Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Blacklists - Why They Might Be Useless  
User currently offlineBackfire From Germany, joined Oct 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 11 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2130 times:

Just a few questions I'd like to throw open to the floor. I'm not convinced that an airline blacklist is going to make any difference to air transport safety. I'd appreciate your thoughts on the following:




What criteria will be used to put an airline on a blacklist?

Even the 'best' carriers can be picked up on potential safety lapses, depending how closely you look. Is unsigned paperwork evidence of slack safety? Or does a wing have to fall off first?

The SAFA programme, which has been used in Europe to perform spot-checks on carriers, only concentrates on technical oversights on single airframes. Is that enough to ban an entire fleet?

And what about non-technical criteria? Since poor crew resource management and crew error are still playing a huge role in the accident chain, these must surely be taken into account when deciding how 'safe' an airline is - and therefore whether the carrier is included on a blacklist. How should this aspect be measured?

We might think it's "obvious" that British Airways shouldn't be on the list, and certain other airlines should, but a blacklist can't be defined by gut feeling - there have to be clearly-defined reasons.

Start trying to define those reasons and it quickly becomes a difficult task.



What happens when safety conflicts with political interests?

Would a government really be prepared to ban an airline from a country with which it has strong political or trade links?

Can you imagine Spain or Portugal banning a Latin American carrier? What happens if that Latin American state responds with its own unilateral blacklist and, using a minor oversight as an excuse, bans Iberia or TAP? Who really ends up under the most pressure?



Is there any reason to believe it would be effective?

Think about this: How many of the airlines involved in the recent accidents - Air France, West Caribbean, Tuninter, Helios Airways, TANS - would realistically have been on a blacklist before their recent accidents?

Would anyone have committed the resources to audit West Caribbean? Even if they had, would they have declared the airline unsafe? French authorities declared Flash Airlines safe before the Sharm El-Sheikh crash - it seems unlikely, therefore, that Flash would have been on any French blacklist.

Since a blacklist is designed to save lives and pressure carriers into improving safety, adding an airline to a blacklist only after it's had a fatal accident makes the exercise completely pointless. The passengers are still dead and the airline has all the pressure it needs.

Besides - if passengers start avoiding carriers on blacklists, then you can draw only one logical conclusion: passengers will start dying only on airlines which are not blacklisted. And then where do you go?

[Edited 2005-08-27 14:15:14]

8 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineEZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4963 posts, RR: 25
Reply 1, posted (8 years 11 months 21 hours ago) and read 2005 times:

Quoting Backfire (Thread starter):
What happens when safety conflicts with political interests?

Would a government really be prepared to ban an airline from a country with which it has strong political or trade links?

Can you imagine Spain or Portugal banning a Latin American carrier? What happens if that Latin American state responds with its own unilateral blacklist and, using a minor oversight as an excuse, bans Iberia or TAP? Who really ends up under the most pressure?

This is the first thought that came to mind as well. Political and economical pressures to not be blacklisted or to put X airline in the list would be huge and would only create that the list would not be an accurate list of "unsafe" airlines

Quoting Backfire (Thread starter):
Is there any reason to believe it would be effective?



Quoting Backfire (Thread starter):
Besides - if passengers start avoiding carriers on blacklists, then you can draw only one logical conclusion: passengers will start dying only on airlines which are not blacklisted. And then where do you go?

I agree 100%

regards



Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
User currently offlineRICARIZA From Colombia, joined Apr 2005, 2382 posts, RR: 26
Reply 2, posted (8 years 11 months 21 hours ago) and read 1979 times:

Quoting Backfire (Thread starter):
West Caribbean, Tuninter, Helios Airways, TANS - would realistically have been on a blacklist before their recent accidents?

Would anyone have committed the resources to audit West Caribbean?

Well, not a black list, but West Caribbean's entire fleet was grounded by the Civil Aeronautics (Colombian FAA) after conducting an audit. The plane that crashed was a charter and apparently passed the controls. One of the thesis of the crash is "lack of fuel".

I don't know, I have mixed feelings about the black list. I understand your points but on the other hand, one a foreigner goes into a country and uses an airline that is the first time he heard of, is taking a bigger risk. At least it will have its own country's black list to check if the airline is there. It happen to me. A few years ago I went to Ecuador. My flight on Saeta was cancelled and I had to take TAME which I didn't know, I had a very bumpy ride from Quito to Guayaquil and then a month later, that same plane crashed.
On the other hand I agree that even the biggest airlines have problems, look at the AF incident in Canada for example or the 744 of Northwest who had a problem with its front wheel.

So, I repeat, I have mixed feelings, I guess I will published the incidents of each airline with some ratings and advice and let people make their own conclusions and decisions.



