BTW Canon have an outlet on Ebay selling returns etc with full warranty for a lot less as refurbished items….

see

http://stores.shop.ebay.co.uk/Canon-Outlet__W0QQ_armrsZ1

from there blurb
Types of Products Sold
(Refurbished / New)
The products sold on eBay are either classified as “new” or “refurbished” (see the beginning of this item description).

…..We just can’t sell a refurbished item as new because…

– …it was used as demo product (at trade fairs etc.), or

– …the outside carton box was slightly damaged during transportation (and then replaced by a neutral brown packaging), or

– …it was sold and the box was opened. Then the item got returned to Canon.

Indeed, bought my EOS 350D via this route a few years ago, and the example I received was brand new, box had never been opened – the only thing “wrong” with the package was that the dispaly box carried an “expired” offer sticker! I paid around £175 les sthan list price, and around £100 les sthan the best price forma ny online retailler. Likewise we picked up a “point and shoot” for my daughter form same outlet, saved around £60 on list price. This camera had been out of the box, as it had a slight “nick” in the battery door, but otherwise it was mint. Neither camera has given any problems since purchase.

As has been said, don’t overbid, or you may pay more than you need to. I watched the bidding on items for a few weeks to get a feel for how the bidding went went on the models I was interested in, then took the plunge.

EOS 350D has long since been superseded of course, but I heard numerous bad reports on the EOS1000D entry level DSLR when we were shopping for a DSLR for my daughter 18 months ago, so be wary about picking up one of those. I’d go for the 450D (or whatever is the current equivalent) or a 50D instead. As for lenses I too have the Canon 70-300mm IS mentioned earlier, and it seems a reasonable value/quality compromise. Don’t forget that on Canon DSLRs there is a “zoom factor” of 1.4 compared to 35mm SLRs, so a 300mm lens on DSLR is equivalent to a 450mm on a 35mm SLR etc, and a 50mm lens is equivalent to a 75mm.

Paul F

The new age of Civil Servants, please, what planet are they on, the chiefs are part of the privelidged old boys network and their servants are shiny faced, manipulative graduates that know nothing of the real world.
My working carreer in architecture and building was started off with real old boy Planners who knew their stuff by experience, backed up with good old boys in the Building Control Department who’d worked on building sites and were ‘belt and braces’ in their approach to problems.
It’s all gone, the ‘New Age Planners’ haven’t a clue, they just read government legislation which is mainly crap, and don’t know how to interpret it.

‘Tis the same in the (my) world of pharmaceuticals too – up until around ten years ago, MHRA Factory Inspectors were mostly people who had many years real ‘hands-on’ experience of pharma manufacturing, so they knew their stuff, and had the ability to assess and interpret what they saw in terms of risk etc. Having succesfully made tablets or ointments themselves for a number of years, in a number of sites, they knew which factors were critical in terms of processing or testing, and which were nice to have/do, but not really critical to the end result.

No more! Those older guys and girls are now largely retired and are fast being replaced by fresh-faced graduates with little, if any, “real world” experience ( = no “common sense”).

Fresh out of college, or with minimal experience they simply read the copious EU rules and then enforce them on sites they audit, secure in the knowledge that they know it all coz’ they’ve read the rulebook :rolleyes:. They have no ability whatsoever to use common sense, or to make allowances where they could be made – it’s all just ‘black and white’ to them. But, challenge their authority by asking them to explain the reasons/logic/thinking behind the rules they so rigidly (and gleefully) enforce, and they look at you blankly, whereas the inspectors of old could explain why the rules permitted this, but not that, or why your factory was approved even though it was not up to the latest standards being built into new-build facilities elsewhere.

I guess its the same everywhere (i.e. in most industries/professions), the current generation of inspectors/enforcers/rule makers have themsleves only grown up and been educated under the current Euro-“nanny state” model, where personal accountability is not welcome, instead, society believes blind trust in the written law is the only way forward (not least because it conveniently allows you to avoid any perosnal responsibility if something goes wrong “I was only followin’ the rules Guv’nor...” ). “Sharp end” experience and knowledge counts for less than an ability to quote chapter and verse from the relevant legislation document.

Its a mad, mad , mad, world, and it’s getting worse….

Paul F

Didn’t the Soviet-era Aeroflot carry standing passengers (and livestock) on some of it’s more… ahem…. rural internal routes?

