Originally Posted by
flopzone
It all boils down to what i said initially. What amounts to a busy airline, working on a nod and a wink for ATC.
If a Pilot needs to be tapped on the shoulder by a passenger, the Pilot shouldt be flying.
I wonder, would a Pilot Observer have been of value? Is it worth the loss of $150 a flight to be safer?
I wonder what the dead think.
Come on, remember what has been pointed out a good number of times already re the media fishing for things, I amongst many others (I don't doubt) didn't reference cost and such a slam dunk comment. This is the sort of comment to be reused by the media. I'm choosing my words carefully and I suggest others do too.
Let the report come out in good time and I couldn't agree more that reducing the number of pax would in effect stuff up the tour industry and that in turn is likely to mean smaller machines to keep the cost down and thus the 130 not being used. Surely that's not in the best interest of all pax and crew?