Northern Boy-I'm not referring to any Airbus here, but let's not forget how many planes with questionable characteristics were "certified" by the US FAA (and allowed to operate with no changes until tragedies took place, while intentionally disregarding serious concerns from overseas operators , i.e. the ATR-42 in icing conditions).
This was in order to "promote aviation", which was the FAA's basic mandate, until the Valuejet (now Airtran) crash.
Have people forgotten the FAA's overriding philosophy in making safety decisions? It is still the "cost vs benefit" analysis. This is understandable, at least to some extent.
[This message has been edited by Ignition Override (edited 01 June 2001).]