Don’t know about that, but I did meet a colleague of my father, who had recently taken an internal flight within soviet bloc on Aeroflot in the early 70’s. He had been seated near the front of the aircraft (my memory says it was a Tu154 or an Il62), but for takeoff the passengers in the front few rows were temporarily moved to the rear of the cabin, where they were told to sit on bar-type stools in the central aisle until the plane was airborne and happily established in the climb, whereupon they were allowed to return to their allocated seats!

He never found it whether it was standard practice, though the fact that suitable stools were provided suggested it was not a “one off” situation. So, poor weight distribution due to an over-loaded aircraft,? an inability to re-distribute pre-loaded fuel ?, an airport related issue prompting need for more elevator pitch authority on take off? He never found out… Suffice to say he never fancied flying that route again!

the one that still stands out was ‘Nightfighter’ (Jimmy Rawnsley/Robert Wright)

Same for me, “Nightfighter” and “Ginger Lacy – Fighter Pilot” were my first “adult” books, read in my last year (IIRC) at junior school, and followed quickly by “The Battle of Britain” by Leonard Moseley. Not surprising as this would have been 1969-70 or so. My Dad then lent me his treasured paperback copies of “Reach for the Sky” and “Test Pilot” (Neville Duke). The former survives, the latter (including the wonderful md 50’s watercolour print cover illustration was torn completely in half by my toddler son many years later 🙁 , (though for sentimental reasons the two halves lingered on for many years, even though the book was in an unreadable condition :o).

Throw in a few family Sunday afternoon trips to watch the airliners at Heathrow, and an early trip to RAFM Hendon, plus living under the RAE Farnborough flight path (Hunters and Hastings being regulars over home and school, plus the regular airshow participants inc Concorde) and I was well and truly hooked. Funny really, my Dad had done his Nat Service in the RAF (Radio/Radar fitter), but had no particular “thing” for aircraft, he loved watching any old machinery (steam locos, vintage cars, bikes etc), but I instantly focussed on aircraft.

AEF Flights resumed as at 09:45 today

My brother, who is an Air Cadet instructor in West Sussex Wing tells me AEF has been resumed as of this morning.

Paul F

Don’t think you can paint composite aircraft black. They disintegrate in the sun if you do.

Moggy

How about red, yellow or blue then (and no I’m not being fascetious) – bands across the wings and around the fuselage like the yellow (or white bands?) on the black Tucanos seen at airshows?

Anything to give a contrast to make the Tutors (and white civilian gliders too) more conspicuous angainst a uniform sky background.

Or is it paint of any sort that increases degradation of the composites?

Paul F

If people can’t accept risks, they better not fly. Or drive. Or take the train, in fact getting out of bed maybe a chancy somedays.:D

As a person who (as a child) flew across the pacific from San Francisco to Tokyo in a DC-6…when there was a much greater chance of engine failures…and long before the days of today’s SAR assets…an ETOPS flight looks fine to me. 😀

Hi JB

I totally agree with you, the risks are so small, but that does not change the basic facts that any pax must accept that every time they step on board an airliner. There is a (very very)slim chance things may go seriously wrong, and if the flight takes them over mid-ocean, the chances of being found/rescued may far less than they may wish to contemplate. SAR involving a handful of survivors is one thing, but imagine trying to rescue 300 people in mid Atlantic, the logistics are mind numbing.

It seems the modern generation seem unable to accept that there are risks in most activities, and that although a 99.9999% success rate is seen is “safe”, they fail to realise that when that 0.0001% chance occurs, the results might well be 100% fatal for those involved, as they may have placed themselves beyond realistic chance of rescue.

In a modern “blame” culture, few people seem to accept that they must take responsibility for their own decisions. I suspect many pax board ETOPs flights without realising just how far from “rescue” resources they may be should they end up in serious trouble in some phase sof the flight (as did AF 447).

I wonder how many pax regularly fly on ETOPS (or any other routes) that take them beyond the range of viable rescue – even some “overland” routes take pax across very inhospitable areas etc, where access would be difficult if rescue became necessary. Of course, airlines don’t mention this fact as the chances of anything going so seriously wrong are very, very, small these days, and also because it might deter passengers from flying on those routes. Modern society perhaps leads many people to believe they live a “low risk” existence – it fails to explain/teach that occasionally we willingly place ourselves in situations where the risk is high should the unexpected “one in a million” chance, or chain of unfortunate events, happen.

Don’t get me wrong, I will and do happily fly on ETOPS routes.

To get the thread back on topic, Lets hope the investigators work out what actually went so wrong with AF447, so that the risks are reduced even further in the future.