dark light

paul1867

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 1,315 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Awesome …. #827869
    paul1867
    Participant

    Yes an excellent idea. Perhaps we could consider a few more around the country such as Fairey Battle, possibly at Battle, but on the South East coast, Halifax and/or Blenheim at Speke. I am sure many more can be suggested, perhaps with the collective name of “Gateways to Freedom”.

    (Ah the good old Wimpy Bar that brings back memories of the 70s before the days of McDonald’s and KFC(in Bromley))

    in reply to: Martin Baker faces prosecution re Red Arrows ejection death. #831581
    paul1867
    Participant

    ………….they should have looked at all aspects including procedures with the Red Arrows .

    I do apologise, David, for getting your name wrong!

    They did David, right down to the pilot taking a phone call on his mobile as he walked to the plane and that the CO had been appointed direct from display flying and therefore already had a relationship with the display pilots. SOP was for COs to be brought in from outside so that there were no such relationships. As in all these inquiries, rail, air and maritime, absolutely every aspect is investigated and assessed to see if it contributed in any way to the event and the outcome of the event. These inquiries do not, of themselves, produce prosecutions, nor can the evidence collected be used by a third party, such as the police, to bring a prosecution, Shoreham highlighted this very clearly.

    This prosecution was brought by the HSE and there may be more to follow.

    From the inquiry, and as Vega has said, it was clear that the MOD was aware of the issue even if there was no actual paper trail as such, whether that could be proved in a court of law is another matter.

    in reply to: Martin Baker faces prosecution re Red Arrows ejection death. #831629
    paul1867
    Participant

    Ouch.

    I saw this on the BBC and thought you should see it:

    Red Arrows death: Ejection seat firm fined £1.1m – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-43171049

    in reply to: Martin Baker faces prosecution re Red Arrows ejection death. #835590
    paul1867
    Participant

    Further BBC report about the prosecution

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-43031833

    in reply to: Martin Baker faces prosecution re Red Arrows ejection death. #772981
    paul1867
    Participant

    Yes indeed David, that is exactly what it is all about and is what MB and MOD have admitted. The procedures were in place that would have prevented this incident, the death but probably not the ejection, but were not followed. In my view it is almost always a management failure, they do not ensure that the correct procedures are being followed. This is totally unacceptable within the armed forces and it was made very clear that the ground level people were not to blame. As I have repeatedly said the HSE prosecutions are just that, H & S, and relate to “due diligence” in that information was not properly disseminated.

    I felt that the coroners comment that the safety system on the pull handle was “entirely useless” somewhat missed the point. The system worked satisfactorily if correctly used, however, with hindsight, is was of poor design as it was not fail safe. SOP required the insertion of the safety pin whilst rolling out from landing, necessitating it was done by feel. It would appear that there was no documentation on how the pin was to be used correctly and checked. The MAA report states that “it was not widely known” that the pin could be inserted incorrectly. This was the failure and although there were many opportunities to inspect that the handle was locked if you do not know what you are looking for you will not necessarily find a problem. Instructions on how to inspect satisfactorily that the pin is correctly installed would seem essential. It would appear that for very many years many aircraft were probably in an unsafe configuration whilst on the ground having followed the roll out procedure on landing.

    As David has said reading the MAA report is essential to understand why the HSE prosecutions are taking place, a link was posted early in this thread and is repeated here. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/service-inquiry-into-the-accident-involving-hawk-tmk1-xx177

    paul1867
    Participant

    I wasn’t suggesting it was David. The point I was making, in response to post #31, is that employers and manufacturers now have to show “due diligence” in preventing work place accidents, which was not the case in the past and that is right and proper. We should no longer have statistics like how many workers died building this or that bridge or tunnel.

    paul1867
    Participant
    in reply to: Martin Baker faces prosecution re Red Arrows ejection death. #773320
    paul1867
    Participant

    The death was caused by the tight shackle not the firing of the seat. This was a known problem and as such could have been prevented. When push comes to shove, insurance wise, this is all important. As I have said all along it is all going to rest on the paper chain and the demonstration of due diligence. How was this known problem disseminated down the chain and if the chain is broken who broke it? Are we not past the age where “workers” are expendable?

    Just in general with air and train accidents it never ceases to amaze me how accidents are almost always a collection of events, each one of which is minor, that align to cause an incident.

    What a difference a comma makes in the BBC News title.

    “Red Arrows death firm admits failings.”

