Originally Posted by
FairWeatherFlyer
The reporting of the comment about "I saw no press reports of bad maintenance." is a little disingenuous. I'm not sure I'd expect the mainstream press to pick up on the many updates and ADs and that comment doesn't even reflect a complete survey just what one (interested) person happened to notice or not notice.
The RS/6000 software used to display maintenance manuals may not have fallen under the scope of an airworthiness directive. The worst that could have happened is that, for a major failure in the procedures involved with maintenance work, the organizations using the defective tools/data/processes might be de-certified until the problem was remedied. It's the sort of process detail that, absent a newsworthy incident involving an aircraft, the mainstream press' eyes would just glaze over.
