Malaysian Airlines MH17 Crashes in Ukraine

[anat0l]

I think one thing we can (or should) all agree on is that irrespective of the action taken by MH (which was not in violation of any particular IATA / ICAO / UN sanctioned directive), this aircraft and its 300 lives on board did not deserve to be shot down and did not deserve to die.

They were not belligerents in any war; if anything now, they are now most unfairly pawns in it. An injustice to them in both life and death.

So the focus should be on working out what shot them, who did it, who pulled or authorised the "trigger", and bringing them to account. This is no longer a conflict of ideologies, territories, nationalities, supremacy or the like... 300 innocent lives are dead.

 

[boomy]

But if you look at the numbers (300 flights a day according to ATC sources), that is a lot of overhead traffic, in fact it is roughly 8500 flights a month.

We could just as easily be talking about the SQ or AI flights here. So easy to look at the one flight in isolation.

My point is, after the unfortunate incident earlier this year, shouldn't MH be more vigilant about safety?
After all, there were some airlines that chose not to use this specific route on their flights from Europe to Asia.

 

[burmans]

My point is, after the unfortunate incident earlier this year, shouldn't MH be more vigilant about safety?
After all, there were some airlines that chose not to use this specific route on their flights from Europe to Asia.

Well apparently one of those that claimed they didn't has now retracted and said actually we do, so are you sure of the rest!

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I think one thing we can (or should) all agree on is that irrespective of the action taken by MH (which was not in violation of any particular IATA / ICAO / UN sanctioned directive), this aircraft and its 300 lives on board did not deserve to be shot down and did not deserve to die.

They were not belligerents in any war; if anything now, they are now most unfairly pawns in it. An injustice to them in both life and death.

So the focus should be on working out what shot them, who did it, who pulled or authorised the "trigger", and bringing them to account. This is no longer a conflict of ideologies, territories, nationalities, supremacy or the like... 300 innocent lives are dead.

for the sake of the 300 innocents that have died, we should not excuse the issue of why the plane was there. I think an airline owes its passengers a duty of care, not excuses. Other airlines might have been flying the same route, but it was MH that got hit.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Well apparently one of those that claimed they didn't has now retracted and said actually we do, so are you sure of the rest!

True, but still, have a look at the data: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...ysian-airlines-flight-mh17.html?_r=0#diverted

 

[Kefci2000]

As a fellow FF, I am touched by many of the comments on this post and share the grief, but quite ashamed by the mud-slinging by a few members. Have some sensitivity to those who have lost friends and relatives, and get off your high or very very low horse.

 

[Austman]

airlines that did not fly over any part of Ukraine: AF BA CX LX

Seems AF and BA still actually fly TO Ukraine.

 

[burmans]

True, but still, have a look at the data: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...ysian-airlines-flight-mh17.html?_r=0#diverted

Well done, you have found the 6 that avoided, what about the 15 that didn't, wil you stop flying them too?

 

[mannej]

Well done, you have found the 6 that avoided, what about the 15 that didn't, wil you stop flying them too?

Those stating that MH failed their duty of care have an over simplistic view of this accident. Having an accident isn't enough evidence to suggest that the Duty of care that has been breached.

for the sake of the 300 innocents that have died, we should not excuse the issue of why the plane was there. I think an airline owes its passengers a duty of care, not excuses. Other airlines might have been flying the same route, but it was MH that got hit.

How do you know what information was available to MH and the other airlines who have been using this route over recent months (~8500 flights a month)? It is easy to suggest things in hindsight.

My point is, after the unfortunate incident earlier this year, shouldn't MH be more vigilant about safety?
After all, there were some airlines that chose not to use this specific route on their flights from Europe to Asia.

Again, hard to state without the full information that MH dropped the ball in regards to this one. If this didn't happen I'd suggest no one would be none the wiser about the current flight paths being utilized by the airlines between Asia and Europe.

 

[straitman]

I'm getting angry watching the Malaysian Airlines Vice President speak in Holland. He keeps saying 'other airlines were flying the route' and 'the route was declared safe'. Really? Did the rebels declare the route safe did they? Why was MH (and others) flying there when other airlines chose to avoid the area? I don't think there would be many passengers who would complain if the flight was slightly linger to avoid the area.

No problem with that logic as long as you apply it to the many others that flew the same of similar routes, will you boycott SQ as wel?

Indeed those questions need to be asked.

Courtesy of NYTimes/FlyerTalk the following list (for the last week):

airlines that continued to overfly Ukraine (prohibited areas excepted): BR KL LH MH TG SQ VS
airlines that did not fly over any part of Ukraine: AF BA CX LX

At least a significant number of airlines didn't fly, so why justify your actions with those who did, rather than those who didn't?

The airlines that flew the route would be doing so in accordance with the ICAO rules that applied and as such there is no real perceived need to go elsewhere.

Do you also suggest they fly clear of Araq, Kuwait, Afghanastan, Pakistan etc. etc. etc. :?:

 

[JohnK]

Exactly. There is devastation in one part of the world, and an idyllic beach in another. We are right to do everything we can to stop the devastation, but there are many positive things as well. Life goes on. It always has.

If you put yourself in a happy place then everything will be OK?

 

[JohnPhelan]

. Other airlines might have been flying the same route, but it was MH that got hit.

So that makes it MH's fault?? MH didn't fire a missile at anyone. Blame the right people, please.

It sounds like you have an anti-MH agenda for some other reason that you are tastelessly using this incident to further.

 

[burmans]

The airlines that flew the route would be doing so in accordance with the ICAO rules that applied and as such there is no real perceived need to go elsewhere.

Do you also suggest they fly clear of Araq, Kuwait, Afghanastan, Pakistan etc. etc. etc. :?:

Probably only after an incident, continues to amaze me how much apparent foresight some people had but didn't bother to tell anyone until after the event.

 

[burmans]

for the sake of the 300 innocents that have died, we should not excuse the issue of why the plane was there. I think an airline owes its passengers a duty of care, not excuses. Other airlines might have been flying the same route, but it was MH that got hit.

That's a it like saying that those who got abused by paedophiles were at fault because well they didn't avoid it.

 

[Tortuga]

There is no question that MH and other airlines were not in breach of the rules/laws in force at the time. However this doesn't stop companies going above the rules and maintaining their own higher standards of safety to separate themselves from the pack. Hindsight is a wonderful thing of course.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

So that makes it MH's fault?? MH didn't fire a missile at anyone. Blame the right people, please.

It sounds like you have an anti-MH agenda for some other reason that you are tastelessly using this incident to further.

The same questioning would apply to any airline, that has been made clear. Asking questions is not anti-MH

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Probably only after an incident, continues to amaze me how much apparent foresight some people had but didn't bother to tell anyone until after the event.

Agreed, and that's one of the questions I raised earlier. If BA was avoiding the country in total, what brought about that decision.

 

[JohnPhelan]

Agreed, and that's one of the questions I raised earlier. If BA was avoiding the country in total, what brought about that decision.

BA continues to fly a daily service to and from Ukraine (Kiev). It was not, and is not, "avoiding the country in total".

 

[Duffa]

Same as my previous post after MH370 tragedy.
I'm still flying MH this October. They are a great airline.
Thoughts are with all the families worldwide

 

[MEL_Traveller]

BA continues to fly a daily service to and from Ukraine (Kiev). It was not, and is not, "avoiding the country in total".

clearly, and the point being made was flights to Asia. some airlines used Ukraine as a corridor, some avoided.