Add me to the OV-10 list of supporters…

Why bother designing a completely “new” aircraft ??

Two seats, two engines, good loiter time, rugged undercarriage…..

Having said that, there would be maybe a marketing problem as some may think its a warmed over design etc etc….

Look at Northrops failure with the F-5G!
(It was quicker to recertify as the F-5G, instead of asking for a new model number)

The other would be the Pucara…. but the high wing of the OV-10 gives a better view with less restrictions etc….

Costantly amazed that S67 was allowed to wither and die.

Sure a crash at an airshow is bad PR (and I hope it goes without saying; a tragedy for friends and family of the deceased) but other aircraft have suffered such bad PR and the programme has continued.

ON PAPER the S67 seems to have offered a unique combination (well unique in the West anyway) of attributes and just not had any friends.

It was essentially the equivilent of the Mi-24 Hind… and one really does wonder why such a wonderful looking machine never went ahead.
Link to a Sikorsky demo video (complete with funky 70s music).
Very pixelated but worth a watch…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vgs5npH_XUo&feature=related

Does anyone else find it odd that Italian-designed, Italian-built, ex-Italian air force aircraft are referred to using the designation applied in US (not Italian) service to a slightly modified (different avionics) version?

Its called marketing… plus the fact if you told the average its a G222 they wouldnt know what it was. Tell them its a C27 and they might twig a bit…

I seemed to have missed a few days of whats going on here.
But from what i see i find it totally strange that someone gets banned for having a 2nd user ID on here?

Why is it there seems to be some odd extremes here?
I also frequent the Military Aviation section of this forum and find the behavour on there to be absolutly disgusting. The same members over and over mudslinging each other, bringing politics into a thread when its not warranted, going completely off topic and destroying the orginal thread until finally after much complaining it gets locked.

Most of those guys on there simply post dribble constantly…

Yet here is a user who has provided a wealth of info to the Historic section of the forum and gets banned “again” because his orginal ban was still enforced????

I also noticed a few posters whinging about people “signing off”.
Heres my whinge… ITS THEIR RIGHT TO WHINGE that they are leaving!
If people are fed up with what they are seeing being done then let them speak up.

What seems a reflection on todays wonderful “modern” society is when people see the wrong thing and they speak up about it they are invariably shouted down and told to “keep quiet”.

It may “just” be a forum… but it also provides people with an outlet, a way to share information and to meet other people with like minded interests.

Stupidity like this needs to be stopped…. and the company taken to task over it.

Also do they not realise that “holding on to it” can cause medical problems in the long run (if its “held” regularly that is..lol)

Disgusting to say the least…. but if they do that the best way to combat it is to not fly with them.

When I was living in Russia around 3 years ago I watched a Russian TV documentary concerning the black market trade in dodgy airliner spare parts, or more to the point, the forging of the documentation that accompanys each and every spare part or component that can be traded. In Russia this document is called a passport. The documentary focussed on the Tu-154 airliner – more specifically components on the Tu-154’s powerplant (Soloviev D-30 if I recall), especially a snail shaped component (‘ulitka’ in Russian) which I presume is some kind of turbine pump. Pretty nasty if it were to fail in flight I’d imagine, and bearing in mind that it seems to have been some sort of catastrophic engine failure which led to the crash of the Iranian Tu-154 2 weeks back – I should think that any air crash investigation would want to look into the origins of many of the airplane’s components checks on the documentation, etc.

Just my 10 kopecks worth….

So your saying that theres no “fake” Airbus or Boeing parts out on the market????

Your basically saying in your post that because its Russian and in Iran, its no doubt got “dodgy” parts. Hence that when a “western” airliner crashes there has never been found a fake part or the investigators never check parts or serial numbers?!

Oh please….

The ETIHAD incident was due to human error… had nothing to do with the design or the software…. You cant help stupidity on the part of the engineers.

They also say “Australia’s Transport Safety Bureau, which is still investigating QF72, isn’t yet sure why the aircraft plunged so violently. But the plane’s survival means the incident can be reconstructed from the cockpit – in this case, the black boxes were recovered.”

So in other words how can they compare anything in relation to the Air France crash? Also consider that the FDR wasnt recovered, so its all… speculation….

“For four years from 1999, Block was a member of a special investigation group set up by the FAA that stripped down six ageing passenger aircraft, including a Kapton-wired Airbus A300, the predecessor of the A330. It found widespread evidence of wire bundles that had become charred, cracked, brittle and prone to arcing, as well as contaminated by dust, lint and fluid from leaking toilets. Yet when its report was produced, the Bush White House took no action.”

OMG the white house took no action!!!!!!
Im a little lost here. Doesnt the FAA make the rules when it comes to aviation safety etc? Or is the article saying the FAA was blocked by the White House when it came to enacting new legislation?

These sorts of articles where a few “facts” are intertwined with speculation are simply designed to make headlines and cause fear in the travelling community. Its also a good way to drive down share prices too…