Originally Posted by
GlobalNav
The validating authority needs to provide rationale to retain compliance authority and this is done regularly, though less frequently than before.
Not sure on that. Outside my knowledge area.
I just know there are reciprocal agreements where EASA accepts FAA certification and the FAA accepts EASA certification.
Builder then certifies once and can fly anywhere. Without them the world certification system grinds to a halt. Then can barely handle what they do now. No way they can all handle al the aircraft/systems/parts being developed. No does it make sense to repeats all that effort a dozen times.
Costs? Time delays? Ask the families and victims how much that bothers them.
Of course individuals don't care if the aircraft costs 10 million or 100 million, or takes 4 or 5 years longer to get in service.
They also don't care about the costs for pilot training.
They'd just balk at ticket prices, complain, and fly less.
The same as arguments over a part that costs $1 more on an automobile. Individuals don't see that that's millions of dollars to the company.
Just like the worries about the general public refusing to fly on the MAX. If you about to board and find it's a MAX. Do you wait 4-5 hours for a different aircraft?
I'll wager most won't.
Shoot I've been offered $100+ to wait 3 hours for a different flight and not accepted. (Those offers always occur when I need to be somewhere at a specific time, and the change would ripple into me arriving 5-6 hours later. Not good when I have a big meeting/event the next morning)