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?

  • Mardoniush [she/her]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Very very. Competition to become a commercial pilot is stiff, super expensive, and training requirements are very focused on impossible failures and what to do. You also spend a long time as Co-Pilot and a long time working your way up the airlines and planes to the major carriers. Anyone piloting an Airbus 380 is very, very, good at what they do and have sacrificed money, relationships, and ordinary sanity over decades to fly it over all other things.

    Much like train drivers and musicians, a concerning number of Pilots have commercial flight simulator setups as their primary hobby. They go home, and then they fly more.

    Honestly I'd probably trust a major commercial pilot to fly the Space Shuttle over a military one (That said many military pilots become commercial pilots.)