----- Original Message ----- From: "Allan9" <exatc@xxxxxxxxxx> To: <AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2005 10:38 AM Subject: Re: You Get What you Pay For > That's a US requirement. Does their country have the same. WOuldn't the > aircraft have to be certified in their country? > Al > A large number of countries accept each other's certifications. If you find a country that allows some practice that most don't, the airplane won't be able to get out of that country. There seem to be some planes flying around Africa that can't go anywhere else (a particular 727 comes to mind). The most important mutual certification is the U.S. - E.U., but the certification of Brazilian and Canadian planes, for instance, whereever it has occurred, is accepted everywhere. There was a dispute between the U.S. and France (who else?) about the conditions regarding icing of the ATR's, but such disagreements are rare. There has been a little scandal about countries not permitting the operation of a particular foreign carrier (usually because of poor maintenance), and failing to notify other countries of the finding. The others don't like to find that the country banning the planes knows something and haven't told. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alireza Alivandivafa" <DEmocrat2n@xxxxxxx> > To: <AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2005 3:17 AM > Subject: Re: You Get What you Pay For > > >> In a message dated 1/9/2005 2:15:29 AM Central Standard Time, >> mgreenwood@xxxxxxxxx writes: >> The 738 can carry 189 in a single class configuration and the way they >> pack >> them in over in their, maybe they added a row or two. >> They cannot. Because of evacuation requirements and floor space the 738 >> is >> maxed at 189. The 739 is also maxed at 189, specifically because of the >> fact >> that it has too few exits. If they changed it, they could do around 200 >>