the first start of the day.

"One guy I flew with drew a direct analogy to resetting the IFE to the SwissAir accident and yet I saw nothing definitive written in SOP. "

Not sure what he meant by that comment but the Swissair plane, as I understand it, was hard wired to the battery, which meant it was powered 24/7 and no way to kill the power to it. I don't see how that's the same thing. Maybe he was thinking of that AC DC9 that burned because of resetting and holding in a circuit breaker?(no relevance there either)
---------- ADS -----------
 
Drinking outside the box.
yycflyguy
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2786
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:18 am

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by yycflyguy »

mmmm, man I love those soft resets.

Nah, he was referring to resetting the system inflight. Your entertainment system probably is more reliable and didnt suffer the common freezes and resets that our Thales system has. The hard reset you speak of is in the flight deck of an Embraer under a GUARDED switch. This is what got guys a little hesitant to lift a guarded switch when it wasn't clear what they were resetting. Since I posted this question to you a memo was put out by the company to explain their position on inflight resets. Still not sure I buy their explanations.... :?
---------- ADS -----------
 
iflyforpie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8133
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:25 pm
Location: Winterfell...

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by iflyforpie »

Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts
A bit of a sensationalist title considering no further aircraft have been lost due to this type of failure in ten years and in my experience I haven't found any or heard of any damaged wires of this type caused purely by the failure of the insulation.

The TSB said since the accident, substantive action has not been taken to comprehensively review the remaining types of insulation currently in use on aircraft. "Instead, regulators are relying on in-service performance to (be) the catalyst for further action," Seymour said.
On the flip side can the current industry bear the burden of replacing all the wires in the current fleet in addition to higher fuel costs and and economic slowdowns, considering these wires are inspected at regular intervals already?

"In other words, a material has to fail before action is taken."
Happens all the time, more often to chaffing or improper installation than faulty insulation and seldom with catastrophic results. If there is really a large problem with these wires, there would be more SDRs out emphasizing the need for action.

Mechanics being simply more aware of the potential for problems and better flight crew discipline when dealing with smoke and/or electrical problems most certainly have reduced the risks of this happening again.

"There are still some areas where we'd like to see further improvements," she said.
There always is. Unless we stay on the ground whether that be by choice or by burdening ourselves trying to implement every safety recommendation imaginable.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Geez did I say that....? Or just think it....?
Widow
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 4592
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 12:57 pm
Location: Vancouver Island

Re: Skies still unsafe 10 years after Swissair crash: Experts

Post by Widow »

If I might suggest, iflyforpie, without seeming hypercritical (lol) ... although I agree that the title of the article was somewhat extremist (although a good way to get people to read the article and start paying attention), the underlying point is that this is not the only TSB report over the years for which TC (or the FAA for that matter) has not responded satisfactorily.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Former Advocate for Floatplane Safety
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”