To your example, the engineers were well aware of the dangers of using hydrogen and they sought to mitigate the risk through design. In fact, the Hindenburg was struck by lightning on multiple occasions during its career with no ill-effects, even when the lightning burned holes in the cover of the airship. Simple bad weather was much more of a threat than hydrogen. The US Navy had four Zeppelin-type airships, all helium, three of which were destroyed in stormy weather. Vehicles and airplanes today are full of flammable fuel. Many have exploded throughout the course of history. I wouldn't say that gasoline in vehicles is a problem if engineers and management can mitigate the risks, which is what they did with regard to the Hindenberg.
Another example is the Challenger explosion. NASA managers disregarded engineers' warnings about the dangers of launching in low temperatures and did not report these technical concerns to their superiors.
I am not defending AI here by placing the blame on management. I'm defending the engineers. Good managers listen to their devs when they report risks. It's as simple as that.
I meant both. AI did it's job, albeit with some faults, as one would suspect and need to review. The devs did their job in discovering and reporting the holes in the code. Management did not do its job if the problem code was allowed to be shipped.