Malaysian Airlines MH17 Crashes in Ukraine

[OATEK]

I simply cannot believe there are posts on this thread trying to lay blame on MH for this.

It still seems to me there is a lot of confusion between blame, and the consequences of failing to actively manage risk when your business is under threat. Yes, the blame for the loss of MH17 will always rest on the shoulders of those who recklessly fired a missile at a passing plane, not matter how ignorant they were of the consequences.

MH was not at fault for the loss of their plane, and as no one was predicting the loss of an aircraft in this way. As many experienced flyers have said, it was reasonable to continue to use a flight path that had not been subject to exclusion notices. However, like any air accident, there are nearly always a series of incidents, mistakes, errors of judgement or the like that lead to an event, and even a slight change in any action in a chain of events can lead to a dramatically different outcome. It has been discussed here many times.

Anyone advising OZ or MH as the organisations faced something of a crisis after their recent aircraft losses would have advised them to own the problem that they would be seen as less safe airline after those accidents. Crisis or issues management methods argue that you assess risk in a different framework after an unexpected event that has the potential to cripple, even bankrupt, any organisation. The accepted method is not to deflect as BP did initially in the recent oil rig incident in the US, but to say we have a problem and we are going to do X, Y and Z to make sure it doesn't happen again.

So if MH, had looked at every area of risk, whether it be changes in crewing say perhaps to ensure always 2 in a coughpit, looking at maintenance to make sure they were going above and beyond, and to look at routes and schedules and any other action they could identify that would reduce the risk of another potential business-threatening accident then one small change in the chain of events might have meant that the MH flight was not in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Yes its a long bow, but when an organisation's whole existence is under threat, as others have said thousands of jobs on the line and all the suffering that goes with that, then a more thorough risk assessment after MH370 might have made a difference. They might have tracked any airline decisions that suggested routes were not as safe. They might not, or they might have risk assessed many other things after MH370 and discounted the route over The Ukraine. Lots of if onlys always come along after tragic events, and I still think it is reasonable to ask if MH had considered the risk at any stage given they were in crisis mode after MH370.

 

[medhead]

I think what BAM1748 is referring to in looking at the unknowns is what are referred to the "known" unknowns. In this context they probably did look at the prospect of someone shooting the plane down and in fact had changed the level that could be flown as a mitigant to 32000. While it was unknown that someone would try to take down a passenger jet they did take action by changing the level planes could fly at to take into account the "known" threat.

I'm not sure if the fact that the rebels had SAM's was "known", I suspect not (given previous attacks seem to have occurred from Russia itself). What would definitely appear to be an "unknown unknown" though was the fact that they probably did an assessment of the rebels deliberately targeting a civilian aircraft. No-one probably considered they might shoot down a plane accidentally.

There are 4 accepted means to mitigate risk of which MAS actually took at least two. Risk Acceptance, Risk Avoidance, Risk Limitation and Risk Transference. They used Transference to a degree by outsourcing the decisions on where to fly to external parties who are experts in this field, limitation was employed by MAS and other when the minimum ceiling was raised, they may have also had some insurance in place (transference). They may even have accepted some risk (too much some are suggesting). What they did not do was risk avoidance (flying around the area). But all of these are regarded as valid risk mitigation activities, not just risk avoidance (speaking general, not making any comment on this particular situation).

The point is that all accident investigate requires not just identifying the causes. But also deciding on corrective actions. This is an open question to all who want to blame MH. What corrective actions would have prevented this accident.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Where were the 'experts' before last Friday ?

Retro-spectroscope is a wonderful thing ... after Friday morning, of course.

At least one expert/manager appeared to have advised/decided not to let their airline fly over the area entirely. Who knows what basis they had to make that decision. They may have had nothing other than no concrete evidence to prove it was safe. One option might have been to look and see what others were doing (an environmental scan) and then make a decision. Did other airlines think BA was being too cautious and therefore discount that?

