The online magazine AvWeb published a poll on Monday asking readers whether “armchair accident analysis” has gotten out of hand. With slightly more than 600 people responding, readers said it absolutely is out of hand because “it leads to misinformation and conspiracy theories.”
I disagree, at least a bit. But not because I endorse conspiracies. I’m actually fascinated by a juicy theory like claiming a particular accident was caused by the Russian covert introduction of rogue squirrel fur into jet fuel production (I made this up).
When I joined the aviation industry decades ago as a wannabe, I was fascinated by the final blue book accident reports the NTSB published. I read them cover to cover and always put them down, wondering why. “Why would a pilot or crew do what they did … or why did they skip some step along the way in a particular checklist?” Little did I know then that I was leading myself to a lifelong curiosity about human factors analysis. Of course, I always told myself I’d never repeat that mistake when I flew.
Over 50 years, I’ve been lucky enough to be part of the industry in various jobs: first as an air traffic controller, then as a flight instructor, then as a charter and business aviation pilot, and now primarily as an aviation journalist. Along the way, I also had an opportunity to spend five years as an adjunct staffer at Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism, where I learned the importance of being able to present my ideas to a group of people. Each role added another perspective on the industry I’d come to call my own. All this said, my inability to hold a job should be viewed through a special lens … that of a guy with an insatiable curiosity. And you know what the world thinks about that.
It was 1598 when the English poet and playwright Ben Jonson conjectured that “curiosity killed the cat.” In other words, being too curious about something might land you in serious hot water. Being born a few centuries later, I’d learn later just how right Jonson was. I was in high school when I first began reading Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s Adventures of Sherlock Holmes. I’ve lost track of how often I’ve reread many of those stories. I always wanted to know what happened and why. I can’t help myself. But letting my curiosity create a conspiracy theory to create a click-bait story … nope. Not me.
Curiosity
I like to think my curiosity has never been focused on publicity. I’ve never believed I was superior to the experts, the dedicated individuals at the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). I’ve been fortunate enough to know several current and former Board members personally. Years ago, Nancy and I visited the NTSB training center in Ashburn, Virginia, when the recreation of TWA 800 was still an intact exhibit. Learning how the staff recreated the fuselage of that Boeing 747 was nothing short of awe-inspiring, especially when you can see how one NTSB investigator determined where a three-inch square piece of metal recovered from Long Island Sound fit into the original structure.
I have enormous respect for the Board. That doesn’t mean that my knowledge and experience are of no value, however.
What has always been important to me are the educational aspects of accident investigation. What information can I share with my own students to prevent them from committing the same, often fatal, mistakes as a crew I’d read about? Over the years, I came to realize that there were plenty of working men and women in the world who were just as curious as me about an accident like the horrible ones we’ve experienced recently in DC, Philly, and Alaska. These people seldom asked me for the technical details about TCAS, DEI, prevailing visibility, or to define lord knows how many dozens of industry acronyms. They asked me to explain the details of an accident in layman’s terms. They didn’t ask me to stretch my brain for the probable cause, so I seldom have.
For instance, when someone asked me how the door could have fallen off that Boeing 737 early last year, I was as honest as I could be based on what little we knew then. Common sense and logic told me there must have been some manufacturing or maintenance mistake along the way. My many years of immersion in the industry pretty much do the rest. I offer readers or listeners a “maybe” to hang their hats on. And I’m perfectly happy to wait for the NTSB to generate their final report.
Human Factors
Does all this make me an armchair aviation detective? Maybe. I like to think of myself as an educated reader and consumer of media about an industry I’ve been immersed in my entire life. But I believe readers of any text surrounding aviation accidents must take a little responsibility for some of the crazy conclusions promoted on social media and TV. My theory is simple, “Consider the Source.” No matter what the source, readers/listeners of any story, aviation, politics, or economics, must engage a pretty well-oiled BS meter during our 24/7 news cycle. Conspiracy theories are usually generated by people with some axe to grind. Crazy theories are spread by people who read and accept the words without question expecting someone else to handle all the critical thinking for them. This must stop.
My advice … check out the writer’s bio before you believe anything you read or listen to. If the writer doesn’t have one , I’d steer clear and suggest others do the same.
Fly safely.