I miss ACES, I am proud of AVIANCA & I am loyal to AMERICAN
User currently offlineEZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4963 posts, RR: 25
Reply 3, posted (8 years 11 months 21 hours ago) and read 1960 times:

Why a blcak list in the first place? What could be done is simply a official list of all commercial airlines and their safety record, fleet age, etc., so then the paseenger can check the airline on the list before booking a ticket. In that way you would avoid all the political pressures, etc. probably a dumb idea but I know i would check a list of that sort (...or i would just ask for info here on a.net Big grin )


Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
User currently offlineBackfire From Germany, joined Oct 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (8 years 11 months 20 hours ago) and read 1944 times:

May I expand on a point I made in the original post: that of the crew aspect.

If crew error contributes directly to an accident, it stands to reason that the airline was inherently 'unsafe' beforehand because of the crew it employed.

And consider this: What if the crew leaves the airline before this hypothetical accident? If the crew transfers from Airline A to Airline B, does that mean Airline A becomes 'safer' and Airline B becomes 'riskier'?

What implication does that have for the realistic value of a blacklist?


User currently offlineRICARIZA From Colombia, joined Apr 2005, 2382 posts, RR: 26
Reply 5, posted (8 years 11 months 20 hours ago) and read 1922 times:

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 3):
What could be done is simply a official list of all commercial airlines and their safety record, fleet age, etc., so then the paseenger can check the airline on the list before booking a ticket.

My point exactly...  Smile



I miss ACES, I am proud of AVIANCA & I am loyal to AMERICAN
User currently offlineThomas_Jaeger From Switzerland, joined Apr 2002, 2376 posts, RR: 28
Reply 6, posted (8 years 11 months 19 hours ago) and read 1890 times:

As far as I know, the Swiss blacklist will just be an official list of all airlines and aircraft which are currently banned in Switzerland. They have published a list before but now they seem to be looking at continously updating it. So it won't be a good-bad list as such, it will be a allowed/banned list, so passengers will not be able to choose an airline for flights from/to Switzerland which is banned anyway.


Swiss aviation news junkie living all over the place
User currently offlineMEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4302 posts, RR: 36
Reply 7, posted (8 years 11 months 18 hours ago) and read 1873 times:

I think a list like that is just populistic crap, so politicians can pretend they took action against unsafe airliners.
Do you think France will ever put on a major Airbus customer on that list?
Even if China Airlines have three new crashes this year caused by fighting pilots and bad maintenance, Airbus and the ministry of foreign affairs will probably block their addition to that list.
Probably some airlines will appear on it which doesn't land in France anyway, like Myanmar Air, IBIS Congo and TANS.
But I'm 99% sure if a list like that existed Helios, Tuninter and Flash Air wouldn't been on it before their accidents so that's the use of it in the first place to avoid accidents?



nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
User currently offlineBackfire From Germany, joined Oct 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 11 months 8 hours ago) and read 1754 times:

So - the much-anticipated French blacklist is published. And what do we find on it? Four airlines of which almost no-one has heard, and would be unlikely to fly in any case.

How useful.

- Liberia has just emerged from a long-running civil war.

- Mozambique is, according to the UN, one of the world's 50 poorest countries and among the 10 least-livable in terms of quality of life.

- North Korea is an isolated dictatorship whose population has suffered mass starvation while its pitiful excuse for a Government pretends to the rest of the world that life is just peachy.

If you're flying in any of these countries, you don't need any official list to tell you that their airline service is unlikely to be offering you frequent-flyer miles and flat beds in premium class.  Yeah sure

And I'll bet the next major fatal accident won't involve any of these carriers. Which means people will still be asking the same questions next time round.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Midwest Airlines: Why Can't They All Be This Good? posted Mon Jan 2 2006 00:04:35 by Bobster2
DC-8s And 707s-how Long Will They Still Be Around? posted Thu Nov 9 2006 20:04:33 by Ferret
Why Can't We Be Friends? posted Fri Oct 27 2006 02:28:18 by KSUpilot
Air France's Spinetta Might Be Indicted... posted Wed Jul 12 2006 14:51:16 by Beaucaire
Iberia Might Be Interested In Buying Tap? posted Tue Feb 21 2006 13:45:27 by PanAm_DC10
December Might Be A Big Month For Boeing posted Thu Oct 27 2005 20:47:16 by NYC777
Why You Should Be Flying The Majors posted Thu Sep 15 2005 04:40:31 by Spinkid
Aircraft Pushback Blunders: Why They Happen? posted Sun Jul 10 2005 05:25:43 by Rhuertas70
They Should Be Kicked Out From Their Alliance! posted Tue May 10 2005 16:59:17 by RootsAir
Why They Always Wish Pleasent Flight? posted Tue Apr 19 2005 06:59:08 by Tomys