Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Voyager Plummets (Merged)

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Voyager Plummets (Merged)

Old 23rd Feb 2014, 11:10
  #201 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,879
What's a deliberate error?

Beagle you've repeated your claim about normal law envelope being exceeded without saying why. Ditto for your postulation of. a LHS side stick fault. This may be the case on both counts but nothing so far publicly aired supports such specifics. Are you speculating or basing on an inside information, ?
ShotOne is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 11:21
  #202 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,943
Surely the risk of the event was classed as negligible before it happened?
a Six-Seven Sigma event so early on in fleet life? Really?

Last edited by VinRouge; 23rd Feb 2014 at 14:58.
VinRouge is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 11:37
  #203 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,744
Yes VinRouge, I understand your point too. But, it seems the definition of "negligible risk" is somewhat vague in the "private raf"?

OAP
Onceapilot is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 11:54
  #204 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: oxford
Posts: 469
Are you speculating or basing on an inside information
Lets just say many of us have spent months/years crewed up together on previous tours and are still friends now.
lj101 is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 12:28
  #205 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the edge
Posts: 234
So is it ok to leak information regarding an ongoing service inquiry to a friend so he can post it on PPRuNe for you?

How very professional.

The facts will be published in the SI, in the mean time the jet is back flying because people who's job it is to make such a decision have done so based on facts, not leaked rumours.

Time to move on perhaps?
Arty Fufkin is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 13:07
  #206 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: West Sussex
Age: 77
Posts: 4,070
AF:-
The facts will be published in the SI
That will be a first then!
Chugalug2 is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 13:13
  #207 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: oxford
Posts: 469
Not at all Arty - I never said Beags had inside information and his speculating is just that - speculating.
lj101 is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 13:33
  #208 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,744
Here is another thought: The "private raf" might not have to satisfy commercial risk oversight for insurance? How could that effect things?

OAP
Onceapilot is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 14:25
  #209 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the edge
Posts: 234
I must admit, I'm a little confused by all this "private RAF" banter. What do you mean?
Arty Fufkin is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 14:36
  #210 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: oxford
Posts: 469
Maybe they mean the PFI?
lj101 is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 16:05
  #211 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 27
All this 'Private RAF' banter is wrongly implying that ATrS have some sort of influence over the decision to fly the Mil Voyager again.
AOC 2 Group decided to ground the fleet and AOC 2 Group decided to allow the aircraft to fly again. The MAAIB are investigating and the event is the subject of a full service investigation. Seems to me the that the RAF are pulling the strings in this case?

Last edited by mr snow; 23rd Feb 2014 at 16:09. Reason: Description
mr snow is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 16:49
  #212 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Hiq et Ubique
Posts: 172
MAAIB
You gotta love 'em!
MAD Boom is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 16:57
  #213 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the edge
Posts: 234
Ok, I get it. It seems to me that some folk on this forum have a bit of an axe to grind with Airtanker.

Bul***it filter duly adjusted!
Arty Fufkin is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 17:33
  #214 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: oxford
Posts: 469
Bul***it filter duly adjusted!
At last - do keep up Arty.
lj101 is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 18:32
  #215 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,311
Arty Fufkin wrote:
It seems to me that some folk on this forum have a bit of an axe to grind with Airtanker.
Apart from the rather inadequate news release on your....their website, I don't think that the company has come in for any significant criticism, Arty? Why should they have? That'd be like Avis being criticised because a hire car they'd provided in good faith had an unknown manufacturer's steering system fault.

I'll freely admit that I consider PFI to be a completely ridiculous way of providing core AAR assets, although it might be just about adequate for mere trash-hauling AT provision. Just as MFTS is a crazy way of providing military flight training. Nevertheless, ATrS are contracted to run with this PFI nonsense.

If there are any ar$es which deserve to be kicked, I suspect they're elsewhere....
BEagle is online now  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 19:01
  #216 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 919
And what makes you posit that there may be ar$es to be kicked at all?
beardy is online now  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 20:19
  #217 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Hiq et Ubique
Posts: 172
Smile

And what makes you posit that there may be ar$es to be kicked at all?
You can't kick ar$es in this Just Culture we're adopting.........
MAD Boom is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 21:04
  #218 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,311
beardy, don't you understand conditional sentences?
BEagle is online now  
Old 24th Feb 2014, 06:58
  #219 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 919
BEagle, yes very much so. I want to understand why you made your 'conditional sentence.' You seem to have preceded it with your own verdict after a trial by innuendo.
You now seem to believe that AirTanker are at no fault ( so it can't possibly be the commercial pressure you implied) and the fault must lie somewhere else. You seem to have that somewhere else in mind. So, go on, tell us all your conspiracy. There only seems to be The RAF in the form of AOC 2GP, the MOD and Airbus, or is there another villain hiding in the dark, you seem to have something in mind so who is it to blame BEagle? Come on, stop beating about the bush, spit it out.
beardy is online now  
Old 24th Feb 2014, 09:06
  #220 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: England
Posts: 1,864
Come on, stop beating about the bush, spit it out.
First paragraph in Post 216?
Roland Pulfrew is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

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