Continental To Blame For Concorde Crash?

A French prosecutor has recommended charging Continental Airlines with manslaughter over the July 2000 crash of a Concorde supersonic jet in Paris.

The generally accepted theory is that the Concorde ran over a strip of metal that fell off a Continental DC-10 that had just taken off. A tire on the Concorde ruptured and sent the debris through a wing, crippling the aircraft, which crashed into a hotel, killing 113 people on board.

The French prosecutor also wants to charge an engineer involved in the design of the Concorde.

The talk on the Web goes mostly like this:

View A: Continental is responsible, just as a trucking company would be responsible if a piece of cargo fell off one of its trucks on a highway and caused a fatal crash.

View B: Air France and the Concorde designers are responsible for flying an aircraft that was overly vulnerable to runway debris, which is a common problem.

View C: Stuff happens, and there’s no point in throwing blame around.


2 thoughts on “Continental To Blame For Concorde Crash?

  1. Metroplexual

    I would posit a view D and view E .
    View D; The piece of metal belonged to another airlines plane so we cannot determine any liability.
    View E; blame the responsible party for runway maintenance.
    BTW, I believe this is about the French pride regarding the plane (they codevelped it with the Brits) so if it was vulnerable blaming someone else for the deaths takes some of the heat off of themselves, specifically for airport maintenance.
    A bit of disclosure, my wife works for Continental Airlines.

  2. RES

    Every day runways throughout the world are checked for items that might have fallen off an aircraft. As a matter of fact, this is performed several times during the day. On the other hand, as I drive the freeways of Houston, numerous times I must dodge items on the freeway, who is at fault for this, the city of Houston?


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *