BD705 MAN-ORD Going with Cargo Hold Panels missing

[modelcuirstudios]

I noticed this morning that there were panels mssing....No-one seemed to be bothered...in-fact the ground crew...you know the ones that are meant to be there for the safety of the aircraft but where actually just chatting and starting at me and them being amused that I am a plane spotter...well they didnt seem bothered about the panels that were missing...
Infact I came back an hour later as it was being pushed back and they still hadnt done anything with it.

http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm62/speedbird1503/DSCF4755.jpg

http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm62/speedbird1503/DSCF4756.jpg

http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm62/speedbird1503/DSCF4757.jpg

http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm62/speedbird1503/DSCF4758.jpg

http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm62/speedbird1503/DSCF4773.jpg

http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm62/speedbird1503/DSCF4774.jpg

Offcourse if it's nothing I would love to be educated on how it fly's like this :)

Also is there anyone in chicago who could take a pic of it landing :)

[smudgethecat]

Stick to spotting you prat, the a/c can be dispatched quite legally with this panel missing iaw MEL/CDG

[Flightmech]

Agree with previous. Stick to spotting. Almost certainly a perfectly legal despatch under the CDL (Configuration Deviation List) which allows all sorts of panels, fairings etc to be missing/removed providing all performance and fuel burn restrictions are complied with.

Stop trying to damage BMI's repuation (and no I dont work for them and never have)

[Pilotpaul787]

Thats right call him a prat for asking, a simple answer such as "actually it can be dispatched quite legally like this" would of surficed.

[geordiejet]

Perfectly innocent question if you ask me.

[smudgethecat]

I would have done so if not for his disparaging comments regarding the ground crew, who were likely type rated licensed engineers who are generally very professional people not in the habit of dispatching a/c with large panels missing that should not be missing

[FlexibleResponse]

Hi modelcuirstudios,

Airliners are designed to operate safely with a surprising and sometimes almost alarming number of panels and other bits and pieces missing. The manufacturer specifies what bits can be missing and what (if any) performance penalties may be incurred. Penalties might include reduction in max allowable T/O weight, or increased drag which requires a percentage increase in fuel burn, or whatever.

I think one of the strangest sights is to see an airliner operating with just one winglet intact and the other completely missing.

Keep up the good work and keep in mind the highly professional engineering that goes into keeping airliners airbourne.

[modelcuirstudios]

You know what Poster number 2...I was a carefull person asking in this forum...I am studying my ATPL you "prat" and for your remark I am now emailing all news companies

[Anti-ice]

What a delightful set of replies from educated 'very' professional people.

With language/aggression like that, you sound no better than a common thug.

It was a perfectly reasonable question from someone with an interest in aviation and genuine concern for peoples safety - he was simply asking a question to someone who would know.

To berate in such a condescending manner is shameful - and if you were a pilot yourself, i would not want to be on your aircraft with that mentality.

It makes you wonder sometimes......

Enjoy your plane watching m-c-s, and well done for replying in a respectful and much more suitable way Flexible Response :ok:

[modelcuirstudios]

Yes Flexible Response thankyou for your intelligent answer...It's prats like post no.2 that caused all the past crashes! a fear of reporting something out of feeling you will get torn apart!
I'm not telling the papers...i would never do that...I was just concerned...I'm not a plane spotter and there's nothing wrong with them Poster no.2...I am a coming pilot...you are a snob who looks down on others I presume.

Oh and BTW I worked in the BA terminal and have the utmost respect for BMI...

[modelcuirstudios]

Thanks Anti-Ice :)...The only reason I wanted someone in ORD to take a pic was out of curiosity and to get your view after seeing the other pics...it's not BMI I was trying to do anything with...it was the contracted out ground crew...
I have worked for many companies in the airport and for the same airline I have seen different companies be slack in a lot of things...not bmi but in general...

