RE: post mortem

Sorry, had to bring this one back – I must have missed it when I was away.

We managed to see it after a friend recorded it for us and I am starting to wonder what sort of things goes through some people’s minds. I never knew the cost of a ticket was £12, we were wondering this and made a few guesses.

What posesses some people to do such disgusting things? Watching it on the television is not too much of a crime in my eyes. If you have only terrestrial TV, you have access to just 5 channels and so it’s really in your face. BUT to pay to watch such a pointless session which had no purpose at all is unacceptable.

Apparently the guy responsible for the supposed “Autopsy” was arrested after the show as what he was doing has not been done for over a century and is illegal. “Jolly Good” I say.

It’s obviously not a disgusting procedure, it happens every day but I think that whoever made the decision to screen it on Channel 4 needs their head examining.

I also would be interested to know from audience members on the night “how was it educational” like they kept saying? They were there for fun, a good night out etc..!! What complete and utter nutcases.

RE: My thoughts on security

Very interesting topic Mongu, an enjoyable read.

I was watching a programme on Discovery the other night I think and it mentioned these bomb-proof hold containers and they seemed very effective and they picked up on the same thing that you have, they are heavy, so the airlines don’t want them. This in my mind is pure ignorance. I saw how effective they were – a bomb was placed in a container in a staged environment and when it exploded, the sides shook frantically and the container itself jumped. It’s a disgrace how an airline can continue to use cheap, unsafe containers when the world we live in is so sick that re-inforced alternatives are a necessity.

As for duty free purchases being handed over to the passenger after touchdown at the destination, another good idea in my opinion. The fact that about 60 or 70% of these products could be used as weapons – i.e. glass from fragrance bottles, alcohol etc. To balance this argument out, I also feel that perfecting security on board is a near impossible task. Let’s face it, anything could be used as a weapon which could cause serious injuries or fatalities on board. The simplest things such as the drawers in the trollies can be used to whack people, seatbelts as rope – seems extreme, but it’s possible.

Also, why protect the flight deck? (I’m not wanting to sound negative here). New doors will simply save the Captain and his Co-Pilot from being victims of violence, whereas in the cabin behind, passengers may be having a severe beating from would-be terrorists or agressive passengers. That’s like saying, “as long as the captain is safe, who cares?”.

But something I feel that does tie in with security on board, whether it be related to terrorism or not is the need for alcohol when flying. If someone who is a real smoker can cope on a transatlantic 8 hour flight for example without having a cigarette, then they should also be able to cope without alcohol. A drunk passenger can wreak havoc, be abusive to airline crew and maybe try something stupid which he/she may later regret.

Security is NOT, nor will it ever be perfect.

RE: Pic of the night.

Is that the Leaning Tower of Pisa and the British Airways London Eye drawn on the side?

Good pic.

RE: New airline, and Apple Vaccations has already nicked a 757 from thomas cook!

So Apple vactions I presume does not actually exist? Does it just rely on “borrowing” aircraft from British Charters?

RE: AW Forum Meet??

Perhaps Mr. Webmaster could consult someone and see if they’d be willing to pay for us to do so? :9

Hee hee… aren’t I a cheeky little rascal?

RE: Merry Xmas La Lalalalalala lalalal

SNOW ON SUNDAY – Yippee!!!

RE: Airliner world…….

That’s one great online facility.. know of any other similar things for other airports?