Originally Posted by
SASless
Nubian,
It is a difficult concept I suppose.
Folks burn to death following a crash in an aircraft without crash resistant fuel cells.
Folks drown in frigid waters due to improper safety harnesses.
Both are sight seeing flights.
That is eleven deaths or so in two crashes in what....a month or so?
Where do you think the Media, FAA, NTSB, Insurance Carriers, and Lawyers are going to be looking for explanations?
Sas,
The media is looking for a great story, no doubt as it sells and they are not out to change one little thing! The FAA, NTSB, Insurance will look at the causes which in these 2 accidents are quite different.
I see the FAA make stricter rules on this type of nonsense operation, GREAT!
They will not make a twin requirement as they will see through the smoke and see the real problem which is not the single engine operation. They will get their support for this from the NTSB. For the aftermath of the GC, the FAA
may mandate the use of crash resistant fuel cells based on the NTSB final findings unless there are very compelling evidence that point to other causes than pilot error, nothing else.
The insurers will no doubt increase premiums on all of us as they always do! The payouts are generally low compared to the profit they make by having ''high accident rates'' and they need accidents to happen on a semi frequent rate in order to justify their bread and butter!!
Do you really think the insurance premiums will drop with an all twin fleet??