durak, yeah looking at info on the net shows a very one eyed view of how this report became about and some facts.
that report was never for you to read or for any of the public today from what we understand, meaning it wasn't suppose to happen.
the airline did its best not have it happen.
that report only came about after the young kiwi guys parents stole a similar report from the airline or boeing stating problems with the lockers after he had been saying this all along.
will the finding of the door the NTSB were pushed by this couple to have a re-look at the the investigation, specially after seen the stolen document in hand as well.
this is my memory working here so i may be wrong in the basics,, its been a while.
before that last report been released the airline was blaming a electrical fault and maintenance crew or something.
this particular airline was actually suppose to change these lockers some time before the incident of 811..
the young kiwi guy who was killed, i'm sure his dad was a engineer as well,,, something got him thinking fishy after a trip to America originally to see the plane with its hole on its side.
he studied all aspects of this plane and what info he could get hold of.
he was adamant in the end the latches were the problem, this by a year or years of the final NTSB report.
he was the person instrumental in getting the last NTSB report done.
in the beginning he sold his home, everything and moved to America with his wife to push this investigation.
he was very lucky in having many American help in this plight..
those two lived out of their car and finished their plight penniless.
yes that door,, i cannot remember when this was found to what period it fits into the kiwi investigation, it was a very late addition from memory and a very lucky find by the navy.
without that door things would have taken much longer.
i'm sure he got a look at that door with the help from someone...
with the door in hand and the stolen report NTSB had to finally come to the party and re-look at the incident.
this was a battle in itself.
the final NTSB report released gave blame to the silly alloy door lockers.
this was what the kiwi guy was pushing all along,,,, the airline had no choice but ground the planes and do what they should have done years before as other airlines had it seemed already.
i cannot remember what the first finding of the NTSB report was but they could have done better, a lot better in their investigation i feel and the pushing that was needed was appalling..
worse there was paperwork in the system filed away about having to replace these lockers?
again Durak its been some years since all this and my memory fades,, but the cheekiness of it all was why it had stuck in my head..
why i'm so critical on airlines.
theres a full in-depth documentary following this couples plight in real time looking for answers why their son died, a very interesting frustrating doco.
i cannot find reference to it other then this http://www.studymode.com/essays/Lee-Campbell-Flight-811-Investigation-864295.htm l from memory its under the name UA811 in one way or another.,
just from having a quick look on the net about this, even now it feels to me its sugar coated unless one digs a bit.
the family's involved got a seriously massive pay out.
we dont see that airline advertising here anymore with its quirky one liner "home everyone's destination"
some very bad jokes were derived from this.. ..
why again it stuck hard in us.
Here is a timeline of UA811 events, based on my reading:
• 1987 Mar 10 -- Pan Am B474 experienced cargo door opening in-flight
• 1987 Aug 27 -- Boeing issued Alert Service Bulletin 52A2206 for the cargo door
• 1988 Apr 14 -- Boeing issued Alert Service Bulletin 52A2209 for the cargo door, requiring strengthened locking pins
• 1988 May 13 -- US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued Airworthiness Directive (AD) 88-12-04, mandating that airlines carry out the recommendations of the two Alert Service Bulletins
• 1989 Feb 24 -- United Airlines B474, registration N4713U operating as Flight 811 to New Zealand, suffered explosive decompression (9 dead, including New Zealander Lee Campbell, 38 non-fatal injuries)
• 1989 Apr -- when United Airlines had scheduled to complete the cargo door work (AD terminating action) for N4713U
• 1989 Aug 23 -- US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued Safety Recommendations to FAA, including a statement that the original design of the cargo door, and the FAAs approval of that design, did not comply fully with the applicable Federal regulation
• 1989 Sep -- Kevin Campbell, Lee's father, submits his analysis of the cargo door failure to NTSB
• 1990 January -- FAA deadline for completion of cargo door work (AD terminating action) for N4713U
• 1990 Apr 16 -- NTSB issued first Aircraft Accident Report, citing cargo door design deficiencies as contributing cause of the accident
• 1990 Oct 01 -- upper portion of separated cargo door recovered from ocean floor
• 1992 Mar 18 -- NTSB issued second Aircraft Accident Report, again citing cargo door design deficiencies as contributing cause of the accident
An Alert Service Bulletin is guidance from an aircraft manufacturer to aircraft operators, recommending changes to procedures and/or equipment that are important for safety. An Airworthiness Directive is an order to aircraft operators, mandating that changes to procedures and/or equipment for safety reasons, within some specified time limit.
