<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:55:25 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:55:25 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
-a-a https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
On 31/3/2024 3:22 am, Rod Speed wrote:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:55:25 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
aa https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a very
high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its being >reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears to be >maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or lack
thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what that
failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance issues,
not design or QC problems.
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 09:21:40 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 31/3/2024 3:22 am, Rod Speed wrote:Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:55:25 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
-a-a https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a very
high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears to be
maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or lack
thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what that
failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance issues,
not design or QC problems.
Seem to remember when Qantas shifted it's heavy maintenance to
Singapore 2019, seem to hit quality problems afterwards?
Would of thought Boeing would need for a maintenance some sort of
quality control certification before being OK'ed?
Used to like Qantas safety 2nd to none reputation and always used
them.
Not happy with the video claim of alleged recent 6000 deaths from
Boeing aircraft mishaps.
On 1/4/2024 1:10 pm, Petzl wrote:
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 09:21:40 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 31/3/2024 3:22 am, Rod Speed wrote:Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:55:25 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
aa https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a very
high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears to be
maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or lack
thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what that
failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance issues,
not design or QC problems.
Seem to remember when Qantas shifted it's heavy maintenance to
Singapore 2019, seem to hit quality problems afterwards?
Would of thought Boeing would need for a maintenance some sort of
quality control certification before being OK'ed?
Certainly would, don't know if that certification comes from the >manufacturer or the local aviation authority, probably both.
Used to like Qantas safety 2nd to none reputation and always used
them.
They still have that safety reputation, shame that the way they have
treated their customers in recent years has been so poor.
Not happy with the video claim of alleged recent 6000 deaths from
Boeing aircraft mishaps.
I didn't watch the video to the very end but that number is bullshit if
it is saying the 6000 is "recent", there hasn't been that number of
people killed in all commercial aircraft crashes in the last 30yrs let
alone just Boeing aircraft.
If you count up the 4 most notable Boeing crashes including the 2 737
Max crashes plus MH370 and the Malaysian Airlines flight that was shoot
down over Ukraine that adds up to 868 fatalities.
Its crazy to blame Boeing for the loss of the 2 Malaysian Airlines
aircraft, one was shot down and the other seems to be due to a
deliberate act of someone on board.
If there was 6000 "recent" deaths on Boeing aircraft no one I know would
be stupid enough to fly in one and all the aircraft would all be grounded.
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 14:25:14 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 1/4/2024 1:10 pm, Petzl wrote:Never had problems with bad customer service, but air flights have
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 09:21:40 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 31/3/2024 3:22 am, Rod Speed wrote:Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:55:25 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
-a-a https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a very
high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears to be
maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or lack
thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what that
failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance issues, >>>> not design or QC problems.
Seem to remember when Qantas shifted it's heavy maintenance to
Singapore 2019, seem to hit quality problems afterwards?
Would of thought Boeing would need for a maintenance some sort of
quality control certification before being OK'ed?
Certainly would, don't know if that certification comes from the
manufacturer or the local aviation authority, probably both.
Used to like Qantas safety 2nd to none reputation and always used
them.
They still have that safety reputation, shame that the way they have
treated their customers in recent years has been so poor.
become cheaper, would say it works both ways there are bad customers
also.
(bus/rail) up to keep out the riff-raff, seemed to work.
I looked again, over 10 years was not clearly mentioned,
Not happy with the video claim of alleged recent 6000 deaths from
Boeing aircraft mishaps.
9:29 minute mark
But he was emphasising problems blowing out this year.
I didn't watch the video to the very end but that number is bullshit if
it is saying the 6000 is "recent", there hasn't been that number of
people killed in all commercial aircraft crashes in the last 30yrs let
alone just Boeing aircraft.
If you count up the 4 most notable Boeing crashes including the 2 737
Max crashes plus MH370 and the Malaysian Airlines flight that was shoot
down over Ukraine that adds up to 868 fatalities.
Its crazy to blame Boeing for the loss of the 2 Malaysian Airlines
aircraft, one was shot down and the other seems to be due to a
deliberate act of someone on board.
If there was 6000 "recent" deaths on Boeing aircraft no one I know would
be stupid enough to fly in one and all the aircraft would all be grounded. >>
Not sure if the 10K figures included terrorism or what ever, maybe.
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide
and a very high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the wayits being reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing forwhat appears to be maintenance faults on older aircraft,
also interesting to note that 3 recent problems involvedUnited Airlines yet the news reported blamed Boeing insteadof asking questions about United maintenance or lack thereof,
AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old sowhat that failure has
to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing aremaintenance issues,
not design or QC problems.
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 09:21:40 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 31/3/2024 3:22 am, Rod Speed wrote:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:55:25 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a very
high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears to be
maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or lack
thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what that
failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance issues,
not design or QC problems.
Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
Seem to remember when Qantas shiftedit's heavy maintenance to
Singapore 2019,
seem to hit quality problems afterwards?
Would of thought Boeing would need for a maintenance somesort of
quality control certification before being OK'ed?
Used to like Qantas safety 2nd to nonereputation and always used them.
Not happy with the video claim of alleged recent6000 deaths from Boeing aircraft mishaps.
On 1/4/2024 6:37 pm, Petzl wrote:
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 14:25:14 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 1/4/2024 1:10 pm, Petzl wrote:Never had problems with bad customer service, but air flights have
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 09:21:40 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 31/3/2024 3:22 am, Rod Speed wrote:Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:55:25 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a very >>>>> high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its being >>>>> reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears to be >>>>> maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note that 3 >>>>> recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported blamed >>>>> Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or lack
thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what that
failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing problem >>>>> but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance
issues,
not design or QC problems.
Seem to remember when Qantas shifted it's heavy maintenance to
Singapore 2019, seem to hit quality problems afterwards?
Would of thought Boeing would need for a maintenance some sort of
quality control certification before being OK'ed?
Certainly would, don't know if that certification comes from the
manufacturer or the local aviation authority, probably both.
Used to like Qantas safety 2nd to none reputation and always used
them.
They still have that safety reputation, shame that the way they have
treated their customers in recent years has been so poor.
become cheaper, would say it works both ways there are bad customers
also.
I was referring to their appalling on time/cancellation record in recent times, its pretty poor and even worse than their own low cost airline Jetstar.
The city of London put city circle public transport costs
(bus/rail) up to keep out the riff-raff, seemed to work.
LOL, I very much doubt that keeping riff raff out was the reason for a price increase.
Prices might be cheaper than during Covid but they are still up on pre Covid prices, I've been to London twice, 2014 and 2016 and both times
the flights were well under AU$2000 economy return, not easy to find flights that cheap unless you want to fly on a Chinese or other dodgy
Asian airline or willing to take about 34hrs+ to get there.
I looked again, over 10 years was not clearly mentioned,
Not happy with the video claim of alleged recent 6000 deaths from
Boeing aircraft mishaps.
9:29 minute mark
But he was emphasising problems blowing out this year.
I didn't watch the video to the very end but that number is bullshit if
it is saying the 6000 is "recent", there hasn't been that number of
people killed in all commercial aircraft crashes in the last 30yrs let
alone just Boeing aircraft.
If you count up the 4 most notable Boeing crashes including the 2 737
Max crashes plus MH370 and the Malaysian Airlines flight that was shoot
down over Ukraine that adds up to 868 fatalities.
Its crazy to blame Boeing for the loss of the 2 Malaysian Airlines
aircraft, one was shot down and the other seems to be due to a
deliberate act of someone on board.
If there was 6000 "recent" deaths on Boeing aircraft no one I know
would
be stupid enough to fly in one and all the aircraft would all be
grounded.
Not sure if the 10K figures included terrorism or what ever, maybe.
Like I said previously he and many other journalists blame Boeing for problems that are out of their control,
if your 10yr old car had a wheel fall off would you blame the car manufacturer?
Petzl wrote
Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a very
high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears to be
maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or lack
thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what that
failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance issues,
not design or QC problems.
Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
Seem to remember when Qantas shifted it's heavy maintenance to
Singapore 2019, seem to hit quality problems afterwards?
Would of thought Boeing would need for a maintenance some sort of
quality control certification before being OK'ed?
Certainly would, don't know if that certification comes from the manufacturer or the local aviation authority, probably both.
Used to like Qantas safety 2nd to nonereputation and always used them.
They still have that safety reputation,
shame that the way they have treated theircustomers in recent years has been so poor.
Not happy with the video claim of alleged recent6000 deaths from
Boeing aircraft mishaps.
I didn't watch the video to the very end but that number is bullshit if
it is saying the 6000 is "recent", there hasn't been that number of
people killed in all commercial aircraft crashes in the last 30yrs let alone just Boeing aircraft.
If you count up the 4 most notable Boeing crashes including the2 737
Max crashes plus MH370 and the Malaysian Airlines flightthat was shoot down over Ukraine that adds up to 868 fatalities.
Its crazy to blame Boeing for the loss of the 2 MalaysianAirlines aircraft, one was shot down and the otherseems to be due to a
deliberate act of someone on board.
If there was 6000 "recent" deaths on Boeing aircraftno one I know would
be stupid enough to fly in oneand all the aircraft would all be
grounded.
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 14:25:14 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 1/4/2024 1:10 pm, Petzl wrote:Never had problems with bad customer service, but air flights have
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 09:21:40 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 31/3/2024 3:22 am, Rod Speed wrote:Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:55:25 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a very
high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears to be
maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or lack
thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what that
failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance
issues,
not design or QC problems.
Seem to remember when Qantas shifted it's heavy maintenance to
Singapore 2019, seem to hit quality problems afterwards?
Would of thought Boeing would need for a maintenance some sort of
quality control certification before being OK'ed?
Certainly would, don't know if that certification comes from the
manufacturer or the local aviation authority, probably both.
Used to like Qantas safety 2nd to none reputation and always used
them.
They still have that safety reputation, shame that the way they have
treated their customers in recent years has been so poor.
become cheaper, would say it works both ways there are bad customers
also.
The city of London put city circle public transport costs
(bus/rail) up to keep out the riff-raff, seemed to work.
Not happy with the video claim of alleged recent 6000 deaths from
Boeing aircraft mishaps.
