Tristars grounded again?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The C2/C2a mods are required for the job we do, but essentially very little difference between them and the civvie version, The powers that be have decided that to do the job we do! we have to have that protection provided by those mods, this has not made it inferior? It has made it safer in the environment that we work in, why because the UK Govt do not want to take the risk, you might be happy to ask yr crews to do it, but we have a duty of care to the passengers down the back
I find it very hard to believe this is simply due to the added equipment the MoD requires.
IE: doesn't pass the smell test.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The RAF have the LARGEST fleet of tristars anywhere left in the world. Not 3 but 9, we have done fairly well with them over the last 25 years. How many of the remaining jets have been with the same operator that long ?. 411A how long has your company 'Owned' their jets ?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Back from the sandpit
Age: 63
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I can smell something coming from 411As direction ........
Sheep ......... No
Pigs ............ No
Cows ........... No
Bull ............. that's it, that's it, it's all bullsh1t coming from across the pond
Sheep ......... No
Pigs ............ No
Cows ........... No
Bull ............. that's it, that's it, it's all bullsh1t coming from across the pond
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's quite a different aeroplane from the ones sold to the RAF by Pan Am and BA.
The same applies to RAF VC10s vs civil ones, RAF Hercs vs L100s etc.
Was it ever confirmed that 411As Tristars are registered in Honduras to avoid having to maintain them to FAA standards?
I recall someone had evidence that alledged that they were flying with tired LLPs that wouldn't be tolerated under FAA standards?
Maybe this is why they have less downtime - they employ a time saving "fingers crossed" maintenance regime!
Their website certainly shouts - "technically competent slick outfit" -
rollinsair.com
AVIATION SAFETY OVERSIGHT: The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has assessed the Government of Honduras Civil Aviation Authority as not being in compliance with International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) aviation safety standards for the oversight of Honduras’ air carrier operations.
I recall someone had evidence that alledged that they were flying with tired LLPs that wouldn't be tolerated under FAA standards?
Maybe this is why they have less downtime - they employ a time saving "fingers crossed" maintenance regime!
Their website certainly shouts - "technically competent slick outfit" -
rollinsair.com
AVIATION SAFETY OVERSIGHT: The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has assessed the Government of Honduras Civil Aviation Authority as not being in compliance with International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) aviation safety standards for the oversight of Honduras’ air carrier operations.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
AVIATION SAFETY OVERSIGHT: The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has assessed the Government of Honduras Civil Aviation Authority as not being in compliance with International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) aviation safety standards for the oversight of Honduras’ air carrier operations.
Indeed so, and that is precisely why our company is actively training Honduran Aviation Safety Inspectors, to allow Honduras to once again obtain Category One status.
Lets review.
At one very small airline where I worked, with a fleet of Lockheed TriStars, several leased on a long term agreement with BA (good airplanes, all -200's) the dispatch reliability was 98%, plus.
Why?
Lockheed first hand assistance, direct from the manufacturer.
Perhaps...the RAF is behind the eight ball with their ops, relying on Marshall's (such as they are) for their 'support'.
Bob T (an absolutely first rate LOCKHEED tech rep, as they ALL were) showed up on a semi-annual basis to advise, and keep the fleet of seven fully operational.
It positively can be done, however I fear that the RAF simply does not know how...or...cannot fund their TriStar fleet properly.
Again, no surprise.
NB.
At this one small airline mentioned above, the daily utilisation of each TriStar was (at the time) 14+ hours, day in and day out.
All maintained in-house, except for heavy checks, and these heavy checks were done by GAMCO.
The RAF operation is clearly deficient...reliability-wise.
How very sad...
AVIATION SAFETY OVERSIGHT: The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has assessed the Government of Honduras Civil Aviation Authority as not being in compliance with International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) aviation safety standards for the oversight of Honduras’ air carrier operations.
Indeed so, and that is precisely why our company is actively training Honduran Aviation Safety Inspectors, to allow Honduras to once again obtain Category One status.
Lets review.
At one very small airline where I worked, with a fleet of Lockheed TriStars, several leased on a long term agreement with BA (good airplanes, all -200's) the dispatch reliability was 98%, plus.
Why?
Lockheed first hand assistance, direct from the manufacturer.
Perhaps...the RAF is behind the eight ball with their ops, relying on Marshall's (such as they are) for their 'support'.
Bob T (an absolutely first rate LOCKHEED tech rep, as they ALL were) showed up on a semi-annual basis to advise, and keep the fleet of seven fully operational.
It positively can be done, however I fear that the RAF simply does not know how...or...cannot fund their TriStar fleet properly.
Again, no surprise.
NB.
At this one small airline mentioned above, the daily utilisation of each TriStar was (at the time) 14+ hours, day in and day out.
