>>Spend more money, reduce flights if necessary, but decrease the accident rate at all costs.<<

Reduced flights mean less work done. If we're going to be that risk averse, if the work isn't important enough to justify the risk -which I grant must be mitigated as much as possible - then why fly at all?

>>you had just stated that "All in all, I think her idea offers nothing of value."<<

And it doesn't. Isn't she talking about rebuilding the whole vehicle? That's ridiculous. I'm talking about rebuilding parts after a given life, something that doesn't require a lengthy down-period for overhaul. It would be done offline and held as a spare until another unit required replacement and rebuild. I'm saying maintain a decent spare parts inventory, not resort to extensive vehicle-wide overhauls. That's gross overkill.

-Kim-