I looked again, over 10 years was not clearly mentioned,
9:29 minute mark
I didn't watch the video to the very end but that number is bullshit if
it is saying the 6000 is "recent", there hasn't been that number of
people killed in all commercial aircraft crashes in the last 30yrs let
alone just Boeing aircraft.
If you count up the 4 most notable Boeing crashes including the 2 737
Max crashes plus MH370 and the Malaysian Airlines flight that was shoot
down over Ukraine that adds up to 868 fatalities.
Its crazy to blame Boeing for the loss of the 2 Malaysian Airlines
aircraft, one was shot down and the other seems to be due to a
deliberate act of someone on board.
If there was 6000 "recent" deaths on Boeing aircraft no one I know would
be stupid enough to fly in one and all the aircraft would all be
grounded.
But he was emphasising problems blowing out this year.
Not sure if the 10K figures included terrorism or what ever, maybe.
I've been to London twice, 2014 and 2016 and both times
the flights were well under AU$2000 economy return,
Beats going broke like Virgin did.
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
Beats going broke like Virgin did.
Yes doubt if Australia can support the manyAirlines serving Australia maybe 3 at most.
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
Beats going broke like Virgin did.
Yes doubt if Australia can support the manyAirlines serving Australia
maybe 3 at most.
I thought Bonza might be gone by now.
Going to be interesting to watch.
Rex is expanding but is having a hell of
a problem with getting enough pilots.
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wroteCan't see that.
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wroteNot enough long term job's IMO
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wroteI thought Bonza might be gone by now.
Beats going broke like Virgin did.Yes doubt if Australia can support the many Airlines serving >>> Australia maybe 3 at most.
Going to be interesting to watch.
Rex is expanding but is having a hell of
a problem with getting enough pilots.
Sydney Mascot is moving half it's control tower staff.We'll see...
Moving them to Melbourne. <https://www.civilair.asn.au/news/2554-smh-plan-to-shift-half-of-sydney-s-air-traffic-controllers-to-melbourne>
https://t.ly/oLRI0
Plan to shift half of SydneyrCOs air traffic controllers to Melbourne Aircraft flying through all but a small part of greater SydneyrCOs
airspace would be handled by a control centre in Melbourne under a controversial plan partly aimed at cutting costs by shifting up to
half the cityrCOs air traffic controllers to Victoria.
Airservices AustraliarCOs plan to relocate up to 65 air traffic
controllers to Melbourne from its terminal control unit at Sydney
Airport is contained in internal briefing documents seen by The Sydney> Morning Herald and The Age.
On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 18:59:54 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote:
On 1/4/2024 6:37 pm, Petzl wrote:
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 14:25:14 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 1/4/2024 1:10 pm, Petzl wrote:Never had problems with bad customer service, but air flights have
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 09:21:40 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 31/3/2024 3:22 am, Rod Speed wrote:Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:55:25 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
-a-a-a-a https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a very >>>>>> high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its being >>>>>> reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears to be >>>>>> maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note that 3 >>>>>> recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported blamed >>>>>> Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or lack >>>>>> thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what that >>>>>> failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing problem >>>>>> but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance
issues,
not design or QC problems.
Seem to remember when Qantas shifted it's heavy maintenance to
Singapore 2019, seem to hit quality problems afterwards?
Would of thought Boeing would need for a maintenance some sort of
quality control certification before being OK'ed?
Certainly would, don't know if that certification comes from the
manufacturer or the local aviation authority, probably both.
Used to like Qantas safety 2nd to none reputation and always used
them.
They still have that safety reputation, shame that the way they have
treated their customers in recent years has been so poor.
become cheaper, would say it works both ways there are bad customers
also.
I was referring to their appalling on time/cancellation record in
recent times, its pretty poor and even worse than their own low cost
airline Jetstar.
The city of London put city circle public transport costs
(bus/rail) up to keep out the riff-raff, seemed to work.
LOL, I very much doubt that keeping riff raff out was the reason for a
price increase.
Prices might be cheaper than during Covid but they are still up on pre
Covid prices, I've been to London twice, 2014 and 2016 and both times
the flights were well under AU$2000 economy return, not easy to find
flights that cheap unless you want to fly on a Chinese or other dodgy
Asian airline or willing to take about 34hrs+ to get there.
I looked again, over 10 years was not clearly mentioned,
Not happy with the video claim of alleged recent 6000 deaths from
Boeing aircraft mishaps.
9:29 minute mark
But he was emphasising problems blowing out this year.
I didn't watch the video to the very end but that number is bullshit if >>>> it is saying the 6000 is "recent", there hasn't been that number of
people killed in all commercial aircraft crashes in the last 30yrs let >>>> alone just Boeing aircraft.
If you count up the 4 most notable Boeing crashes including the 2 737
Max crashes plus MH370 and the Malaysian Airlines flight that was shoot >>>> down over Ukraine that adds up to 868 fatalities.
Its crazy to blame Boeing for the loss of the 2 Malaysian Airlines
aircraft, one was shot down and the other seems to be due to a
deliberate act of someone on board.
If there was 6000 "recent" deaths on Boeing aircraft no one I know
would
be stupid enough to fly in one and all the aircraft would all be
grounded.
Not sure if the 10K figures included terrorism or what ever, maybe.
Like I said previously he and many other journalists blame Boeing for
problems that are out of their control,
if your 10yr old car had a wheel-a fall off would you blame the car
manufacturer?
Yes, if the design meant that that was even possible
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 18:59:54 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
I've been to London twice, 2014 and 2016 and both timesJust looked for next month return from Sydney to London
the flights were well under AU$2000 economy return,
https://t.ly/Udyzo
Economy 29 hours
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
Beats going broke like Virgin did.
Yes doubt if Australia can support the many Airlines serving
Australia maybe 3 at most.
I thought Bonza might be gone by now.
Going to be interesting to watch.
Rex is expanding but is having a hell of
a problem with getting enough pilots.
Not enough long term job's IMO
Can't see that.
Sydney Mascot is moving half it's control tower staff.
Moving them to Melbourne.
<https://www.civilair.asn.au/news/2554-smh-plan-to-shift-half-of-sydney-s-air-traffic-controllers-to-melbourne>
https://t.ly/oLRI0
Plan to shift half of SydneyAs air traffic controllers to Melbourne
Aircraft flying through all but a small part of greater SydneyAs
airspace would be handled by a control centre in Melbourne under a
controversial plan partly aimed at cutting costs by shifting up to
half the cityAs air traffic controllers to Victoria.
Airservices AustraliaAs plan to relocate up to 65 air traffic
controllers to Melbourne from its terminal control unit at Sydney
Airport is contained in internal briefing documents seen by The Sydney
Morning Herald and The Age.
We'll see...
On 2/4/2024 10:29 am, Petzl wrote:
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 18:59:54 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
I've been to London twice, 2014 and 2016 and both timesJust looked for next month return from Sydney to London
the flights were well under AU$2000 economy return,
https://t.ly/Udyzo
Economy 29 hours
29hrs means a long stop over in Singapore, try looking for flights with
less than 24 hrs total travel time and watch the prices increase.
On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 13:10:41 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 09:21:40 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 31/3/2024 3:22 am, Rod Speed wrote:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:55:25 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
-a-a https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a very
high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears to be
maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or lack
thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what that
failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance issues,
not design or QC problems.
Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
Presumably you lost a word there given you are blotto, as always.
If you meant Boeing maintenance person, there is no such individual.
Those allowed to do maintenance on heavys do maintenance on all
heavys, their qualification is not brand specific.
--Seem to remember when Qantas shiftedit's-a heavy maintenance to
Singapore 2019,
That isnt what happened.
seem to hit quality problems afterwards?
The union CLAIMED that and presented no evidence of that.
Would of thought Boeing would need for a maintenance somesort of
quality control certification before being OK'ed?
Boeing does not do that maintenance.
Used to like Qantas safety 2nd to nonereputation and always used-a them.
Its still true.
Not happy with the video claim of alleged recent6000 deaths from
Boeing aircraft mishaps.
Just because some fool claims something...
Why are you a sucker for every stupid claim going-a ?
Dementia is rife in this one.
Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
Presumably you lost a word there given you are blotto, as always.
If you meant Boeing maintenance person, there is no such individual.
I beg to differ. There are indeed licenced aircraft maintenance
engineers known in the industry as LAMEs. Not only are they *licenced*
but they are also required to be *type certified*. That means a LAME can
be type certified on Boeing 747s but not the Max. Type certification is >required in order to sign off on aircraft. So, yes, you can be a Boeing >maintenance person if they are the only aircraft you are certified to
work on. A friend here, a LAME(Engines-turbine) used to be certified for >specific Boeing commercial airliner aircraft types in his younger days
but those certs have long since lapsed. These days he remains certified
on smaller turbine aircraft, like the Cessnas, and even at the ripe old
age of 74, his services are still in high demand in Oceana and Africa,
https://www.casa.gov.au/licences-and-certificates/maintenance-engineers/about-aircraft-maintenance-engineers
Unlicensed aircraft maintenance engineers (AMEs) and licensed aircraft
On 2/4/2024 5:22 am, Rod Speed wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 18:59:54 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 1/4/2024 6:37 pm, Petzl wrote:Yes, if the design meant that that was even possible
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 14:25:14 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 1/4/2024 1:10 pm, Petzl wrote:Never had problems with bad customer service, but air flights have
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 09:21:40 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> >>>>>> wrote:
On 31/3/2024 3:22 am, Rod Speed wrote:Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:55:25 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a >>>>>>> very
high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its >>>>>>> being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears to >>>>>>> be
maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note >>>>>>> that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported >>>>>>> blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or lack >>>>>>> thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what that >>>>>>> failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing
problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance >>>>>>> issues,
not design or QC problems.
Seem to remember when Qantas shifted it's heavy maintenance to
Singapore 2019, seem to hit quality problems afterwards?
Would of thought Boeing would need for a maintenance some sort of
quality control certification before being OK'ed?
Certainly would, don't know if that certification comes from the
manufacturer or the local aviation authority, probably both.
Used to like Qantas safety 2nd to none reputation and always used
them.
They still have that safety reputation, shame that the way they have >>>>> treated their customers in recent years has been so poor.
become cheaper, would say it works both ways there are bad customers
also.
I was referring to their appalling on time/cancellation record in
recent times, its pretty poor and even worse than their own low cost
airline Jetstar.
