• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Plane crash in Kent"

Collapse

  • TheFaQQer
    replied
    Originally posted by Lucy View Post
    Most commercial airlines (minus Aeroflot and Air India etc) triple check repairs/upgrades etc. It is not common practice amongst charter airlines, and they don't have the same congruence of skilled staff in the way that large commercial airlines do.
    Originally posted by Lucy in the Kiva thread View Post
    Based on what evidence?

    Not worth listening to?
    So, what's your evidence Lucy? Did I miss it in the thread?

    At least when I asserted one thing in response to your other wonderfully thought out idea, I had the evidence, from their own website (it's OK, there's no need to apologise, either). So, where's yours for this libellous post?

    Leave a comment:


  • threaded
    replied
    Originally posted by Churchill View Post
    I do know that the guy involved didn't buy his replacement blades from Robinson.
    So, theoretically the engineer knowingly fitted dodgy parts and some other git gave it an airworthiness certificate...

    Like I say, that doesn't feel right, either the system allows dodgy parts, yet gets upset over pilots having a jar or two, or these parts aren't really all that dodgy...

    Leave a comment:


  • Churchill
    replied
    Originally posted by threaded View Post
    So for really really important jesus-bolt type parts, you're telling me there's no chain of custody from conception to abortion? That sounds more than a little slap-happy when they get all upset over a pilot having had a drinky or two.

    Or could it be that when one of these blades de-laminate in flight the manufacturer goes like, oh gosh, that one was fake (all the while having their fingers crossed behind their backs).
    I do know that the guy involved didn't buy his replacement blades from Robinson.

    Leave a comment:


  • threaded
    replied
    Originally posted by Churchill View Post
    You are quite correct, there are serial numbers on the parts. Even the fake ones.

    Btw, we're not talking CDs, we're talking anti-torque rotor blades that de-laminate in flight!
    So for really really important jesus-bolt type parts, you're telling me there's no chain of custody from conception to abortion? That sounds more than a little slap-happy when they get all upset over a pilot having had a drinky or two.

    Or could it be that when one of these blades de-laminate in flight the manufacturer goes like, oh gosh, that one was fake (all the while having their fingers crossed behind their backs).

    Leave a comment:


  • Churchill
    replied
    Originally posted by threaded View Post
    Oh my gawd, not another one who's fallen for that "Copying CDs aids terrorists" bollox.

    So someone uses a halfords 5p fuse instead of a boeing $50 one, yeah, that makes an aircraft un-airworthy.

    Oh, and now you're going to say they counterfeit turbine blades? Well, exsqueeze me, but they have, and always have had, serial numbers, so they can, and have always been, able to be traced back. So if there are 'counterfeit' parts, it's the manufacturers who are aiding and abetting it.
    You are quite correct, there are serial numbers on the parts. Even the fake ones.

    Btw, we're not talking CDs, we're talking anti-torque rotor blades that de-laminate in flight!

    Leave a comment:


  • threaded
    replied
    Originally posted by Churchill View Post
    Oi Lucy, you asked me about my aviation experience.

    I wasn't being boastful, merely putting you in your place.

    Btw, your assertion regarding quality of maintenance is bollocks, the biggest threat to aviation safety at the moment isn't the quality of maintenance, it's actually counterfeit parts.
    Oh my gawd, not another one who's fallen for that "Copying CDs aids terrorists" bollox.

    So someone uses a halfords 5p fuse instead of a boeing $50 one, yeah, that makes an aircraft un-airworthy.

    Oh, and now you're going to say they counterfeit turbine blades? Well, exsqueeze me, but they have, and always have had, serial numbers, so they can, and have always been, able to be traced back. So if there are 'counterfeit' parts, it's the manufacturers who are aiding and abetting it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Churchill
    replied
    Originally posted by Lucy View Post
    That absolutely facinating.

    Now would you like to dispute my assertation, given you have so much experience. Do you really think there is a difference between how commercial and private jets are maintained - see my previous post.

