←back to thread

165 points starkparker | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.267s | source
Show context
thomascountz ◴[] No.44525985[source]
> We determined that the probable cause of this accident was the in-flight separation of the left MED plug due to Boeing’s failure to provide adequate training, guidance, and oversight necessary to ensure that manufacturing personnel could consistently and correctly comply with its parts removal process, which was intended to document and ensure that the securing bolts and hardware that were removed to facilitate rework during the manufacturing process were properly reinstalled.

A bit OT, but what a gorgeous whale of a sentence! As always, the literary prowess of NTSB writers does not disappoint.

replies(11): >>44526007 #>>44526135 #>>44526208 #>>44526228 #>>44526278 #>>44526384 #>>44526528 #>>44526546 #>>44526632 #>>44526688 #>>44535189 #
dlcarrier ◴[] No.44526528[source]
My favorite NTSB-ism is "controlled flight into terrain", which means "crashed". This is as opposed to "uncontrolled flight into terrain", which means "fell from the sky".
replies(5): >>44526667 #>>44526669 #>>44526818 #>>44526866 #>>44527226 #
1. FL410 ◴[] No.44526818[source]
It’s a bit more nuanced than that. CFIT is intended to classify accidents where the aircraft itself was not causal. In any other case, it is assumed that there were mechanical or other aircraft-related factors that were contributory or causal.