Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Quoting billreid (Thread starter): Right to you MOL! |
Quoting bennett123 (Reply 5): |
Quoting airbazar (Reply 4): Lucky for the rest of the flying public not many people agree with you or MOL. I have absolutely no problem with the regulators erroring on the side of caution. |
Quoting SSTeve (Reply 12): From MOL's perspective, the regulators prevent a lot of envelope-pushing in favor of chasing extra 999s after the decimal place in aviation safety numbers. |
Quoting UALWN (Reply 14): It makes you wonder what else does MOL consider "regulatory crap," to be dispensed with at the first opportunity... Not the best attitude for the CEO of an airline. |
Quoting zippyjet (Reply 1): |
Quoting billreid (Reply 9): |
Quoting airbazar (Reply 4): Lucky for the rest of the flying public not many people agree with you or MOL. I have absolutely no problem with the regulators erroring on the side of caution. |
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 20): This CEO is speaking out of the lavs he wanted to charge his flyers to use. He doesn't know squat about the reasons why the 787 was grounded and in all seriousness has no right to say anything about it since his airline has one of the lowest customer service records on the planet |
Quoting mayor (Reply 21): Obviously, O'Leary has been out of the spotlight for awhile and he doesn't like that. Even if the subject has nothing to do with him, he'll stick his nose into it because it's newsworth (why, I don't know) and he'll get some free publicity out of it. |
Quoting peterinlisbon (Reply 16): his idea to allow people to store their children in the overhead luggage compartments |
Quoting billreid (Thread starter): If these guys could design anything then they wouldn't be working for the DOT. |
Quoting billreid (Thread starter): MOL is 1000000000000% correct. The reason why. The DOT/FAA and any Government doesn't have .000000001% of the engineering smarts that Airbus or Boeing have for ten minutes on any Sunday at 2am. If these guys could design anything then they wouldn't be working for the DOT. The GOV is nothing but another set of Grifters. Right to you MOL! |
Quoting billreid (Reply 9): Why would anyone work for Boeing or Airbus when they could work for the Government? B and A obviously only get third and fourth rate engineers, all the good ones obviously work for the DOT. |
Quoting flyingalex (Reply 15): The man is a Class-A [censored], but an annoyingly successful one. |
Quoting bendewire (Reply 32): If the problem was as potentially widespread as the actions of the FAA and NTSB have acted on then surely it would have occured during on at least one of the test aircraft before deliveries took place. as these aircraft are worked to the edge of the envelope way above what any in service frame would ecperience! |
Quoting billreid (Thread starter): The DOT/FAA and any Government doesn't have .000000001% of the engineering smarts that Airbus or Boeing have for ten minutes on any Sunday at 2am. If these guys could design anything then they wouldn't be working for the DOT. |
Quoting mayor (Reply 18): BTW, the surgeon general of the U.S. is usually a medical doctor, so that theory of yours is wrong. |
Quoting mayor (Reply 18): I'm not a government apologist, but your portrayal of some of these gov't workers is very wrong........most of the people that work, doing investigations for the NTSB are very, very good at what they do. |
Quoting billreid (Reply 9): The FAA and DOT isn't qualified. |
Quoting Asiaflyer (Reply 33): FAA and NTSB are experts in their area. |
Quoting billreid (Reply 9): Or let me ask you this would you let the Secretary of Health operate on your partner, rather than a up to date qualified doctor? Might be a bad example |
Quoting billreid (Reply 9): but do you really prefer politicians over professionals? |
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 21): Is this just his personality or what is it? |
Quoting billreid (Thread starter): The DOT/FAA and any Government doesn't have .000000001% of the engineering smarts that Airbus or Boeing have for ten minutes on any Sunday at 2am. |
Quoting ikramerica (Reply 25): Many people now see the 787 as UNSAFE despite there being no evidence that it is unsafe. |
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 21): Is this just his personality or what is it? I don't know enough about FR or O'Leary except from what I read here and in newspapers. Japanese media don't like him much either apparently. |
Quoting seachaz (Reply 29): If the problem was as potentially widespread as the actions of the FAA and NTSB have acted on then surely it would have occured during on at least one of the test aircraft before deliveries took place. as these aircraft are worked to the edge of the envelope way above what any in service frame would ecperience! |
Quoting trex8 (Reply 32): Thats the whole point why the NTSB is so concerned! It wasn't picked up by the "testing"!!! |
Quoting billreid (Reply 9): I do not trust politics over engineering |
Quoting CXfirst (Reply 34): Boeing engineers are maybe top range, but that does not mean they are free to create perfect airplanes. They are bounded by budgets and time |
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 19): This CEO is speaking out of the lavs he wanted to charge his flyers to use. He doesn't know squat about the reasons why the 787 was grounded |
Quoting ltbewr (Reply 31): MOL hates govenment and their regulators (especially the EC 'government') but love their subsidies in taxes, for airports, for support services to get pax to/from the airport. Just like every other rich guy, he talks out of both his mouth and ...um... anus. |
Quoting GDB (Reply 45): As for the thread starter, sounds like the sort of nonsense spouted at CPAC, y'know, like 'they are performing abortions on women who are not even pregnant'. |
Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 41): Two battery fires taking place within two weeks are enough evidence that 787 IS unsafe, with the current setup. |