The city of London put city circle public transport costs
(bus/rail) up to keep out the riff-raff, seemed to work.
LOL, I very much doubt that keeping riff raff out was the reason for a >>> price increase.
Prices might be cheaper than during Covid but they are still up on pre >>> Covid prices, I've been to London twice, 2014 and 2016 and both times
the flights were well under AU$2000 economy return, not easy to find
flights that cheap unless you want to fly on a Chinese or other dodgy
Asian airline or willing to take about 34hrs+ to get there.
I looked again, over 10 years was not clearly mentioned,
Not happy with the video claim of alleged recent 6000 deaths from
Boeing aircraft mishaps.
9:29 minute mark
But he was emphasising problems blowing out this year.
I didn't watch the video to the very end but that number is bullshit >>>>> if
it is saying the 6000 is "recent", there hasn't been that number of
people killed in all commercial aircraft crashes in the last 30yrs >>>>> let
alone just Boeing aircraft.
If you count up the 4 most notable Boeing crashes including the 2 737 >>>>> Max crashes plus MH370 and the Malaysian Airlines flight that was
shoot
down over Ukraine that adds up to 868 fatalities.
Its crazy to blame Boeing for the loss of the 2 Malaysian Airlines
aircraft, one was shot down and the other seems to be due to a
deliberate act of someone on board.
If there was 6000 "recent" deaths on Boeing aircraft no one I know >>>>> would
be stupid enough to fly in one and all the aircraft would all be
grounded.
Not sure if the 10K figures included terrorism or what ever, maybe.
Like I said previously he and many other journalists blame Boeing for
problems that are out of their control,
if your 10yr old car had a wheel fall off would you blame the car
manufacturer?
If wheels were regularly falling off the same make andmodel of car or aircraft then it could be a design fault
but if its just a random event
them more likely to be a maintenance issue.
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wroteSpecially thru the winter when far fewer
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wroteI thought Bonza might be gone by now.
Beats going broke like Virgin did.Yes doubt if Australia can support the many Airlines serving
Australia maybe 3 at most.
Going to be interesting to watch.
It wouldnt have been anything to do with the govt.Possibly "our" government believing it's own bull about theCan't see that.Rex is expanding but is having a hell ofNot enough long term job's IMO
a problem with getting enough pilots.
Sydney Mascot is moving half it's control tower staff.We'll see...
Moving them to Melbourne.
<https://www.civilair.asn.au/news/2554-smh-plan-to-shift-half-of-sydney-s-air-traffic-controllers-to-melbourne>
https://t.ly/oLRI0
Plan to shift half of SydneyrCOs air traffic controllers to Melbourne
Aircraft flying through all but a small part of greater SydneyrCOs
airspace would be handled by a control centre in Melbourne under a
controversial plan partly aimed at cutting costs by shifting up to
half the cityrCOs air traffic controllers to Victoria.
Airservices AustraliarCOs plan to relocate up to 65 air traffic
controllers to Melbourne from its terminal control unit at Sydney
Airport is contained in internal briefing documents seen by The Sydney
Morning Herald and The Age.
infrastructure for the Western Sydney Airport all that is showing is a> LGBTQ+ rainbow spiral
https://ibb.co/52ZsB5m
for a cost of more than $500 million to the , at least Thats what NSWJust because some fool polly claims something...
has paid the government bureaucrats have paid for infrastructure of
western Sydney aerotropolis Government oversight body!
Some big wheelers and dealers not seeing the humor in this joke https://t.ly/fAf5D
A case of don't believe everything you read!
Our Government and media often lies to us intentionally <https://www.governmentnews.com.au/bradfield-blueprint-slammed-for-lack-of-infrastructure-planning/>
https://t.ly/e7Vmt
Liverpool Mayor Ned Mannoun: infrastructure ignored
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a very
high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears to be
maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or lack
thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what that
failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance
issues, not design or QC problems.
Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
Presumably you lost a word there given you are blotto, as always.
If you meant Boeing maintenance person, there is no such individual.
I beg to differ.
There are indeed licenced aircraft maintenance engineers known in the industry as LAMEs.
Not only are they *licenced* but they are also required to be *type certified*.
That means a LAME can be type certifiedon Boeing 747s but not the Max.
Type certification is required in order to sign off on aircraft.
So, yes, you can be a Boeing maintenanceperson if they are the only aircraft you arecertified to work on.
A friend here, a LAME(Engines-turbine)
used to be certified for specific Boeing commercialairliner aircraft
types in his younger days
but those certs have long since lapsed. These days he remains certified
on smaller turbine aircraft, like the Cessnas, and even at the ripe old
age of 74, his services are still in high demand in Oceana and Africa,
https://www.casa.gov.au/licences-and-certificates/maintenance-engineers/about-aircraft-maintenance-engineers
Those allowed to do maintenance on heavys do maintenanceon all heavys,
their qualification is not brand specific.
Qualifications, no, type certificationis brand *and* aircraft type specific.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2Seem to remember when Qantas shifted
it's heavy maintenance to Singapore 2019,
That isnt what happened.
seem to hit quality problems afterwards?
The union CLAIMED that and presented no evidence of that.
Would of thought Boeing would need for a maintenance somesort of
quality control certification before being OK'ed?
Boeing does not do that maintenance.
Used to like Qantas safety 2nd to none
reputation and always used them.
Its still true.
Not happy with the video claim of alleged recent6000 deaths from
Boeing aircraft mishaps.
Just because some fool claims something...
Why are you a sucker for every stupid claim going ?
Dementia is rife in this one.
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 13:15:04 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 2/4/2024 10:29 am, Petzl wrote:
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 18:59:54 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
I've been to London twice, 2014 and 2016 and both timesJust looked for next month return from Sydney to London
the flights were well under AU$2000 economy return,
https://t.ly/Udyzo
Economy 29 hours
29hrs means a long stop over in Singapore, try looking for flights with
less than 24 hrs total travel time and watch the prices increase.
But cheaper if you go by others but you and luggage end up in another
carrier (but even cheaper). Seems AFIAK that is the only way to get to
London totally via Qantas?
29hrs you could break jet lag by splitting trip by a stay over in
Singapore catching QANTAS the next time it comes through?
On 2/4/2024 1:25 pm, Petzl wrote:
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 13:15:04 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 2/4/2024 10:29 am, Petzl wrote:
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 18:59:54 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
I've been to London twice, 2014 and 2016 and both timesJust looked for next month return from Sydney to London
the flights were well under AU$2000 economy return,
https://t.ly/Udyzo
Economy 29 hours
29hrs means a long stop over in Singapore, try looking for flights with
less than 24 hrs total travel time and watch the prices increase.
But cheaper if you go by others but you and luggage end up in another
carrier (but even cheaper). Seems AFIAK that is the only way to get to
London totally via Qantas?
29hrs you could break jet lag by splitting trip by a stay over in
Singapore catching QANTAS the next time it comes through?
I like to break up the trip with a stopover of at least a couple of
nights but my wife doesn't agree so guess who gets her way:-)
We stayed in Singapore for 3 nights on the way back in 2014.
I've never flown Qantas even when I used to fly to places for work, I
worked for Ford and they wouldn't use Qantas because at the time it was
Govt owned, we had to fly Ansett.
At Changi airport you can rent a hotel room in the terminal for enough
hours to have a shower and a few hours sleep before you continue your >journey, probably the same facilities are available in many big >international airports, great idea if you are traveling a very long >distance.
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
Beats going broke like Virgin did.
Yes doubt if Australia can support the many Airlines serving
Australia maybe 3 at most.
I thought Bonza might be gone by now.
Going to be interesting to watch.
Specially thru the winter when far fewer
will be travelling, even at their low fares.
Rex is expanding but is having a hell of
a problem with getting enough pilots.
Not enough long term job's IMO
Can't see that.
Sydney Mascot is moving half it's control tower staff.
Moving them to Melbourne.
<https://www.civilair.asn.au/news/2554-smh-plan-to-shift-half-of-sydney-s-air-traffic-controllers-to-melbourne>
https://t.ly/oLRI0
Plan to shift half of SydneyAs air traffic controllers to Melbourne
Aircraft flying through all but a small part of greater SydneyAs
airspace would be handled by a control centre in Melbourne under a
controversial plan partly aimed at cutting costs by shifting up to
half the cityAs air traffic controllers to Victoria.
Airservices AustraliaAs plan to relocate up to 65 air traffic
controllers to Melbourne from its terminal control unit at Sydney
Airport is contained in internal briefing documents seen by The Sydney >>>> Morning Herald and The Age.
We'll see...
Possibly "our" government believing it's own bull about the
infrastructure for the Western Sydney Airport all that is showing is a
LGBTQ+ rainbow spiral
https://ibb.co/52ZsB5m
It wouldnt have been anything to do with the govt.
for a cost of more than $500 million to the , at least Thats what NSW
has paid the government bureaucrats have paid for infrastructure of
western Sydney aerotropolis Government oversight body!
Some big wheelers and dealers not seeing the humor in this joke
https://t.ly/fAf5D
A case of don't believe everything you read!
Our Government and media often lies to us intentionally
<https://www.governmentnews.com.au/bradfield-blueprint-slammed-for-lack-of-infrastructure-planning/>
https://t.ly/e7Vmt
Liverpool Mayor Ned Mannoun: infrastructure ignored
Just because some fool polly claims something...
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wroteBecause it sort of worked in Canada and
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wroteFail to see why money is spent on somethingthat looks like it's going to > fail?
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wroteSpecially thru the winter when far fewer
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wroteI thought Bonza might be gone by now.
Beats going broke like Virgin did.Yes doubt if Australia can support the many Airlines serving
Australia maybe 3 at most.
Going to be interesting to watch.
will be travelling, even at their low fares.
Nothing to do with govt.Both sides have been led by Government Lobbyists and bureaucrats.It wouldnt have been anything to do with the govt.Possibly "our" government believing it's own bull about theCan't see that.Rex is expanding but is having a hell ofNot enough long term job's IMO
a problem with getting enough pilots.
Sydney Mascot is moving half it's control tower staff.We'll see...
Moving them to Melbourne.