Rob Mark
You make very good points. Just yesterday I was reading a report on a Lear jet colliding with a Gulfstream “on a runway”. Of course it wasn’t true. The Lear had a main gear break away, and it ran off the runway and struck the Gulfstream outside a hangar. But, the damage was done! “How could controllers permit two aircraft on the same runway” – and we are away to the races…… Just awful reporting by a careless (dis-interested?) reporter.?On the other hand, with our ability to track aircraft using ADS-B, and other forms of data, we can be far better informed than we were 50 years ago. While this can still lead to “conjecture” it is more informed than it was back then.?However, full and detailed explanations can still lead to surprising findings and we should never assume that we really do know the cause of an accident / incident until the final (NTSB or other aviation authority) report has been issued. Speculation is dangerous!
Excellent points Ed, especially the ADS-B content. But interpreting that data does demand some real skill too.
AVWEB wrote the Poll responses with massive built-in confirmation bias. ?If the questions were done differently the resulting responses easily could have been more informative.?AVWEB just made its own contribution to the problem by pushing emotional reactions instead of thoughtful analysis.
Interesting point. How would you have worded the question?
Robert, while YOU may be a reliable source for insight into aviation accidents, I assure you that 99 out of 100 people presenting theories after a crash wouldn’t know which end of a plane gets the rubber band. ?The eye-watering stupidity which I’ve read about the DC crash – just the comments, mind you – makes me want to start charging user fees for posting dumb things.?BTW, have you heard about the newest invention? Circular runways!
Thanks for your note Don. Circular runways aren’t a new idea though. But I hear you about “eye-watering stupidity,” but some of that we can blame on the media. Twenty or 30 years ago, newspapers and TV employed journalists who specialized in aviation. But then they realized the cost to keep those people on the payroll just to keep readers straight about aviation wasn’t worth it. Personally, I think that was pretty short sighted.
After over 50 years as a pilot and 30 years as an aircraft accident investigator in the military, the aerospace industry and now in the legal world ,I cannot agree more. As investigators we collect facts and compare that information to see where it leads. When several, facts, often from different sources, point in the same direction then theories of causation develop. Keep up the good work, Robert!?
Thanks for the kind words Jeff. Much appreciate them. Rob
I’m not a pilot, nor do I work in the airline industry or aircraft maintenance (although I DID have a job manufacturing aircraft cables and other components for various aircraft, but I digress). Maybe the simple fact there have been THREE aircraft “incidents” in the past week while the Donald Trump/Elon Musk administration is laying off air traffic controllers? See https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-begins-firings-of-faa-air-traffic-control-employees-weeks-after-fatal-dc-plane-crash</u??Just my two cents. Good article, bookmarking for future reference….
Thanks for your comment. The FAA hasn’t actually begun cutting controllers … yet. They did, however, yesterday begin cutting the IT support people, something that’s nearly as stupid since those are the folks who keep the agency’s ancient technology operating at full power.
Rob, yet another excellent, thoughtful article.
I am really picky which YouTube channels I watch that claim to specialize in “accident investigation”. Many are on my “Do not view list”. I find a few to be helpful and stick to the facts and avoids speculation about causes e.g. Broncolirio with Juan Brown which is usually thoughtful and generally well researched. Brown is apparently a qualified and experienced airline pilot.
On the other hand, one I watched today (name withheld to protect the guilty – but with a large number of subscribers) started off well on a piece about the Toronto CRJ accident.
It showed part of the presentation by the Canadian TSB investigator standing by the inverted plane. The official presented the facts that they had learned and finished with something like “of course it is far too early to start speculating about the cause of this accident”.
The camera returned to the “studio” where the presenter immediately began (you guessed it) to speculate about the cause of the accident! Including going through the resumes of the two pilots, naming them and speculating about why something in their backgrounds may have led to this accident!
You are right. Avoid conspiracy theories. My life experience has shown me that incompetence, screw ups and plain old bad luck are generally far more common than conspiracy. Whether in life, business, politics or aviation this seems to be true and Occam’s razor generally applies (to use a rather Holmsian thought as you began with)
Excellent suggestion re checking the writer’s bio. Of course, in some cases they can be fabricated like some of the bots out there, so you also have to look at their history of posts. Only just started posting? Yeah, big grain of salt right there. Posting forever with plenty of references to authoritative sources? Well damn, they may be onto something :)
Possibly a fabricated bio? Interesting point Grant, but you’re right. Even more a reason to think about what you’re reading and who’s posting and not simply accepting everything at face value.