Litespeed

The sheer size of defence contracts means they will be supported no matter what happens. And that is the essence of the problem, no problem is too big to coverup or allow to happen. They lost the huge air tanker contract for all the correct reasons, then got Congress to reverse the decision. Boeing's airtanker is massive dud and actually still unsafe for use. Meanwhile the Airbus version is great 👍, in use and only suffers from USA based issues. I see a theme here.

The seats next to the plug were empty, as it was in intial climb, they make have had their belts still on. No belts, a higher altitude and it could have been passengers sucked out. Nasty

Yet more reasons for my mantra, " ifs it's Boeing, I am not going". Now I bet if I go to a US based AV site they will be shooting anyone who is anti Boeing. They get overprotective, they hate that the USA could make a mistake. In reality the 737 max should lose its certificate of airworthiness, no aircraft they have produced could reasonably said to be made to the "certificate". None have the level of safety in assembly nor of the actual parts as expected in the certificates. History has proven this. If one has a missing critical bolt and you inspect a second new aircraft and it's missing as well, what does that say? If one has a plug/door/death hole blow open in flight at low altitude, would we expect it's siblings to be safe? No longer do you need a rough landing for a Boeing to break in half, ala 767 they now build them to break in the air. Would you guys be happy piloting or been a passenger in a Boeing now? Not this black duck.

Yet more reasons for my mantra, " ifs it's Boeing, I am not going". I would expect not all the fasteners were tight or even fitted, forget about any quality control. After the missing nut on a tail surface, it keeps getting worse. It's not a one off but seems systemic. How can a simple 4-8 hr check as per the FAA expect to find all these issues? These are all new aircraft, the door loss is on a plane in service only 8 weeks. After the max 8 disaster, this shows they have not improved at all, their ability to self certify should be completely revoked. Why have the entire fleet not been grounded for heavy maintenance inspection? If they where Airbus, the FAA would have acted far faster and with intent. No confidence can be had flying in any recent Boeing, they consistently prove profit is the only motive and safety is a afterthought.

If you smoke one next to me on a aircraft, I will demonstrate. 1, smack throat with open palm. 2, mouth flexes for breathing. 3, shove cigar down throat. 4, pour their drink down throat to extinguish Simple really, mind you I am normally much nicer than that. Just my wicked imagination.

So does this mean they intend to use the laser kit parts for old kits and test , or is it also new kits? To be honest, given the industry does not use laser parts unless final machined/heat treated, I would be concerned. How can we trust a engineering report given their circumstances and recent history? If the parts lasered are as previously described, the answer would be No. You can't substitute a inferior part and keep the design limits as the designer intended. The article says they are testing coupons of alloy and finite element analysis. Not actual aircraft parts or assemblies. That I would not consider sufficient given the potential cracking. Most potential for fatigue cracking will not be apparent from such limited testing and modelling. But it does make it easier to get the result they want. I hope I am wrong but it appears that's the case.

What's the purpose of the low level waste storage? It would not be related to nuclear power, maybe they are talking medical waste products? Do you have a link?

No such thing as a act of God. Just bullshit to take payments and never payout.

Your right KG, no responsible kit maker would ever use such laser cut parts, it is a absolute no no for safety and quality. I have previously noted exactly why. It is absolute worst practice. As soon as such a decision was made they loaded the gun and pointed it at customers. It should be turned back on the owners, then they can pull the trigger. I am sorry, but too me that's unforgivable. It's like a miniature Boeing, once great now a laughing stock for those that know. I don't want to see them fail but I doubt they will ever be the same.

Talk about a sweetheart interview. Makes it all sound rosey and as if the kits will proceed at a little extra cost. I expect kit owners are going to get bugger all back in the dollar if they want a refund. I expect staff will have a very shitty Christmas, as will customers. 5000 plus creditors, I do not see a happy ending. Bar screwing everyone bar it's biggest suppliers and a complete phoneix operation, it's a one legged duck full of buckshot.

Those two small Cessna's look like they had a wild party, got on the sauce and drugs and woke up bruised and in a compromising position. How else do aircraft breed?

Given they were young children, it's a bit much to expect them to save the day. If a pilot can't control it or loses consciousness and spins the chance are very low. But you are correct, in that a design that needs a chute to recover is a death sentence unless the chute is pulled. That still assumes a spinning iced aircraft will recover and float gently down. A chute should be to save you after structural failure or engine loss. Not because it is unrecoverable from a spin. I personally do not like the SR22 but your life your choice. Given the destruction, I doubt we will ever know the actual truth.