Why did Ukraine not close it's airspace entirely? Why did it approve airlines to fly over? If, as was initially suggested, the SAMs were stolen from an overrun Ukrainian facility... why was that not relayed to the relevant authorities? Or was it? If Russia supplied (or allowed) the SAMs to be taken, why did they not close their airspace or advise accordingly? There are a lot of unanswered questions.

 

[OATEK]

The point is that all accident investigate requires not just identifying the causes. But also deciding on corrective actions. This is an open question to all who want to blame MH. What corrective actions would have prevented this accident.

Exactly.....

 

[MEL_Traveller]

The point is that all accident investigate requires not just identifying the causes. But also deciding on corrective actions. This is an open question to all who want to blame MH. What corrective actions would have prevented this accident.

It's not a case of blaming MH. It is a case of asking what might have prevented this, or could this have been prevented?

The Bolt Report today seemed to go to the extreme of suggesting that if the USA had a tougher foreign policy, hadn't let the situation in Crimea escalate, then the flight wouldn't have been shot down. I struggle with that concept. But I don't struggle overall with the concept of asking how this might have been avoided.

 

[drron]

And there are posts on FT where people flying BA in the past LHR-SIN noted on the route map that they passed over Crimea.That area was subject to exclusion.So is it relevant?

And in the links I gave before the video showing the SAMs being moved into the area was 2 hours before the MH flight overflew the area.So the managers at MH should have foreseen that?

Of the 3 planes shot down in the area 1 was whilst on approach,1 they blame on an air to air missile so only the third which was the transport brought down at 21000 feet.Now is that in the range of a 1 man missile?I don't know but it was after that that the alert was put out at 24000 fet to which a 30% margin of error was added hence the limit of 32000 feet.
A correspondent for one of the Russian media outlets quits because of the lies about the shootdown-
MH17 Coverage From Russia Today Forces Correspondent Sara Firth To Quit

And the utter disregard for the deceased continues-
http://www.buzzfeed.com/alanwhite/bodies-from-malaysian-airlines-crash-left-to-rot-in-deserted

But the rules that are really being broken are those for the investigation of an aircraft crash.Plenty of eyewitness reports of looting,things being moved etc.Here are 3 such links to reporters on the scene-
https://twitter.com/fergalkeane47?o....html&tw_i=490423084277829632&tw_p=tweetembed
https://twitter.com/maxseddon

Only 1 person is in a position to bring order to the situation and that is Mr.Putin.

 

[drron]

The US Embassy in Kiev has now released a statement.Again confirming that the missile launcher was moved into the area on Thursday 17th.Also says Russia trained the rebels in its use.-
Statements 2014 | Embassy of the United States Kyiv, Ukraine

Over the past month, we have detected an increasing amount of heavy weaponry to separatist fighters crossing the border from Russia into Ukraine. Last weekend, Russia sent a convoy of military equipment with up to 150 vehicles including tanks, armored personnel carriers, artillery, and multiple rocket launchers to the separatist. We also have information indicating that Russia is providing training to separatist fighters at a facility in southwest Russia, and this effort included training on air defense systems.

 

[ozkid]

Only 1 person is in a position to bring order to the situation and that is Mr.Putin.

Hear hear.

 

[drron]

Came across this powerful speech given by the Anglican dean of Salisbury-

Nobody who holds sacred the dignity of human life can be anything but sickened at the events attending the crash.........But are we deafened with the voice of protest from nations which call themselves "civilised"? We are not. Like men in the story of the Good Samaritan, they "pass by, on the other side." One listens for loud condemnation.
One listens and the silence is deafening.
One listens for loud condemnation by the President of the United States.
One listens for loud condemnation by the Pope, by the Chief Rabbi, by the Archbishop of Canterbury, by all who love the name of God.
Again the silence is deafening.

First, those who fired the guns. Who were they? Youths and men who, as likely as not. Men who went over to the other side in a few months were so indoctrinated that all they had previously learned was obliterated.

