Trimtank2
Hmmm.. Well one of the things that surprised me was how easy it was for SSV to gain extensions on MEL items from Transport Canada. It would appear that all they had to do was convince Transport Canada that they were unable to procure parts for defects and magically a 10 day extension to the already 9 day old MEL limit was granted. This happened several times and for defects that could be easily corrected with easily obtainable parts. If SSV did not have the parts in their UK inventory they were readily available from pool or on loan (I know because on these occasions, with the MEL drop dead date looming Stock checks revealed that the required parts were available and this option was presented to them every time but they never took it up.) I suspect that SSV found it cheaper to pull the wool over the eyes of Transport Canada.
MEL time limit extensions or permission to operate outside of the MEL could be reasonably requested if the aircraft was in some place at the back of beyond but it wasn't. It was within a 3 hour drive of a readily available source of spares from MYT, Air France and FLS and within a 45 minute drive of SSV's main UK spares base.
I wouldn't know about cowardice. I know that on occasion MORs and ASRs have been filed for breaches of the MEL, specifically the lack of implementation of MEL requirements for maintenace actions and/or operational restrictions. This is the correct way to report these "lapses" and the authorities should deal with it (if they ever got to see them after SSV had handled them). I don't know the end result and to elaborate would be guesswork.
HST
