Having been a BA maintenance crew servicing the Concorde/VC-10 fleet,I'm just glad I never ever got into a situation like this. Being Air Force-trained, the very first thing we did with our RAF VC-10s was to fit the pins.Am really surprised an airline as big as AA did not have such a maintenance regime. Still, nobody is perfect and in all types of machinery, there is always one element that can never be accounted for----human beings.

Just a side note: That's really cool!

Wonder how many lost their job over that one. People lose jobs when costing their company a lot less over a screw up. I am sure at least 1 guy lost their job for a 150 Million Dollar write off. Most Definately the guy that raised the landing gear. For what Purpose they would have done that I have no Idea.

I know the article says that's rumored, but I'd be amazed if it's really a writeoff. We've seen planes with far more obvious damage come back for long and healthy service lives. Just one example I know of personally: D-ABYU...www.airliners.net/photo/Lufthansa-Cargo/Boeing-747-230F-SCD/0527817/L/www.airdisaster.com/photos/d-abyu/20.shtmlwww.airdisaster.com/photos/d-abyu/22.shtmlNot pretty. At the time of the accident, she was a little over two years old, and she went on to fly a little past her 26th birthday after being repaired. Admittedly this is a slightly older and presumably much less expensive airframe, but still...Of course, I'll freely admit I'm a layperson with no real knowledge here, and this is just conjecture.Edit: Actually, couldn't resist checking. Presuming the reg in the article is correct (and it corresponds with the construction number of the aircraft said to have had the accident on other sites, so I'm guessing it is), then a.net pictures have her back in service just four months later.