Airports closed as volcanic ash drifts toward UK

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

No, but he does have an MBA, Garry, and part of that (and being the CEO of a large company) is about risk assessment/mitigation

Not to cast a shadow on this, but the specualtion that the Polish president "encouraged" the pilot of his plane to land in bad weather, could be described as a similar scenario. I wouldn't put it past Walsh to "bully" someone into declaring the skies are safe.

[Hom3r]

Just seen two jets at low level over my town bound for Stansted

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Not to cast a shadow on this, but the specualtion that the Polish president "encouraged" the pilot of his plane to land in bad weather, could be described as a similar scenario. I wouldn't put it past Walsh to "bully" someone into declaring the skies are safe.

The fact that planes are landing and taking off with no problems thus far seems to bear out the facts and the suggestion that anyone has been bullied to ignore safety precautions seems speculative.

[moiraf100]

@ budwieser :-)

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Not to cast a shadow on this, but the specualtion that the Polish president "encouraged" the pilot of his plane to land in bad weather, could be described as a similar scenario. I wouldn't put it past Walsh to "bully" someone into declaring the skies are safe.

are the airlines carrying out extra checks and inspections of the planes because surely even if they catch the remnants of the ash cloud it could still damage engine parts over a period of time some short haul planes will do 3 or 4 trips a day into Europe and damage could have a cumulative effect

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Not to cast a shadow on this, but the specualtion that the Polish president "encouraged" the pilot of his plane to land in bad weather, could be described as a similar scenario. I wouldn't put it past Walsh to "bully" someone into declaring the skies are safe.

What is the difference between bully and "bully"?

I am sure the BALPA would be out the door faster than a speeding bullet if they had any hint of pressure on a pilot to fly in unsafe conditions, don't you? (especially after their protest march against BA in 2008).

[budwieser]

Originally Posted by moiraf100

@ budwieser :-)

Thank you me darlin`

[Tinky]

Just had a phone call from Mr Tink he's on his way back from Exeter Airport yipeee !!!

[Hom3r]

Get a nice cuppa tea and his favourite food ready

[joglynne]

... and a big hug.

So happy for you Tinky.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Not to cast a shadow on this, but the specualtion that the Polish president "encouraged" the pilot of his plane to land in bad weather, could be described as a similar scenario. I wouldn't put it past Walsh to "bully" someone into declaring the skies are safe.

Think about this logically.. If they lose a plane, how much would it cost to replace? About two to three hundred million dollars (http://www.boeing.com/commercial/prices/ ) for a 747.

Now add in the costs for the inevitable legal actions (which depending on which country the action takes place in may include punitive damages). This will cost millions.

Now multiply that by the number of flights that each airline makes in one day (which can be hundreds)

Finally, factor in the damage caused to their reputation when people start thinking that the airline was willing to risk their lives to save a few pounds..

That kind of loss of reputation bankrupted Pan Am (then one of the largest airlines) after Lockerbie.

Now, do you *really* think the airlines would risk all that cost to save a few £million?

[Hom3r]

Originally Posted by Stuart C

Think about this logically.. If they lose a plane, how much would it cost to replace? About two to three hundred million dollars (http://www.boeing.com/commercial/prices/ ) for a 747.

Now add in the costs for the inevitable legal actions (which depending on which country the action takes place in may include punitive damages). This will cost millions.

Now multiply that by the number of flights that each airline makes in one day (which can be hundreds)

Finally, factor in the damage caused to their reputation when people start thinking that the airline was willing to risk their lives to save a few pounds..

That kind of loss of reputation bankrupted Pan Am (then one of the largest airlines) after Lockerbie.

Now, do you *really* think the airlines would risk all that cost to save a few £million?

What I know from working within the aviation industry is like this.

A plane crashes somewhere in the world, and it is found a minor fault in a planes system is to blame.

The A/C reg makers (EASA / FAA / CAA etc) make the decision to either a mandatory fix, or recommendation.

Say the fix is a recommendation, the airline looks at it and says the fix on all the affected A/C will cost £250 million (yes that is possible), but the risk of another plane crashing is very slim, and if one does go down it would cost in payouts £200 milion, they would chose the latter.


The cost I quoted can happen, bearing in mind that a 737 has approx 2 million parts, and some of these aren't cheap. I had to purchase a CMM which was less than 40 pages and cost £5,000.

---------- Post added at 22:52 ---------- Previous post was at 22:43 ----------

CMM = Component Maintenance Manual

---------- Post added at 22:58 ---------- Previous post was at 22:52 ----------

Where I worked they have 3 versions of the BAe-146 they are:

-200QT
-300QT

-200QC

There was an Aircaft Maintenace Manual for each type (Luckly the QTs used the same manual, as the only difference was the length.)

The QC (quick change) was a frieghter/Passenger varient.

So I had to maintain two sets of manuals each was 20 volumes and each volume was approx 5" thick.

Each set cost around £80,000 to buy and another annual payment of £15,000.

---------- Post added at 22:59 ---------- Previous post was at 22:58 ----------

Final point though

you are far safer flying than you are driving

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Stuart C

Think about this logically.. If they lose a plane, how much would it cost to replace? About two to three hundred million dollars (http://www.boeing.com/commercial/prices/ ) for a 747.

Now add in the costs for the inevitable legal actions (which depending on which country the action takes place in may include punitive damages). This will cost millions.

Now multiply that by the number of flights that each airline makes in one day (which can be hundreds)

Finally, factor in the damage caused to their reputation when people start thinking that the airline was willing to risk their lives to save a few pounds..

That kind of loss of reputation bankrupted Pan Am (then one of the largest airlines) after Lockerbie.

Now, do you *really* think the airlines would risk all that cost to save a few £million?

Yes, I know, I was just being flippant. But, bearing in mind Walsh's arrogance, it does have ring of truth about it.

[Stuart]

Unfortunately, assuming that the predicted path of the Ash cloud was (or is) correct, then the chances of planes crashing increase massively..

I would have thought it was certainly enough that the airlines would put up with losing the odd few million a day, rather than the cost of a new aircraft (or even a few).

[Ben B]

Even if there was a 1% chance of the planes crashing nobody would want to fly so it must all be safe otherwise the planes would still be grounded now.