Last week's emergency landing

They say the fan cowl doors were left unlatched following routine maintenance. How was this missed? :0

I thought the captain did a visual check of the aircraft before starting on the in-cockpit pre flight checks?

Still speculation at the moment but the probable cause. I'm sure the pilot did a walk round and all appeared normal. The problem with these engines (International Aero Engines V2500) is the catches are not conspicuous meaning they can give the appearance of being closed when only partially engaged. It's happened before, see

http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources/df ... 501061.pdf

Crikey, something else to worry about now,

I'm a recovering nervous flyer!

I wouldn't worry about it. I'm an engineer (non aviation) with a particular interest in human factors (designing things so that the user can't get it wrong), so with the stuff I read air travel should terrify me but it doesn't, I love it!

Because as last weeks incident shows, things like that need a whole series of things to break down before there is a problem, and even when there is a problem the aircraft was still ok and everybody walked away.

And now they'll go and resign the catches and eliminate the problem. The more emergency landings, the safer travel becomes!

I wouldn't worry about it. I'm an engineer (non aviation) with a particular interest in human factors (designing things so that the user can't get it wrong)

Looks like some work for you.
The AAIB report states photographs of that aircraft before takeoff show the latches unlocked. If they can be seen on photographs (probably CCTV) then that should have been be clear on a proper visual inspection by both engineer and flight crew.
I suspect particular care will be given with this issue for the next few weeks but if there has already been 32 known similar events, it seems that the previous safety warnings, such as in the Airbus ‘Safety First’ magazine less than a year ago, have not been effective, so time for a redesign of hardware.

The massive publicity for this particular incident may finally have that effect. Somewhat disturbing that the previous 32 events had no such result but media reports of flames over London may concentrate the mind. It is not so much the flames but the damage to engine(s) and control surfaces that are of concern.

Not that it will stop me flying, no more than I stop going into or out of my front door. Risk is a factor of life and the risks in commercial flight are small compared to most other activities both inside and outside your home.

Looks like some work for you.
The AAIB report states photographs of that aircraft before takeoff show the latches unlocked.

Suspect someone in BA engineering is being severely spanked!

Looks like some work for you.
The AAIB report states photographs of that aircraft before takeoff show the latches unlocked.

Suspect someone in BA engineering is being severely spanked!

Suspect both engineering & flight crew are severely spanking themselves much more than by others.
The problem lies more with those that never take responsibility and accountability.

The problem lies more with those that never take responsibility and accountability.

Not entirely sure what you mean? Are you implying it is a management or accounting-driven/cost-cutting issue?

The problem lies more with those that never take responsibility and accountability.

Not entirely sure what you mean? Are you implying it is a management or accounting-driven/cost-cutting issue?

25 min turnarounds, reductions in engineering, reductions in engineering qualifications, reductions in crew training. All "cuts" which can increase pressure upon those at the sharp end and reduce the margins of safety.
Yes "management and accounting-driven/cost cutting" is a relevant issue IMHO, and not just in BA or indeed in airlines.
I see little likelihood that those directly concerned will ever allow the same error. I have little confidence that the "error" will not be repeated by others. 33 separate occasions suggest systemic failure.

You can see many opinions from both crew and engineering perspectives in pprune, particularly posts from the mid to upper #600s. Some very valuable, if complex, long-held views from aviation professionals who work at the sharp end.

Certainly crew and engineering will take and accept some "blame" for this incident but my greater concern is not with the single incident but the 32 others that did not result in corrective action. That multiple issue cannot be blamed upon the individuals involved on this occasion.

Incident reports tend to focus upon the specific incident. Hopefully this time they may take a wider view and consider why there have actually been 32 prior reports without dealing with this issue.

+1 to Bill S. It applies to more walks of life than just aviation these days.