Malaysian Airlines MH17 Crashes in Ukraine

Status
Not open for further replies.
AMEX Velocity Platinum Card Benefits
Australia's highest-earning Velocity Frequent Flyer credit card: Offer expires: 21 Jan 2025
- Earn 60,000 bonus Velocity Points
- Get unlimited Virgin Australia Lounge access
- Enjoy a complimentary return Virgin Australia domestic flight each year

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

What a surprise!

The families of the victims should be waiting at BNE Airport to greet Mr. Putin upon his arrival.
 
Buzzard said:
An Americanism like nine eleven?
Much prefer MH Seventeen myself.
Click to expand...

Probably not. I noticed after MH 370, Australian and SE Asia referred to it as "MH 370" whilst US media simply referred to it as "flight 370" - no reference to MH. Maybe the Americanism is "flight one seven".
 
How would Tony Abbot know at this stage that the airline was not negligent in their chosen flight path for MH17? Seems to be a brave statement pre-empting any judicial finding.
 
MEL_Traveller said:
How would Tony Abbot know at this stage that the airline was not negligent in their chosen flight path for MH17? Seems to be a brave statement pre-empting any judicial finding.
Click to expand...

Because that route was still open; was approved by ICAO; and was flown by a whole raft of other reputable airlines. If MH was negligent, so was SQ and every other airline that was continuing to fly in that airspace.

Where the blame lies is clear - the separatists and the Russians who support them.
 
JohnPhelan said:
Because that route was still open; was approved by ICAO; and was flown by a whole raft of other reputable airlines. If MH was negligent, so was SQ and every other airline that was continuing to fly in that airspace.

Where the blame lies is clear - the separatists and the Russians who support them.
Click to expand...

Why do so many people (including Malaysia Airlines) keep saying 'other airlines were flying there' but completely ignore the fact that other airlines weren't flying there?

Cherry picking the facts that suit them?

But the bottom line is that if you're going to bring an action for negligence you will do so because you have suffered some harm or injury (you must show damages). The other airlines aren't in the position to have to answer that issue.
 
Last edited:
MEL_Traveller said:
Why do so many people (including Malaysia Airlines) keep saying 'other airlines were flying there' but completely ignore the fact that other airlines weren't flying there?

Cherry picking the facts that suit them?

But the bottom line is that if you're going to bring an action for negligence you will do so because you have suffered some harm or injury (you must show damages). The other airlines aren't in the position to have to answer that issue.
Click to expand...

I feel like I've heard this conversation before, but most other airlines (with a couple, but before MH17 very few exceptions) were still flying there because it was deemed safe. Nobody was asking why they were still flying there before the incident because nobody expected it to happen.

I really wish people would stop trying to place blame on MH for what most people would see as an unfortunate event which had nothing to do with anyone on board that aircraft.
 
Mattg said:
I feel like I've heard this conversation before, but most other airlines (with a couple, but before MH17 very few exceptions) were still flying there because it was deemed safe. Nobody was asking why they were still flying there before the incident because nobody expected it to happen.

I really wish people would stop trying to place blame on MH for what most people would see as an unfortunate event which had nothing to do with anyone on board that aircraft.
Click to expand...

So you think the victims' families should either drop, or be prevented from bringing any action against MH?
 
MEL_Traveller said:
So you think the victims' families should either drop, or be prevented from bringing any action against MH?
Click to expand...

I think we've been here time and time again. In a legal sense, MH have some responsibility, and anyone taking legal action would pursue MH, as probably the easiest party to attrribute blame to.

But it would be both naive and irresponsible to assume that if MH in isolation adopts a much more proactive approach to risk management of the routes it flies, that the problem is fixed. At face value, I can't help but think it would be much better that rather a well resourced, well connected (in terms of intelligence) international (private or public) organisation, such as ICAO to advise airlines on such matters than rely on each airlines own assessments of intelligence.