There is no question that the Campbell family did an extraordinary amount of work making their own investigation of the accident, and that they did this work with great thoroughness and competence.
As the timeline shows, the NTSB went on record concerning the inadequacy of the cargo door design before Kevin Campbell provided his findings. I have no way to be sure, but given the NTSB's record of thoroughness (for which they are famous) and the circumstances and evidence of the accident, I think it most likely that the NTSB findings were not substantially altered by information disclosed by the Campbell family.
I have found one significant disagreement between the Campbells and the NTSB: Kevin Campbell apparently concluded that the electrical fault that allowed the door to opened occurred in flight, just before the accident; the NTSB concluded that it occurred on the ground, between the time the ground crew closed the cargo door, and takeoff.
Part of the sadness of this story, is that UA811 "blew its hatch" two months before the airline had scheduled strengthening of the cargo door latches, which likely would have kept the cargo door closed even in spite of the apparent electrical fault causing uncommanded operation of the door latch motors. Two other US airlines operating B747s peformed the door modifications very promptly after the Airworthiness Directive was issued.
United Airlines took the position (not altogether unreasonably) that because the FAA allowed so much time for the AD work to be completed, the airline had no reason to believe that the cargo door problem was a critical danger.
So what do you think, kiwi? What should the NTSB have done, that they didn't do? Did they fall short?
By way of background, the NTSB is an independent body, having no responsibility other than safety. They are not regulators, and are not beholden to the FAA, airlines, manufacturers, or anybody else. They are not required to, nor do they, consider economic or political consequences of their findings and recommendations (which are non-binding). Their job is not to pass judgment on persons or organizations (with one exception not related to this matter): they find probable cause of accidents; they don't fix blame. Though they surely make mistakes, I'm aware of no evidence that NTSB has ever allowed its findings to be swayed by influence or partiality.
NTSB welcomes and considers input from all interested parties.
NTSB reports are open public records, available for anyone in the world to inspect.
Durak,, thats interesting.
i didnt realize NTSB was an independent body, non-binding directives decisions or what have you..
so who pays them? must be govt.
i'm starting to see more why this became a drama.
looking at what you have given me puts it in a pretty good perspective.
airlines do what they must, only by moral pressure(is that fare to say) in what free range they are given.
all that evidence in this case was there but really there was no evidence at all!
i have to ask then how could a airline give the accident, to evidence but none at all' ,,,, of the so called electrical fault which the airline presumed as primery cause, i'm guessing they thought it made some kind of explosion or heat source in causing the decom.
but of cause electrical faults are rather common, this i do know,, and is a easy out.
from what i remember the only proof of the electrical fault was when the lockers were found due to the abnormal position they where in yes no?.
lets not forget about the history of faulty lockers and a Airworthiness Directive hanging over them in the very area of the hole on the side of plane.
i dont know about you Durak but it all makes me very uncomfortable about flying.
is this just a business thing, a numbers game of how moneys is allocated,,, maintenance and possible pay out concerns from the emergency board meetings they would of had 60 times over.
its undeniable the airlines duty of care wasnt there, if your car Durak had a recall part, do you wait for the last moment and do your best to carry as many passengers as possible.
this is basically where this stinks.
it stinks even more if the airline did replace the lockers in the time you say with no movement verbally they may have been the problem with the accident.
this is as frustrating as it gets, the whole thing is like a dog chasing its tale,, everything going around in circles for all to see but the airline isn't as stupid as they look, they know its tale was docked long before this silly game.
i'm trying to think what use the NTSB are on certain serious matters if their decisions are non-binding?
dont get me wrong, i like the idea of the independent body far more then any govt or any industry doing its own investigation.
my business here is under this type of thing, the govt doesn't control us to a degree like other business's.
trouble is the govt never gives independent organizations decent clout( what i dont like about my organization).
did they fall short you ask,,, i will have to say no from what you have put forward.
one can see why this became an ordeal,,,, NTSB having no true bite, the airline having its own good reason to run from whats logically the most likely reason.
the airline if not all make their own rules to suit a numbers game, before incidents, and just as happy to do so after terrible incidents.
