Flt. Lt. Sean Cunningham inquest
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Southend
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Nutloose, I can't accept your comment re inadequate servicing manuals, I spent several years at CSDE making sure they were as accurate and fit for purpose as it was possible to be with constant monitoring and revision but unless things have changed dramatically I would hope the standards we set were being maintained. However comma I endorse the rest of your remarks! 
Last edited by Bill4a; 12th Jan 2014 at 12:41. Reason: Missed a bit
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,035
Received 2,906 Likes
on
1,246 Posts
Bill I am quoting what was said at the inquiry, wait a sec and i will post the tweets
As a side note
As for manuals, the CAA have recently decided to reduce legislation on the smaller side of things, and leave it up to the Owner / Engineer.. Had a long email discussion over this. The attitude now Is anything mandatory in the manufacturers manual, is only mandatory if it is in Section 4 in the CAA's eyes, this in effect wipes out loads of life limits as some aircraft never had their manuals laid out in a standard format. It also in one foul sweep brought a fundamental change in airworthiness, prior to it the book was gospel, now it isn't with parts of it being sanctioned to be ignored, this will in these eyes lead to maintenance by affordability and not by safety whilst encouraging multiple standards, again to the detriment of safety... It's a sad state of affairs, as culpable blame will now point at us for not doing items the CAA deem as not required.. The words arse covering by the CAA comes to mind..
Clarkson admits drogue bolt tightening crucial but aircraft manual instructions were 'vague' lincolnshireecho.co.uk/Red-Arrow-Sean…
Engineers pretty much left to their own judgement re drogue bolt tightening lincolnshireecho.co.uk/Red-Arrow-Sean…
Shackle bolt over tightening and affecting the deployment of drogue and main chutes becoming increasingly crucial lincolnshireecho.co.uk/Red-Arrow-Sean…
Clarkson adamant that he was not aware that over tightening of shackle bolts could affect performance of chutes lincolnshireecho.co.uk/Red-Arrow-Sean…
As for manuals, the CAA have recently decided to reduce legislation on the smaller side of things, and leave it up to the Owner / Engineer.. Had a long email discussion over this. The attitude now Is anything mandatory in the manufacturers manual, is only mandatory if it is in Section 4 in the CAA's eyes, this in effect wipes out loads of life limits as some aircraft never had their manuals laid out in a standard format. It also in one foul sweep brought a fundamental change in airworthiness, prior to it the book was gospel, now it isn't with parts of it being sanctioned to be ignored, this will in these eyes lead to maintenance by affordability and not by safety whilst encouraging multiple standards, again to the detriment of safety... It's a sad state of affairs, as culpable blame will now point at us for not doing items the CAA deem as not required.. The words arse covering by the CAA comes to mind..
Last edited by NutLoose; 12th Jan 2014 at 13:01.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Southend
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks, it probably was but knowing how much effort goes into maintaining schedules in an up to date state it stung a bit!
None of those tweets should be true, there must be a loading set by MB for the shackle bolt, and it would be in the seat schedule or SP. But it will all come out in the wash I'm sure.
None of those tweets should be true, there must be a loading set by MB for the shackle bolt, and it would be in the seat schedule or SP. But it will all come out in the wash I'm sure.
Last edited by Bill4a; 12th Jan 2014 at 12:53. Reason: Forgot a bit again
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bristol Temple Meads
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regardless of medication etc, with the firing of a MK10 "zero zero" ejector seat Flt Lt Cunningham should have survived. If the main parachute did not deploy, then perhaps the drogue gun did not fire. Should be mentioned in the SI report.
DV
DV
D2,
I was merely illustrating that mobile phone usage on military aircraft has occurred, and maybe still does - I was not advocating the use of "personal" mobiles in similar situations, in that instance I fully agree with your comments....
I was merely illustrating that mobile phone usage on military aircraft has occurred, and maybe still does - I was not advocating the use of "personal" mobiles in similar situations, in that instance I fully agree with your comments....
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DV
AFAIK there is no report e.g. SI, out yet.
However, reading the above posts (inc tweets), and certain related MPDs, it is fairly well known why the main chute did not deploy. And it is not failure of the drogue gun (which again from the inquest tweets it is pretty clear did fire).