[jewitts]

OK so we gather this is not a safety issue. But just imagine one or more passengers had seen the aforesaid part missing??? Mis-informed Joe-public sometimes will not fly with a Bin-Laden lookalike on board. So what would they think about a big hole in the skin? Lucky it is on the blindside for boarding eh?
It always amazes me that the airlines spend so much on the paint-job (corporate image massaging?) when, at most large airports anyway, the aircraft can hardly be seen. One can only assume that in the minds of the airline management, nice paint-job equates to well-maintained aircraft = safe aircraft. So getting back to the point of this thread, a missing panel hardly maintains this "ultra-safe" image to which everyone tries to aspire.

[G-BPED]

Judging by the scathing replies to the posters question about whether the airplane is ok for dispatch or not just proves how Unprofessional some people are on this web site.

[Skipness One Echo]

I am DAMN sure I would have asked if I had seen that ! Whatever you might think, it doesn't LOOK safe, and I'm not disputing that fact that it actually is.

[driftdown]

The more time I spend looking at threads on this forum the more I realise there are some quite class a :mad: posting responses, something along the lines of post in haste and repent at leisure, although I doubt the latter would ever figure in their thinking.

Perhaps Modelcuirstudios original posting could have left out reference to ground engineers.... safety of aircraft etc, but did it require the sort of response poster No2 thought was appropriate? :=

I think it was a valid question and should have received a professional response.

Well just my 2p worth.

[Hotel Tango]

Folks, please note that the two hostile answers did come from aviation "professionals" but not from pilots. Post 2 and 3 came from mechanics/engineers.

[caaardiff]

MCS it is good that you noticed and raised this issue. To the untrained eye it could have been a major problem.

However, rest assured as the a/c was at BMI's base - MAN. Engineers would have more than likely been present for the turnaround, the pilots would have done their walk around, and the many ground crew working around the a/c would have noticed it.
Then finally the ground crew would report on pushback any possible defects before being allowed off stand.

[virgin_cc_wannabe]

are there any ideas as to what caused the skin to be missing. I presume it must be some issue as you dont decide 'hmm, ill take some panels off that plane today'

regards

[modelcuirstudios]

Thanks for those last few replies aswell :)...I used to think pilots did walkarounds...but since I remember that flightplans in most companies are done by dispatchers I thought maybe pilots dont always do the walkarounds...I didnt mean to say engineers...I meant just that there was only security guys and that all I thought I saw there and just a tug.... :)

[smudgethecat]

Indeed, one does not remove panels from an A/C without good reason,the "skin" is actually a Q/D panel that covers the lower cargo door lockshaft mechanism and is frequently damaged during cargo loading /unloading operations, no doubt the panel has been damaged and removed IAW the provisions of the config deviation guide which allows the a/c quite legally to be released and to operate for a perod of time until a spare has been proccured ,needless to say if no release was posible under the MEL/CDG then the a/c would not be released for service, hope this clears the mystery up and puts everyones mind at rest;)

[forget]

modelcuir did NOT ask a 'reasonable question'. He'd already decided there was a problem, and incompetence. := And he can't spell.

No-one seemed to be bothered...in-fact the ground crew...you know the ones that are meant to be there for the safety of the aircraft but where actually just chatting and starting at me and them being amused that I am a plane spotter...well they didnt seem bothered about the panels that were missing... Infact I came back an hour later as it was being pushed back and they still hadnt done anything with it.

[smudgethecat]

Spot on forgot, which is why i referred to him as a prat.

[modelcuirstudios]

You Spelt his username wrong you Prat!...and what were you saying? I'll listen to the intelligent pilots who can view ither people's points of view thanks...there's a reason why pilots and cabin crew are who they are! it's because they have passed competency tests and have shown their good natured personality that is able to reason with people in a just way...