    “Red Arrows death, firm admits failings.”

    in reply to: Martin Baker faces prosecution re Red Arrows ejection death. #773328
    paul1867
    Participant

    Martin Baker pleads guilty

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42773834

    in reply to: Paphos shackletons #781151
    paul1867
    Participant

    It would be a bit mean not to include a closer look at the Dassault MD.312 Flamant

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4360/37148066301_f2459e2a5f_b.jpg

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4374/36476618053_145122e0dc_b.jpg

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4342/36476620783_44666e4a9e_b.jpg

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4410/37099973966_7d37f83d64_b.jpg

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4429/36486973833_335f63e47e_b.jpg

    in reply to: Paphos shackletons #781168
    paul1867
    Participant

    Yes they are very close to the sea but on the plus side extremely low rain fall and very high temperatures without too high humidity.

    Moving on to 747. Unfortunately, I only had my No.2 kit with me so max lens was only 300mm.

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4414/37118141152_a4b0e65edb_b.jpg

    Sadly, the ground drops away outside the fence as you traverse across the front of the planes.

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4337/37291162395_545c8b84d4_b.jpg

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4343/37148077161_3cc032f627_b.jpg

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4431/36463354804_4df8cff1fe_b.jpg

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4434/37128148112_22b19d970e_b.jpg

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4397/36486934113_06e70658be_b.jpg

    And that was as far as I could easily get so no images of the port side either from the front or back.

    in reply to: Paphos shackletons #781237
    paul1867
    Participant

    Thank you Meddle.

    Moving in for a closer look at 757.

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4380/37118129422_9b031f7389_b.jpg

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4389/37118130572_e0312edf48_b.jpg

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4408/37118134682_7c3b160350_b.jpg

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4422/36893090140_dc37d9d9af_b.jpg

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4332/36893095270_b9d5d7e7a5_b.jpg

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4440/37148075651_507ac0b5a7_b.jpg

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4352/37301610195_1aeb637b6b_b.jpg

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4400/37128055112_48868b420a_b.jpg

    in reply to: Paphos shackletons #781348
    paul1867
    Participant

    That there’s some corner of a foreign field
    That is for ever England.

    On a recent visit to Cyprus I went along to Paphos Airport to take a look at the two Shackletons and the Flamant.

    Boredom alert.

    If you are not interested in my brush with the law when photographing the Shacks then please just jump to “ENDS”

    I was busy taking pictures through the fence when a vehicle went past inside the fence. When I heard it stop I saw it was a police jeep which backed up until it was opposite me. The vehicle contained a female police officer and a male soldier. From the jeep the police officer asked me what I was doing, as the 300mm lens and the camera was a bit of a give-away I said I was taking pictures of the planes. She got out and said that was not allowed and I responded by saying I only took pictures of the Shackletons and what appeared to be an air raid shelter and that they were of historic interest. In the meantime, the soldier had got out with a gun at the ready. After replying to the following questions, how did I get there, what was the purpose of my visit to Cyprus and who was with me, with, a hire car, holiday/wedding, son and wife the two guards got into conversation then the police officer started making phone calls. There was more quizzing as they could not see the car or my wife and kept asking me where they were. Anyway, after both of them consulting further up the chain I was told that I would have to delete all the pictures. I like to obey the laws in other countries so I showed her the screen as I deleted all of the pictures on my camera, which she was happy with so I didn’t mention my phone in my pocket. She then said that they had seen my son taking pictures with his phone and that they must be deleted as well. He was about 200 yards away across a field and as they had obviously seen him I did wonder why they had not stopped for him. Anyway, the officer watched as my son deleted the photographs and then told us to go back to the car and drive right away from the area. They then watched as we all went back to the car which they could now see. We went to drive away but the track was blocked by a farmer’s pickup and while we waited for the farmer to come back the same police vehicle turned up at the track so they were serious about us leaving the area.

    Well my conclusions from all this is that, although there are no warning signs about taking pictures, it is best to obey the laws of the country and not argue with any officers. If they had been really serious they could have confiscated the equipment or at least the memory cards or at worst detained us. I would think it unlikely that, at least back in the office, they do not understand modern technology. My son was even quick thinking enough to put his phone into airplane mode!

    ENDS

    Please do not post on this thread any technical advice about deleted images.

    I think Murphy’s Law was formulated for me personally as it seems to apply a lot.

    As it happens another guest at the wedding had already been to take pictures the day before so I am pleased to be able to share those here:D

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4369/37124939782_90169ff403_h.jpg

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4412/37128044632_9cbbe0f728_h.jpg

    https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4592/38643498285_235178877e_h.jpg

    in reply to: Anyone want to own up to losing something? #781374
    paul1867
    Participant

    Only 30 years old eh, must be current RAF equipment then and should be in Modern:D

    in reply to: New plans for Wroughton #787669
    paul1867
    Participant

    This is indeed excellent news and certainly one to put back on my bucket list. The airfield site has wonderful potential for “live” exhibits and I just hope that this development is not going to be funded by selling some of the site off.

Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 1,315 total)