PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - CAP 667 9.2(c)
Thread: CAP 667 9.2(c)
View Single Post
Old 12th Apr 2003, 05:16
  #18 (permalink)  
rustle
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"...example, why don't KwikFit waive the costs of fixing poor brakes on cars?"

Erm, same reason Avgas costs. And aircraft engineers.

But how much do KwikFit et al charge you to park on their driveway for 10 minutes?

Oh that's right, nothing

And motorway services?

If I stop for fuel I pay, what , 80p/litre?

If I stop to stretch my legs, or use the bog: nothing.
No discretion, just zero cost.

And apparently I'm a safer motorist for doing so -- according to all the signs I see about "Tiredness Kills".

-----------

That's interesting and I'm amazed this system is not abused.

Do you abuse the NHS by going to the doctor with a rumbling stomach? No. Too inconvenient. Only use them when you absolutely have to.

By way of comparison, the military trialled the FOC precautionary landing scheme.

Now they have extended the trial because they did not experience abuse of the free landing on diversion scheme

Says a lot about the "abuse" theory

I'm not talking about free fuel, food, engineering or even water.

I'm talking about using an existing runway, with existing ATC/FIS, who will already be there whether I need them or not - where's the cost to them?

Will my precautionary landing wear-out the runway or the microphone button?

Last edited by rustle; 12th Apr 2003 at 05:44.
rustle is offline