The only reason for my post is detailed but you didnt bother to read it...selective reading? :ugh:

[Mr @ Spotty M]

The panel has more than likely been damaged by a hi-loader and removed to be repaired.
How about a change in the title of this thread, as it is the hold door panel missing and not a cargo hold panel.
Not knowing the MEL on this a/c, but l could have a guess that you would not be able to despatch with a hold panel missing, which is why l read this thread.:=

[Re-Heat]

Frequently people seem to use the anonymity afforded by this internet forum to spout unitelligible and thoughtless diatrabes at each other. In addition, some appear to think that the universal and public nature of the internet should allow each and every viewpoint, however ill-considered or ludicrous to be aired and assessed along with other, more intelligent questions.

This thread goes to show the worst of both.

The OP - claiming studying for ATPLs - should be in an adequate position to know the legal requirements for a pilot to perform a walkaround, know that aircraft remain airworthy with panels missing, and finally should not resort to "telling the press" when nobody listens to the uninformed viewpoint he holds (however poor the responses were). For certain, he should be adult enough to know that the press trawl these forums.

The responders should be in an adequate position to engage brain before replying, to consider that their responses are seen by a large audience, and to consider that the core of what was brought up by the OP was essentially a question - however poorly phrased.

I am not sure why it remains in R&N, but I doubt it will be here for long.


I have reported the above posts, and recommend that all involved re-register in a new and more adult guise before posting ever again.

[modelcuirstudios]

Thanks...Sorry I am not an ATPL'er...I just got annoyed at his Pre-judging that I am nothing just because I happen to enjoy watching a few planes at the airport every now and then...
I'm a PPL'er though...I did know they do walkarounds but like i said before companies seem to have taken flight planning away from pilots and now the dispatcher does it...and I thought maybe they dont do a walk around at least on this occasion.

And Last poster also...saying about internet bringing the worst out...yes I think they probably would be as horribe in real life if they could get away with it...Just think....neighbours always seem to be nice on the whole but that's because they have to get along...similar to this...But I think I can relax and say pilots seem to be well rounded :)

[forget]

Let's draw a line under this ---- after -

Thanks...Sorry I am not an ATPL'er...I just got annoyed at his Pre-judging that I am nothing just because I happen to enjoy watching a few planes at the airport every now and then...

You pre-judged a reputable airline and claimed it was operating a trans-Atlantic flight with defective (illegal) aircraft. You now understand it wasn't - and wouldn't. End of story.

[modelcuirstudios]

I didnt pre-judge it was flying illegally...I was concerned that people didnt see this problem....and wanted a view...exactly I was looking for views from professionals of which you are clearly not one of them...But thanks to the actual pilots and ones with a good nature who dont jump the gun...heaven forbid we have the bad posters as pilots...
Anyway I like BMI so go away! If the contracted out ground crew I.E not BMI were overlooking something then BMI would now be aware of them by someone on here that works for them and also the main reason I posted just to see if It would be safe...not for anything liable

[K.Whyjelly]

Hi Modelcuirstudios

Sorry you've been flamed by a few intolerant people here on Pprune but rest assured that any bmi aircraft wouldn't depart transatlantic in an unsafe or illegal condition. The aircraft is given a full ETOPS check by extremely professional and highly experienced engineers prior to dispatch, the flight crew will do a thorough walk around check prior to accepting the aircraft (it's their arses out there at 30W if it all goes wrong after all!!!), and at the end of this chain are the ground crew who do a walk around, prior to pushing back the aircraft checking for loose and missing panels amongst other things and alert the crew if they find anything out of the ordinary.

Just so the engineers and flight crew know what is acceptable to have missing or damaged and what is not, they have a Minimum Equipment List and within this MEL is a section titled Configuration Deviation List (CDL). Under the structures section it details what can be missing and any performance penalties accrued. I've copied the relevant section below and as you can see 2 cover panels ( 1 fwd and 1 aft) are installed but none are needed for dispatch.

