One thing I don't understand about the management of Adam Air is how they thought this policy of not replacing almost any faulty parts was sustainable in the long run.
Had the airline been on its last legs financially at the time of crisis then the policy of postponing replacement of faulty components as an only short term move might have been understandable, but instead of as this they were a rapidly growing operation taking on more and more aircraft how did they expect to keep all these aircraft operational in the long run if they avoided carrying out almost all essential repairs and component replacement?
Surely it would have been self evident that such a set of policies in a fast growing airline would be bound to lead to serious incident(s) sooner or later and that this would then irretrievably damage the brand and the business that those in charge were so eager to build up? I supppose we have to assume that those in charge were previously in some much simpler line of business where slashing all costs to the bone regardless of merit is a policy that actually worked?