PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - MD Explorer
Thread: MD Explorer
View Single Post
Old 4th Nov 2005, 22:45
  #257 (permalink)  
PANews
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Waltham Abbey, Essex, UK
Age: 77
Posts: 1,174
Received 8 Likes on 4 Posts
Attack from two people who might just be employed by the maintenance organisation that did such a good job in recovering the Explorer, at a fully commercial price, might just wash by.

You are not independent. The only difference is that I am willing to post transparent and take the stick. Or ignore the post. I have no hidden handle.

On many occasions I have stated that the aircraft is fine it is other aspects that draw criticism.

Years ago I was being put down by statements about the health of the programme like 'no one is interested' ... well wrong, they are interested and have been for a long time.

Operators are still very worried whether the support for the aircraft is up to scratch and as a result some of them are visibly voting with their feet. And this is not all Explorer the worry is across the product line. The eminence of the Explorer is that there are some with a vested interest in defending that product.

The length of time taken undertaking an annual could be a matter of question if one organisation claims four days and yet 2 weeks is 'pretty good going.' This is customer availability time. The customer is supposed to be important, and if he/she is happy with 7 weeks so be it.

It does not mean I am right, it means I am asking.

It does the Explorer case no real credit to blandly state that

'It just shows how much safer the 902 is in the city environment where fod damage is a real danger. Imagine if the shop front sign had gone through the tail rotor of an EC145 or AS355 on landing. No such problems with a Notar aircraft.'

Half truth seeking to negate the truth. The fact is that this whole thread hangs on FOD to EHMS. Fanciful 'ifs' about whether the sign went through the MRB or might have gone through the tail rotor of a different type that was not even there hardly apply when we have a 'proven' instance of FOD.

There is little doubt that NOTAR is less likely to suffer FOD but that is not to say there have never been instances of FOD to the NOTAR fan [or for that matter fan failure]. Rarer or not the resultant flight emergency is similar.

Last edited by PANews; 5th Nov 2005 at 00:12.
PANews is offline