• EmmaGoldman [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.netM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I mean, yeah. You’d be surprised how much gets missed. more things are missed than are caught, and it virtually never leads to something that could cause a serious problem. That’s because pre-flight inspection is way less useful than you’d think, because most of the important stuff kinda can’t be inspected without major teardowns. Only a handful of the tens of thousands of incidents in aviation history have anything to do with something that could have conceivably fallen under a pre-flight inspection. All of them have been things unnoticed on the plane and affected stuff below the plane that a small hunk of plane landed on.

    That’s not to say that we should eliminate inspections, just the opposite. Planes should be torn down and refitted way more often than they are. Probably the 100-hour inspections should actually be much more in-depth and most of the content of a 100-hour inspection should be part of a pre-flight inspection. Deferred maintenance should be a lot less permissible than it is on anything that isn’t just skin-layer cosmetic or aerodynamic.