What is going on this week? Is it just psychological, coincidences, or something more? Or a massive terrorist plot against Pratt and Whitney, Boeing, and Lear?

Seriously, here's every major incident I've found reported on the site over the past three days:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1458015 (UA328 engine explosion at DEN)
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1458013 (Longtail 744 blows up engine out of MST (2 injuries on the ground))
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1458009 (UA 1832 CUN-IAH MSY Divert Due to #2 Engine Shutdown Plus Flap Issues)
https://www.united.com/en/us/flightstat ... DEL/EWR/UA (Major electrical problems with a 777)
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1458041 (Mexican Government Learjet 45 crashes in Veracruz State)
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1458035 (Nigerian Air Force King Air crash)
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1457995 (Columbus AFB T-38 crash in Montgomery, AL. Both crew dead)

Why is it so much?

Is it just that we're being drawn to notice every little incident? That something psychological with regard to fear is causing incidents to cascade (i.e. people are stressed and off-balanced and are making mistakes because of other incidents with safety)

I sincerely believe that aviation is overall quite safe and that this is either a string of coincidences or just a product of our/my imagination but the past three days (Saturday-Monday) have definitely been weird to say the least.

I think incidents like this are probably more common than you would expect, however because one made the media they are clocking all of them and reporting. Like when the incidents and issues with the 737 Max came about, for months every single minor incident involving any 737 be it a classic or NG it was in the media. Perhaps some coincidences with timing in relation to the incidents that have occurred, but I think majority is the media hyping up every incident that 99.9% of the time you would hardly hear about had the 777 engine not hit the media.

XLA2008 wrote:

I think incidents like this are probably more common than you would expect, however because one made the media they are clocking all of them and reporting. Like when the incidents and issues with the 737 Max came about, for months every single minor incident involving any 737 be it a classic or NG it was in the media. Perhaps some coincidences with timing in relation to the incidents that have occurred, but I think majority is the media hyping up every incident that 99.9% of the time you would hardly hear about had the 777 engine not hit the media.

Yep, probably definitely the case with the DL incident today. Just amazing how easy it is to start imagining conspiracy theories in the mind , even though I know how much such incidents can and do happen with engines/airframes... Too bad it is that way. Scares a lot of people pointlessly

SumChristianus wrote:

XLA2008 wrote:

I think incidents like this are probably more common than you would expect, however because one made the media they are clocking all of them and reporting. Like when the incidents and issues with the 737 Max came about, for months every single minor incident involving any 737 be it a classic or NG it was in the media. Perhaps some coincidences with timing in relation to the incidents that have occurred, but I think majority is the media hyping up every incident that 99.9% of the time you would hardly hear about had the 777 engine not hit the media.

Yep, probably definitely the case with the DL incident today. Just amazing how easy it is to start imagining conspiracy theories in the mind , even though I know how much such incidents can and do happen with engines/airframes... Too bad it is that way. Scares a lot of people pointlessly

The media is dangerous IMO. They report on aviation facts and incidents when most of the time they can't tell a A320 from a B777. If they report on every incident then people will of course start to think something is wrong. People really need to do their own research but unfortunately many do not so they believe what the media tells them. The media spreads false misinformation, fear and panic; the times we are in right now should be proof of that.

777luver wrote:

SumChristianus wrote:

XLA2008 wrote:

I think incidents like this are probably more common than you would expect, however because one made the media they are clocking all of them and reporting. Like when the incidents and issues with the 737 Max came about, for months every single minor incident involving any 737 be it a classic or NG it was in the media. Perhaps some coincidences with timing in relation to the incidents that have occurred, but I think majority is the media hyping up every incident that 99.9% of the time you would hardly hear about had the 777 engine not hit the media.

Yep, probably definitely the case with the DL incident today. Just amazing how easy it is to start imagining conspiracy theories in the mind , even though I know how much such incidents can and do happen with engines/airframes... Too bad it is that way. Scares a lot of people pointlessly

The media is dangerous IMO. They report on aviation facts and incidents when most of the time they can't tell a A320 from a B777. If they report on every incident then people will of course start to think something is wrong. People really need to do their own research but unfortunately many do not so they believe what the media tells them. The media spreads false misinformation, fear and panic; the times we are in right now should be proof of that.

