Broke From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1322 posts, RR: 3 Posted (12 years 11 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 863 times:
This is a comment on my part. Air transport saftety so far during 2002 in the U.S. has been very good; with only 2 fatal accidents with the loss of 4 lives. World wide, 2002 is already a horrible year; there have been a total of 22 fatal accidents with the loss of 922 lives (including the U.S. figures). The accidents that I have reviewed do not show any particular trend with a lot of the problems of the past being repeated.
What this does for me personally is to keep complacency at bay. An indifferent attitude in aviation creates an enviroment in which saftey is taken for granted, then things happen, and family and friends are lost. Occasionally, as an aircraft engineer, I have been the bad guy when telling maintenance that there is no easy fix for a problem and a trip has to be delayed or cancelled.
The attitude "that it flew in that way, so what's the problem of letting go a little further" is one that I have great difficulty is accepting, even in jest.
Saintsman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2002, 2065 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (12 years 11 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 858 times:
As an engineer it gives me no delight to say that an aircraft cannot fly because of a fault. Aircraft have go / no go lists, so they can carry faults if required, but at the end of the day I do not compromise safety. I have been lucky in never being pressurised into signing off something, though have had the pressure of meeting deadlines.
Engineers who become the bad guy when delaying an aircraft are not as bad as the person who lets it go and crash when being warned otherwise. (Yes I know it's a bit extreme but hopefully you get the principle).