Originally Posted by
ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE
i think that the point that everyone is making is that with most MELs there is still a level of redundancy. Operating 1 pack inop with only 1 pack remaining gives zero redundancy. You lose that one pack, you’re going to have a depressurisation event.
Ah, if you look at an MEL, you'll find a number of systems where "Number installed" is 2, "Number required" is 1 (sometimes zero). MEL operation, pretty much by definition, means reduced safety relative to a full up aircraft. The effect on safety is very, very small (assuming the MEL limitations are observed), but if you're going to take Dick Smith's position of absolute safety regardless of cost, you need to
ban MEL operation.
Or you can live in the real world.