I tend to agree with you although denigrating "the media" should also then include individuals like me, who even though I do tend to think I know a lot about aviation, still am open to postulating conspiracy theories all the time about crashes/incidents... I do wish people particularly with reference to this industry would be more informed as some of the misreportings are comically wrong and disingenuous however I'm not really sure what could be done to fix it. Pressure news media to hire more true "aviation experts", call it "science" as a way of getting them to it? I don't know. Eveyone has a predisposition to want to add their "two cents" even if they have nothing to actually add, and "danger, danger, panic, panic, everybody's going to die if we don't ground x or investigate practice y" is a pretty easy two cents to come up with if you don't have anything else.

2020 just got extended.

In-flight engine shutdowns, electrical issues, flap troubles, ... happen fairly often. I would guess that you'll find at least one of these incidents every day, somewhere in the world. Usually it just results in a diversion or a landing with emergency services on standby. So there's not much to report.

Crashes of military and other smaller aircraft are surprisingly common too, though thankfully not daily. If you check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_a ... %80%932019), you'll note that there was no accident-free month in the past 10 years. I guess that all 3 happened this week is a streak of bad luck.

I will say, one of the airlines I used to fly for some 14 years ago when I first started my flying career, on average our A330’s would return to the gate with a technical issue at least 3+ times a week or divert for some technical reason or another on a TATL flight, and I can say I had several precautionary landings with emergancy services on standby because of an issue with our 757’s. Moving forward a few years to a different airline and in a single year on our 737’s we had a decompression, emergancy landing, went tech down route MULTIPLE times for various issues. As well as the many other issues with aircraft throughout my flying career with various airlines which would be too long to list.

Now if you are the media focusing on those sole incidents with say just one of those airlines it makes it sound like they are unsafe, that the aircraft aren’t maintained and would in respect look terrible... and probably make a GREAT news story. But if you actually calculate those “common” incidents/tech issues against the 1000’s of flights I’ve worked with those individual airlines that went without any problems, then they really are minor in the grand scheme of things. Aircraft are far more complex and technical than most vehicles, and there for keeping all of those components running 24/7 without ever having an issue is foolish to think you are not going to have faults/failures somewhere along the line. Bear in mind that the aforementioned airlines where “small” in terms of major airlines, but large enough to be respected and well know, with good safety records, both of them british carriers so not some random 3rd world airline (no offense intended with that remark) and aircraft at the time where not “old” by any means. Incidents happen constantly! It really is mostly media hype running with a story when they get a good headline from something. If they always reported every single incident then it would take over the news like Covid has!

Side note to show just how common it really is Crew often have nicknames for certain “troublesome” aircraft in their airlines fleet, and hence the many running jokes in the community of things like “some speed/duct tape will fix that”

XLA2008 wrote:

I will say, one of the airlines I used to fly for some 14 years ago when I first started my flying career, I would say on average our A330’s would return to the gate with a technical issue at least 3+ times a week or divert for some technical reason or another on a TATL flight, and I can say I had several precautionary landings with emergancy services on standby because of an issue with our 757’s. Moving forward a few years to a different airline and in a single year on our 737’s we had a decompression, emergancy landing, went tech down route MULTIPLE times for various issues. As well as the many other issues with aircraft throughout my flying career with various airlines which would be too long to list.

Now if you are the media focusing on those sole incidents with say just one of those airlines it makes it sound like they are unsafe, the aircraft aren’t maintained and would in respect look terrible... and probably make a GREAT news story, but if you actually calculate those incidents/tech issues against the 1000’s of flights I worked with those individual airlines that went without any issues then they really are minor in the grand scheme of things. Aircraft are far more complex and technical than most vehicles, and there for keeping all of those components running 24/7 without ever having an issue is foolish if you think you are not going to have failures somewhere along the route. Bear in mind that the aforementioned airlines where “small” in terms of major airlines, but large enough to be respected, with good safety records, both of them british carriers so not some random 3rd world airline (no offense intended with that remark) the aircraft at the time where not “old” by any means. Incidents happen constantly! It really is mostly media hype running with a story.

Crew often have nicknames for certain “troublesome” aircraft in their airlines fleet, and hence the many running jokes in the community of things like “some speed/duct tape will fix that”

Yes, it's very important to note probably that while there have been say 5 or so incidents over the past few days, there have been at the very least tens of thousands of flights over that same period. Still safer than driving!

