Now for the sudden increase in mysterious, exceedingly regional bad weather conditions that only impact a specific flight.
That may be better than the alternative: airlines flying mechanically-suspect planes due to the penalty for correcting a problem.
cf. “unintended consequences”
Well, if any airline does that I hope they like getting even more lawsuits and likely criminal negligence charges pressed against them.
If you can’t afford to not fuck over your customers, your business shouldn’t exist.
Which happens only if the bet does not work. Given the redundancy of the aircraft systems, there’s a good chance the bet works. It’s the plane’s captain’s ass that’s at risk too, after all.
On the other hand, not all of us have the additional money to afford to pay for squeaky perfect.
All a major tragedy would take under those tactics is one flight made with a bit too much confidence in the plane’s redundancy.
Happened more than once. Still it is pretty safe. If I don’t have to pay twice as much for my flights, I can live with that. I risk more in the taxi to the airport anyway.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.