With the recent crash of the Nepalese airplane, I saw a lot of comments on :reddit-logo: talking about how Nepal has poor safety standards, bad piloting certifications, and how they buy second to third hand planes that they don’t maintain.

I’m sure that has nothing to do with capitalism.

But I also saw comments about how Euro and American standards are much, much better. I’m sure that’s true to some extent, given how many airplanes fly over these regions with so few incidents. But… I don’t really see why.

Wouldn’t the center of capitalism be more aggressive with its cost-cutting measures and safety shortcuts? It would improve their profit margins and given the Tendency, they have to take every chance they get, right?

Are we just waiting for a huge, huge sudden spike in airplane crashes as these measures start catching up?

Or is government regulation (and enforcement) still somehow strong in this industry?

  • Shinji_Ikari [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    There's a ton of approaches/airports that the planes cant auto-land. The Nepal case seems to be on approach, as they were fairly low already. I was seeing someone from Nepal saying how their geography also makes flying in general a much bigger challenge. You have smaller runways, high elevation, geographical features in the way, etc.