Wow. History hasn't been kind. As is often the case around limited-mindset thinking.
From TFA:
"civil authorities said that “Dr Warren’s instrument has little immediate direct use in civil aircraft.” The Royal Australian Air Force likewise decided that “such a device is not required—the recorder would yield more expletives than explanations.”
Well. No. Multiple air crashes across the world relied on recordings as a key part of their investigation. Especially when a plane lands in the Hudson, just to name one example.
This is very telling:
"Most damning was the Federation of Air Pilots, which declared that the device would be like “a spy flying alongside—no plane would take off in Australia with Big Brother listening.”
History wasn't kind here either. Just try and take off in a jet from a commercial airliner without the various safety equipment installed. The insurance companies alone will try to eat you alive, let alone every other agency.
There's definitely a repeating theme around safety equipment and authority/authority figures. The ridicule at the start is definitely a common starting point. Seat belts and air bags were both ridiculous inventions. Then they weren't. Then they became required.
Quote from elsewhere and not necessarily about flight recorders:
"It has been said that any new idea must pass through three stages. First, it is ridiculed; second, it is subject to argument: third, it is accepted. The safety idea has reached the final stage. It is accepted." -- Earl B. Morgan, journal of Safety Engineering, 1917
I guess one possible explanation is that having a black box in your plane is not useful to you, only for other people after you die. Pushing for the idea requires accepting you are going to screw up and some people will think that your job is preventing the airplane from crashing in the first place. It's obviously useful in the long term from a societal perspective, not from a short-term and individual point of view.
Even then I don’t get why someone would object. But of course hindsight is 20/20 so that may be why. Having a black box in all aircraft would help me too, because other crashes are better understood. Then again I also do want my death to be maximally useful to others should I die, so that at least I don’t die completely in vain. I don’t want to live forever, but I don’t want my life to end abruptly and outside of my control either, and I have plenty of things I want to do still before I leave. So that may also be why I don’t understand that POV you suggested.
Also, if I was a pilot, I would appreciate the fact that the black box can potentially help my friends and family get closure, because if the black box survives then my friends and family can learn what happened that caused the crash.
I think pilot must have known that the information in the back box would provide them heaps of data on how to prevent crashes, to their benefits. My guess is that is was not opposed by average pilots, but by people in power above or around or among pilots, whose power would be undercut by any new idea.
First They Ignore You, Then They Laugh at You, Then They Attack You, Then You Win.
"The statement evolved from a large family of sayings that originated in the nineteenth century. In 1918 a closely similar remark emerged in a speech by Nicholas Klein, a union representative. Gandhi discussed stages that a movement passes through in a collection of writings he published in 1921, but his words did not really match the target expression."
Yes. You can find the same kind of bs regarding safety belts in cars, ABS, airbags and so on. The part where I'm seeing a difference is when safety gear starts to actively interfere with operating the vehicle.
From TFA: "civil authorities said that “Dr Warren’s instrument has little immediate direct use in civil aircraft.” The Royal Australian Air Force likewise decided that “such a device is not required—the recorder would yield more expletives than explanations.”
Well. No. Multiple air crashes across the world relied on recordings as a key part of their investigation. Especially when a plane lands in the Hudson, just to name one example.
This is very telling:
"Most damning was the Federation of Air Pilots, which declared that the device would be like “a spy flying alongside—no plane would take off in Australia with Big Brother listening.”
History wasn't kind here either. Just try and take off in a jet from a commercial airliner without the various safety equipment installed. The insurance companies alone will try to eat you alive, let alone every other agency.
There's definitely a repeating theme around safety equipment and authority/authority figures. The ridicule at the start is definitely a common starting point. Seat belts and air bags were both ridiculous inventions. Then they weren't. Then they became required.
Quote from elsewhere and not necessarily about flight recorders: "It has been said that any new idea must pass through three stages. First, it is ridiculed; second, it is subject to argument: third, it is accepted. The safety idea has reached the final stage. It is accepted." -- Earl B. Morgan, journal of Safety Engineering, 1917