The fact that other airlines were flying there does not excuse MH (legally), but it potentially points to a systematic problem. If it was MH only, sure fix them and it is fixed, but there were many other airlines flying over that part of Ukraine that this could have equally happened too. Also one wonders what information BA and AF received that made them avoid the area. Was it that everyone had the same information and they made a conservative decision (if so then MH can should take their fair share of the blame) - or was it that they had extra access to information from their national intelligence organisation that other countries (such as Malaysia, Singapore, Netherlands, Germany) did not have access to. Bloggers from 17 July onwards will tell you that it was obvious this was going to happen - but where were they all before July 17.

Anybody familiar with any sort of incident investigation, who really cares about fixing the system rather than just finding a scapegoat/attributing a blame, will know that one single factor does not cause an incident of this nature, and you need to look at all the different factors that contribute to it. As the saying goes - "the holes in the swiss cheese" need to line up for it to happen.
 
Mattg said:
I feel like I've heard this conversation before, but most other airlines (with a couple, but before MH17 very few exceptions) were still flying there because it was deemed safe. Nobody was asking why they were still flying there before the incident because nobody expected it to happen.

I really wish people would stop trying to place blame on MH for what most people would see as an unfortunate event which had nothing to do with anyone on board that aircraft.
Click to expand...

MEL_Traveller said:
So you think the victims' families should either drop, or be prevented from bringing any action against MH?
Click to expand...

I thought Mattg's comment was that most people would see it as an unfortunate event. Not sure if that is right or not, given as far as I know no one has done a comprehensive survey, but it is a position a lot of respondents have taken on this thread.

But I don't see his comments as saying that those directly involved should not pursue all the options available to receive both compensation and answers.
 
dajop said:
I think we've been here time and time again. In a legal sense, MH have some responsibility, and anyone taking legal action would pursue MH, as probably the easiest party to attrribute blame to.

But it would be both naive and irresponsible to assume that if MH in isolation adopts a much more proactive approach to risk management of the routes it flies, that the problem is fixed. At face value, I can't help but think it would be much better that rather a well resourced, well connected (in terms of intelligence) international (private or public) organisation, such as ICAO to advise airlines on such matters than rely on each airlines own assessments of intelligence.

The fact that other airlines were flying there does not excuse MH (legally), but it potentially points to a systematic problem. If it was MH only, sure fix them and it is fixed, but there were many other airlines flying over that part of Ukraine that this could have equally happened too. Also one wonders what information BA and AF received that made them avoid the area. Was it that everyone had the same information and they made a conservative decision (if so then MH can should take their fair share of the blame) - or was it that they had extra access to information from their national intelligence organisation that other countries (such as Malaysia, Singapore, Netherlands, Germany) did not have access to. Bloggers from 17 July onwards will tell you that it was obvious this was going to happen - but where were they all before July 17.

Anybody familiar with any sort of incident investigation, who really cares about fixing the system rather than just finding a scapegoat/attributing a blame, will know that one single factor does not cause an incident of this nature, and you need to look at all the different factors that contribute to it. As the saying goes - "the holes in the swiss cheese" need to line up for it to happen.
Click to expand...

I agree with what you're saying.

But I'm not advocating MH moves in isolation to adopt a more proactive risk management strategy. All airlines should do that.

There is a role for international organisations, but by the same token there shouldn't be anything to stop individual airlines rejecting a recommendation and erring on the side of caution if they feel it appropriate. Even if ICAO says it's safe, or a country says 'our airspace is safe', an airline risk assessor watching CNN may decide 'hey, I'm not too comfortable with what I'm seeing'. And hopefully have the authority to act on that.
 
MEL_Traveller said:
How would Tony Abbot know at this stage that the airline was not negligent in their chosen flight path for MH17? Seems to be a brave statement pre-empting any judicial finding.
Click to expand...

The plane was on its approved course.

Nothing brave about the facts
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Become an AFF member!

Join Australian Frequent Flyer (AFF) for free and unlock insider tips, exclusive deals, and global meetups with 65,000+ frequent flyers.

AFF members can also access our Frequent Flyer Training courses, and upgrade to Fast-track your way to expert traveller status and unlock even more exclusive discounts!

AFF forum abbreviations

Wondering about Y, J or any of the other abbreviations used on our forum?

Check out our guide to common AFF acronyms & abbreviations.

Recent Posts

Currently Active Users

Total: 225 (members: 12, guests: 213)
Back
Top