NoD
Regardless of medication etc, with the firing of a MK10 "zero zero" ejector seat Flt Lt Cunningham should have survived. If the main parachute did not deploy, then perhaps the drogue gun did not fire. Should be mentioned in the SI report
However, reading the above posts (inc tweets), and certain related MPDs, it is fairly well known why the main chute did not deploy. And it is not failure of the drogue gun (which again from the inquest tweets it is pretty clear did fire).
NoD
Must have serviced 200/300 seats in my time but never ever had to touch/adjust/alter the shackle bolt. If I recall correctly the bolt was peined with the nut in position when the seat was manufactured.
edit: Come to think of it I'm convinced that bolt was shouldered and could not be over-tightened.............
edit: Come to think of it I'm convinced that bolt was shouldered and could not be over-tightened.............
Last edited by dctyke; 12th Jan 2014 at 18:35.
Fat One
Don't disagree, but coroners have been able to make recommendations under something called Rule 43 - for instance in the Hercules and Nimrod inquests.
I would have replied earlier, but there are now some changed arrangements for inquests that were embargoed until this morning by the Min of Justice. Here's some of their news release.
airsound
It is not the job of an inquest to apportion guilt or blame or indeed to be seen to do so. It is the job of an inquest to establish the cause of death, or to record an open verdict and that is all. Ergo an inquest cannot dispense justice of any kind.
I would have replied earlier, but there are now some changed arrangements for inquests that were embargoed until this morning by the Min of Justice. Here's some of their news release.
Reports made by coroners to help prevent future deaths will be routinely published online for the first time today (Tuesday 14th January).
Following an inquest a coroner may make a report to a person, organisation, local authority or government department or agency with a view to preventing future deaths (a PFD report).
From today the Chief Coroner’s office will publish PFD (preventing future deaths) reports made by coroners on the judiciary website and for the first time the public will have access to these reports online in a readable and searchable format.
HHJ Peter Thornton QC, The Chief Coroner said
“I place great emphasis on the valuable work of coroners in saving lives by highlighting risks which need to be eliminated. That is why publishing these reports and putting them into the public domain is so important.”
Some 600 reports are now made by coroners in England and Wales every year. The topics they cover ranges from reports about speed limits on particular roads to changes in military equipment used in Helmand Province, Afghanistan.
Following an inquest a coroner may make a report to a person, organisation, local authority or government department or agency with a view to preventing future deaths (a PFD report).
From today the Chief Coroner’s office will publish PFD (preventing future deaths) reports made by coroners on the judiciary website and for the first time the public will have access to these reports online in a readable and searchable format.
HHJ Peter Thornton QC, The Chief Coroner said
“I place great emphasis on the valuable work of coroners in saving lives by highlighting risks which need to be eliminated. That is why publishing these reports and putting them into the public domain is so important.”
Some 600 reports are now made by coroners in England and Wales every year. The topics they cover ranges from reports about speed limits on particular roads to changes in military equipment used in Helmand Province, Afghanistan.
Is the Service Inquiry (SI) report in the public domain for this accident?
I've been trying to find it, and have failed so far. Phone calls go straight to voicemail, and get no response. I've emailed the MAA to ask what's happening.
Space being watched
airsound
wow, impressive response speed. Just heard from MAA that the SI will be published on the final day of the inquest. According to the Lincs Coroner's office, that will be 31 Jan.
Last edited by airsound; 14th Jan 2014 at 11:02. Reason: adding late news
I know nothing about ejection seats, so silly question time: Is there any electronics in the firing system that could be initiated by mobile phone RF (EMI)?
Although there was mention of him taking a call when walking out to the jet, I didn't see any statement/confirmation if the phone was "on" post accident.
Absolutely terrible whatever the cause.
Although there was mention of him taking a call when walking out to the jet, I didn't see any statement/confirmation if the phone was "on" post accident.
Absolutely terrible whatever the cause.
Well, not everyone always reads every thread all the way through, especially if one has missed a few days or has come into it cold. So the easier answer might be "No". Not as far as we know. Post 37 does give a good answer.
CM,
It's a thread that's still on its third page, with only 50 odd posts - not a long read.
I did say "kindly", refrained from anything more pointed, and even steered the person directly to the answer, so avoiding them having to read all the posts if they so desired....
I consider my response to have been very reasonable by average pprune standards!!
It's a thread that's still on its third page, with only 50 odd posts - not a long read.
I did say "kindly", refrained from anything more pointed, and even steered the person directly to the answer, so avoiding them having to read all the posts if they so desired....
