FalKlands Run

[L1011 Flyer]

Recently heard a rumour that from spring 02 the Tri* will cease to operate the South Atlantic Schedule when an airline picks up the contract, possibly slipping through South America. Anyone out there got any more information?

[BEagle]

Something about fare-paying passengers being carried on aircraft without Public Transport C of As, which are not maintained to civil standards, whose crews do not have ATPLs and which belong to a carrier without an Air Operator's Certificate, perhaps?

[A and C]

Cant have you flying pax without an AOC or a valid C of A and as your crews dont have a licence how can we be sure that you are up to the job ?

Or is it that the CAA are protecting the jobs in the cristal palace at gatwick !

[The Guvnor]

L1011 Flyer - enquiries reveal that the matter is still with RAF Legal who assert that they have the right to carry pax if they want to. CAA, of course, disagree. Contract will not be put out to tender until such time that the matter is resolved, with the decision going against the RAF.

Suggestion now is that with the cost of JAA licences, AOCs etc being so high, it would be cheaper if the RAF takes over all flying operations of BA, BD, VS etc - and with rearward facing seats, safer as well! :D :D :D

[Descend to What Height?!?]

Last time I was on a Tri-motor, I recall the seats were forward facing. Something to do with, er what was it now, ah yes, COST :( When the originals were converted, they could not afford rear seats, and used the excuse of the angle of the floor being wrong in the cruise.
It's been a long time since I flew in one, so Guv, are you suggesting that safety has over ridden accountants for once, and rear facing seats are now fitted???

We fought and lost for rear facing seats to be fitted in our new aircraft, but they have agreed to 4 point harnesses. :mad:

[The Curator]

D.T.W.H.
It has been several months since I have posted on this forum, however your last comment has awoken me! Have you been on a civilian aircraft recently? If so (please forgive the starting of a sentence with a preposition) can you name one that indeed has rearward facing seats? Forward facing seats are fitted to airliners for two important reasons, namely,

1)Most passengers prefer to face forwards!!
( Look the next time you are on a train )

2) The body angle achieved on initial climb would have most passengers "hanging on their straps".

P.S. The "angle" of the aircraft that you refer to is actually the body angle achieved on initial climb out. Believe it or not, it is actually governed by the Galley trolleys!! - they are liable to break free from their restraints and career backwards at a great rate of knots!

[ 31 August 2001: Message edited by: The Curator ]

[ 31 August 2001: Message edited by: The Curator ]

[3m Strop Carrier]

If the South Atlantic Flight goes private do you think they will still wake you up, 2 hrs before landing then tell you its an hour to meal time!. Or WOULD YOU LIKE SOME ORANGE JUICE? I do hope so, it just wouldn't be as much fun if they don't :rolleyes:

[slapandtickle]

If the RAF could afford more stewards and stewardesses then 216 Sqn could give as good a service as the airlines. The boys and girls on the Tri * are working their asses off, so stop your whingeing. Anyway their primary role is to get you out when it all goes horribly wrong, not serve oiks food and drink. Thank your lucky stars its orange juice, who knows what they'll do to yours next time, want chocolate bits on your capacino??? (Needs editing for spelling, no ISS!)

[BEagle]

Agree - they work very hard on the Malvinas run. Don't knock 'em!!

I do wonder why the in-flight juice is invariably orange - it says 'fruit juice' on the carton, implying that somewhere there must be another flavour? And why is it always 'Italian lamb'.....

The majority of southbound passengers really don't want to be travelling, so some have been known to be unnecessarily rude to the cabin crew. That just is not on! You'll be very grateful when they get you out of the aircraft in an emergency.

Of course, northbound the whole Timmy team are everyone's favourite people! Although I still wonder why the ac takes off and turns south when it leaves from Base Aerea Gringo when anyone else going north checks whether the range is cold and then turns north......and why they persist in using the high speed exit at Ascension the wrong way round!

Happiness is PNR ASI northbound!!

[dopeonarope]

When it all goes wrong? What in a Tristar? Never! And how many people do you think would survive in the water (if they got out of the ac anyway) dressed in their Ascension Island T-shirts; in the South Atlantic.

Warm Orange Squash please....Oh no, Just remembered, Don't have to go again to that place (never say never again!).... 36 Days to go..and yes I am counting. :cool:

[lightbob]

Anyone know the pilot of the first RAF Tristar to fly the UK - Ascension route in July 1983? Best bit was the wheels up pass along the runway to announce his arrival. Luxury went downhill after that - Herc airbridge for the lucky few or 2 weeks on the Keren.

[Spencer the Rover]

Beagle. You never know what may be lurking in the dark of that high speed loop! Donkeys,C17s,Follow me's have all been found in there. Much better to cruise passed and check it out than commit and have to stand on the brakes in a hurry. Don't you think old chap.

"twas the 5th of November I've reason to remember"

[Reheat On]

What happens if the Argentines decide to play political hard ball and block all attemtps to set up a civian shuttle unless it is an argentine airline and runs through an Argie staging post?

