Originally Posted by
atcer28
Having worked in the aviation safety area for a number of years previously it wasn't so much the low cost model that had an impact as the policies for the pilots and sometimes the top down atttitude of the company.
One of the biggest influencers in safety can be turn around times and the pressure to keep on schedule. What is known as the 'drive to arrive' which has led to many incidents and quite a few accidents across the world. Obviously turn around times are not so much of a factor for long haul flights. Any sort of bonus that can influence safety related behaviour such as fuel bonuses also can have an impact.
Generally we found the LCC just as engaged with safety as the legacy airlines.
Pretty much what I see. You can lob the militaries into the attitude/culture mix too.
For commercial flights.
On some carriers I observe/suspect higher than average 'safety' in one aspect or another, on others it'll be a different positive and some different negatives maybe.
And yes, maybe more LCC in some positives and more 'legacy' in others but no black/white split, in my view.
I draw two distinctions in parting.
Poorly instigated cost-cutting (salami slicing and weak risk management) will tend to increase the safety risks over a genuine balanced low-cost carrier where safety has been properly integrated.
Air travel is one of those industries where the prevention vs detect/react balance for safety should be skewed well to the former. In my experience, quite a few senior people in decision chains fail to understand this fully and how to 'improve' and champion the prevention aspects.