Letter: Concorde tragedy: is the engineer’s duty to explain

`Engineers of all disciplines owe it to the general public to be able to offer an opinion on the tragic end to flight AF4590 ….’ (Leader, 28 July). No! Engineers should only offer an opinion if they know what they are talking about. Otherwise they risk losing the credibility needed to educate others. Peter Cutler, […]

`Engineers of all disciplines owe it to the general public to be able to offer an opinion on the tragic end to flight AF4590 ….’ (Leader, 28 July). No! Engineers should only offer an opinion if they know what they are talking about. Otherwise they risk losing the credibility needed to educate others.

Peter Cutler, by e-mail

I believe many engineers would rather your comment went as follows: `Engineers owe it to the general public to be able to keep their opinions to themselves until all the facts relating to any tragedy are known. That way the general public’s limited capacity for remembering the truths of any given case may not be exceeded. Then those with the technical knowledge to educate the travelling public about the engineering that still makes air travel the safest form of transport would have a sporting chance.

Philip Rowles, Senior Design Engineer, Portsmouth Aviation Ltd

Letter: or to reassure?

I have just read your leading comment on Concorde. It’s an excellent piece that puts things into perspective! As an admirer of Concorde from its conception, one of my lifelong ambitions has been to travel at supersonic speed in this remarkable aircraft, and this unfortunate accident has not changed my view, and I hope that one day in the future I will have the funds and opportunity to enjoy the experience.

Gordon Johnston, Senior production engineer, MMG Neosid

Copyright: Centaur Communications Ltd. and licensors