Originally Posted by
Yoda2
I recall attending a meeting where the FAA was introducing and touting EMAS. The FAA talked it all up, and most of us seemed to think it was a great idea. Then the FAA presenters went right into how expensive it was to replace, and whoever used it had to pay for the repairs. A sizable amount of attendees then seemed to change their minds and said they would try to avoid using it, so as to not have their companies incur the repair costs...
Those sizable numbers of attendees didn't understand the purpose of EMAS then
It is cheaper than the lawsuits resulting from the aircraft going over the side of the cliff.
Since it is a
last ditch effort to keep the aircraft in the *safety zone* - the crew would have already used every effort to not use EMAS - sort of like the E-5 chain gear use to be.