Your concern is admirable but rest assured that anything that looks as dramatic as you thought is not something that would go unnoticed :}


A330
CONFIGURATION DEVIATION LIST
Doors
CDL 52 (C) P12
SEQ
005
Rev 16
PART DESCRIPTION, NORMAL QTY,
REMARKS AND OR EXCEPTIONS
12. Fwd Cargo Door Access
Cover Panels Number installed 2
821AR – 821BR
All may be missing

The following performance penalties
must be applied.

Missing Takeoff One engine Fuel Consumption
Parts: Weight Net ceiling Penalty (%)
penalty Penalty (ft)
(%)

FWD + AFT 0.06 70 0.3
panels
(821AR +
821BR)



AFT panel 0.04 negligible 0.2
(821BR)


Notes:
When the AFT panel of the door is
missing (821BR), the FWD panel may
remain installed.
When the FWD panel of the door is
missing (821AR), the AFT panel should
be removed before next flight (821BR).
Items 52-12 and 52-13 may be missing simultaneously provided that performance
penalties are cumulated.

[spannersatcx]

http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k319/spannersatcx/330cdl.jpg

Here's a screen shot of the 330 CDL, as you can see perfectly acceptable to fly without panel in question.:ok:

I guess they were bothered as they knew what they were doing.:eek:

[modelcuirstudios]

@Jelly Thanks for the kind words and technical details...:)
@Spanner Thanks for diagram...It's nice to see every detail...Do they have these checklists for every single panel...is this what the pilot carried or is it an engineers paper...
Thanks for your trouble of scanning them up :)
I love to learn every part of aviation...:)

[K.Whyjelly]

All angles covered in a hard back MEL running to 513 pages. From the biggest of items right down to a small Delrin underwing jacking point hole plug. Each aircraft carries its own copy of this Minimum Equipment List on board.

[oversteer]

So what's the biggest, most alarming thing that an A330 can legally be dispatched without? :)

[Ian Brooks]

There was a call whilst he was taxying re panel, can`t remember who from but a comment of we are aware of it and no problem was made

Ian

[spannersatcx]

Biggest - winglet or flap track fairing, most alarming - none.

[Notso Fantastic]

This is a very bizarre thread thanks to Modelcuirstud.....sreally weird posting. He has managed to totally trash the ground engineers responsible for despatching the aircraft, aimed a barb at pilots who apparently don't do walkarounds or check their flight plans, and all because he thought he'd hit it big time with spotting a defect that wasn't being handled correctly by an engineering department he seems to have issues with?

Weird! Why can't people just post up a picture and ask? Instead of adding numerous comments and personal opinion! He totally provoked the responses he had- had I seen this in time, I would have responded the same way.

[AMEandPPL]

would of surficed

= would have sufficed

[TeachMe]

A lot of it comes down to how you read it. When reading the OP first post I did not have a feeling of him trashing anyone or the airline. I actually took his comment about the ground staff to be a bit of a joke to himself along the lines of why am I (modelcuirstudios) so stupidly interested in something that these ground crew dont even care about.

If you read innocently, you see it innocently.

If you are looking to be insulted, you will see it.

Perhpas a good thing for all of us to remember in our lives.

[modelcuirstudios]

Firstly I didnt think engineers or dispatchers would have seen it as I thought maybe they dont see that side of the plane...I only thought there would just be baggage handlers and a security guy that would have seen it..
That security guy was chatting and just not doing anything but looking smug watching my every move as I had my camera...it was a smart alleck look for 5 mins...I just thought innocently that there was no staff that knew how serious the panel was...
I didnt think there would be engineers in general with any airline unless there was a need.etc...
That's why I posted sorry.

[VAFFPAX]

Looks like certain engineers are getting all upset and cranky because someone dared, dared to question their working practices. Calling someone a prat online is stupid. You make yourself look like a complete, well, you know what (oh dear, did I just say that?) instead of the other person.

Now, as for the original post, I don't see ANY reference to BMI flying a damaged a/c illegally, I don't see any references to "OMG, I'm gonna tell the world press to ostracise those bad bad people at BMI" kind of scare that the two posters following up seemed to conjure up.

