Originally Posted by
s0ssos
I don't get it. UA says it was voluntarily disclosed. From what I read it was disclosed "earlier this year", while the event happened last December, which would be "last year". So obviously there is a time gap. And the NTSB didn't learn til months later?
Who was it disclosed to? Is voluntary disclosure when you are retiring 50 years later useful? There's no sense of promptness?
It was voluntarily disclosed to a registry which deliberately omits identifying data and flight information to shield reporting crewmembers from potential retribution and discipline (as an incentive to self-report). Certain databases are actually available to the public, too. You just have to know where to look.
This thread is an example of why the reporting system works. A sensationalist public outcry did not lead to any more investigation or analysis than had already been performed, and the system is no more or less safe as a result.
My view, as someone working in the industry and particularly in the area of aviation safety (though not for an airline) is that situations like this are best left to the professionals to analyze, study and recommend change. Incidents like this are not evidence that the broader system is broken.