> If your soap dispenser breaks, yeah that sucks and it's maybe a little gross, but you can just replace it with you land. I struggle to imagine what rule about soap dispensers was written in blood.
The very second you start making an exception because "a soap dispenser is trivial", other stuff will get labeled as exempt (or treated as such), eventually there will be no one knowing what is exempt and what is not, and someone will treat something as exempt that clearly shouldn't have been exempt, causing an incident.
In aircraft and spacecraft design and manufacture, the rule is "safety by design". Treating everything as "needs to be certified by default" is fail-safe, it eliminates entire classes of incident causes.
>The very second you start making an exception because "a soap dispenser is trivial", other stuff will get labeled as exempt
As we've seen from the slight "windows falling off planes mid flight" problem which they furiously tried to cover up, Boeing has a bit of a problem with making exceptions where it actually matters.
A far more likely explanation here isn't that Boeing is being too strict and disciplined over all things up to and including a soap dispenser, but that a bunch of people have their noses in the trough and have figured out a hack to drain money out of the federal government budget.
The very second you start making an exception because "a soap dispenser is trivial", other stuff will get labeled as exempt (or treated as such), eventually there will be no one knowing what is exempt and what is not, and someone will treat something as exempt that clearly shouldn't have been exempt, causing an incident.
In aircraft and spacecraft design and manufacture, the rule is "safety by design". Treating everything as "needs to be certified by default" is fail-safe, it eliminates entire classes of incident causes.