Re: Case Study
John Wiley (jwiley_at_mindspring.com)
Sat, 18 Apr 1998 21:50:02 -0400
> The mishap crew was making their first transoceanic crossing for a
>commercial carrier in a newly introduced equipment type. The equipment was
>considered to be the most technologically advanced to date.
> The captain had approximately 40 years experience and was consistently
>chosen by the carrier to perform command duties when new equipment was
>acquired. He was respected by his peers. Crewmembers characterized him as "low
>key" and "firm, but fair". Prior to this incident, his safety record was
>spotless.
> All other crewmembers aboard were highly experienced and respected members
>of the company. None had been directly involved in any major incidents.
> The equipement in use had been involved in a "normal" course of
>Operational Test and Evaluation according to records. Subsequent investigation
>called the quality of the OT & E process and findings into question. Comm/Nav
>equipment was "state of the art". All required equipment was aboard, in
>accordance with policies and regulations, except for one navaid that was
>determined to be non-mission essential.
> Enroute weather indicated conditions were favorable for icing. Reports
>received from other carriers confirmed icing conditions.
> Manifested passengers included several Distinguished Visitors, including
>the president of the carrier.
> During departure, a "minor incident" occurred that caused no damage and
>was judged to have no bearing on the mishap. Departure was on schedule.
>
>Which event was this?
Just a guess but Titanic?
FWIW, there was another ship on its maiden voyage that went into an ice
field, hit an iceberg and it went down also. The Hans Hedtoft went down off
the coast of Greenland with a trace.....and the crew was also experienced.