Trust is everything in this game. Can I trust the kit is complete? Can I trust the parts are to specifications? Can I trust the parts are protected from corrode and crack formation? Can I trust the employees are motivated for quality and paid appropriately? Can I trust the price? Can I trust replacement parts to cover the dodgy ones, esp. given they consider non structural parts, which by admission are below par and will not be replaced unless at customer expense? If I was a current customer, I would be angry as hell. As a new customer, I would not trust a thing they say, would be very worried about quality, and even doubt I would get a complete kit, at expected quality. Price wise I would see it like gambling on a limp horse. They may be a great company historically, but that is only previously. They screwed their original suppliers, staff and customers. Nothing they are currently doing provides any great confidence bar much larger prices and a lesson in how not to manage a aircraft company. I accept many will forgive but I am very wary. I like the Vans aircraft but would not trust the company, maybe in five years when products are prooved again.

Business was wants it to happen, so that's a worry. Qantas would replace everyone if it could, even at greater expense. They have proven ideology beats economic sense. Fortunately the humans like a human to die with them.

I think Nev is making it plain, there ain't no God. If their was, a benevolent caring one would be female.

I agree the real cost is the cost. The problem is they allowed a situation where everyone from workers, legacy suppliers and customers pay the cost. The employees didn't get the luxury of chapter 11. Jobs, loyalty and quality parts became the casualty. For management to fork out, is the least they should do.

Lucky indeed, more a feather than real punishment. He has lost flight priveledges for life- not long enough, he can still be on aircraft. Purposely crashing a aircraft with fuel onboard in a fire banned national park ( visitors were banned at the time during fire season ) is not a harmless stunt. The guys who fight fire there are "fire jumpers" and risk their life everytime. If his agenda was political rather then YouTube fame, he would be a terrorist. That does not include destroying the evidence and lying to the FAA. 10 years seems fair with parole, subject to assessment his ego no longer presents a clear and present danger to the public. A no public media ban for life. 6 months is just free bed and board, he will make a motza talking about it and doing stupid shit. America, where you do criminal shit and can become rich and celebrated. Infamy lasts forever and is always currency, fame can be fleeting.

Onetrack, Yes, it is yet to go to court but on the evidence reported and the ATSB report, the charges already laid and court reporting, I feel warranted in my opinion. No statement I have made is untrue, given publicly available admissible evidence, all of which will be used in court for criminal and civil matters. I am happy to defend my statements and opinions, even in court. The David Beck case success has little relevance bar some precedence. This is a unique case. The involvement of the employers actions are fundamental. Its a mutch bigger can of worms.

I think this should really get moved to Social Australia site for more in depth discussions. My last post is far from Kansas Toto, or Jabiru.

I agree totally. And we subsidise non tax paying foreign companies to take our natural resources and not pay for them or repair the damage. We are the biggest and one of cheapest gas exporters In the world. We also pay the highest prices in the world for our own gas. Why? John Howard thought it a good idea to make it that way and it's kept snowballing. The $12.5 billion in subsidy for fossil fuels this year alone could make fundamental change. That's $12,500 for each of a 1 million homes to be solar powered and connected to home/ community batteries with argumentation of electric car batteries as storage for those that have them. 10 years of such a program would fundamentally change, not only our energy system but be a step change in economic growth that reduces national energy costs and imports of energy with insecure pricing. That would create great fundamental sustainable wealth for our economy. And would not cost a cent to the budget. Just no free ride on excise anymore. What can a family do if they have almost zero home or car energy bills? Start by doing homes where the poor and renters are to reduce housing costs, it is a social benefit as well. We have government giving bill relief into the pocket of big energy, instead, invest that as well into social power. A simple change of priorities and world view and the world can change. Power to the people, owned by the people. If given the choice who would vote for continued fossil fuel subsidies and ever bigger bills or everyone gets free solar and battery power with tiny bills over a decade? A political no brainer, a win for the country, the people and the environment.

And we still allow it to happen. Profit Trump's health and society in a rigged card game.

If the world agreed to send the waste, and pay for its storage forever, that's the essential problem economic wise. Assuming we could it safely, which human nature, greed and a 22,000 plus half life is problematic. We would also have to get it here and ships are nasty terror targets. But my reason to ask is about the moral responsibility. If we should take responsibility for a poisonous product we sell, then, are we not on the hook for been a massive polluter for the exported coal and gas? If I sell a known poisonous drug offshore , am I still a drug dealer? Sadly, I think the nuclear fuel we sell is a lessor sin on the global scale. 40 minutes away is the largest coal loading port in the world from me. For a smart country, we spend a lot of effort to did holes and put our heads in them.

As can battery storage including pumped hydro, which can produce surge but also long term power. Both on demand rather than burning fuel even when not needed. It's inherently inefficient to burn fuel in a coal power plant whilst solar is plentiful during the day and thus very cheap. Storage is quamtams more efficient and economical when all costs are born.

Exactly. It's called "State Capture" where government is so influenced by private power they control the agenda and what laws or taxes they accept. Or the " economic Mafia" that's a lovely economy or policy you have, pity if something happened to it". The very same mob that peddles disinformation to stop the public changing it.

Brendan , I was intrigued by your earlier comment on nuclear waste and our moral responsibility to take it back and store it. Can you extrapolate your reasoning and how, it should work? Could it be a big earner?