|
|
|
|
|
by stevenstremciuc
3876 days ago
|
|
Xenophobic was the exact word that came to mind. I have a close personal relative who spent several years working for one of the airlines mentioned in the article at the Aeroman facility in El Salvador and pictured in that article. I've visited it myself several times. He has also worked at maintenance facilities in the U.S. The article reads xenophobic/sensationalistic. What is so scary about planes being serviced/maintained at these locations as opposed to in the U.S.? Do they have factual data comparisons of maintenance issues at these sites including maintenance facilities in the U.S.? Or do we just assume that they're inferior and if the maintenance facility is in the U.S. there MUST be less of the issues described in the article and attributed to these remote facilities. Is the article about the F.A.A. sucking at inspecting sites, and is that the fault of the airlines? Aeroman and other MRO's will all bend over backwards to keep airlines (and their regulators if required) happy with the work being done at their facilities, as it's great money and jobs for those areas. Maybe the article should be less scaremongering and more questioning about why the F.A.A. seems to suck so bad at their jobs (at least that's what I got out of the article, that's not my opinion at all). |
|
All the statistical evidence points to air travel being safer than at any point in history but.... scary anecdotes and foreigners