<https://www.civilair.asn.au/news/2554-smh-plan-to-shift-half-of-sydney-s-air-traffic-controllers-to-melbourne>
https://t.ly/oLRI0
Plan to shift half of SydneyrCOs air traffic controllers to Melbourne >>>>> Aircraft flying through all but a small part of greater SydneyrCOs
airspace would be handled by a control centre in Melbourne under a>>>>> controversial plan partly aimed at cutting costs by shifting up to>>>>> half the cityrCOs air traffic controllers to Victoria.
Airservices AustraliarCOs plan to relocate up to 65 air traffic
controllers to Melbourne from its terminal control unit at Sydney
Airport is contained in internal briefing documents seen by The >>>>> Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.
infrastructure for the Western Sydney Airport all that is showing is a
LGBTQ+ rainbow spiral
https://ibb.co/52ZsB5m
Fantasy.Might. Seems to of stirred the NSW Government into gas lighting.for a cost of more than $500 million to the , at least Thats what NSWJust because some fool polly claims something...
has paid the government bureaucrats have paid for infrastructure of
western Sydney aerotropolis Government oversight body!
Some big wheelers and dealers not seeing the humor in this joke
https://t.ly/fAf5D
A case of don't believe everything you read!
Our Government and media often lies to us intentionally
<https://www.governmentnews.com.au/bradfield-blueprint-slammed-for-lack-of-infrastructure-planning/>
https://t.ly/e7Vmt
Liverpool Mayor Ned Mannoun: infrastructure ignored
But a lot of international investment is no longer interested and have> formally withdrawn support in going ahead with aerotropolis because it> is not moving.Fantasy
Why Australia moved away from France bull that aside from taking aTry that again in english. Not even google translate does gobbledegook yet.
billion dollars after 2 years they could not even show a office or
even a desk?
Albo has just paid AU$4 Billion to British PrimeMinister Rishi Sunak to > build our submarine.Fantasy.
The nuke engine is to be built in the US of A.Just because some fool claims something...
https://ibb.co/LNmMxdF
Mystically just after gave US$3 billion to the Ukraine.Fantasy
<https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/u-k-boosts-military-aid-to-ukraine-amid-u-s-deadlock-0523f356>Nothing whatever to do with ANZUS
https://t.ly/pysUI
LONDONrCoThe U.K. government pledged nearly $3 billion in fresh military support for Ukraine on Friday, the latest example of Europe bolstering> aid for the war-torn country as additional U.S. funding hangs in the--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
balance amid deadlock in Congress.
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing problem >>>>> but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance
issues,-a not design or QC problems.
Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
-aPresumably you lost a word there given you are blotto, as always.
-aIf you meant Boeing maintenance person, there is no such individual.
I beg to differ.
You are wrong.
There are indeed licenced aircraft maintenance engineers known in the
industry as LAMEs.
That's not a BOEING maintenance person. Like I said, they
are licensed to work on ALL aircraft, not just Boeings.
Not only are they *licenced*-a but they are also required to be *type
certified*.
But are not BRAND certified.
That means a LAME can-a be type certifiedon Boeing 747s but not the Max.
None are certified on all Boeing aircraft and no other aircraft.
Type certification is-a required in order to sign off on aircraft.
Duh.
So, yes, you can be a Boeing-a maintenanceperson if they are the only
aircraft you arecertified to-a work on.
But no one is ever certified on all BOEING aircraft.
And when something unusual shows up like say an
Antonov, and it needs something to be fixed, there is
never a situation where a lame who is certified on that
particular aircraft has to be flown in to do that work.
A friend here, a LAME(Engines-turbine)
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
-a-a https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a very >>>>> high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its being >>>>> reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears to be >>>>> maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note that 3 >>>>> recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported blamed >>>>> Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or lack
thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what that
failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing problem >>>>> but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance
issues,-a not design or QC problems.
Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
-aPresumably you lost a word there given you are blotto, as always.
-aIf you meant Boeing maintenance person, there is no such individual.
I beg to differ.
You are wrong.
There are indeed licenced aircraft maintenance engineers known in the
industry as LAMEs.
That's not a BOEING maintenance person. Like I said, they
are licensed to work on ALL aircraft, not just Boeings.
Not only are they *licenced*-a but they are also required to be *type
certified*.
But are not BRAND certified.
That means a LAME can-a be type certifiedon Boeing 747s but not the Max.
None are certified on all Boeing aircraft and no other aircraft.
Type certification is-a required in order to sign off on aircraft.
Duh.
So, yes, you can be a Boeing-a maintenanceperson if they are the only
aircraft you arecertified to-a work on.
But no one is ever certified on all BOEING aircraft.
And when something unusual shows up like say an
Antonov, and it needs something to be fixed, there is
never a situation where a lame who is certified on that
particular aircraft has to be flown in to do that work.
A friend here, a LAME(Engines-turbine)
Thats not a BRAND certification.
used to be certified for-a specific Boeing commercialairliner aircraft
types in his younger days
But was never certified on all Boeing aircraft.
but those certs have long since lapsed. These days he remains
certified on smaller turbine aircraft, like the Cessnas, and even at
the ripe old age of 74, his services are still in high demand in
Oceana and Africa,
Irrelevant to whether the lame must be certified on the
specific aircraft before they can legally do any work on
a particular aircaft which has a fault develop in it.
https://www.casa.gov.au/licences-and-certificates/maintenance-engineers/about-aircraft-maintenance-engineers
No news. I am a light aircraft owner.
<reams of shit that is no news at all and never
says that there are ever just BOEING specific LAMEs or AMEs
Those allowed to do maintenance on heavys do maintenanceon all
heavys, their qualification is not brand specific.
Qualifications, no, type certification is-abrand *and* aircraft type
specific.
Its nothing like as black and white as you are
ignorantly claiming, most obviously with the
work done on aircraft not usually seen.
On Tue, 02 Apr 2024 13:10:19 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote:
On 2/4/2024 5:22 am, Rod Speed wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 18:59:54 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 1/4/2024 6:37 pm, Petzl wrote:-aYes, if the design meant that that was even possible
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 14:25:14 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 1/4/2024 1:10 pm, Petzl wrote:Never had problems with bad customer service, but air flights have
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 09:21:40 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 31/3/2024 3:22 am, Rod Speed wrote:Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:55:25 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
-a-a-a-a https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a >>>>>>>> very
high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its >>>>>>>> being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears >>>>>>>> to be
maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note >>>>>>>> that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported >>>>>>>> blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or lack >>>>>>>> thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what that >>>>>>>> failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing >>>>>>>> problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance >>>>>>>> issues,
not design or QC problems.
Seem to remember when Qantas shifted it's heavy maintenance to
Singapore 2019, seem to hit quality problems afterwards?
Would of thought Boeing would need for a maintenance some sort of >>>>>>> quality control certification before being OK'ed?
Certainly would, don't know if that certification comes from the
manufacturer or the local aviation authority, probably both.
Used to like Qantas safety 2nd to none reputation and always used >>>>>>> them.
They still have that safety reputation, shame that the way they have >>>>>> treated their customers in recent years has been so poor.
become cheaper, would say it works both ways there are bad customers >>>>> also.
I was referring to their appalling on time/cancellation record in
recent times, its pretty poor and even worse than their own low cost
airline Jetstar.
The city of London put city circle public transport costs
(bus/rail) up to keep out the riff-raff, seemed to work.
LOL, I very much doubt that keeping riff raff out was the reason for
a price increase.
Prices might be cheaper than during Covid but they are still up on
pre Covid prices, I've been to London twice, 2014 and 2016 and both
times the flights were well under AU$2000 economy return, not easy
to find flights that cheap unless you want to fly on a Chinese or
other dodgy Asian airline or willing to take about 34hrs+ to get there. >>>>>>
I looked again, over 10 years was not clearly mentioned,Not happy with the video claim of alleged recent 6000 deaths from >>>>>>> Boeing aircraft mishaps.
9:29 minute mark
But he was emphasising problems blowing out this year.
I didn't watch the video to the very end but that number is
bullshit if
it is saying the 6000 is "recent", there hasn't been that number of >>>>>> people killed in all commercial aircraft crashes in the last 30yrs >>>>>> let
alone just Boeing aircraft.
If you count up the 4 most notable Boeing crashes including the 2 737 >>>>>> Max crashes plus MH370 and the Malaysian Airlines flight that was >>>>>> shoot
down over Ukraine that adds up to 868 fatalities.
Its crazy to blame Boeing for the loss of the 2 Malaysian Airlines >>>>>> aircraft, one was shot down and the other seems to be due to a
deliberate act of someone on board.
If there was 6000 "recent" deaths on Boeing aircraft no one I know >>>>>> would
be stupid enough to fly in one and all the aircraft would all be
grounded.
Not sure if the 10K figures included terrorism or what ever, maybe.
Like I said previously he and many other journalists blame Boeing
for problems that are out of their control,
if your 10yr old car had a wheel-a fall off would you blame the car
manufacturer?
If wheels were regularly falling off the same make andmodel-a of car
or-a aircraft then it could be a design fault
Of course it would be. Wheels shouldnt ever fall off.
but if its just a random event
A wheel falling off never is. It has fallen off for a reason.
them more likely to be a maintenance issue.
You shouldnt have to do any maintenance to stop the wheel
falling off. It should be designed so that it doesnt fall off.
Rod Speed wrote
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing
problem but many of the other problems blamed on Boeingare
maintenance issues, not design or QC problems.
Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
Presumably you lost a word there given you are blotto, as always.
If you meant Boeing maintenance person, there is no such individual.
I beg to differ.
You are wrong.
There are indeed licenced aircraft maintenanceengineers known in the
industry as LAMEs.
That's not a BOEING maintenance person. Like I said, they
are licensed to work on ALL aircraft, not just Boeings.
Not only are they *licenced* but they arealso required to be *type
certified*.
But are not BRAND certified.
That means a LAME can be type certifiedon Boeing 747s but not the Max.
None are certified on all Boeing aircraft and no other aircraft.
Type certification is required in order to sign off on aircraft.
Duh.
So, yes, you can be a Boeing maintenanceperson if they are the only
aircraft you arecertified to work on.
But no one is ever certified on all BOEING aircraft.
And when something unusual shows up like say an
Antonov, and it needs something to be fixed, there is
never a situation where a lame who is certified on that
particular aircraft has to be flown in to do that work.