SumChristianus wrote:

XLA2008 wrote:

I will say, one of the airlines I used to fly for some 14 years ago when I first started my flying career, I would say on average our A330’s would return to the gate with a technical issue at least 3+ times a week or divert for some technical reason or another on a TATL flight, and I can say I had several precautionary landings with emergancy services on standby because of an issue with our 757’s. Moving forward a few years to a different airline and in a single year on our 737’s we had a decompression, emergancy landing, went tech down route MULTIPLE times for various issues. As well as the many other issues with aircraft throughout my flying career with various airlines which would be too long to list.

Now if you are the media focusing on those sole incidents with say just one of those airlines it makes it sound like they are unsafe, the aircraft aren’t maintained and would in respect look terrible... and probably make a GREAT news story, but if you actually calculate those incidents/tech issues against the 1000’s of flights I worked with those individual airlines that went without any issues then they really are minor in the grand scheme of things. Aircraft are far more complex and technical than most vehicles, and there for keeping all of those components running 24/7 without ever having an issue is foolish if you think you are not going to have failures somewhere along the route. Bear in mind that the aforementioned airlines where “small” in terms of major airlines, but large enough to be respected, with good safety records, both of them british carriers so not some random 3rd world airline (no offense intended with that remark) the aircraft at the time where not “old” by any means. Incidents happen constantly! It really is mostly media hype running with a story.

Crew often have nicknames for certain “troublesome” aircraft in their airlines fleet, and hence the many running jokes in the community of things like “some speed/duct tape will fix that”

Yes, it's very important to note probably that while there have been say 5 or so incidents over the past few days, there have been at the very least tens of thousands of flights over that same period. Still safer than driving!

Of those “5 reported” incidents there is also probably 55+ more that haven’t been reported for the same time period. And I’m sure those 5 incidents over the last few days are coincidental with timing perhaps. Who knows, I only ever had one engine failure in almost 15 years of flying, but I’ve had parts of the aircraft fall off inflight (couple of times actually) never any “major” part obviously but you catch my gist. Some people fly and never have an issue others fly and seem to always have the problems that is luck of the draw. So probably wiser to actually calculate how often engine failures of any kind are to properly gauge if timing was a coincidence this time around or if it is purely hype. I can only go by my personal experience flying. But you get my point, incidents are common, they happen every single day for every single airline around the world. We just don’t hear about it all until it’s newsworthy, pretty sure UA wouldn’t have made “such big” headlines had the parts not fallen on a community and there been the smartphone footage to follow it!

Its a media hype when it comes to "BOEING!". Same when they highlighted the AD affecting 787s but ignoring the current ADs on the A320 and A330 families.

Mercury retrograde.

mxaxai wrote:

Crashes of military and other smaller aircraft are surprisingly common too, though thankfully not daily.

According to faa accident reporting system, fatal general aviation accidents are almost daily...

My personal fav is when anything with more than two passengers is called a Jumbo jet by the media. And everything happens on the runway if it is not in the air.

777luver wrote:

The media is dangerous IMO. They report on aviation facts and incidents when most of the time they can't tell a A320 from a B777. If they report on every incident then people will of course start to think something is wrong. People really need to do their own research...

'Do their own research...' That's a key phrase, as if a majority of the population were aviation safety experts! Or epidemiologists, or vaccination experts.

The media today are not meaningfully different from what they were in 2019. The sudden rash of incidents really does need some thought put into it, in contrast to a cynical dismissal of events.

Maybe the FAA will look into the adequacy of engine storage and return-to-service protocols.

jeffrey0032j wrote:

Its a media hype when it comes to "BOEING!". Same when they highlighted the AD affecting 787s but ignoring the current ADs on the A320 and A330 families.

limelight is like a magnet

But:
do they touch on the same issue domain?

IMU most of the B ADs touch on (lack of) process control, systemic manufacturing defects ,
software bugs.

I haven't look at the topic of current A ADs though.

kalvado wrote:

mxaxai wrote:

Crashes of military and other smaller aircraft are surprisingly common too, though thankfully not daily.

According to faa accident reporting system, fatal general aviation accidents are almost daily...

GA is lemming country

WIederling wrote:

jeffrey0032j wrote:

Its a media hype when it comes to "BOEING!". Same when they highlighted the AD affecting 787s but ignoring the current ADs on the A320 and A330 families.

limelight is like a magnet

But:
do they touch on the same issue domain?

IMU most of the B ADs touch on (lack of) process control, systemic manufacturing defects ,
software bugs.

I haven't look at the topic of current A ADs though.

The A ADs are also due to lack of process control and defects. If things were that perfect, there wouldn't be a need for ADs in this world.