Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

Flying defective aircraft

Wikiposts
Search
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

Flying defective aircraft

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 3rd Nov 2008, 10:54
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: nigeria
Age: 49
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
inceredible

It is unexplicably amazing to think anyone in their right senses would put an aircraft in the air without it being hundred percent fit to fly at varanda of cost saving! It is criminal and absolutely unacceptable.
oladapo is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2008, 13:58
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,569
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
It is unexplicably amazing to think anyone in their right senses would put an aircraft in the air without it being hundred percent fit to fly at varanda of cost saving! It is criminal and absolutely unacceptable.
Of course your right, but can you define 100%

Do you get out of bed every morning feeling 100%
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2008, 17:14
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Interesting thread..

Very relevant considering the congressional hearings on SouthWest's 'deferment of maintanance items'...Alaska's Jackscrew endemic 'overlooking and sign-off items'...ect ect. It's pretty clear when we should take off or not...it's kinda scary when we are told to take off when we know something has been deferered or not even inspected in the first place. Big difference between interpretation and outright fraud/negligence.
NonFlushingLav is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2008, 19:10
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If you have genuine concerns about safety, this really should be MOR-ed.

There is no point just airing the problem here, without taking any action to stop it - you know it will have no effect.

I suggest you read the Statement by the Chairman of the CAA at page vii/viii of CAP 382 - then have the courage to report it.


JD
Jumbo Driver is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2008, 14:55
  #65 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Denmark
Age: 57
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thank you for answers.

Thank you for your answers.
It's been exciting reading.

However, it is a little disturbing to hear that there are a few pilots who do not have a limit, to how many number of defects to be in an operational aircraft.
Even if MEL says OK for each defect.

(just to provoke a bit)
Do pilots and technicians nothing to stop this at some point, then you accept more and more defects, so in the end it is legal to fly IFR only on the fuel gauge.

No matter what you call it, I would call it a defect, for there is something that does not work 100%


Next time I will fly, I will enjoy the trip as always.
I love to fly.
So I let the professionals to do their work.
I trust in your decisions, from mechanic to pilot.
verticallimit is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2008, 09:27
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Safety Concerns, I'm sure I don't need to remind you that not MOR-ing a reportable Occurrence when it comes to your attention as a responsible professional isn't too clever either ... not only is it contrary to Article 142 of the ANO, but it could also be said to be potentially endangering lives in precisely the same way as the instances you are complaining about ...


JD
Jumbo Driver is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.