Hope the foreign office have been doing their honmework and that someone speaks to them before they cave in to the parochial CAA.

[BEagle]

Perhaps someone will wake up to the fact that non-military passengers could fly from UK-Santiago-Base Aerea Gringo, Islas Malvinas, by LAN Chile?
That might make it more expensive for contractors to support the wretched place - and hence make more expensive to garrison it.....leading to more civilian usage? More investment in infrastructure and civilian needs? An airport hotel? The second runway extended? A taxiway built? Cable and Witless to commission a cell phone system??

[Wycombe]

Or when will Cable & Witless stop ripping of the poor souls who just want to speak to Wifey & kids for 5 minutes (that'll be £5 gone off your phonecard!)??

Thank God for the ladies at the "Weavers" and
Hotmail!

[Dan Winterland]

Five squids for five minutes, prices must have dropped recently :eek:

[The Guvnor]

Want a quick giggle? Go here: Airport locator codes (http://www.ar-group.com/Airport-Locator.asp) and type in EGYP.

And you guys thought that the Falklands were cold? :D :eek: :D

[Art Field]

Maybe there's oil there!

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Guvnor,

Very good. The TWO places the tube will be inserted when the Earth gets an enema.

[Doctor Cruces]

So, the CAA are running the RAF now eh? Very sad when the civvie authorities can make rulings that stick with the military.

How long will it be before they insist on having a CAA inspector type rated on every military aircraft to make sure that "it's being dun proper".

Sad. very sad. Glad I'm not in any more.

Doc C. :(

[ 02 September 2001: Message edited by: Doctor Cruces ]

[Tonkenna]

Sadly Doc this is not the first time that we have been nobled by CAA rules, just look at the Tutor. Can't low fly at 250' or carry out proper EFATO/Turnback practice or fly in cloud. We should just tell them to get lost.

Tonks :(

[BEagle]

Tonks - ask yourself why your aircraft ended up with such restrictions in the first place! No - the fault doesn't lie with the CAA but with the total dickheads who sold us out to the creeping cancer of contractorisation in the first place and awarded a contract to a bunch offering this German plastic thing instead of making adequate long term plans to replace the Bulldog with another RAF-owned and operated military aeroplane.

Incidentally there is nothing to stop you flying below 500 ft msd so long as you do so in accordance with Rule 5. Never heard of Rule 5? Well best you do find out about it, because your aircraft have to be operated within its provisions!

[Dan Winterland]

And it shouldn't have been a suprise that you can't fly IMC. It was always going to be operated on a civil AOC (Air Operator's Certificate) and the thing had never been allowed to fly IMC prior to the purchase by the contractor. Someone should have asked the Cranwell Flying Club. They have been flying two of the for years - they knew!

Someone could suggest a simple mod such as fitting an air driven T+S and plumbing it to a bolt on venturi positioned somewhere in the slipstream. But that would be too simple, or of course require the contract to be re-written and new certification to be undreraken - all too expensive no doubt. Now, If someone had done their homework properly in the first place.....

Oops, I'm beginning to sound like BEagle!

[A and C]

Nothing hard about putting another attitude system in the grob the engine has a pad for the vac pump and other grobs have had air driven gyros (normaly an AH)so the paperwork is in the system.

The problem in my opinion is in the minds of the upper end of the RAF/MOD who wont look outside and talk to the civil operators of these types and so persist in ordering the wrong kit and then try to cover up the mistakes they make.

[BEagle]

Doc C - the CAA has a duty of care towards civilians and hence must make certain demands on aviation safety. Thus any aircraft carrying fare-paying passengers or operated on the civilian register must accord to certain provisions of the Air Navigation Order. However, although military registered aircraft have no such restriction, since the TriStar started carrying civilians-other-than-indulgees to the Islas Malvinas and we started hiring plastic planes from contractors instead of owning and operating our own military training aircraft, such activities are apparently no longer outside the ANO. It seems that MoD can't have it's cake and eat it - I have absolutely no sympathy and wouldn't be surprised if it costs them zillions to sort out! Penny-pinching fools!!

[ 03 September 2001: Message edited by: BEagle ]

[Bellerophon]

It would appear that The Curator hasn't been on a BA B747-400 recently, for if he had been, he would surely have noticed that half of all the Club World seats are rearwards facing, with no discernable adverse passenger reaction!

Of course if it's a faster service you require, then we do have a little..er..spare capacity at the moment, and at the right price could probably oblige about October time! :D

[charliecossie]

BEagle:
Lan Chiles' only European route is MAD/FRA.
I think BA have dropped (or will soon) LHR-SCL.

[4 of 7]

I don't know what everybody's getting excited about.

BA did the run for a while while the Tristars were getting started and I think it was Wheelchair Airways (Britannia) that took over when we went to the Gulf.

One remembers a funny phonecall to 216 Ops when they were asked for the VOR/ILS freq for ASI - wake up call!