All maintained in-house, except for heavy checks, and these heavy checks were done by GAMCO.
The RAF operation is clearly deficient...reliability-wise.
How very sad...
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bob T (an absolutely first rate LOCKHEED tech rep, as they ALL were) showed up on a semi-annual basis to advise, and keep the fleet of seven fully operational.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are not military so have no right to be here nor are you welcome.
The RAF has a huge problem on its hands regarding their TriStar fleet, so...either they wake up and smell the coffee or will totally fail in their mission.
I suspect the latter outcome.
Thank you for the kind words about us Lockheed tech reps! But I am having a hard time placing a Bob T. The only Bob T I could come up with was not a tech rep, but a flight crew type.
It would appear that the RAF will continue to bumble along...with minimal success.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Mostly here, but often there
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Minimal success....oh do f*** off you ill-informed tw@t.
How you have the nerve to come on here and denigrate those members of the UK mil simply carrying out their duty (not job, duty) to the best of their ability within some exceptionally tight constraints (overseen at the highest political level) makes my blood boil. You have no idea of the constraints within which they work, nor the lengths they go to in order to achieve a succesful mission. Some of us do. Now do us all a favour and toddle off back to Honduras and hide under your stetson.
(Mods,I do apologise but the effluent gushing forth from his posts is enough to make the Pope swear)
How you have the nerve to come on here and denigrate those members of the UK mil simply carrying out their duty (not job, duty) to the best of their ability within some exceptionally tight constraints (overseen at the highest political level) makes my blood boil. You have no idea of the constraints within which they work, nor the lengths they go to in order to achieve a succesful mission. Some of us do. Now do us all a favour and toddle off back to Honduras and hide under your stetson.
(Mods,I do apologise but the effluent gushing forth from his posts is enough to make the Pope swear)
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Nr Witney
Age: 72
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A trio of observations if I may?
1. Quote! "You're not paying attention, Sideshow Bob, the tech stop for refueling also has a crew change, and in addition, catering uplift for the passengers (you do feed 'em in the RAF yes?), because... it would be operated as an airline operation not some off the wall military ops without adequate forethought.
The military is very good at what they were designed for, fighting, however, it would appear that the transport of personel could be greatly enhanced by adopting proven commercial airline ops, and at an expected lower overall cost.
One wonders...is the MoD up to the task?" Unquote
I know that as one ages the memory starts to fade, but do I not remember flying RAFAIR for a 9 month suntanning holiday 40 miles south of the Equator in 1973 (and returning safely courtesy of the same 'airline')?
My military employer at the time seemed to manage basic commercial airline techniques reasonably well, as they did for me on numerous occasions afterwards. And from what I see at the moment that same military organisation manages pretty well considering the impositions placed on it by the 'government of the day'
2. I sat and watched a 216 Sqn Tristar perform some spirited local flying for 3hrs or so last Saturday - the airplane looked fine to me.
3. My eldest son is due to fly out via the same squadron to Afghan shortly for a 7 month+ tour of duty - methinks I'd rather trust him into the tender and safe hands of the RAF than a Honduras air carrier operator
1. Quote! "You're not paying attention, Sideshow Bob, the tech stop for refueling also has a crew change, and in addition, catering uplift for the passengers (you do feed 'em in the RAF yes?), because... it would be operated as an airline operation not some off the wall military ops without adequate forethought.
The military is very good at what they were designed for, fighting, however, it would appear that the transport of personel could be greatly enhanced by adopting proven commercial airline ops, and at an expected lower overall cost.
One wonders...is the MoD up to the task?" Unquote
I know that as one ages the memory starts to fade, but do I not remember flying RAFAIR for a 9 month suntanning holiday 40 miles south of the Equator in 1973 (and returning safely courtesy of the same 'airline')?
My military employer at the time seemed to manage basic commercial airline techniques reasonably well, as they did for me on numerous occasions afterwards. And from what I see at the moment that same military organisation manages pretty well considering the impositions placed on it by the 'government of the day'
2. I sat and watched a 216 Sqn Tristar perform some spirited local flying for 3hrs or so last Saturday - the airplane looked fine to me.
3. My eldest son is due to fly out via the same squadron to Afghan shortly for a 7 month+ tour of duty - methinks I'd rather trust him into the tender and safe hands of the RAF than a Honduras air carrier operator
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: England
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
411A,
How generous of you to provide us with an excuse to have a look at this marvellous monologue!
YouTube - David Mitchell Writes - Dear America...
He really ought to record a simliar piece about using ellipses to link the clauses of a "sentence".
Do keep up the good work!
I could care less about your opinion
YouTube - David Mitchell Writes - Dear America...
He really ought to record a simliar piece about using ellipses to link the clauses of a "sentence".
Do keep up the good work!
