Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sender
Ummmmm - the airline didn't think they were dealing with a infinitely powerful group of insane Obsessive-Compulsive nutballs who would pull a stunt like this just to show everyone that they can.

Oops!

16 posted on 04/11/2008 7:17:58 PM PDT by an amused spectator (Spitzer would have used the Mann Act against an enemy in a New York minute.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: an amused spectator
Ummmmm - the airline didn't think they were dealing with a infinitely powerful group of insane Obsessive-Compulsive nutballs who would pull a stunt like this just to show everyone that they can.

Ummmmmm... Nope. The airline figured they could bull their way through the argument and force the FAA to accept or defer the airline's requirement to perform the checks correctly.

The stunt is the airline's failure to perform the checks within the specified period.

They are called "Instructions for Continued Airworthiness" for a reason, and compliance to them is required under the code of federal regulations (CFR) title 14. Or does the law no longer mean anything?

20 posted on 04/11/2008 9:16:21 PM PDT by MortMan (Those who stand for nothing fall for anything. - Alexander Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson