Re: The causal factor...
Donald A. Talleur (dtalleur_at_ux1.cso.uiuc.edu)
Thu, 08 Oct 1998 08:28:39 -0500
Graham,
If lightning strikes an airliner, and the airliner subsequently blow ups
(don't laugh, at least one DC-8 went down this way) is the human still a
contributory factor to the fatal accident? If you sight our inability to
predict where lightning will strike or that they took-off when there were
clouds in the sky then maybe it is human error. However, I would hardly
believe that humans could be "contributory" factors in accidents 100% of
the time. I think we need to be careful to catagorize what we believe are
controllable cirsumstances vs. uncontrollable, necessary risks vs.
unnecessary risks, etc. If we understood exactly how mother nature worked
we'd probably eliminate many accidents. But only if one includes our
general lack of understanding of weather as a human error can we really say
that human's are partly to blame for 100% of accidents. And for weather
forecasters: forecasts can only be as good as the models that create them,
which can only be as good as the research and understanding of our weather
systems. An inaccurate weather forecast is seldom the result of a human
error! It is a result of a lack of ability to produce models that will
account for all atmospheric anomalies. If you call this human error, all
you're saying is that we just aren't smart enough when it comes to weather
forecasting. In the presence of ALL available information, if a error
occurs in forecasting, how can it be labled human error?
Just some thoughts for discussion.
Don
At 08:15 AM 10/8/98 +1000, you wrote:
>
>"Statistics show that approximately 65 percent of all fatal air carrier
>accidents list human error as a probable cause," said Dr. Herman Rediess,
>director of the Office of Aviation Research."
>
>By probable cause, are we talking about primary cause or causal factors?
>
>If it is the latter, do we count ATC, Maintenance, design atc. as human
error?
>
>At the risk of sounding pedantic, I believe human error is a contributory
>factor in 100% of aircraft accidents. This does not aim to legitimise human
>error, but to remind us of the importance of work in the area.
>
>Air traffic controllers, weather forecasters, maintenance engineers,
>designers etc. are all human and therefore prone to human error.
>
>If we are talking about primary cause then that is a different matter, but
>then let me pose this question:
>
>If an airliner has a crash in Australia (God forbid), who will determine
>what contribution it has to accident statistics that are based on primary
>cause? The Australian Bureau of Air Safety which investigates accidents in
>Australia stopped using 'primary cause' years ago and now only uses
>'Findings' and 'Significant Factors'.
>
>
>
>
>
>Dr. Graham Braithwaite
>Department of Aviation
>University of New South Wales
>Sydney 2052
>Australia
>
>Tel: +61 (0) 2 9385 6757
>Fax: +61 (0) 2 9385 6637
>Mobile: 0414 736 467
>