I consider my response to have been very reasonable by average pprune standards!!
Dtyke said:
/"Here's a fact for you. In the 80's that shackle would have been testedinspected in the ejection seat bay every 6 months. It then changed to every 12 months, then it changed to every 24 months........ no idea what it is now (they were talking 5 yrs when I left the RAF). I also believe all the unit ej seat bays are now shut down and seats are now crated up and serviced in one location. When I worked in ej seat bays (3 tours) it was not unusual to be called out to sqns for a 2nd oppinion on things the sqn armourers were not happy with, this is not possible now."
Extension of inspection periods is mainly based on the reliability of the subject area - If no faults were found in all those inspections you quoted why not extend them?
Likewise, if you have good data to show that you have found nothing significant after two or three inspections of the same articles - your inspection rate (and possibly your whole maintenance program) needs to be reassessed.
I believe that centralised seat servicing (at Marham?) had proven to be quite a cost saver for the RAF
/"Here's a fact for you. In the 80's that shackle would have been testedinspected in the ejection seat bay every 6 months. It then changed to every 12 months, then it changed to every 24 months........ no idea what it is now (they were talking 5 yrs when I left the RAF). I also believe all the unit ej seat bays are now shut down and seats are now crated up and serviced in one location. When I worked in ej seat bays (3 tours) it was not unusual to be called out to sqns for a 2nd oppinion on things the sqn armourers were not happy with, this is not possible now."
Extension of inspection periods is mainly based on the reliability of the subject area - If no faults were found in all those inspections you quoted why not extend them?
Likewise, if you have good data to show that you have found nothing significant after two or three inspections of the same articles - your inspection rate (and possibly your whole maintenance program) needs to be reassessed.
I believe that centralised seat servicing (at Marham?) had proven to be quite a cost saver for the RAF
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the Fence
Age: 71
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
4 Posts
Well Courtney, That's put you in your place. Obviously, that helpful, friendly place that we used to work at has changed. Must be that QF* mentality to never answer a question, just in case that answer is wrong! Ask another question and then claim it is to help educate the poor soul.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the Fence
Age: 71
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
4 Posts
Rigga,
I cannot agree with you when talking about safety critical items. Otherwise, the first failure could cause loss of life. Through over 40 years in aviation I could site countless accidents caused by an item that failed unexpectedly. The fact that you think that saving money justifies cutting Safety Critical Inspections is fundamentally floored. It is about time that some people realise that aviation costs money. Some things cannot be brushed over or diminished, otherwise it will cost lives.
I cannot agree with you when talking about safety critical items. Otherwise, the first failure could cause loss of life. Through over 40 years in aviation I could site countless accidents caused by an item that failed unexpectedly. The fact that you think that saving money justifies cutting Safety Critical Inspections is fundamentally floored. It is about time that some people realise that aviation costs money. Some things cannot be brushed over or diminished, otherwise it will cost lives.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South of Old Warden
Age: 87
Posts: 1,375
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Good point Rigga. There was a time when, on a major servicing, just about every component was removed and tested. Rarely was anything found defective, though the removal and re-fitting often created faults.
Dominator 2 Safety critical components were, of course, a different matter.
Dominator 2 Safety critical components were, of course, a different matter.
It's OK, Biggus, I wasn't really having a go. I just thought "NO" was an easier answer. And, Dom, I am as ever back in my place, as you say - good call. But probably not for long 
Here's a thing, though. If we can't use mobiles on garage foecourts in case they make the pumps explode (I know, I'm being flippant), could a strong RF signal trigger a detonator? Probably not in my view, but has anyone tested it?
As for a teaspoon full of Night Nurse last night, really? One might ask if he had flu, but I think someone might have noticed and the man was certainly smart enough not to press like that.
Maybe a good deal of speculation from somewhere that only suggests an eargerness to get the fisrst "told you so" headline at the expance of a bloody good aviator.
Here's a thing, though. If we can't use mobiles on garage foecourts in case they make the pumps explode (I know, I'm being flippant), could a strong RF signal trigger a detonator? Probably not in my view, but has anyone tested it?
As for a teaspoon full of Night Nurse last night, really? One might ask if he had flu, but I think someone might have noticed and the man was certainly smart enough not to press like that.
Maybe a good deal of speculation from somewhere that only suggests an eargerness to get the fisrst "told you so" headline at the expance of a bloody good aviator.