Comparing two iconic accidents

After an accident, we create a narrative to give meaning to misfortune. these narratives are packed in the discourse of science and they claim to prevent future recurrences (formal investigation reports) and learn from accidents?But to what extent are these narratives true? can they really prevent anything? do they help us to learn from accidents? here's my talk at the Library of Accidents in Edinburgh drawing upon examples from the Costa Concordia and the US Airways 1549. both the narratives are underpinned in myth although they are presented as 'scientific and objective' truths.