A friend here, a LAME(Engines-turbine)
And as usual, Tomas/xeno pulls a "friend" out of his arse totry to give his imagination some credence.... an example:
All information per a friend who is a seismic survey navigator, now retired, who spent a lifetime navigating seismic survey vessels all over the worlds oceans in search of oil." 03/04/17 1.29pm
and then, in the space of 1 hour 10 mins, he passes it off as his knowledge:
"New found knowledge? Ocean currents, winds, etc. was something I learnt
at school, both primary and high school. Geography, remember that?" 03/04/17 2.40pm
Oceanography, in geography class, in primary school?? Tomas is suffering from early Altz. Has been for some time, right xeno/kryspis?
Rod Speed wrote
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
You are wrong.<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a very >>>>>> high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its
being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears to be >>>>>> maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note that >>>>>> 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported
blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or lack >>>>>> thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what that >>>>>> failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing
problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance
issues, not design or QC problems.
Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
Presumably you lost a word there given you are blotto, as always.
If you meant Boeing maintenance person, there is no such individual.
I beg to differ.
There are indeed licenced aircraft maintenance engineers known in theThat's not a BOEING maintenance person. Like I said, they
industry as LAMEs.
are licensed to work on ALL aircraft, not just Boeings.
Not only are they *licenced* but they are also required to be *typeBut are not BRAND certified.
certified*.
That means a LAME can be type certifiedon Boeing 747s but not the Max.None are certified on all Boeing aircraft and no other aircraft.
Type certification is required in order to sign off on aircraft.Duh.
So, yes, you can be a Boeing maintenanceperson if they are the onlyBut no one is ever certified on all BOEING aircraft.
aircraft you arecertified to work on.
You need to have training/certification on every aircraft type
so it is customary to only be certifiedon a limited subset, even of a brand.
And when something unusual shows up like say an
Antonov, and it needs something to be fixed, there is
never a situation where a lame who is certified on that
particular aircraft has to be flown in to do that work.
Bzzzztt, wrong, wrong, wrong. The plane will not leave theground unless/until a *type certified LAME signs off on it*.
They WILL fly LAMEs all over to do exactly what you deny happens.
My friend often gets plane tips to Africa to service/
repair specific aircraft that he is certified for.
He was recently flown to one of the far flung Pacific islands to do an engine change and tail sectionchange - million dollar repair job.
Did I mention he is a LAME(engines), LAME(Airframe) and
LAME(Electrical). So, yes, they do fly certified LAMEs all over.
Remember, no sign off, no fly!
A friend here, a LAME(Engines-turbine)
Thats not a BRAND certification.
Never said it was.
It's just what he specialises these days. He did rattle offthe types he was certified for but I cannot recall them all. The Cessna Caravan was
one, the Beechcraft King Air another.
This be the man! We even went to the samehigh school albeit at
different times.
https://au.linkedin.com/in/graeme-sambell-b2269337
used to be certified for specific Boeing commercialairliner aircraft
types in his younger days
But was never certified on all Boeing aircraft.
No one is. You have to do certification for any new aircraft.You also
have to recertify if you let the certification lapse,ie. not work on
one of said type for extended periods.
LAMEs will only certify for aircraft that they willencounter on a day
to day basis, gets a bit time consuming and expensive otherwise.
but those certs have long since lapsed. These days he remains
certified on smaller turbine aircraft, like the Cessnas, and even at
the ripe old age of 74, his services are still in high demand in
Oceana and Africa,
Irrelevant to whether the lame must be certified on the
specific aircraft before they can legally do any work on
a particular aircaft which has a fault develop in it.
https://www.casa.gov.au/licences-and-certificates/maintenance-engineers/about-aircraft-maintenance-engineersNo news. I am a light aircraft owner.
But not a certified LAME.
<reams of shit that is no news at all and never
says that there are ever just BOEING specific LAMEs or AMEs
If all you have ever worked on and are certified for areBoeing
aircraft, then you are a Boeing specific LAME.
Those allowed to do maintenance on heavys do maintenanceon all
heavys, their qualification is not brand specific.
Qualifications, no, type certification is brand *and* aircraft type
specific.
Its nothing like as black and white as you are
ignorantly claiming, most obviously with the
work done on aircraft not usually seen.
If you have no one who is *certified* to work on a specific aircraft brand/type, that aircraft doesn't leave the ground since it has to be signed off by a type certified LAME.
On 2/4/2024 3:01 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
On Tue, 02 Apr 2024 13:10:19 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 2/4/2024 5:22 am, Rod Speed wrote:Of course it would be. Wheels shouldnt ever fall off.
On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 18:59:54 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> >>>> wrote:
On 1/4/2024 6:37 pm, Petzl wrote:Yes, if the design meant that that was even possible
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 14:25:14 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> >>>>>> wrote:
On 1/4/2024 1:10 pm, Petzl wrote:Never had problems with bad customer service, but air flights have >>>>>> become cheaper, would say it works both ways there are bad customers >>>>>> also.
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 09:21:40 +1100, Daryl
<dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:
On 31/3/2024 3:22 am, Rod Speed wrote:Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:55:25 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>Just because some fool claims something...
https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered >>>>>>>>>>
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a >>>>>>>>> very
high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its >>>>>>>>> being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears >>>>>>>>> to be
maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note >>>>>>>>> that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported >>>>>>>>> blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or >>>>>>>>> lack
thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what >>>>>>>>> that
failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing >>>>>>>>> problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance >>>>>>>>> issues,
not design or QC problems.
Seem to remember when Qantas shifted it's heavy maintenance to >>>>>>>> Singapore 2019, seem to hit quality problems afterwards?
Would of thought Boeing would need for a maintenance some sort of >>>>>>>> quality control certification before being OK'ed?
Certainly would, don't know if that certification comes from the >>>>>>> manufacturer or the local aviation authority, probably both.
Used to like Qantas safety 2nd to none reputation and always used >>>>>>>> them.
They still have that safety reputation, shame that the way they >>>>>>> have
treated their customers in recent years has been so poor.
I was referring to their appalling on time/cancellation record in
recent times, its pretty poor and even worse than their own low cost >>>>> airline Jetstar.
The city of London put city circle public transport costs
(bus/rail) up to keep out the riff-raff, seemed to work.
LOL, I very much doubt that keeping riff raff out was the reason for >>>>> a price increase.
Prices might be cheaper than during Covid but they are still up on >>>>> pre Covid prices, I've been to London twice, 2014 and 2016 and both >>>>> times the flights were well under AU$2000 economy return, not easy >>>>> to find flights that cheap unless you want to fly on a Chinese or
other dodgy Asian airline or willing to take about 34hrs+ to get
there.
Like I said previously he and many other journalists blame BoeingI looked again, over 10 years was not clearly mentioned,
Not happy with the video claim of alleged recent 6000 deaths from >>>>>>>> Boeing aircraft mishaps.
9:29 minute mark
But he was emphasising problems blowing out this year.
I didn't watch the video to the very end but that number is
bullshit if
it is saying the 6000 is "recent", there hasn't been that number of >>>>>>> people killed in all commercial aircraft crashes in the last 30yrs >>>>>>> let
alone just Boeing aircraft.
If you count up the 4 most notable Boeing crashes including the 2 >>>>>>> 737
Max crashes plus MH370 and the Malaysian Airlines flight that was >>>>>>> shoot
down over Ukraine that adds up to 868 fatalities.
Its crazy to blame Boeing for the loss of the 2 Malaysian Airlines >>>>>>> aircraft, one was shot down and the other seems to be due to a
deliberate act of someone on board.
If there was 6000 "recent" deaths on Boeing aircraft no one I know >>>>>>> would
be stupid enough to fly in one and all the aircraft would all be >>>>>>> grounded.
Not sure if the 10K figures included terrorism or what ever, maybe. >>>>>
for problems that are out of their control,
if your 10yr old car had a wheel fall off would you blame the car >>>>> manufacturer?
If wheels were regularly falling off the same make andmodel of car
or aircraft then it could be a design fault
but if its just a random eventA wheel falling off never is. It has fallen off for a reason.
them more likely to be a maintenance issue.You shouldnt have to do any maintenance to stop the wheel
falling off. It should be designed so that it doesnt fall off.
Correct, most likely the wheel fell off because whoever was doing maintenance such as replacing a tyre or repairing a brake didn't refit
the wheel correctly therefore it was a maintenance done improperly issue. I've seen quite a few car wheels fall off because who ever fitted the
wheel didn't do the nuts/lugs up correctly.
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
-aYou are wrong.<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
-a-a https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a very >>>>>>> high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its >>>>>>> being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears to be >>>>>>> maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note
that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported
blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or lack >>>>>>> thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what that >>>>>>> failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing
problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance >>>>>>> issues,-a not design or QC problems.
Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
-aPresumably you lost a word there given you are blotto, as always.I beg to differ.
-aIf you meant Boeing maintenance person, there is no such individual. >>>
There are indeed licenced aircraft maintenance engineers known in-aThat's not a BOEING maintenance person. Like I said, they
the industry as LAMEs.
are licensed to work on ALL aircraft, not just Boeings.
Not only are they *licenced*-a but they are also required to be *type >>>> certified*.-aBut are not BRAND certified.
That means a LAME can-a be type certifiedon Boeing 747s but not the Max. >>> -aNone are certified on all Boeing aircraft and no other aircraft.-aDuh.
Type certification is-a required in order to sign off on aircraft.
So, yes, you can be a Boeing-a maintenanceperson if they are the only >>>> aircraft you arecertified to-a work on.-aBut no one is ever certified on all BOEING aircraft.
You need to have training/certification on every aircraft type
Wrong. Most obviously when something
needs to be done on an unusual aircraft.
so it is-a customary to only be certifiedon a limited subset, even of a
brand.
So there is no such animal as a Boeing maintenance person.
-aAnd when something unusual shows up like say an
Antonov, and it needs something to be fixed, there is
never a situation where a lame who is certified on that
particular aircraft has to be flown in to do that work.
Bzzzztt, wrong, wrong, wrong. The plane will not leave theground
unless/until a *type certified LAME signs off on it*.
Wrong, as always.
They WILL fly-a LAMEs all over to do exactly what you deny happens.
