Originally Posted by
Admiral Ackbar
Wouldn't put myself in the alarmist planes are falling camp but this is just another data point in an apparent erosion of safety standards at AC in the last decade or so. Personal evaluation of course and would still get on AC plane tomorrow morning.
I am in the third camp. I want the regulatory system to work. Reading between the lines sounds like the focus of the regulator was the QA program and QA records. They identified them as a High Risk licensee. That is a positive. Perhaps they needed to allocate more resources and different types of resources to stepping up surveillance.
Georgian is the lowest cost bidder on a contract to AC where they frankly bring very little IP or assets to the table. The brand caries no value. The aircraft are probably leased. The customer service procedures are dictated by AC. The maintenance procedures are dictated by the aircraft manufacture. Where can Georgian generate a competitive advantage? Labour cost? Finding creative ways to cut corners? If AC fires Georgian, it will be replaced with another operator in the same boat.
The issue is why the regulator required so long and what have they done to avoid another operator in the same situation.