    Or I guess you could go on insulting me and making offensive and spiteful remarks. Actually, you know what, don't worry, I don't think you are capable of anything else (other than being really boastful on this board)
    Oi Lucy, you asked me about my aviation experience.

    I wasn't being boastful, merely putting you in your place.

    Btw, your assertion regarding quality of maintenance is bollocks, the biggest threat to aviation safety at the moment isn't the quality of maintenance, it's actually counterfeit parts.
    Last edited by Churchill; 1 April 2008, 06:29.

    Leave a comment:


  • ratewhore
    replied
    Originally posted by Churchill View Post
    Btw Lucy, just 'coz you gave some jet jockey a blow job doesn't mean you're an expert on matters aviation.

    Leave a comment:


  • sasguru
    replied
    Originally posted by Lucy View Post
    That absolutely facinating.

    Now would you like to dispute my assertation, given you have so much experience. Do you really think there is a difference between how commercial and private jets are maintained - see my previous post.

    Or I guess you could go on insulting me and making offensive and spiteful remarks. Actually, you know what, don't worry, I don't think you are capable of anything else (other than being really boastful on this board)
    Your previous post claimed that charter aircraft, Air India and Aeroflot have inferior maintenance compared with some other commercial airlines.
    That is a contentious (not to mention libellous) statement.
    So you should provide evidence. Please do so.

    This should be good

    Leave a comment:


  • Lucy
    replied
    Originally posted by Churchill View Post
    I've got a PPL(H) with type ratings on R22, R44, Hughes 500(+NOTAR) and Jet (+Long)Ranger.

    I passed my test in 1998 (first time) so this year will have had 10 years experience as a qualified pilot.

    I currently have 700+ hours PIC.

    If you were my friend on Facebook then you could see some piccies of what I fly.

    Thanks for asking Btw.
    That absolutely facinating.

    Now would you like to dispute my assertation, given you have so much experience. Do you really think there is a difference between how commercial and private jets are maintained - see my previous post.

    Or I guess you could go on insulting me and making offensive and spiteful remarks. Actually, you know what, don't worry, I don't think you are capable of anything else (other than being really boastful on this board)

    Leave a comment:


  • PAH
    replied
    Originally posted by Churchill View Post
    She's never heard of the FAA, CAA and JAR.

    Btw Lucy, just 'coz you gave some jet jockey a blow job doesn't mean you're an expert on matters aviation.

    I blame Always. Since they added wings, everyone's a pilot.

    Leave a comment:


  • Churchill
    replied
    Originally posted by sasguru View Post

    You really are a cretin aren't you? That, or a very good bot.
    She's never heard of the FAA, CAA and JAR.

    Btw Lucy, just 'coz you gave some jet jockey a blow job doesn't mean you're an expert on matters aviation.

    Leave a comment:


  • sasguru
    replied
    Originally posted by Lucy View Post
    Most commercial airlines (minus Aeroflot and Air India etc) triple check repairs/upgrades etc. It is not common practice amongst charter airlines, and they don't have the same congruence of skilled staff in the way that large commercial airlines do.

    Now tell us about your experience as a pilot.

    You really are a cretin aren't you? That, or a very good bot.

    Leave a comment:


  • Churchill
    replied
    Originally posted by Spartacus View Post
    I've put in about six hours on Microsoft Flight 92. Oh, and about 20 hours on Mig-29 Combat.
    An expert then, eh?

    Leave a comment:


  • Spartacus
    replied
    Originally posted by Churchill View Post
    I've got a PPL(H) with type ratings on R22, R44, Hughes 500(+NOTAR) and Jet (+Long)Ranger.

    I passed my test in 1998 (first time) so this year will have had 10 years experience as a qualified pilot.

    I currently have 700+ hours PIC.

    If you were my friend on Facebook then you could see some piccies of what I fly.

    Thanks for asking Btw.
    I've put in about six hours on Microsoft Flight 92. Oh, and about 20 hours on Mig-29 Combat.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X