Falcon 2000 Fire at Biggin Hill
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Stairways to heaven
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
76 totally agree. Common sense.
IMHO if I was the owner, case would not be closed without proper NDT.
ALOHA air springs to my mind where metal fatigue, due to the many cycles, led to a cabriolet configuration and only a few spars prevented a catastrophic outcome.
She will likely fly safely for many cycles but "what if" in say a few years from now.
IMHO if I was the owner, case would not be closed without proper NDT.
ALOHA air springs to my mind where metal fatigue, due to the many cycles, led to a cabriolet configuration and only a few spars prevented a catastrophic outcome.
She will likely fly safely for many cycles but "what if" in say a few years from now.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far away from LA
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you had a bit of knowledge about how Dassault is dealing with THEIR planes, you will not even ask yourself the question. And if you had a bit of NetJets insight, you will not as well.
Dassault, will not accept in their active registry ANY airframe on which they have FULL confidence that it performs as well as when outside the factory on day one.
The wing was changed, the eddies and rays did not show any attachement damages, nor the flight testing after repair. After such a reparation the SRM has VERY clear test card to be flown, and SPECIFIC data to be collected before having the plane back in active duty.
comparing the aloha incident to this one is poor and without any grounds to compare.
As for the crews are concerned, the mistake made ( as AAIB is clearly depicting it) was the transfer of competence from the maintenance manager to the engineer at BIG; this was inadequate since this particular individual never performed such checks in any of his previous experiences. The plane crew was mislead by this and made the mistake. As well as performing this as a maintenance check and not a flight check.
During OCF, or testing, on EVERY single one of them , you cannot perform these if not in possession of a test card; this card will waive the normal ops of the plane, for the duration of the exercise. If not with this card on board, would it be for high speed taxing to full devellopped stalls, you are NOT legal.
Aftermath are always easy to comment, and i am sure that nobody here had EVER made an error for sure !! ;-)
Hang loose !
Dassault, will not accept in their active registry ANY airframe on which they have FULL confidence that it performs as well as when outside the factory on day one.
The wing was changed, the eddies and rays did not show any attachement damages, nor the flight testing after repair. After such a reparation the SRM has VERY clear test card to be flown, and SPECIFIC data to be collected before having the plane back in active duty.
comparing the aloha incident to this one is poor and without any grounds to compare.
As for the crews are concerned, the mistake made ( as AAIB is clearly depicting it) was the transfer of competence from the maintenance manager to the engineer at BIG; this was inadequate since this particular individual never performed such checks in any of his previous experiences. The plane crew was mislead by this and made the mistake. As well as performing this as a maintenance check and not a flight check.
During OCF, or testing, on EVERY single one of them , you cannot perform these if not in possession of a test card; this card will waive the normal ops of the plane, for the duration of the exercise. If not with this card on board, would it be for high speed taxing to full devellopped stalls, you are NOT legal.
Aftermath are always easy to comment, and i am sure that nobody here had EVER made an error for sure !! ;-)
Hang loose !
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far away from LA
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dassault is looking for test pilots in Istres... You should go, since you can compute all limits from the top of your head...Here is the address to apply :
Dassault Istres
Essais en vol
13804 Istres Cedex
France
Tél. : + 33 (0)4 42 56 77 77
Fax : + 33 (0)4 42 56 70 03
Make sure to mention your screen name, i can assure you a fair assesment
Dassault Istres
Essais en vol
13804 Istres Cedex
France
Tél. : + 33 (0)4 42 56 77 77
Fax : + 33 (0)4 42 56 70 03
Make sure to mention your screen name, i can assure you a fair assesment
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Europe
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Falcon 2000 CS-NJE
What a big mess this was? I was in Biggin Hill when this happened couple of thoughts.
1) What was they thinking? I think personally after the 3 or 4th RTO I would have taxied the aircraft back and reviewed further.
2) Why was a Ferry for MX flight not performed to Paris to DFS?
3) What was the FA doing on board? this clearly makes the commanders decision he was not fully informed accordingly on the real pressing issues.
I witnessed the whole thing happening I was with a aircraft at the time and the CRM was terrible the Safety escape was at best something from the carry on films, they all exited the aircraft and just stood around. The Fire Truck arrived and ordered them away from the aircraft ASAP.
The NJE procedures need altering big time on this, you have MX controllers and MX managers whom often have no real live experiance on type instructing the PIC to carry out OCF and Test flights or procedures. In addition the Pilot Fleet Managers are too wrapped up in pie charts.
If DM was still there it would have had a different outcome.
its disgraceful what happened and it was the lisboa monkeys driving this what caused the whole thing to happen.
Although it was investigated by the AAIB as it was on their turf I wonder what INAC would have done.
1) What was they thinking? I think personally after the 3 or 4th RTO I would have taxied the aircraft back and reviewed further.
2) Why was a Ferry for MX flight not performed to Paris to DFS?
3) What was the FA doing on board? this clearly makes the commanders decision he was not fully informed accordingly on the real pressing issues.
I witnessed the whole thing happening I was with a aircraft at the time and the CRM was terrible the Safety escape was at best something from the carry on films, they all exited the aircraft and just stood around. The Fire Truck arrived and ordered them away from the aircraft ASAP.
The NJE procedures need altering big time on this, you have MX controllers and MX managers whom often have no real live experiance on type instructing the PIC to carry out OCF and Test flights or procedures. In addition the Pilot Fleet Managers are too wrapped up in pie charts.
If DM was still there it would have had a different outcome.
its disgraceful what happened and it was the lisboa monkeys driving this what caused the whole thing to happen.
Although it was investigated by the AAIB as it was on their turf I wonder what INAC would have done.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Here & there
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a LAE I'd be interested in hearing what the cause of the original snag was. Does anybody know?
Another example of getting 'blinkered,' not taking a step back and thinking about the bigger picture.
Happy new year!
Another example of getting 'blinkered,' not taking a step back and thinking about the bigger picture.
Happy new year!
