A fuel imbalance happening twice is not a "recurring issue". It's a problem that wasn't fixed correctly. It may or may not concern you, depending on your level of knowledge about aviation, to know that when it comes to relatively minor issues like this, this kind of thing actually happens all the time — the maintenance engineer will carry out a documented series of steps to test the system, find that everything tests OK, and release the aircraft back to service. Meanwhile some intermittent fault is still present, that didn't show up during the test, and it happens again on the next flight or a few flights later. Eventually the tech log entries give enough clues to identify the problem or it happens during a test, and the issue is solved. No sane regulator would ban an aircraft for this kind of situation — a version of it happens daily worldwide, including on whatever your own favourite airline is.

Yeah, we’re gonna have to agree to disagree.

Do I personally think that the 2x fuel imbalance is a problem? Nope, I’d happily get on that plane

Could this situation become a safety issue? Yes it could.

Is it possible that there’s more to this situation than safety? Yeah, probably. Maybe they want shiny new planes on the route. But also, the passengers are paying customers with consumer rights - these are being enforced

Are the Ghanaian authorities not a sane regulator? I’ve got no reason to believe they aren’t being proper regulators. There is a possible safety issue that’s well within their mandate.

What happens when you’re dealing with regulators is if you’ve got a good relationship with them, then all the optional stuff (and some of the mandatory stuff) is optional. If not, then you’re gonna have to check every single box and then some. See Boeing in the US vs Europe.

Call it politics, call it whatever but it is what it is

Given how important fuel balance is to trimming the aircraft, I would not board an aircraft that has a history of problems with this.

> See Boeing in the US vs Europe. Call it politics, call it whatever but it is what it is

What you call "good relationship", I call corruption and murder. If Ghanan authorities are fighting against that, more power to them.

  I would not board an aircraft that has a history of problems with this.

Which aircraft would that be? The article describes one (yes, just one) instance of a fuel imbalance leading the crew to return to the departure airport. The reasons for the other diversions are not articulated.

FWIW your EU list shows restricted airlines not individual frames. At the end there are two airlines (Iran Air and Air Koryo) where subsets of their fleets are restricted (whole types not individual frames). With Iran Air it's likely that the restricted types are ones where sanctions make maintenance or safety compliance impossible. With Air Koryo the EU banned a bunch of unpopular Russian and Soviet types that are either way too noisy, incapable of meeting current safety standards, or are unsupported by the Russians.

Agree. Politically a government is responsible for giving its citizens a sense of security… maybe more so than actual security. Ghana and the US were both doing that in this scenario. Whether the fear is 100% reasonable or not is ultimately irrelevant. “We fixed it, no worries, go back to being productive.”

Then of course there’s the reality of them abusing fear of security to steer the herd, but I don’t want to wander down that rabbit hole.