dark light

bloodnok

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 601 through 615 (of 741 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Honington Open Day #1334775
    bloodnok
    Participant

    tis indeed a sad site nowadays, i spent 3 1/2 years there at the back end of the 80’s on TWCU, and now its full of tanks and rockapes!
    i remember they hadn’t even done the finishing touches to the new (then 13sqn) HAS site before they moved them out to Marham, what a waste of money!

    in reply to: Aussie Air Transport Thread #2586315
    bloodnok
    Participant

    personally i’d have thought all this talk of c-130 floors cracking up is total rubbish.
    the floors (and supporting structure) are exactly the same as H or E model Hercs.
    the floor loading may be different between a stretched Herc and a short one, but the fact that its a J model has no bearing on it.
    having worked on Hercs for the last 12 years, i can also confirm that the floors do not crack up, they get dented or pierced, and may crack as a result of this damage, but cracking up do to overloading (as implyed earlier) just does not happen.

    in reply to: Missing Pilot #593456
    bloodnok
    Participant

    not good news i’m afraid, pilot was found dead in the wreckage of his micro light.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/5068708.stm

    in reply to: RAF Valley terminal approved! #595475
    bloodnok
    Participant

    i’m not sure that the dublin link will be very succesful, back in the 80’s it was tried with dublin city helicopters flying large sikorsky s-61’s, but passenger numbers were so few it folded after a while.

    in reply to: British C130 fire in afganistan #2598358
    bloodnok
    Participant

    aircraft was XV206 if anyone’s interested.

    in reply to: Toilets on fighters #2574552
    bloodnok
    Participant

    isn’t the B-2 a bomber not a fighter?

    RAF aircrew in fighters have a small plastic bag with a dried sponge inside, the wee in this, and bin it when they land. there are no provisions for the pilot to take a number 2.

    in reply to: Yet another relic to identify. #1296213
    bloodnok
    Participant

    looks a bit big for a refuel point, could be something as mundane as a taxi way light housing.

    in reply to: (Zombie thread from 2002) 558 hopes dashed ? #1320279
    bloodnok
    Participant

    marshalls is still a family firm, so the shareholders are very few.
    i’ll bow to your superior knowledge if you say that that the hourly rate they are quoting, it just seem incredibly high compared to the hourly rate i’m led to believe they charge airline customers.

    in reply to: Alternative engine power sources? #549380
    bloodnok
    Participant

    i doubt many aircraft manufacturers are, but i expect most aircraft engine manufacturers will have a R+D department looking a whole host of ways of making engines more efficient, and at alternative fuels.

    in reply to: (Zombie thread from 2002) 558 hopes dashed ? #1320455
    bloodnok
    Participant

    At last i see sense emerging

    here is my thumbnail sketch

    25 chaps (marshalls)………there were 25 clock cards on the wall last time i was allowed in there

    lets say £90.00 per hour charged out, 8 hours per day
    25 x 8 x 90 = £18,000/day

    18,000 x 5 = £90,000 per week
    90,000 x 4 = £360,000 per month

    2.73 million divided by £360,000 = about 7.5 months work

    I think they started working in about July…………ok so about 9 months ago….maybe some of my figs are out a bit, maybe only 20 guys, maybe only £50.00 per hour, point still stands

    this doesn’t include VOC employees salaries or buying any bits.

    100% increase in contractors costs kinda says to me the need another 9 months to finish it.

    IMHO It was never gonna happen………….ask anyone actually involved in aviation their true gut feelings

    major sponsers ain’t that stupid to put that sort of money into something so flakey.

    go on everyone take a pop at me, i don’t care anymore but moggy’s point is well made and exactly what i have been saying all along….. as a reminder…….[B]”But lottery money meant for good causes has been wasted on keeping Marshalls profitable and some self-serving Vulcan fanatics in (presumably) gainful employment for the last few years.”

    I very ragerly agree with moggy but i do this time

    here is what to do…….take an estimate and then double it in cost and time…….for example, Beech 18, estimated 5 years and here we are in year 11, estimated £25,000 now about £50,000

    stahlhelm on ready for the flak heading my way

    it seems to me to be a little unfair to start implying Marshalls dont give a hoot, and are just in it for the money.
    surely when they first got involved with the project, a budget would have been set. they would have had a rough idea the ammount of work involved, so would have had a rough idea of the cost of having marshalls, and any other companies on board.
    with any aircraft, be it old or new, once you start doing major work, you WILL find unforseen problems. that is a dead cert.
    so its not unreasonable to assume that the budget will increase, and a contingency should have been allowed for.

    it seems to me that the whole project is being rumn very amateurishly. not to have a budget for the whole project right up until air test seems madness to me, even if they dont have the funds in place, they should have an idea of a figure that the whole project will take, including contingencies.

    and just to get things a little more in perspective, i’d say the hourly rate for the marshalls fitters is more likely to closer to half that of the figure above.

    aaand relax…rant over.

    in reply to: Drop Tanks #2590377
    bloodnok
    Participant

    they weren’t when i worked on them, they were called ‘tanks’.

    bloodnok
    Participant

    bit early to be sitting in the dog and partridge isn’t it!

    in reply to: Drop Tanks #2590558
    bloodnok
    Participant

    the designers dont always get it right with drop tanks. the original Tornado drop tanks (original low speed tanks, not the pointy ‘fast’ tanks) used to have 4 fins at the back, but it was found when they were released in flight, that they hung around the rear of the wing/taileron area before dropping away.
    it turned out the fix was quite simple, just take the top 2 fins off and blank the holes, problem solved!

    in reply to: Drop Tanks #2590908
    bloodnok
    Participant

    drop tanks aren’t generally dropped in peace time unless its an emergency or there’s a fault with the wiring (oops!)

    in reply to: (Zombie thread from 2002) 558 hopes dashed ? #1322403
    bloodnok
    Participant

    i see they put out a press release yesterday just about admitting defeat, citing increasing costs, and grants not coming through

Viewing 15 posts - 601 through 615 (of 741 total)