Good Ole Bob

[Hopeful]

Duh. The FAA's supposed to be on the side of safety. They're not there to create regulations or increase oversight just to favor the plight of the US AMT and create jobs.

Prove that safety is at risk, and you'll have them on your side.

After almost ten years of discussing this, I haven't seen anything other than a lot of hyperbole and anecdotal evidence that overseas overhaul is unsafe.

Is it perhaps more expensive? Perhaps. But unsafe? Hasn't been proven, and probably won't be, given that airplanes flown by every airline in the world using those overseas overhaul bases seem to stay in the air just fine.

How about drug testing overseas?

 

[tech2101]

You forgot the other role of the FAA..Which is to promote the aviation industry and air travel in general. They should not have the dual role of enforcing regulations AND promoting the industry. It is a conflict of interest when they need to make costly and over do changes, the airlines run like little kids whining how they can't afford all the changes and regulations.

They (FAA) also maintain the National Airspace System. That is their biggest role; air traffic control and maintaining the Navigational Aids and infrastructure supporting the safest airspace in the world. Who do you think makes sure that the aircraft ILS lines up with a runway centerline and not a wooded patch in the country (hint...there is something out there that generates the signal that the aircraft uses). I'll bet many of you avionics guys don't even know what a Localizer/Glideslope transmitter looks like or where it is located. (No, I'm not talking about a TIC-30). Many of the ex-airline guys I know moved on to that line of work (not scabs).