4 ms·
Let's see, one party focus on safety (minimizing the chance of accidents) and the other focises on revenue. I know which of the parties has more legs to stand u
by hef19898 4y ago
Let's see, one party focus on safety (minimizing the chance of accidents) and the other focises on revenue. I know which of the parties has more legs to stand upon. And don't pull out the MAX disaster, that is the proverbial exception that proofs the rule.
- darksaints 4y agoYou can call it focusing on revenue if you want, but the reason carriers are willing to pay so much for it is because it is so useful. The 280MHz of C-Band spectrum is close to 2TB/s of data throughput. That is a massive benefit to our society. If we only cared about safety, zero planes would be in the air right now. But sometimes usefulness outweighs safety. And the money-grubber argument could easily go both ways. The airlines bought radar altimeters that were out of spec. They could buy radar altimeters that are in spec and just as safe, but that would cost money. You could just as easily spin that as the FAA only caring about money.
- hef19898 4y agoThe FAA isn't hetting money from manufacturers for certification taking longer. Altimeters out of spec are, if true, a no-go and finding for every continued airworthiness org out there.