I distinctly recall seeing this:Offcourse if it's nothing I would love to be educated on how it fly's like this
That leads me to believe that the original poster is wondering whether it can be allowed to be flown like this. Which, according to several other great posters, it is.

So as much as you are the experts, at least show some courtesy when asked a question. I'm sure you don't call someone who asks you in person about whether that's a good or a bad thing a prat.

S.

[Skipness One Echo]

So what's the biggest, most alarming thing that an A330 can legally be dispatched without?


My luggage?

[VAFFPAX]

So what's the biggest, most alarming thing that an A330 can legally be dispatched without?My luggage?
:hmm: Naomi Campbell. ;)

S.

[Notso Fantastic]

Vaffpax, I do declare I think you're actually right. Whatever frame of mind you read post 1 in, it's actually extraordinary, but you can come to totally different conclusions about what the original meaning was. It was a bit naughty to respond to criticism with: You know what Poster number 2...I was a carefull person asking in this forum...I am studying my ATPL you "prat" and for your remark I am now emailing all news companies
because it shows the motivation all along was getting a news splash and maybe a downpayment on a new KIA.

Funny how the thread has gravitated from 'dare this aeroplane get airborne with a queer panel' to 'dare this posting get airborne in Pprune with a queer meaning'!

Just a simple query would have got the answer! Why was it dramatised so? It reminds me of this silly thread: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=328339
A little knowledge is a bad thing. People assume they have caught someone out!

[VAFFPAX]

NSF - I get you... to me the response to posts 2 and 3 sounded more like a childish "you were rude, clearly you're hiding something, I'm going to the press now" manoeuvre ;)

Of course, I don't know the original motivation, so I can't speculate (yeah right!)

:) ;)

S.

[smudgethecat]

NSF you have hit the nail squarely on the head a little knowledge is indeed a dangerous thing and as long as we allow these characters armed with a camera, note book and not much else close to operating aircraft this sort of shock horror exposure will happen,lets be thankfull he did not make good his threat to take his photos and his crass comments to the press, as if he had we would have been in real danger of waking up to .... "HEROIC PLANE SPOTTER MOCKED AS HE VAINLY TRIED TO PREVENT DOOMED JUMBO TAKING TO THE SKIES blah blah:eek::eek:

[j4ckos mate]

he raised a query, that is all, what isnt alarming to some professionals may be alarming to others, i do stuff at work thats run of the mill, yet it others see it as cavalier, all the poster was doing was checking, what would be the consequences of never checking? you lot are like wolves sometimes, either its open to the public or its not if its open to the public you should show them respect, you wouldnt have a job without us you know:=

[Notso Fantastic]

Well it wasn't actually 'just a query'. If you are going to come to a professional forum and denigrate the professionals of that industry (the 'ground crew', ie the ground engineers), because it was more than a little insulting to them (I am not one), then you are going to get a reaction when it is shown you were actually barking up the wrong tree. So the defence of 'he was only asking' doesn't apply- he was actually scoring a point back off ground staff whom he felt were dissing him AND he thought had neglected to do their job properly.

As to the public 'giving us a job', we have a very small sample of the public who visit here- a sample that is 'public' AND also 'computer nerds'- not yer average 'public' at all. You don't give me a job, right? My employer does. You buy a service off my employer, and I endeavour to provide that service on behalf of my employer, not you. When we understand each other clearly, you will stop pulling that one! If you don't want your head bit off, the answer is don't come to a professional forum and denigrate professionals in that industry!

[beefster]

The damage would more than likely have been caused by the door coming into contact with the Highloader i have seen it happen a few times at BHX normally it would be reported to the engineers who would remove the panel to be repaired or replaced at a later date. It is mush beter to fly without the panel than risk flying with a damaged one that could be ripped off during flight and who knows what damage could be caused to either the leading edges of the wing or even worse if injested through the engine

[Skipness One Echo]

Anyone remember that little old lady boarding an Aloha B737 who noticed a bloody great crack by the door and didn't want to disturb the aviation professionals?