such a numbers game.
looking at all this, i still dont trust these industry's let alone any that make a lot of money.
to be proud of such industry's would be something,,, i wish i could say that about air NZ,, it only takes one mongrel-set of people running the show once when shit happens to destroy a lifes work of someones dream.
end of the day a father shouldn't have to do what Campbell did,,,,, no father should wrestle a industry for answers like this.
reminds me of a shit fight we had some years ago over a past good friend of mine involving substandard vehicle parts and a rather infamous piece of drive-shaft coming though his car window one morning.
maybe this is where i got my cynical outlook on these industry's from.
cannot remember how many lawyers mitzi had in court, more then ten i think to our one.
the payoffs, missing paperwork and all what goes which goes with these things are like some bad film.
it wasnt long later every board member in japan was arrested for throwing out to the world substandard mitzi's bits.
they still didnt get what they deserved.
NTSB is a government body, reporting directly to the President. One might expect it to be part of the US Department of Transportation (a cabinet-level department of the executive branch), but it is completely separate from the system of departments and cabinet secretaries. Of course, its costs are paid by the US taxpayer.
Members are nominated by the President, and confirmed by the Senate for terms of 5 years. No more than 3 of the 5 members can belong to the same political party.
Although the investigations of major accidents evoke intense emotions from large numbers of people, and there is often controversy about evidence and its analysis, I am aware of no case in which NTSB's integrity was tainted by favoring (or disfavoring) any faction, or responding to any outside influence.
The Board members themselves go to the sites of major accidents. They see the landscapes strewn with fragments of human bodies, and smell the reek of jet fuel -- and sometimes burned or decaying flesh. They are about one thing, and one thing only: preventing these disasters.
Their primary product is safety recommendations. That they have no teeth, is part of the price paid for their complete independence.
As I understand the logic of the 747 crash (I'm no expert on this, apologies if I'm getting it wrong), the forward cargo door latch design had two big problems:
(1) The door could not be properly latched, without it being evident to the ground handlers responsible for closing the door; and
(2) The locking mechanism (to hold the latches closed when the door is hut) could be badly deformed in unusual conditions, in which the drive motors continued turning past the point where the latches are supposed to be closed; once deformed, the motors could unlatch the door, even though it was supposed to be locked shut.
Both the NTSB and New Zealand's Campbell family agreed that an electrical fault likely contributed to the accident. This comes primarily from reasoning backwards, as to how the mechanical failure and resulting damage could have come about. A recovered switch was in an incorrect position (possibly enabling incorrect drive motor operation), and some wiring had damaged insulation (possibly causing a short circuit with the same effect). However, the switch position might have been affected by impact with the sea, and much of the relevant wiring was not recovered.
Kevin Campbell's belief that the motor operated in flight was based on his interview of a survivor, who heard a noise moments prior to the explosion. However, the NTSB concluded that this was impossible, because the cargo door electrical system draws its power from a source that was shut off during flight.
Yo u were a mate of Eddie Tavinor? I can surely imagine your anguish, over a probably avoidable loss of life.
i have to admit, you have put a different light on it for me Durak.
regarding the NTSB.
i still feel very uncomfortable how the airlines work themselves in general tho, very.
Eddie Tav,,, yes we grew up together.
i will be with his family(his lady, children) this xmas eve.
i had to clean out his pickup up after the accident, hold his family together(as in try to keep things like xmas normal happy for the kids)
they are family to me.
Ed was quite the center piece to many of us, not a leader, far from it.
just a guy that collected all sorts of people into a collective one if you know what i mean, rather special really in that sense.
without getting into mitzi's part of it, the whole business opened up many dark doors of unethical behavior by people actually here.
those who had some relationship with mitzi in one way or the other.
as fault mitzi was, thats another story which involves more then a few continents,, the people here is where i had the problem with, in our trade, our own.
the missing files, the slap happy workmanship, bad sign offs by official people, the pressure some business put on their employers to lie in the inquest to protect a job.
stuff like that, it was interesting, many snakes in the grass of cause,, which had the problem of diverting off from mitzi's own duty of care.
i even learnt how crap our media is, all that exposure for making a dollar.
what the media said happened to him didnt.
just a silly,,,,, to the side of the,,, nothing dramatic as they said.
the world sometimes Durak is a sorry place when money is involved.