Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Safety Should Not Be Negotiable - Avweb (USA)

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Safety Should Not Be Negotiable - Avweb (USA)

Old 14th Aug 2020, 08:33
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Up The 116E, Stbd Turn at 32S...:-)
Age: 79
Posts: 2,830
Devil Safety Should Not Be Negotiable - Avweb (USA)

In light of the many comments re the aviation 'regulator', wouldn't it be luverly if.............
(Apols to the song writer...)

Safety Shouldn't Be Negotiable - AVweb

Well worth the read.
Ex FSO GRIFFO is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2020, 10:13
  #2 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kichin
Posts: 524
Isn’t the term thrown around “affordable safety”? Absolute safety is impossible while our good record and dare I say good fortune masks the latency in our industry.

Good read indeed.
gordonfvckingramsay is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2020, 13:42
  #3 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,414
A good “Motherhood” article but it misses the point.

In order for inspectors to do an excellent job they need a good set of standards to compare the product against and management who will back them up.

By “good set of standards” I don’t mean rolled gold specifications and minute detailed specification - unless it’s needed. The overriding criteria in quality management is called “fitness for purpose” that relates back to sound risk management criteria. There is no point for example in making a “chemically machined from solid forging [email protected] welded” part when a sheet of folded 0.32 6061 - T6 will do just as well. What is needed are simple straightforward standards. If you have the time, look at a DC9 cockpit opening window versus the equivalent B737 assembly. Here’s a hint the DC9 one is an engineering marvel of sophistication. The Boeing assembly is a bunch of crappy sheet metal. Guess which company went broke?

I would argue in Australia (begging the question that does anyone care what we do) we shoot ourselves in the foot by using the words “appropriate”, “acceptable”, “sufficient” when we shouldn’t, thus leaving room for undue influence at best and corruption at worst. Furthermore the poor designer and builder has to second guess the inspector as to what “acceptable” means under the current star sign. It is all those little latitudes that leave room for a Boeing to twist people’s arms.

‘’Anyway, I’m just a know nothing old fart, set in my ways.
Sunfish is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.