*POP*

[glhcarl]

The damage would more than likely have been caused by the door coming into contact with the Highloader i have seen it happen a few times at BHX normally it would be reported to the engineers who would remove the panel to be repaired or replaced at a later date. It is mush beter to fly without the panel than risk flying with a damaged one that could be ripped off during flight and who knows what damage could be caused to either the leading edges of the wing or even worse if injested through the engine
My first thought, when I saw the picture was that a viewing port was damaged and you could not verify the door was locked, so the panel was removed to insure proper latching of the door. I guess the panel could be damage if a Highloader was used as a stand reach the door controls.

[spannersatcx]

My first thought, when I saw the picture was that a viewing port was damaged and you could not verify the door was locked, so the panel was removed to insure proper latching of the door. I guess the panel could be damage if a Highloader was used as a stand reach the door controls

There is no viewing port on a 330, the 'closed/locked' indicators stick out with the sides painted red so they can be seen.

[Fargoo]

I think the reason the original post was treated harshly was that it was originally posted in Rumours and News at the top of the forums and that it seemed to imply that something very dangerous had been pointed out and ignored.

If there had been a single photo with just the question about how it's allowed to fly in that condition then i'm sure a more reasonable answer would have been forthcoming.

Personally if someone shouted over to me and pointed something like this out i'd be more than happy to pop over and explain the situation to them (assuming I had time) , better to have someone say something than keep shut and have something genuinely dangerous go unnoticed.

:ok:

[Jimmy08]

I am newby FO...is it me or do the tech guys seem to have a grudge against everyone or everything??? The guy asked a resonable question, it's not everyday you see half the 'panel' missing from the front of an a/c!!!

[smudgethecat]

I for one certainly do not have a problem with anyone asking a question about anything and had he posed the question politely without clearly implying the ground engineers were neglecting their responsibilities he would have received a polite response from me, however he didnt , how anyone who clearly has such scant knowledge of the subject can have the arrogance to come onto a aviation forum and lambast the very well qualified, dedicated people who maintain these aircraft without any knowledge of what had occured is beyond me, further if he was so concerned about the issue instead of taking photos to post on the internet why did he not report the problem before the A/C pushed, and finally its not at all unusual for a/c to operate with all manner of external fairings /panels etc missing, its why we have the MEL/CDL

[DeltaIndiaSierraPapa]

What I find so 'funny' is the OPs original intentions and motives. Also the fact that he is blatantly a liar. First of all this was posted in the Rumours section. in my opinion to stir up ****. Anybody who posts here or reads this site on a regular basis KNOWS that the media monitors this site, AND, that they rarely stray out of the Rumours section. Posting a pic like that I am surprised we did not see a 3 inch headline on one of the Red Tops saying something like:

"BMI RISKS PASSENGERS LIVES ON A FALLING APART A347 BOEING BUS!!"

Furthermore, he (the OP) gets rightfully slated in my opinion. He makes a blanket statement about the ground staff

No-one seemed to be bothered...in-fact the ground crew...you know the ones that are meant to be there for the safety of the aircraft but where actually just chatting and starting at me and them being amused that I am a plane spotter

I got news for you bud. Those ground staff are there for either loading bags, catering, pushback etc... And the 'security' personell are there to pat everyone down and check ID's. They do NOT have safety knowledge of the aircraft or it's systems. THAT is what engineers, pilots and dispatchers are for. Sure, safety is everyones responsibility, but I can say AS a dispatcher (not for bmi mind you) that the only people that actually SIGN OFF a flight and thereby hold legal liability are the Captain, the Dispatcher and the Engineer.

He (the OP) then goes on an claims he is studying for his ATPL and threatens us with going to the media...

You know what Poster number 2...I was a carefull person asking in this forum...I am studying my ATPL you "prat" and for your remark I am now emailing all news companies

Then he decides NOT to go to the media

It's prats like post no.2 that caused all the past crashes! a fear of reporting something out of feeling you will get torn apart!