Ignorant fantasy. Read the memoirs of those who specialise
in ferrying aircraft. Those do often end up with maintenance
problem and they are not stuck on the ground until a LAME
who is type certified for that particular aircraft is flown in
to sign off on the work that has been done.
My friend often gets-a plane tips to Africa to service/
repair specific aircraft that he is-a certified for.
That's for his specialised knowledge, not because
he is certified on that particular aircraft.
If he actually exists and isnt just another of your inventions.
He was recently flown to one of the far flung Pacific islands to do an
engine change and tail sectionchange - million dollar-a repair job.
Because that place didnt have anyone who
could do that work, not because he is type
certified for that particular aircraft.
Did I mention he is a LAME(engines), LAME(Airframe) and
LAME(Electrical). So, yes, they do fly certified LAMEs all over.
Remember, no sign off, no fly!
But that LAME does not have to be certified
FOR THAT PARTICULAR AIRCRAFT TYPE.
A friend here, a LAME(Engines-turbine)
-aThats not a BRAND certification.
Never said it was.
That is what we are discussing.
It's just what he specialises these days. He did-a rattle offthe types
he was certified for but I cannot recall them all. The Cessna Caravan
was one, the Beechcraft King Air another.
But that does NOT mean that he has to be certified
for every aircraft type he signs work off on.
This be the man! We even went to the samehigh school albeit at
different times.
https://au.linkedin.com/in/graeme-sambell-b2269337
Irrelevant to your ignorant claim that the LAME that
signs off on work done has to be type certified for
the aircraft whose work is being signed off on.
used to be certified for-a specific Boeing commercialairliner
aircraft types in his younger days
-aBut was never certified on all Boeing aircraft.
No one is. You have to do certification for any new aircraft.You also
have to recertify if you let the certification lapse,ie. not work on
one of said type for extended periods.
Utterly ignorantly mangled all over again.
LAMEs will only certify for-a aircraft that they willencounter-a on a
day to day basis, gets a bit time consuming and expensive otherwise.
Utterly ignorantly mangled all over again.
That was never the case with our LAME and we at one time own
the Fairchild 24 and he had never seen one of those before and it
isnt even possible to get certified on those. Its still flying even now.
but those certs have long since lapsed. These days he remains
certified on smaller turbine aircraft, like the Cessnas, and even at
the ripe old age of 74, his services are still in high demand in
Oceana and Africa,
-aIrrelevant to whether the lame must be certified on the
specific aircraft before they can legally do any work on
a particular aircaft which has a fault develop in it.
https://www.casa.gov.au/licences-and-certificates/maintenance-engineers/about-aircraft-maintenance-engineers-aNo news. I am a light aircraft owner.
But not a certified LAME.
Don't need to be given I know the vast range of stuff ours signs off on.
And one of us used to work for him.
-a<reams of shit that is no news at all and never
says that there are ever just BOEING specific LAMEs or AMEs
If all you have ever worked on and are certified for areBoeing
aircraft, then you are a Boeing specific LAME.
Wrong, as always.
--Those allowed to do maintenance on heavys do maintenanceon all
heavys, their qualification is not brand specific.
Qualifications, no, type certification is brand *and* aircraft type
specific.
-aIts nothing like as black and white as you are
ignorantly claiming, most obviously with the
work done on aircraft not usually seen.
If you have no one who is *certified* to work on a specific aircraft
brand/type, that aircraft doesn't leave the ground since it has to be
signed off by a type certified LAME.
Wrong, as always. And we know that because we owned
a Fairchild 24 at one time that no one was type certified on.
You don't have a fucking clue what a LAME can sign off on.
Rod Speed wrote
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Wrong. Most obviously when somethingYou are wrong.<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>
https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered
Just because some fool claims something...
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a >>>>>>>> very
high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its >>>>>>>> being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears to >>>>>>>> be
maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note >>>>>>>> that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported >>>>>>>> blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or >>>>>>>> lack
thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what >>>>>>>> that
failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing >>>>>>>> problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance >>>>>>>> issues, not design or QC problems.
Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
Presumably you lost a word there given you are blotto, as always. >>>>>> If you meant Boeing maintenance person, there is no such
individual.
I beg to differ.
There are indeed licenced aircraft maintenance engineers known inThat's not a BOEING maintenance person. Like I said, they
the industry as LAMEs.
are licensed to work on ALL aircraft, not just Boeings.
Not only are they *licenced* but they are also required to be *type >>>>> certified*.But are not BRAND certified.
That means a LAME can be type certifiedon Boeing 747s but not the >>>>> Max.None are certified on all Boeing aircraft and no other aircraft.
Type certification is required in order to sign off on aircraft.Duh.
So, yes, you can be a Boeing maintenanceperson if they are the only >>>>> aircraft you arecertified to work on.But no one is ever certified on all BOEING aircraft.
You need to have training/certification on every aircraft type
needs to be done on an unusual aircraft.
so it is customary to only be certifiedon a limited subset, even of a >>> brand.So there is no such animal as a Boeing maintenance person.
Wrong, as always.And when something unusual shows up like say an
Antonov, and it needs something to be fixed, there is
never a situation where a lame who is certified on that
particular aircraft has to be flown in to do that work.
Bzzzztt, wrong, wrong, wrong. The plane will not leave theground
unless/until a *type certified LAME signs off on it*.
They WILL fly LAMEs all over to do exactly what you deny happens.Ignorant fantasy. Read the memoirs of those who specialise
in ferrying aircraft. Those do often end up with maintenance
problem and they are not stuck on the ground until a LAME
who is type certified for that particular aircraft is flown in
to sign off on the work that has been done.
My friend often gets plane tips to Africa to service/That's for his specialised knowledge, not because
repair specific aircraft that he is certified for.
he is certified on that particular aircraft.
If he actually exists and isnt just another of your inventions.
https://au.linkedin.com/in/graeme-sambell-b2269337
Note his current domicile.
Also note where he attended high school.If you look at my LinkedIn profile,
you'll see we both come from the same state and attended the same high school.
He was recently flown to one of the far flung Pacific islands to do an >>> engine change and tail sectionchange - million dollar repair job.
Because that place didnt have anyone who
could do that work, not because he is type
certified for that particular aircraft.
No, it was because the plane was damaged in an accidentand it needed certification before it could fly again. Hedid the repair, he then did
the certification.
Did I mention he is a LAME(engines), LAME(Airframe) andBut that LAME does not have to be certified
LAME(Electrical). So, yes, they do fly certified LAMEs all over.
Remember, no sign off, no fly!
FOR THAT PARTICULAR AIRCRAFT TYPE.
He does
and he is.
That is what we are discussing.A friend here, a LAME(Engines-turbine)
Thats not a BRAND certification.
Never said it was.
It's just what he specialises these days. He did rattle offthe typesBut that does NOT mean that he has to be certified
he was certified for but I cannot recall them all. The Cessna Caravan
was one, the Beechcraft King Air another.
for every aircraft type he signs work off on.
He can only sign off for work done on aircraft he is certified for.
This be the man! We even went to the samehigh school albeit atIrrelevant to your ignorant claim that the LAME that
different times.
https://au.linkedin.com/in/graeme-sambell-b2269337
signs off on work done has to be type certified for
the aircraft whose work is being signed off on.
Utterly ignorantly mangled all over again.used to be certified for specific Boeing commercialairliner
aircraft types in his younger days
But was never certified on all Boeing aircraft.
No one is. You have to do certification for any new aircraft.You also >>> have to recertify if you let the certification lapse,ie. not work on
one of said type for extended periods.
Nope, recertification was something we discussed on our last catchup.
LAMEs will only certify for aircraft that they willencounter on aUtterly ignorantly mangled all over again.
day to day basis, gets a bit time consuming and expensive otherwise.
That was never the case with our LAME and we at one time own
the Fairchild 24 and he had never seen one of those before and it
isnt even possible to get certified on those. Its still flying even now.
FFS, those things are ancient history!
Are they even certified to fly these days?
Don't need to be given I know the vast range of stuff ours signs offbut those certs have long since lapsed. These days he remains
certified on smaller turbine aircraft, like the Cessnas, and even at >>>>> the ripe old age of 74, his services are still in high demand in
Oceana and Africa,
Irrelevant to whether the lame must be certified on the
specific aircraft before they can legally do any work on
a particular aircaft which has a fault develop in it.
https://www.casa.gov.au/licences-and-certificates/maintenance-engineers/about-aircraft-maintenance-engineersNo news. I am a light aircraft owner.
But not a certified LAME.
on.
And one of us used to work for him.
Wrong, as always.<reams of shit that is no news at all and never
says that there are ever just BOEING specific LAMEs or AMEs
If all you have ever worked on and are certified for areBoeing
aircraft, then you are a Boeing specific LAME.
Prove it.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2Wrong, as always. And we know that because we ownedThose allowed to do maintenance on heavys do maintenanceon all
heavys, their qualification is not brand specific.
Qualifications, no, type certification is brand *and* aircraft type >>>>> specific.
Its nothing like as black and white as you are
ignorantly claiming, most obviously with the
work done on aircraft not usually seen.
If you have no one who is *certified* to work on a specific aircraft
brand/type, that aircraft doesn't leave the ground since it has to be
signed off by a type certified LAME.
a Fairchild 24 at one time that no one was type certified on.
You don't have a fucking clue what a LAME can sign off on.
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
-aWrong. Most obviously when something-aYou are wrong.<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>Just because some fool claims something...
-a-a https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered >>>>>>>>>>
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a >>>>>>>>> very
high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its >>>>>>>>> being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears >>>>>>>>> to be
maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note >>>>>>>>> that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported >>>>>>>>> blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or >>>>>>>>> lack
thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what >>>>>>>>> that
failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing >>>>>>>>> problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance >>>>>>>>> issues,-a not design or QC problems.
Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
-aPresumably you lost a word there given you are blotto, as always. >>>>>>> -aIf you meant Boeing maintenance person, there is no such
individual.
I beg to differ.
There are indeed licenced aircraft maintenance engineers known in >>>>>> the industry as LAMEs.-aThat's not a BOEING maintenance person. Like I said, they
are licensed to work on ALL aircraft, not just Boeings.
Not only are they *licenced*-a but they are also required to be-aBut are not BRAND certified.
*type certified*.
