Who should we blame when an aircraft crashes?

I woke up one morning this week to news of an airliner missing on a flight from Paris to Cairo, and the radar trail abruptly stops in the Eastern Mediterranean. With my personal interest in the helicopter industry, the accident on Friday 29th April near Bergen in Norway remains central in my mind. A helicopter on its way from an offshore rig on its way back to Bergen Airport crash with the loss of all on board.

As we carry around the world’s media sources on our phones, our demand for news has never been higher. In fact, our demand for answers has never been higher.

We need to remember that the media — particularly the broadcast and newsprint media — are so hungry for news that they will sacrifice accuracy for the need of sensationalism to keep their readership. Their dependency on profitability, and thus income, rises above the need for research and getting expert opinion. Advertising rates are driven by audience figures.

The priority for the media is profit before accuracy.

With any aviation accident, there is a need for assessment to determine how best to prevent, or at least minimise, the same situation happening again. A national air accident investigation authority goes to task quickly after an accident, but will take many months — often 15 to 30 months for a fatal accident — to produce a report. Their task is to gather all the evidence, make further investigation of every factor they see as potentially linked, and then draw conclusions to advise the aviation industry what could have been done differently.

As the United Kingdom’s AAIB authority notes on its website “Our purpose is to improve aviation safety globally by determining the causes of air accidents and serious incidents, and making safety recommendations intended to prevent recurrence. It is not to apportion blame or liability.”

The media wants to apportion blame or liability. They want to point the finger, and the option of saying that the report will not be out for 24 months will not bring their audience back to read the next issue or view the next bulletin. The apparent side-stepping by accident investigators of apportioning blame is also a legal issue, as their remit is factual and advisory. It is up to the legal system in the country concerned to reach a decision, as much as the media would prefer to act as judge and jury.

Aircraft manufacturers can become the focus of a hate campaign, and a particular aircraft type can be maligned purely on the basis of media headlines. Headlines written by editors thinking about profit before accuracy. Public online polls can suddenly sprout up and find 20,000 or more people wanting the aircraft type grounded for ever because the broadcasters want them to believe the aircraft type is at fault.

That said, there is a very good case to get hold of reliable and analysed conclusions quicker than the investigators currently produce their reports. The sooner we can action all the learning points from an accident, the safer flying becomes.

The Norway helicopter accident

Following the accident in Norway, I have had an increase in enquiries trying to elicit my personal opinion on the cause of the accident, given my focus as a journalist in the helicopter market. But I have no primary evidence on my own desk from which to give an opinion — nor am I skilled in aerospace engineering or accident investigation. I can only provide information along with details of the source of that information. Beyond that I would be doing everyone a disservice if I was trying to draw conclusions.

From photographic and video evidence touted in the media, the rotor head with all its blades attached came off in flight only a few minutes out from its destination at Bergen Airport. Aircraft certification authorities, who validate that each aircraft design is safe to fly, have issued documentation requiring the checking the correct installation of particular parts. This is an interim response and there could be a further requirement which may, or may not, be related.

Scores of aviation industry people merge on online forums (“rumour networks”) and try to do their own analysis without all of the primary evidence physically in front of them. They exacerbate the problem from within the industry by setting themselves up as self-appointed experts hiding behind forum user names.

Stop pointing the finger

Without referring to any particular accident, incident or manufacturer, if an aircraft part stops working, on what basis is the manufacturer or aircraft type to be blamed in the way the media seek to? How can they possibly narrow it down so quickly when there are many other questions that must be covered by an accident investigator, including:-

• Was the aircraft being flown within its design limits?
• Did the certification authority validate the design limits?
• Was the part installed correctly?
• Was the part maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s requirements?
• Were those requirements appropriate?
• Who supplied the part?
• Who manufactured the part?
• Has the paperwork for that part been checked?
• Has the ongoing usage monitoring of the parts on the aircraft been thoroughly completed?
• Was the weather appropriate for the flight?
• Was the pilot’s medical valid?
• Has the pilot been under medical analysis and not told their employer?
• Is the pilot correctly licenced for the flight?
• Has the pilot had the required amount of rest time before the flight?
• Is sufficient time given for aircraft maintenance?
• How much pressure was put on the operator by the customer to fly?
• How much pressure did the operator (their employer) put on the pilot to fly?
• Is there a culture of blame within any relevant organisation?
• And so on….

And there are many more potential lines of enquiry, some of which can likely be answered quickly, others will take longer. We must avoid finger pointing. Manufacturers are at risk of an aircraft type being wrongly maligned, and the loss of confidence in a particular model could have serious detrimental effect on whole companies — both operators and manufacturers.

What’s next?

Are the broadcasters and newspaper editors ready for the libel cases?

How much would it cost to have more accident investigators to produce reports quicker, so that mistakes can be corrected and lessons learned sooner?

Should the end-user customers show willingness to pay more to hire an aircraft so that more money can be invested in safety?