She was in bed. She was playing on her phone as you do, and the news came in at about 9 o'clock.
Immediately, she looked, she suspected it, looked up what kind of plane it was, exactly as she thought: a Boeing.
Then she immediately looked up what plane her 12-year-old daughter is on to Samoa this Sunday —exactly as she expected, a Boeing— and she freaked out.
Now fortunately for her, she's got a partner with common sense, and actually, she herself is reasonably rational, so she's not going to be pulling her daughter off that flight. But she is still feeling incredibly uncomfortable about it.
And look, I don't blame her for that. I would bet that she's not alone in reacting like this.
And just assuming this is a Boeing problem. Truth is, we don't actually know that this is a Boeing problem.
Yes, it was a Boeing plane, but there is a very, very good chance that this is actually a pilot problem because it looks like the pilot may not have extended the wing flaps.
But the trouble for Boeing is it does not have the same benefit of the doubt that a planemaker would normally have with a crash like this because of all of the problems that Boeing has already had in the last 10 years.
Never mind the fact that the problems have been with the 737 narrow-body planes, and this is a 787, which is completely different. Never mind that.
Boeing shares fell immediately, and they have stayed down.
Now, I would say that speed is of the essence here for the people who are doing the investigation with getting those answers out.
These investigators, I understand, have about 30 days under international expectations to issue the preliminary findings, but they should, all things going well, have answers out of that flight data, the flight data recorders within days, if not hours of the crash.
And then I think the sooner that the public are told what has happened, the better for Boeing's sake. And Boeing will be hoping like hell that the answers clear the plane and unfortunately blame the pilot.
Heather du Plessis-Allan is a journalist and commentator who hosts Newstalk ZB's Drive show HERE - where this article was sourced.
9 comments:
Or the engine maker. The 12 year olds mother may better not enquire.
Or just settle down, research how many planes are in the sky every minute of the day. Understand that it is safer to be in the air in a plane than a child in NZ when extrapolating the risk versus world population . All is not OK in NZ but very safe actually flying .
Reality needs to take place and not panis.
I recall the Erebus crash back in 1979 was a DC-10.
But it was not the planes fault.
We flew on DC-10's many times in 1979/80 in the USA and were not in a state of panic.
An almost totally irrational response. But what do you expect from people who live in their phones? How many successful Boeing flights are completed every day? How many successful hours have been flown by B707, B727, B737, B747? Don't know? Go figure.
correction. panic not "panis"
Millions safe and sound Vic.
.... B757, B767, B777 and YES, B787.
Tell Kylie to research how many cars of the make she drives are in car accidents
Comparisons with car crashes etc are dubious. In very many car accidents the driver and occupnts influence the degree of risk. Risks for the very cautious are much reduced. With planes it is entirely outside the influence of the individual. Whole families are seldom wiped out in car crashes. Many air accident findings seem soft on the planemakers and operators.. I recall a case years ago where in turbulence the pilot applied the controls too vigorously leading to structural failure. In older aircraft physical effort limited such actions .A design and training fault incredibly overlooked,.
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.