[Denzil]

Could an A340-600 fly direct BZZ-MPA?? If so it could be a good job for Sir Dickies boys (many ex-RAF types who would enjoy to visit the Islands again I am sure!!) :D

[scroggs]

Yes, it could. And it was VS who held the contract during the Gulf punch-up. However, I've done about 2 years down-south, and I'm not volunteering for any more. Let BA have it!

[Denzil]

Sorry Scroggs (first volunteer for "down south" with VS) but it was BY who did the SA during the Gulf. VS, however did do a couple of flights (until they had an engine go u/s in Asi) in between the BA L1011's being Tankerfied and the receipt of the ex Pan Am's, although the majority of the flying was BA B747,s. We had the pleasure of doing the turnrounds at BZZ and I can assure you it was better to deal with a B747 full of totty than one full of puffs (now as a VS man happy to deal with both, no touching mind ;) !)

[Taffmerlin]

Denzil, as far as I can remeber you were used to chat up the P**Fs, while we nicked the one shot peanuts

[Denzil]

It was a tough job but someone had to do it :( Luckily our limp wristed friends don't like me anymore (except for one, but we are just friends :o).
Anyway Taff drop us an e for old times sake, we can talk about those crazy drunken day's in Asi (& Machrahanish).

[ 05 September 2001: Message edited by: Denzil ]

[xsimba]

Slapandtickle, fail to see how your 2 statements tie up. Firstly you say that you could give as good a service as any civilian airline. And then you set off complaining about having to serve oiks down the back with food and water.

You wouldn't last 2 minutes in a real airline with that kind of attitude. Judging by your comments it would appear that 216 haven't improved since my last joyous excursion with them and still don't understand that they are there to give a service.

[Seak1ng]

Please God tell me that I do not have to rely on the crew of an Air Force Luxury Jet to escape in the event of an emergency.
Bu***r that!! Survival of the fittest! :p

[Follow Me Through]

An interesting thread that starts on one subject and meanders all over the place.

However, a couple of facts for the 'Guvnor'. Whilst accepting that on take-off the pax are at an uncomfortable angle in rear-facing seats the safety benefits in a crash situation are undeniable. Source: Ken Smart of the AIB. The CAA have claimed that 'pax do not like flying backwards' but cannot provide any evidence to support this.

Interestingly, the RAF made the bold statement post WWII that future RAF AT would be fitted with rear-facing seats for safety reasons. However, apart from the elderly VC10 no other main AT aircraft in the RAF have them(I have excluded the 125 and 146). The TriStar certainly does not. Perhaps more importantly the replacements for 10s and Tri*, namely FSTA, will come with civilian spec in the cabin as they will generate Third Party revenue when the RAF do not use them.

So to the main reason for forward-facing seats........cost. In a forward-facing seat only the seat base is required to be restrained to 9g(soon 16g). However, on rear-facing seats the whole of the seat must be restrained to 9/16g. Unless the regulators enforce it the manufacturers will not fit them and the airlines will not request them due to increased costs(weight). Therefore, unless the public/media get excited about it, like DVT, we will stick with forward-facing seats.

[Farfrompuken]

Rest easy, Follow me Through,

The mighty L-1011 3* has an unusually strong seat/floor attatchment. This fact accounted for the high survival rate in the '72 Everglades crash than in comparable accidents. I believe they're stressed to at least 11g. That holds true for the C2s at least. Hate to think about the K/KCs though.
Best not find out really!

Rgds,

Farfrompuken.

[only1leftmate!]

FMT

sorry to burst yer bubble but when the RAF are not using the FSTA it will definately NOT be earning revenue. It will be sitting on its a@rse on the Waterfront at Brize u/s or untasked just like the ac it replaces. The only other possibility of seeing it fly for non-mil business will be when it pokes off to the civvy contractor who will be maintainig it.

(please don't shoot the messenger!) :confused:

[Tonkenna]

Only1left

I thought the whole point of the PFI for FSTA was that while the RAF was not using the jets they would be off making dosh in civvy street (something I wish I could do myself!) so I think FMT is right. I am sure BEagle could put us straight on this?

BEagle and Dan. Yep, know all about rule 5. There is another way round it, but no one seems willing to do anything about it so we are stuck with the civvy rules, though I agree that it was mostly the RAFs fault that we are stuck in the pile of pooh we are now in. No IF until at least after winter, which is not looking good in my log book, if you know what I mean :(

Tonks

[ 09 September 2001: Message edited by: Tonkenna ]

[BEagle]

Sorry to hear that Das Teutor Unterflugzeug is still having such problems, Tonks. Did some actual the other day in one of my 3 FM-immune ac - not a problem. But the FM-immunity mods are costing me £17K - good job I don't have to rely on Aunty Bettie's cash to sort things out..........

Don't want to say too much about FSTA as I've seen certain commercial-in-confidence material. Suffice to say that it is NOT the intention of the potential PSPs to allow FSTA to catch TriStar disease! (Sitting around the waterfront doing b*gger all!!).

[ 10 September 2001: Message edited by: BEagle ]