Posted By barrie knight Applying Risk Assessments to Flying Concorde The aftermath of the Concorde disaster provides an opportunity to discuss the use of risk assessment. Despite legal requirements for work related risk assessments, there seems to be a general lack of understanding of how the process should be used. The technique has seldom been mentioned in media coverage of the crash, yet clearly its use is implicit in the decisions to ground Concorde on the one hand and to continue flying on the other. It is inconceivable that British Airways would authorise the continued use of Concorde without being aware of the potential consequences of a second crash and without taking extremely rigorous measures to prevent such an occurrence. These would include minimising the risk of every imaginable occurrence that could lead to a ruptured fuel tank, whether from debris on the runway, bits from burst tyres catastrophic engine failure or any other scenario that experts or lay people might be putting forward at the moment. Is it likely that, if the unthinkable were to occur and a second crash happened, criminal charges against BA management could be made to stick? What is highly likely is that after a second crash, the public, the Government, the media and the victims would start to look for someone to blame. Would this be because people generally do not accept that the fundamental, simple and obvious point that there is risk in everything we do? The only way to eliminate risk is to stop the activity – which of course is what Air France have done – no use of Concorde, no risk of a Concorde crash. If British Airways has in fact been robustly competent in performing its risk assessment, then the understandable fears which many interested parties have at the moment are unfounded. British Airways, therefore, has a huge interest in trying to educate the public on its risk assessment techniques. It needs to persuade everybody, including the media, the government and the legal profession, that it has taken all reasonable precautions. The Institution also has a large interest in getting the Risk Assessment message across. How do we go about it? What could British Airways publish? How can they get people ‘on their side?’ Can the Institution help? How can the discussion be opened up to the public arena?

Posted By MICHAEL LACY I think the problem here is not just wether the airlines conclude that concorde can be flown again, but if they can find airports which will accept them! At present it is most unlikely any American air authorities would take the risk of possible secondary litigation for a similar disaster occuring in a more residential area.