Which crashes EXACTLY? Stir it Mate, Stir it up...

I'm not telling the papers...i would never do that...

But you just said you were emailing all the news companies!

Oh and BTW I worked in the BA terminal and have the utmost respect for BMI...

It hasn't been the "BA Terminal" in over 2 years. It is simply Terminal 3.

The only reason I wanted someone in ORD to take a pic was out of curiosity and to get your view after seeing the other pics...it's not BMI I was trying to do anything with...it was the contracted out ground crew...

What's your beef with Aviance, OCS, Alpha, Omniserve et al? Why do you have a problem with THEM? None of them sign off the aircraft. THAT goes down to bmi and bmi ALONE.

I have worked for many companies in the airport and for the same airline I have seen different companies be slack in a lot of things...not bmi but in general...

Huh?

Thanks for those last few replies aswell ...I used to think pilots did walkarounds...

They do. Always. An engineer might do one as well on arrival and the pushback team leader MUST do one prior to push back, either the Captain or FO ALWAYS do a walk around.

but since I remember that flightplans in most companies are done by dispatchers I thought maybe pilots dont always do the walkarounds...I didnt mean to say engineers...I meant just that there was only security guys and that all I thought I saw there and just a tug....

You say you worked for many different companies in the airport (couldn't stick with one huh?), which ones? Boots? The Food Court? Clearly not for an airline or handling agent because you clearly dont have a clue who does what on a turnaround....

I'll listen to the intelligent pilots who can view ither people's points of view thanks...there's a reason why pilots and cabin crew are who they are! it's because they have passed competency tests and have shown their good natured personality that is able to reason with people in a just way...

So by your reasoning Dispatchers and engineers dont have a clue about anything operationally as they have not taken these same competency tests. Next time I spot a hydraulic leak I will go get the trolley dolley. She will know what to do. What would I know? I havent taken their competency tests!

Thanks...Sorry I am not an ATPL'er...I just got annoyed at his Pre-judging that I am nothing just because I happen to enjoy watching a few planes at the airport every now and then...
I'm a PPL'er though...

Oh, but I thought you said you were studying your ATPL. So you are able to tool around in a Cessna (WHich I doubt as well) and tell LIES. FANTASTIC!!

I did know they do walkarounds but like i said before companies seem to have taken flight planning away from pilots and now the dispatcher does it...and I thought maybe they dont do a walk around at least on this occasion.

I dont know of any companies where the pilots do their own flight planning. That is the job of Ops and Dispatch. Sure the pilots can review them, and ask for deviations, but pilots fly planes. Ops and dispatch flight plan and do weight and balance so the pilots CAN fly their planes. We all have our roles.

Firstly I didnt think engineers or dispatchers would have seen it as I thought maybe they dont see that side of the plane...I only thought there would just be baggage handlers and a security guy that would have seen it..

****. There's a RIGHT hand side of the plane? I never knew.... Is there a wing and an engine over there as well? I always wondered where they hid that second engine!

Now look. I don't have a problem with someone askinga legitimate question. I am always too glad to help where my knowledge base allows me to do so. That said, this poster was insulting, childish, threatening and a LIAR! That, I cant stand for...

[StoneyBridge Radar]

To DeltaIndiaSierraPapa:

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z192/PrimavistaGiantSchnauzers/Gifs/Bravo.gif

Stoney

[TURIN]

To DeltaIndiaSierraPapa:

I was going to post a very similar reply but gave up and went to bed last night as I thought "What's the use?"

However, on reflection, well done for taking the time to nail this once and for all. :ok:

[spannersatcx]

And the OP seems to of disappeared from this thread as well.:rolleyes:

[jedigtr]

Just checked up on the a/c in question, and the FWD Cargo Door Access Panel 821RR, was damaged by a cargo loader on or about the 26th may and was removed IAW the CDL (Config Deviation List)

[Notso Fantastic]

DISP- very well put. A query is a query. This was something malicious, and needed nailing down. It was idiotic with all the backtracking and changing stories, resulting in abuse. It is postings like no.1 that are shameful here.