That means a LAME can-a be type certifiedon Boeing 747s but not the >>>>>> Max.-aNone are certified on all Boeing aircraft and no other aircraft.
Type certification is-a required in order to sign off on aircraft.-aDuh.
So, yes, you can be a Boeing-a maintenanceperson if they are the-aBut no one is ever certified on all BOEING aircraft.
only aircraft you arecertified to-a work on.
You need to have training/certification on every aircraft type
needs to be done on an unusual aircraft.
so it is-a customary to only be certifiedon a limited subset, even of >>>> a brand.-aSo there is no such animal as a Boeing maintenance person.
-aWrong, as always.-aAnd when something unusual shows up like say an
Antonov, and it needs something to be fixed, there is
never a situation where a lame who is certified on that
particular aircraft has to be flown in to do that work.
Bzzzztt, wrong, wrong, wrong. The plane will not leave theground
unless/until a *type certified LAME signs off on it*.
They WILL fly-a LAMEs all over to do exactly what you deny happens.-aIgnorant fantasy. Read the memoirs of those who specialise
in ferrying aircraft. Those do often end up with maintenance
problem and they are not stuck on the ground until a LAME
who is type certified for that particular aircraft is flown in
to sign off on the work that has been done.
My friend often gets-a plane tips to Africa to service/-aThat's for his specialised knowledge, not because
repair specific aircraft that he is-a certified for.
he is certified on that particular aircraft.
-aIf he actually exists and isnt just another of your inventions.
https://au.linkedin.com/in/graeme-sambell-b2269337
Easy to find someone like that and claim you know them.
Note his current domicile.
Irrelevant to whether a LAME can sign off work on
an aircraft for which he is not currently certified for.
Also note where he attended high school.If-a you-a look at my LinkedIn
profile,
No Xeno on Linkedin.
--you'll see we both come-a from the same state-a and attended the same
high school.
He was recently flown to one of the far flung Pacific islands to do
an engine change and tail sectionchange - million dollar-a repair job.
-aBecause that place didnt have anyone who
could do that work, not because he is type
certified for that particular aircraft.
No, it was because the plane was damaged in an accidentand it needed
certification before it could fly again. Hedid the repair, he then
did-a the certification.
I meant he didnt have to have type certification for that particular aircraft.
Did I mention he is a LAME(engines), LAME(Airframe) and-aBut that LAME does not have to be certified
LAME(Electrical). So, yes, they do fly certified LAMEs all over.
Remember, no sign off, no fly!
FOR THAT PARTICULAR AIRCRAFT TYPE.
He does
Wrong, as always.
and he is.
Irrelevant.
-aThat is what we are discussing.A friend here, a LAME(Engines-turbine)
-aThats not a BRAND certification.
Never said it was.
It's just what he specialises these days. He did-a rattle offthe-aBut that does NOT mean that he has to be certified
types he was certified for but I cannot recall them all. The Cessna
Caravan was one, the Beechcraft King Air another.
for every aircraft type he signs work off on.
He can only sign off for work done on aircraft he is certified for.
Wrong, as always.
This be the man! We even went to the samehigh school albeit at-aIrrelevant to your ignorant claim that the LAME that
different times.
https://au.linkedin.com/in/graeme-sambell-b2269337
signs off on work done has to be type certified for
the aircraft whose work is being signed off on.
-aUtterly ignorantly mangled all over again.used to be certified for-a specific Boeing commercialairliner
aircraft types in his younger days
-aBut was never certified on all Boeing aircraft.
No one is. You have to do certification for any new aircraft.You
also-a have to recertify if you let the certification lapse,ie. not
work on-a one of said type for extended periods.
Nope, recertification was something we discussed on our last catchup.
You don't have a fucking clue about what is legally required.
LAMEs will only certify for-a aircraft that they willencounter-a on a >>>> day to day basis, gets a bit time consuming and expensive otherwise.-aUtterly ignorantly mangled all over again.
-aThat was never the case with our LAME and we at one time own
the Fairchild 24 and he had never seen one of those before and it
isnt even possible to get certified on those. Its still flying even now.
FFS, those things are ancient history!
Irrelevant to your pig ignorant claim that any LAME has to be
type certified to be able to sign off on work done on one of those.
Are they even certified to fly-a these days?
Corse they are.
-aDon't need to be given I know the vast range of stuff ours signs offbut those certs have long since lapsed. These days he remains
certified on smaller turbine aircraft, like the Cessnas, and even >>>>>> at the ripe old age of 74, his services are still in high demand
in Oceana and Africa,
-aIrrelevant to whether the lame must be certified on the
specific aircraft before they can legally do any work on
a particular aircaft which has a fault develop in it.
https://www.casa.gov.au/licences-and-certificates/maintenance-engineers/about-aircraft-maintenance-engineers-aNo news. I am a light aircraft owner.
But not a certified LAME.
on.
And one of us used to work for him.
-aWrong, as always.-a<reams of shit that is no news at all and never
says that there are ever just BOEING specific LAMEs or AMEs
If all you have ever worked on and are certified for areBoeing
aircraft, then you are a Boeing specific LAME.
Prove it.
YOU made the claim.
YOU get to do the proving.
THAT'S how it works.
-aWrong, as always. And we know that because we ownedThose allowed to do maintenance on heavys do maintenanceon all >>>>>>> heavys, their qualification is not brand specific.
Qualifications, no, type certification is brand *and* aircraft
type-a specific.
-aIts nothing like as black and white as you are
ignorantly claiming, most obviously with the
work done on aircraft not usually seen.
If you have no one who is *certified* to work on a specific aircraft
brand/type, that aircraft doesn't leave the ground since it has to
be signed off by a type certified LAME.
a Fairchild 24 at one time that no one was type certified on.
-aYou don't have a fucking clue what a LAME can sign off on.
Rod Speed wrote
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Wrong. Most obviously when somethingYou are wrong.<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>Just because some fool claims something...
https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered >>>>>>>>>>>
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and a >>>>>>>>>> very
high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way its >>>>>>>>>> being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what appears >>>>>>>>>> to be
maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to note >>>>>>>>>> that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news reported >>>>>>>>>> blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance or >>>>>>>>>> lack
thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so what >>>>>>>>>> that
failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing >>>>>>>>>> problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are maintenance >>>>>>>>>> issues, not design or QC problems.
Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
Presumably you lost a word there given you are blotto, as always. >>>>>>>> If you meant Boeing maintenance person, there is no such
individual.
I beg to differ.
There are indeed licenced aircraft maintenance engineers known in >>>>>>> the industry as LAMEs.That's not a BOEING maintenance person. Like I said, they
are licensed to work on ALL aircraft, not just Boeings.
Not only are they *licenced* but they are also required to be >>>>>>> *type certified*.But are not BRAND certified.
That means a LAME can be type certifiedon Boeing 747s but not the >>>>>>> Max.None are certified on all Boeing aircraft and no other aircraft.
Type certification is required in order to sign off on aircraft. >>>>>> Duh.But no one is ever certified on all BOEING aircraft.
So, yes, you can be a Boeing maintenanceperson if they are the >>>>>>> only aircraft you arecertified to work on.
You need to have training/certification on every aircraft type
needs to be done on an unusual aircraft.
so it is customary to only be certifiedon a limited subset, even of >>>>> a brand.So there is no such animal as a Boeing maintenance person.
Wrong, as always.And when something unusual shows up like say an
Antonov, and it needs something to be fixed, there is
never a situation where a lame who is certified on that
particular aircraft has to be flown in to do that work.
Bzzzztt, wrong, wrong, wrong. The plane will not leave theground
unless/until a *type certified LAME signs off on it*.
They WILL fly LAMEs all over to do exactly what you deny happens.Ignorant fantasy. Read the memoirs of those who specialise
in ferrying aircraft. Those do often end up with maintenance
problem and they are not stuck on the ground until a LAME
who is type certified for that particular aircraft is flown in
to sign off on the work that has been done.
My friend often gets plane tips to Africa to service/That's for his specialised knowledge, not because
repair specific aircraft that he is certified for.
he is certified on that particular aircraft.
If he actually exists and isnt just another of your inventions.
https://au.linkedin.com/in/graeme-sambell-b2269337
Easy to find someone like that and claim you know them.
We live in the same town, we come from the same area in the same state, went to the same high school, he lives a mere 3 kilometres from me as
the crow files and I have been to his home on numerous occasions - but
he isn't home very often.
Note his current domicile.Irrelevant to whether a LAME can sign off work on
an aircraft for which he is not currently certified for.
Also note where he attended high school.If you look at my LinkedIn
profile,
No Xeno on Linkedin.
Look for my real name, it's been bandied around here often enough.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2you'll see we both come from the same state and attended the sameI meant he didnt have to have type certification for that particular
high school.
He was recently flown to one of the far flung Pacific islands to do >>>>> an engine change and tail sectionchange - million dollar repair job.
Because that place didnt have anyone who
could do that work, not because he is type
certified for that particular aircraft.
No, it was because the plane was damaged in an accidentand it needed
certification before it could fly again. Hedid the repair, he then
did the certification.
aircraft.
Wrong, as always.Did I mention he is a LAME(engines), LAME(Airframe) andBut that LAME does not have to be certified
LAME(Electrical). So, yes, they do fly certified LAMEs all over.
Remember, no sign off, no fly!
FOR THAT PARTICULAR AIRCRAFT TYPE.
He does
and he is.Irrelevant.
Wrong, as always.That is what we are discussing.A friend here, a LAME(Engines-turbine)
Thats not a BRAND certification.
Never said it was.
It's just what he specialises these days. He did rattle offtheBut that does NOT mean that he has to be certified
types he was certified for but I cannot recall them all. The Cessna >>>>> Caravan was one, the Beechcraft King Air another.
for every aircraft type he signs work off on.
He can only sign off for work done on aircraft he is certified for.
You don't have a fucking clue about what is legally required.This be the man! We even went to the samehigh school albeit atIrrelevant to your ignorant claim that the LAME that
different times.
https://au.linkedin.com/in/graeme-sambell-b2269337
signs off on work done has to be type certified for
the aircraft whose work is being signed off on.
Utterly ignorantly mangled all over again.used to be certified for specific Boeing commercialairliner
aircraft types in his younger days
But was never certified on all Boeing aircraft.
