4 ms·

> there's nothing wrong with doing heavy maintenance checks in low-labor-cost countries, provided they are done to FAA standards (which I have no reason to bel

> there's nothing wrong with doing heavy maintenance checks in low-labor-cost countries, provided they are done to FAA standards (which I have no reason to believe they aren't). Including the article that was in my previous comment, there's good to reason to believe that it isn't done to FAA standards. Of course I could be wrong and things may change in the foreseeable future. https://psmag.com/economics/are-some-airlines-just-too-dangerous-to-fly-3460 https://psmag.com/economics/are-some-airlines-just-too-dange... https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100901132235.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100901132235.h...

sokoloff 9y ago
The Vanity Fair article made the case it wasn’t being done by FAA licensed mechanics; it didn’t make the case that it wasn’t done to FAA standards. It just gave a lot of innuendo to that effect. One doesn’t need to read or speak English to take out or put in 39 rows of seats that are all the same... I don’t believe that maintenance signed off on a US N-registration aircraft by an FAA-licensed mechanic outside the US is any more likely to be substandard than that done inside the US. There’s just too much at stake for the company and inspector and the safety record of N-reg airliners is outstanding. There is a LOT to worry about Central and South American and African/Asian airlines. The second two articles focus there, and there is genuine, statistically significant reduction in safety there. The Vanity Fair article made a big deal about FAA licensed vs not, but I don’t see that as nearly as big a deal. I (no FAA mechanic credentials) can do any amount of work on an N-reg airplane provided I’m under the effective supervision of an FAA licensed mechanic. I see no reason to think that isn’t safe for me and no reason to think it isn’t safe for the teams taking out and reinstalling interiors on heavies.
- chaostheory 9y ago
  > The Vanity Fair article made the case it wasn’t being done by FAA licensed mechanics; it didn’t make the case that it wasn’t done to FAA standards. Actually it did. It points out that it's near impossible for the FAA to make inspections in these countries to ensure that the work meets its standards. For example, unlike here - it's impossible for them to conduct surprise inspections. Regardless, there IS reasonable doubt. There is a high chance that work done in developing nations does not meet FAA standards.

sokoloff 9y ago

The Vanity Fair article made the case it wasn’t being done by FAA licensed mechanics; it didn’t make the case that it wasn’t done to FAA standards. It just gave a lot of innuendo to that effect. One doesn’t need to read or speak English to take out or put in 39 rows of seats that are all the same... I don’t believe that maintenance signed off on a US N-registration aircraft by an FAA-licensed mechanic outside the US is any more likely to be substandard than that done inside the US. There’s just too much at stake for the company and inspector and the safety record of N-reg airliners is outstanding. There is a LOT to worry about Central and South American and African/Asian airlines. The second two articles focus there, and there is genuine, statistically significant reduction in safety there. The Vanity Fair article made a big deal about FAA licensed vs not, but I don’t see that as nearly as big a deal. I (no FAA mechanic credentials) can do any amount of work on an N-reg airplane provided I’m under the effective supervision of an FAA licensed mechanic. I see no reason to think that isn’t safe for me and no reason to think it isn’t safe for the teams taking out and reinstalling interiors on heavies.

chaostheory 9y ago
> The Vanity Fair article made the case it wasn’t being done by FAA licensed mechanics; it didn’t make the case that it wasn’t done to FAA standards. Actually it did. It points out that it's near impossible for the FAA to make inspections in these countries to ensure that the work meets its standards. For example, unlike here - it's impossible for them to conduct surprise inspections. Regardless, there IS reasonable doubt. There is a high chance that work done in developing nations does not meet FAA standards.