Rather the opposite: if the cause is similar to AA 191, why weren't the actions taken after AA 191 to prevent a repeat effective? If we can get a repeat of that incident, what's preventing the industry from repeating the mistakes from all those other incidents from the past decades? Why aren't they learning from their past mistakes - often paid for in blood?

▲

lotsofpulp 6 hours ago | parent [-]

I understood the post I responded to to be referring to the cause as the engine detaching from the same type of plane, not the root cause for why the engine detached. Per the “investigation section” in the wikipedia article, I would be surprised if it was the same root cause:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_191

I assume the erroneous maintenance procedures that led to the loss of AA191 were rectified a long time ago.

	▲	mrguyorama 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		>rectified a long time ago. There's no such thing as "This is fixed forever". If lax maintenance oversight has led to companies re-introducing known dangerous maintenance procedures or departing from known good ones, then we will be back in the 70s in terms of airplane safety and people will have to die again to relearn those lessons. Someone's always trying to claw you in the less safe direction. It's a constant battle to not regress. But IDK, hopefully this plane just got some sort of "unlucky" about fatigue somehow, and it doesn't have far reaching consequences.