[smudgethecat]

Yes well said ,it would appear from a recent post by jedigtr the panel was indeed damaged during loading and removed iaw the CDL, as the more informed on here had assumed

[mercurydancer]

What a fascinating thread not so much for the actual subject but how it was broached and the answers it got.

I am by no means technically qualified on any aircraft whatsoever in any capacity but I do fly on them which means I have a vested interest in the way they are maintained and flown. If I have a concern I expect it to be dealt with professionally and with respect and not just fobbed off with an insult or a patronising attitude. If I had seen such a defect from the departure lounge on the aircraft I was about to board I would have asked if it was approrpriate for a panel to be missing. If I had recieved the answer that it was without explanation I would have enquired further and if if there was not a reasoned explanation forthcoming I would have escalated my enquiry. I would have been satisfied with the explanations given by the posters on this thread that it was safe and why it was safe.

What is probably more to the point is that the original poster has no intrinsic interest in the aircraft whatsoever. He has no reason to be concerned for his safety or his legal responsibility for his passengers. I can see perfectly why the ground staff would have ignored him. I doubt that they even noticed him. Even more to the point - did the original poster ever ask the question about the airworthiness before he came on this site? I doubt that.

If I had asked in a non-antagonisitic way - "I saw this today on an aircraft, I would have had concerns about boarding such an aircraft, could you knowledgeable people tell me if it is acceptable and if so why?" would you have called me a prat?

[smudgethecat]

I for one, and i suspect most others would have certainly not called you a prat, its a fair and valid question ,i would have explained what the MEL/CDL is and how it enables aircraft to legally carry certain acceptable defects which to the layman may well appear worrying

[forget]

mercurydancer, That's the whole point of the responses to this thread. The thread starter had already decided that the aircraft was defective, and that the guys on the ground were ignoring the problem.

Had he asked 'Is this OK to go?' then he would have been told how it could legally be signed off.

[modelcuirstudios]

Wow I havent posted in a while because why would I? I come here to post worrying things. simple as...
NOw I come and view any new news on pprune and get this in my inbox

Complete Stirring up trouble I think:
Must say you have been noticable by your absence on the bmi thread you started old chap , cat got your tongue?:)

[forget]

Wow I havent posted in a while because why would I? I come here to post worrying things.

15 posts in the last 9 days. All cr*p.

why would I? God, I wish you could find an answer.

[pwalhx]

modelcuir you have done the same thing again, you say I have come here to post worrying things'.

If you read the thread it has been proven that it was not a worrying thing.

I have no axe to grind with you personally but if I may offer some simple advice, consider the wording of your comments and you will find the reaction is different.

[Terminal 5ive]

modelcuirstudios,

pwlahx is spot on, you have done it again and I'm sure it isn't intentional.

In both posts you have expressed your thoughts in what you have written.

I come here to post worrying things
To me, that suggests you have made your mind up that the situations you raise are worrying.

Wouldn't something like, " I come on here to post things I don't fully understand", have been more appropriate?

I can fully understand how the implications of your perceptions within the opening post, could cause offence.

I say, " Ask the question but edit your perception." :ok:

[Forkandles]

I agree with Whirly. I think this is SteveHudd. But before you take this guy/kid/whatever seriously, check out his previous rambling posts. His website is worth a look as well. He's an odd fella.
We'll be reading about him in the papers soon enough, mark my words... :E

[Notso Fantastic]

Think you're right. Someone with a bizarre way of putting things that is always going to get peoples' back up or always see something odd in the rest of the world, or think the rest of the world sees something odd in him- when the rest of the world really couldn't give a damn. It's just being subjected to it all the time.....'people don't like me.........'

[forget]

He's been banned! I'm missing him already. :{