Re: NY TIMES: The Humble Valujet No More

"Frank F. Matthews" <frankfmatthews@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

James Robinson wrote:

beavis <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


James Robinson <wascana@xxxxxxx> wrote:

... they were the first airline to extensively contract out
maintenance. Something done in many other industries, I might add.
There was an accident, which arguably wasn't the fault of the
airline management, and were then considered as "unsafe".

Please. They contracted things out to SabreTech because they were
CHEAPER, simple as that. Their subcontractor cut corners, and 110
people died as a result. ValuJet wasn't DIRECTLY responsible, no,
but they were most certainly at fault for using a shady contractor.

Are you implying that dealing with the lowest bidder is somehow
wrong? It is the way business is done. Everything from computer
programming to moon landers is awarded to the lowest qualified bidder
as a normal contracting process. SabreTech was a licenced aircraft
maintenance supplier.

As far as SabreTech being "shady", they were properly licensed by the
FAA to perform aircraft maintenance. It's not as though they were
some back lot garage that repairs cars using stolen parts.

Also, please describe how the accident was as a result of Sabretech
"cutting corners". The airline prohibited the shipment of hazardous
material, and weren't aware that the oxygen generators were aboard.
The maintenance contractor made a mistake in not discharging the
generators or applying safety caps. It was more a mistake than a
deliberate act to save money.

Blaming the airline, even partially, is like blaming Ford Explorer
drivers for Firestone tire failures: They shouldn't have bought them,
therefore they are at fault.

If Ford sold Firestone tires as original equipment then they are
responsible for the performance of the tires. If the tires were
subsequently purchased then they are not.

Yes, to the final buyer, but they will pass on any claims to Firestone,
who ultimately is responsible.

And if an owner gets into an accident as a result of tire failure that
involves others, the owner and his insurance company would be
responsible for the damages. However, do you really "blame" the owner,
or is Firestone utimately to blame. That is my point.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: NY TIMES: The Humble Valujet No More
    ... which arguably wasn't the fault of the airline ... SabreTech was a licenced aircraft maintenance ... please describe how the accident was as a result of Sabretech ...
    (rec.travel.air)
  • Re: NY TIMES: The Humble Valujet No More
    ... which arguably wasn't the fault of the airline ... SabreTech was a licenced aircraft maintenance supplier. ... please describe how the accident was as a result of Sabretech "cutting corners". ... The airline prohibited the shipment of hazardous material, and weren't aware that the oxygen generators were aboard. ...
    (rec.travel.air)
  • Re: NY TIMES: The Humble Valujet No More
    ... but they were most certainly at fault for using a shady contractor. ... maintenance supplier. ... The airline prohibited the shipment of hazardous material, and weren't aware that the oxygen generators were aboard. ... If Ford sold Firestone tires as original equipment then they are responsible for the performance of the tires. ...
    (rec.travel.air)
  • Re: 92 Saturn SL1 Maintenance Question
    ... The last scheduled maintenance was somewhere around 100K - rotate ... tires, lube locks, and I don't remember what else. ... > AFAIK there are no lube points on the drive train but age may cause the CV ... I told them I just had the tires rotated just do the rest ...
    (rec.autos.makers.saturn)
  • Re: zooms zooming againZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
    ... It wasn't for a Haitian "airline," that's for damn sure. ... manage, voodoo maintenance? ... I have Combat Assault time in a UH1C gunship ...
    (rec.aviation.homebuilt)
Loading