No one is. You have to do certification for any new aircraft.You
also have to recertify if you let the certification lapse,ie. not >>>>> work on one of said type for extended periods.
Nope, recertification was something we discussed on our last catchup.
Irrelevant to your pig ignorant claim that any LAME has to beLAMEs will only certify for aircraft that they willencounter on a >>>>> day to day basis, gets a bit time consuming and expensive otherwise.Utterly ignorantly mangled all over again.
That was never the case with our LAME and we at one time own
the Fairchild 24 and he had never seen one of those before and it
isnt even possible to get certified on those. Its still flying even
now.
FFS, those things are ancient history!
type certified to be able to sign off on work done on one of those.
Are they even certified to fly these days?Corse they are.
YOU made the claim.Don't need to be given I know the vast range of stuff ours signs off >>>> on.but those certs have long since lapsed. These days he remains
certified on smaller turbine aircraft, like the Cessnas, and even >>>>>>> at the ripe old age of 74, his services are still in high demand >>>>>>> in Oceana and Africa,
Irrelevant to whether the lame must be certified on the
specific aircraft before they can legally do any work on
a particular aircaft which has a fault develop in it.
https://www.casa.gov.au/licences-and-certificates/maintenance-engineers/about-aircraft-maintenance-engineersNo news. I am a light aircraft owner.
But not a certified LAME.
And one of us used to work for him.
Wrong, as always.<reams of shit that is no news at all and never
says that there are ever just BOEING specific LAMEs or AMEs
If all you have ever worked on and are certified for areBoeing
aircraft, then you are a Boeing specific LAME.
Prove it.
YOU get to do the proving.
THAT'S how it works.
Wrong, as always. And we know that because we ownedThose allowed to do maintenance on heavys do maintenanceon all >>>>>>>> heavys, their qualification is not brand specific.
Qualifications, no, type certification is brand *and* aircraft >>>>>>> type specific.
Its nothing like as black and white as you are
ignorantly claiming, most obviously with the
work done on aircraft not usually seen.
If you have no one who is *certified* to work on a specific aircraft >>>>> brand/type, that aircraft doesn't leave the ground since it has to >>>>> be signed off by a type certified LAME.
a Fairchild 24 at one time that no one was type certified on.
You don't have a fucking clue what a LAME can sign off on.
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
-aWrong. Most obviously when something-aYou are wrong.<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>Just because some fool claims something...
-a-a https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered >>>>>>>>>>>>
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and >>>>>>>>>>> a very
high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way >>>>>>>>>>> its being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what
appears to be
maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to >>>>>>>>>>> note that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news
reported blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance >>>>>>>>>>> or lack
thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so >>>>>>>>>>> what that
failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing >>>>>>>>>>> problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are
maintenance issues,-a not design or QC problems.
Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance.
-aPresumably you lost a word there given you are blotto, as always. >>>>>>>>> -aIf you meant Boeing maintenance person, there is no such
individual.
I beg to differ.
There are indeed licenced aircraft maintenance engineers known >>>>>>>> in the industry as LAMEs.-aThat's not a BOEING maintenance person. Like I said, they
are licensed to work on ALL aircraft, not just Boeings.
Not only are they *licenced*-a but they are also required to be >>>>>>>> *type certified*.-aBut are not BRAND certified.
That means a LAME can-a be type certifiedon Boeing 747s but not >>>>>>>> the Max.-aNone are certified on all Boeing aircraft and no other aircraft. >>>>>>>
Type certification is-a required in order to sign off on aircraft. >>>>>>> -aDuh.-aBut no one is ever certified on all BOEING aircraft.
So, yes, you can be a Boeing-a maintenanceperson if they are the >>>>>>>> only aircraft you arecertified to-a work on.
You need to have training/certification on every aircraft type
needs to be done on an unusual aircraft.
so it is-a customary to only be certifiedon a limited subset, even >>>>>> of a brand.-aSo there is no such animal as a Boeing maintenance person.
-aWrong, as always.-aAnd when something unusual shows up like say an
Antonov, and it needs something to be fixed, there is
never a situation where a lame who is certified on that
particular aircraft has to be flown in to do that work.
Bzzzztt, wrong, wrong, wrong. The plane will not leave theground >>>>>> unless/until a *type certified LAME signs off on it*.
They WILL fly-a LAMEs all over to do exactly what you deny happens. >>>>> -aIgnorant fantasy. Read the memoirs of those who specialisein ferrying aircraft. Those do often end up with maintenance
problem and they are not stuck on the ground until a LAME
who is type certified for that particular aircraft is flown in
to sign off on the work that has been done.
My friend often gets-a plane tips to Africa to service/-aThat's for his specialised knowledge, not because
repair specific aircraft that he is-a certified for.
he is certified on that particular aircraft.
-aIf he actually exists and isnt just another of your inventions.
https://au.linkedin.com/in/graeme-sambell-b2269337
-aEasy to find someone like that and claim you know them.
We live in the same town, we come from the same area in the same
state, went to the same high school, he lives a mere 3 kilometres from
me as the crow files and I have been to his home on numerous occasions
- but he isn't home very often.
Easy to claim and no way to verify your claim
and we know you lie thru your teeth all the time
Note his current domicile.-aIrrelevant to whether a LAME can sign off work on
an aircraft for which he is not currently certified for.
Also note where he attended high school.If-a you-a look at my LinkedIn >>>> profile,
-aNo Xeno on Linkedin.
Look for my real name, it's been bandied around here often enough.
And you stupidly don't list it now.
And even if you did, proves nothing about whether you even know him.
--you'll see we both come-a from the same state-a and attended the same >>>> high school.
Rod Speed wrote
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
Wrong. Most obviously when somethingYou are wrong.<https://rumble.com/v4mapg5-breaking-boeing-bosses-fired-after-whistleblower-murdered-redacted-with-cla.html>Just because some fool claims something...
https://t.ly/HA3cm
BREAKING! Boeing bosses fired after Whistleblower murdered >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Not much chance that the whistle blower committed suicide and >>>>>>>>>>>> a very
high chance that foul play was involved.
What I find annoying with the whole Boeing issue is the way >>>>>>>>>>>> its being
reported, the news reports are blaming Boeing for what >>>>>>>>>>>> appears to be
maintenance faults on older aircraft, also interesting to >>>>>>>>>>>> note that 3
recent problems involved United Airlines yet the news >>>>>>>>>>>> reported blamed
Boeing instead of asking questions about United maintenance >>>>>>>>>>>> or lack
thereof, AFAIK the 777 that lost a wheel was 10yrs old so >>>>>>>>>>>> what that
failure has to do with Boeing is a mystery.
The door failure on the Alaska flight was definitely a Boeing >>>>>>>>>>>> problem
but many of the other problems blamed on Boeing are
maintenance issues, not design or QC problems.
Not sure what is involved un becoming a Boeing maintenance. >>>>>>>>Presumably you lost a word there given you are blotto, as >>>>>>>>>> always.
If you meant Boeing maintenance person, there is no such >>>>>>>>>> individual.
I beg to differ.
There are indeed licenced aircraft maintenance engineers known >>>>>>>>> in the industry as LAMEs.That's not a BOEING maintenance person. Like I said, they
are licensed to work on ALL aircraft, not just Boeings.
Not only are they *licenced* but they are also required to be >>>>>>>>> *type certified*.But are not BRAND certified.
That means a LAME can be type certifiedon Boeing 747s but not >>>>>>>>> the Max.None are certified on all Boeing aircraft and no other aircraft. >>>>>>>>
Type certification is required in order to sign off on aircraft. >>>>>>>> Duh.But no one is ever certified on all BOEING aircraft.
So, yes, you can be a Boeing maintenanceperson if they are the >>>>>>>>> only aircraft you arecertified to work on.
You need to have training/certification on every aircraft type
needs to be done on an unusual aircraft.
so it is customary to only be certifiedon a limited subset, even >>>>>>> of a brand.So there is no such animal as a Boeing maintenance person.
Wrong, as always.And when something unusual shows up like say an
Antonov, and it needs something to be fixed, there is
never a situation where a lame who is certified on that
particular aircraft has to be flown in to do that work.
Bzzzztt, wrong, wrong, wrong. The plane will not leave theground >>>>>>> unless/until a *type certified LAME signs off on it*.
They WILL fly LAMEs all over to do exactly what you deny happens. >>>>>> Ignorant fantasy. Read the memoirs of those who specialisein ferrying aircraft. Those do often end up with maintenance
problem and they are not stuck on the ground until a LAME
who is type certified for that particular aircraft is flown in
to sign off on the work that has been done.
My friend often gets plane tips to Africa to service/That's for his specialised knowledge, not because
repair specific aircraft that he is certified for.
he is certified on that particular aircraft.
If he actually exists and isnt just another of your inventions.
https://au.linkedin.com/in/graeme-sambell-b2269337
Easy to find someone like that and claim you know them.
We live in the same town, we come from the same area in the same
state, went to the same high school, he lives a mere 3 kilometres from >>> me as the crow files and I have been to his home on numerous occasions >>> - but he isn't home very often.
Easy to claim and no way to verify your claim
and we know you lie thru your teeth all the time
Easy to verify - if you had a clue.
Note his current domicile.Irrelevant to whether a LAME can sign off work on
an aircraft for which he is not currently certified for.
Also note where he attended high school.If you look at my LinkedIn >>>>> profile,
No Xeno on Linkedin.
Look for my real name, it's been bandied around here often enough.
And you stupidly don't list it now.
I have never listed it here.
And even if you did, proves nothing about whether you even know him.
Send him a message on LinkedIn and *ask him*.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2you'll see we both come from the same state and attended the same >>>>> high school.
They still have that safety reputation, shame that the way they haveNever had problems with bad customer service, but air flights have
treated their customers in recent years has been so poor.
become cheaper, would say it works both ways there are bad customers
also.
I was referring to their appalling on time/cancellation record in recent >times, its pretty poor and even worse than their own low cost airline >Jetstar.
The city of London put city circle public transport costs
(bus/rail) up to keep out the riff-raff, seemed to work.
LOL, I very much doubt that keeping riff raff out was the reason for a
price increase.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 65 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 05:26:38 |
| Calls: | 862 |
| Files: | 1,311 |
| D/L today: |
921 files (14,318M bytes) |
| Messages: | 264,603 |