Second, it is common knowledge that in large parts of the world violence is paraded on TV and cinema screens as entertainment. Films about war, murder, violence, rape devil-possession and the like are "good box-office". Peak viewing time is set aside for murderers from Belfast,, Palestine, Europe, Africa and the rest, to speak before an audience of tens of millions. Thugs are given full treatment, as if deserving of respect.
Not so the victims' relations.
Who else is to be blamed?
The United Nations.......... I am sure they both bear blame in this. Each parade a pseudo-morality which, like all half-truths, is more dangerous than the lie direct. From the safety and comfort of New York and Geneva, high moral attitudes can safely be struck. For us in the sweat, the blood, the suffering, it is somewhat different.
. The ghastliness of this ill-fated flight ...... will be burned upon our memories for years to come. For others, far from our borders, it is an intellectual matter, not one which affects them deeply. Here is the tragedy!
The especial danger of Marxism is its teaching that human life is cheap, expendable, of less importance than the well-being of the State. But there are men who call themselves Christians who have the same contempt for other human beings, and who treat them as being expendable.
.
I have nothing but amazement at the silence of so many of the political leaders of the world..

However it was given 36 years ago in Southern Rhodesia as it was known then after an Air Rhodesia viscount was shot down by Zipra militia.
Just as relevant today.

 

[medhead]

It's not a case of blaming MH. It is a case of asking what might have prevented this, or could this have been prevented?

The Bolt Report today seemed to go to the extreme of suggesting that if the USA had a tougher foreign policy, hadn't let the situation in Crimea escalate, then the flight wouldn't have been shot down. I struggle with that concept. But I don't struggle overall with the concept of asking how this might have been avoided.

That's the question I'm asking, what do you suggest to prevent this accident? Your posts certainly sound like blaming MH. How would this have been prevented?

 

[mannej]

At least one expert/manager appeared to have advised/decided not to let their airline fly over the area entirely. Who knows what basis they had to make that decision. They may have had nothing other than no concrete evidence to prove it was safe. One option might have been to look and see what others were doing (an environmental scan) and then make a decision. Did other airlines think BA was being too cautious and therefore discount that?

This isn't the first time something similar has occurred. I guess closer to home we have seen this with the ash clouds over the last couple of years where certain airlines fly, and label those who don't as over-cautious.

Why did Ukraine not close it's airspace entirely? Why did it approve airlines to fly over? If, as was initially suggested, the SAMs were stolen from an overrun Ukrainian facility... why was that not relayed to the relevant authorities? Or was it? If Russia supplied (or allowed) the SAMs to be taken, why did they not close their airspace or advise accordingly? There are a lot of unanswered questions.

And it is these questions that you are asking that suggest it isn't as clear cut as to the liability that MH hold if any. It is not as simple as what has been suggested previously. In reality, the only way to completely mitigate the risks are to not fly at all. Are we going to see new policies in regards to flying over conflict zones (Middle East, Crimea etc), possibly.

Stop blaming Malaysia Airlines for downed MH17 - The Malaysian Insider

I thank Princess Fiona for the article, however the two things that hit me are the anti-MH sentiment, and the views of the armchair experts. It seems as if many people are feeding off what there is in the media (i.e QF not overflying Ukraine, FAA banning flights over the area [did someone forget to mention that to UA?]etc). As much as this accident is visible compared to MH370, there is still a lot pieces in the puzzle missing before liability can be assigned. I am sorry but there are comments on here that i see as lacking credibility without the full story behind them when it comes to assigned liability.

I still do maintain that it could have been SQ or AI very easily instead of MH.

 

[mannej]

That's the question I'm asking, what do you suggest to prevent this accident? Your posts certainly sound like blaming MH. How would this have been prevented?

Yet post #443 suggests that it isn't as simple as assigning liability to MH. There are too many variables involved before you can attribute blame and liability IMHO.

 

[burmans]

It's not a case of blaming MH. It is a case of asking what might have prevented this, or could this have been prevented?

The Bolt Report today seemed to go to the extreme of suggesting that if the USA had a tougher foreign policy, hadn't let the situation in Crimea escalate, then the flight wouldn't have been shot down. I struggle with that concept. But I don't struggle overall with the concept of asking how this might have been avoided.

