Continental Airlines and mechanic guilty,

[XabbaRus]

Sorry but this verdict is rubbish.

There was no regard given to other evidence, eg the condition of the plane and its maintenace record.

Go see pprune as they have links to some good information of the crash.

The concorde in question should possibly have never been allowed to fly.

[TarJak]

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

Sorry but this verdict is rubbish.

There was no regard given to other evidence, eg the condition of the plane and its maintenace record.

Go see pprune as they have links to some good information of the crash.

The concorde in question should possibly have never been allowed to fly.

But why let facts get in the way of a verdict that avoids placing any blame on your govnerment owned (at the time of the crash) airline?

[gimpy117]

wiki says the primary cause was FOD from a DC-10. It says this strip was installed against rules.
But somebody had to tell him to install the part...he's taking the fall for his former supervisor and what not. I'm sure his supervisor knew exactly what was done. but somehow he skated free...shameful.

always a DC-10 those things are storm crows. It seems everybody finds new ways to break matainace regs on these things.

[Jimbuna]

So whose responsibility was it to see that the runway was safe and free of debris?

[XabbaRus]

Basically the French absolved themselves of blame completely.

There was eyewitness accounts of the plane being on fire before if rotated, there was proof the that the main bogie on the concorde was faulty and shimmying before hand.

the continental guy might have ignored procedure but he is not completely to blame.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concord...ative_theories

[gimpy117]

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

Basically the French absolved themselves of blame completely.

There was eyewitness accounts of the plane being on fire before if rotated, there was proof the that the main bogie on the concorde was faulty and shimmying before hand.

the continental guy might have ignored procedure but he is not completely to blame.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concord...ative_theories

you are exactly right. rarely does only one thing cause an accident. But the thing is, FOD is a big problem, but it could have been anything that could have caused it at any time.

[Oberon]

Hardly surprising, the French were very wary of blaming any French company for this.

An interesting spot of trivia for you all.

The Concorde which crashed was the same Concorde which was used in the filming for the film "The Concorde...Airport '79"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Con..._Airport_%2779

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

So whose responsibility was it to see that the runway was safe and free of debris?

in virtually every single air regulation, responsibility for everything no matter how inconceivable, falls upon the Pilot in Command of the flight

[Platapus]

Kinda like being the captain of a ship: Everything is your fault.

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

in virtually every single air regulation, responsibility for everything no matter how inconceivable, falls upon the Pilot in Command of the flight

That's the truth. It's not exactly the fairest situation, but probably the only workable one


The spread of blame on this one is interesting, between the missing spacer on the Concorde, and tough titanium being used instead of aluminium on the CO DC10.