BD705 MAN-ORD Going with Cargo Hold Panels missing
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: oop north
Age: 54
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes well said ,it would appear from a recent post by jedigtr the panel was indeed damaged during loading and removed iaw the CDL, as the more informed on here had assumed
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Durham
Age: 62
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perspective
What a fascinating thread not so much for the actual subject but how it was broached and the answers it got.
I am by no means technically qualified on any aircraft whatsoever in any capacity but I do fly on them which means I have a vested interest in the way they are maintained and flown. If I have a concern I expect it to be dealt with professionally and with respect and not just fobbed off with an insult or a patronising attitude. If I had seen such a defect from the departure lounge on the aircraft I was about to board I would have asked if it was approrpriate for a panel to be missing. If I had recieved the answer that it was without explanation I would have enquired further and if if there was not a reasoned explanation forthcoming I would have escalated my enquiry. I would have been satisfied with the explanations given by the posters on this thread that it was safe and why it was safe.
What is probably more to the point is that the original poster has no intrinsic interest in the aircraft whatsoever. He has no reason to be concerned for his safety or his legal responsibility for his passengers. I can see perfectly why the ground staff would have ignored him. I doubt that they even noticed him. Even more to the point - did the original poster ever ask the question about the airworthiness before he came on this site? I doubt that.
If I had asked in a non-antagonisitic way - "I saw this today on an aircraft, I would have had concerns about boarding such an aircraft, could you knowledgeable people tell me if it is acceptable and if so why?" would you have called me a prat?
I am by no means technically qualified on any aircraft whatsoever in any capacity but I do fly on them which means I have a vested interest in the way they are maintained and flown. If I have a concern I expect it to be dealt with professionally and with respect and not just fobbed off with an insult or a patronising attitude. If I had seen such a defect from the departure lounge on the aircraft I was about to board I would have asked if it was approrpriate for a panel to be missing. If I had recieved the answer that it was without explanation I would have enquired further and if if there was not a reasoned explanation forthcoming I would have escalated my enquiry. I would have been satisfied with the explanations given by the posters on this thread that it was safe and why it was safe.
What is probably more to the point is that the original poster has no intrinsic interest in the aircraft whatsoever. He has no reason to be concerned for his safety or his legal responsibility for his passengers. I can see perfectly why the ground staff would have ignored him. I doubt that they even noticed him. Even more to the point - did the original poster ever ask the question about the airworthiness before he came on this site? I doubt that.
If I had asked in a non-antagonisitic way - "I saw this today on an aircraft, I would have had concerns about boarding such an aircraft, could you knowledgeable people tell me if it is acceptable and if so why?" would you have called me a prat?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: oop north
Age: 54
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I for one, and i suspect most others would have certainly not called you a prat, its a fair and valid question ,i would have explained what the MEL/CDL is and how it enables aircraft to legally carry certain acceptable defects which to the layman may well appear worrying
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
Posts: 3,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mercurydancer, That's the whole point of the responses to this thread. The thread starter had already decided that the aircraft was defective, and that the guys on the ground were ignoring the problem.
Had he asked 'Is this OK to go?' then he would have been told how it could legally be signed off.
Had he asked 'Is this OK to go?' then he would have been told how it could legally be signed off.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Location: 550 steps from the airport pub
Age: 41
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow I havent posted in a while because why would I? I come here to post worrying things. simple as...
NOw I come and view any new news on pprune and get this in my inbox
Complete Stirring up trouble I think:
NOw I come and view any new news on pprune and get this in my inbox
Complete Stirring up trouble I think:
Originally Posted by smudgethecat
Must say you have been noticable by your absence on the bmi thread you started old chap , cat got your tongue?
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
Posts: 3,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow I havent posted in a while because why would I? I come here to post worrying things.
why would I?
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: North, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 936
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
modelcuir you have done the same thing again, you say I have come here to post worrying things'.
If you read the thread it has been proven that it was not a worrying thing.
I have no axe to grind with you personally but if I may offer some simple advice, consider the wording of your comments and you will find the reaction is different.
If you read the thread it has been proven that it was not a worrying thing.
I have no axe to grind with you personally but if I may offer some simple advice, consider the wording of your comments and you will find the reaction is different.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: There
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
modelcuirstudios,
pwlahx is spot on, you have done it again and I'm sure it isn't intentional.
In both posts you have expressed your thoughts in what you have written.
To me, that suggests you have made your mind up that the situations you raise are worrying.
Wouldn't something like, " I come on here to post things I don't fully understand", have been more appropriate?
I can fully understand how the implications of your perceptions within the opening post, could cause offence.
I say, " Ask the question but edit your perception."
pwlahx is spot on, you have done it again and I'm sure it isn't intentional.
In both posts you have expressed your thoughts in what you have written.
I come here to post worrying things
Wouldn't something like, " I come on here to post things I don't fully understand", have been more appropriate?
I can fully understand how the implications of your perceptions within the opening post, could cause offence.
I say, " Ask the question but edit your perception."
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with Whirly. I think this is SteveHudd. But before you take this guy/kid/whatever seriously, check out his previous rambling posts. His website is worth a look as well. He's an odd fella.
We'll be reading about him in the papers soon enough, mark my words...
We'll be reading about him in the papers soon enough, mark my words...
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think you're right. Someone with a bizarre way of putting things that is always going to get peoples' back up or always see something odd in the rest of the world, or think the rest of the world sees something odd in him- when the rest of the world really couldn't give a damn. It's just being subjected to it all the time.....'people don't like me.........'