Of course it's useful to understand how things can be prevented via lessons learnt, but suggesting we all have a better ability to predict the future really isn't a very useful lesson. Don't be in the wrong place at the wrong time is only useful if you have the ability to predict that wrong place and time. If you were avoiding all "potential" wrong places & times you would not go anywhere.

 

[JohnK]

Even lets compare what is easily comparable, motor vehicle deaths vs air deaths. The first probably exceeds the second by more than 100 to 1 each year but how much shock do we have about this. Note I'm not saying don't be shocked by what has happened here, more why aren't we shocked by the rest?

I guess we are used to motor vehicle deaths.

We are not used to some lowlife shooting down civilian aircraft though. Accidently or intentionally is irrelevant. The cause the lowlife is fighting for is also irrelevant.

Our biggest problem is these lowlifes are usually backed by someone powerful so difficult to get retirbution. And if we can't get retribution there is nothing to stop the next lowlife from killing inoccent people in the name of their cause.

 

[drron]

At least one expert/manager appeared to have advised/decided not to let their airline fly over the area entirely. Who knows what basis they had to make that decision. They may have had nothing other than no concrete evidence to prove it was safe. One option might have been to look and see what others were doing (an environmental scan) and then make a decision. Did other airlines think BA was being too cautious and therefore discount that?

Why did Ukraine not close it's airspace entirely? Why did it approve airlines to fly over? If, as was initially suggested, the SAMs were stolen from an overrun Ukrainian facility... why was that not relayed to the relevant authorities? Or was it? If Russia supplied (or allowed) the SAMs to be taken, why did they not close their airspace or advise accordingly? There are a lot of unanswered questions.

I think you have not realised that the Ukraine is a large country.
BA and QF said they stopped overflying the Ukraine 4 months ago.That is coincidentally when the exclusion notice for Crimean airspace was issued.This is not near where MH17 was brought down.
The NOTAM issued for the area MH17 was flying to fly above 32000 feet was issued on July 14th.
As I said above the missile launcher apparently used was moved into the area that day.

 

[whatmeworry]

End of the day Putin gave/enabled some goons to shoot down planes and they shot down a commercial liner. 298 innocent people are dead due to Putin's meddling.

 

[knightman7]

I think people are getting too caught up in the minutiae and not stepping back and looking at the big picture. The only fact we can verify with complete certainty is that a plane was shot down and 298 people died.

The rest is open for debate until the true facts are confirmed. Something which may never happen considering the region in question.

Before anyone else feels the need to jump in and defend their point of view or point out that they are right, spare a thought for the simple but undeniable fact that it really does not matter. Death is a part of life. As humans we desire knowledge and answers, comprehension and relevance.

I lost a cousin on that flight. All I care about is that she didn't suffer when she died. The rest doesn't matter.

 

[mannej]

I lost a cousin on that flight. All I care about is that she didn't suffer when she died. The rest doesn't matter.

My condolences are with you at this time.

 

[ozkid]

I still do maintain that it could have been SQ or AI very easily instead of MH.

at Mach 0.85 and 33,000 feet, the time separation between MH17, SQ and AI was about 2 minutes. Yes, very easily

 

[legroom]

That's the question I'm asking, what do you suggest to prevent this accident? Your posts certainly sound like blaming MH. How would this have been prevented?

My 2c is that the source of the missiles (? Russia) ought to have advised the recipients of the missile about its maximal range, what possible targets & their 'signatures' were and how to confirm that it could not be a civilian target.

Should Kiev close their airspace ? Well, no one issued any threat to knock out civilian airliners @ 33,000 feet ? Not even now (or anywhere else for that matter).

Should ICAO advise Russia & its proxy army that "hey buddies, we are up here !" Well, again no one was issuing any demand for total air clearance over East Ukraine - certainly not at 33,000 feet where jet fighters do not operate.

The persons who supplied the lethal weapons have the absolute onus to ensure they were to be used with the right intent i.e. targets. Without such clear instructions & training, it is too much to expect "combatants" of 4-6 weeks' experience to handle them.

It's all academic now obviously. The horse had clearly bolted.