Dave T-S

And your point is?????

Geezer

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Malcolm RC:
<B>I had the pleasure in my mis spent youth of driving an old E type Jag, which was when I purchased it equipped with re-treads. Always
remember the Motor Mechanic who did the Mot check saying: 'You do realise your Driving
a death trap' sold it shortly after that...
(after spending a fortune on new tyres!)[/quote]

I see, so your motor mechanics wise words of wisdom prove conclusively that the whole flying world haven't a clue what they are doing, and every passenger for the past 40 years has taken their life in their hands in travelling on planes with "death trap" tyres?

Phew, it's a good job you know all these people, otherwise the world might stop spinning.

Geezer

andrew6321

Did this motor mechanic also run a tyre business?

Seriously, I'm no expert, but I think the retread industry has to meet the same standards as new tyre vendors these days.

Condorde on retreads is nothing to get excited about. Anyway, wasn't the self-sealing fuel tank invented in WW2?

Dave T-S

I do love this thread!!!

It really is a bag of (self sealing) POO

Kettle on Blowdog

KF

Seriously, this is a wind-up isn't it?
KF.

carl

Re-treads are no problem -- lorries run on them too and the tyres are *designed* to be retreaded. With the size of lorry and aircraft tyres being what they are, there's potentially several inches depth of rubber that could accommodate tread. Of course, if they made the tread 2 inches deep there would be far too much block shift, so they make it more like 10mm and retread it when it wears out.

Malcolm RC

Ok fair comment, but I think BA did change their tyres more frequently, or allow them
less cycles. Also in 1993 when a water deflector was blasted into a fuel tank by an exploding tyre BA did modify their water deflectors whereas Air France did not...

Aero

What if all planes were to use bluetooth technology, save on the cost and weight of wiring, and pile in more fare paying passengers as a result?
Or make solid and reliable fixes to problems, which were previously ruled out due to weight restrictions.

This is sure to win me five pounds....

Dave T-S

Aero
Or they could be flown from the ground with a remote control....OI, I thought of that first, i'm going to sue myself

Malcolm RC

Thank you for your your interest in the above and your message to Mike Bell
who is at present away from the office.

May I kindly ask that you to forward your suggestions to:

Mr J A Jupp
Director Technical
Airbus UK Ltd.
P O Box 77
Filton, Bristol BS99 7AR
E-Mail: Jeff.Jupp@BAE.Co.UK

Thankyou.

Trish Moram
Secretary to Michael J Bell
Head of Design & Production Standards Division
Safety Regulation Group.
----------
From: Malcolm Rivett-Carnac[SMTP:malcolm@acestudio.co.uk]
Sent: 25 September 2000 12:48
To: mike.bell@srg.caa.co.uk
Subject: Re: Possible Concorde solution....yes yet another one!!!

Mike

I understand you are heading the group that is looking into
the problems of getting the Concorde fleet back into the air again.

I have a suggestion for a fix, if you wish to take a look please
point
your Browser at:

IWatkins

This wind-up ? I'm not sure

Anyway, BAe hold several patents on resealing, armoured and lightweight fuel tanks for aircraft and have done so for over 20 years.

I'm guessing the only reason for not doing this on Concorde (or other aircraft) is the usual cost and weight issues.

However, I guess they will have to do something about it now.

Cheers

Ian

Dave T-S

Just a thought, you don't go visiting Subaru dealers on a Saturday do you??

Dave T-S

Having read the most recent bit.....if they haven't got back to you on your message of 25 September - maybe they are not ever going to......

Malcolm RC

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Dave T-S:
<B>Having read the most recent bit.....if they haven't got back to you on your message of 25 September - maybe they are not ever going to......[/quote]

Don't think we have to 'phone a friend' for the answer to that one do we?

Malcolm RC

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sabin, Theresa J" &lt;Theresa.J.Sabin@BritishAirways.com&gt;
To: "malcolm" &lt;malcolm@acestudio.co.uk&gt;
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 2:41 PM
Subject: Concorde Solution


&gt; Dear Mr Rivett-Carnac
&gt;
&gt; Further to your enquiry yesterday, we would like to stress that it is the
aircraft manufacturers, and not BA, who are responsible for the design of
any modifications to Concorde.
&gt;
&gt; In any event British Airways is unable to agree to the payment to you of
any consultancy fees or the provision of any flight concessions.
&gt;
&gt; Kind regards
&gt;
&gt; Theresa Sabin
&gt; Personal Assistant to Rod Eddington

Dave T-S

So that's DEFINITELY a fu.ck off now then is it??

The truth is out there - but not if you are howling to the moon up the wrong tree.....

Malcolm - are we on a different wavelength or something - you appear to think you are getting somewhere with this quest and I think you are pi55ing in a force 10 headwind.....

Malcolm RC

Well you could always lend me a Subaru for a few weeks, then run a major ad' campaign to say the guy who helped fix Concorde chooses to drive a Subaru..

Bound to be quite a high profile campaign, should sell a few Subaru's!!

And should blow their scabby cover up to hell and back..

BAe cannot really sue..cos it's true and they know too many people know it!!

And if they do, you will get even more publicity!!

(and no this is not all just a ruse to get a
free Subaru for a few weeks)...

Your call I guess....

Dave T-S

Sorry
I think you have mistaken me for Subaru UK Ltd??

Dave T-S

Diablo
Can you please do the decent thing with this thread??????

Malcolm RC

ROTFL

Paul Wilson

re:- remoulds, in the car world have a look at Colway Tyres, they are all remoulds and are used by a lot of rally teams on a budget, ie , those that are not manufacturer funded. They also do slicks and road tyres that are TuV approved, available to fit 911's etc, hardly unsfe.

with regard to the main pint, have a look at

AWD

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Dave T-S:
<B>Sorry
I think you have mistaken me for Subaru UK Ltd??[/quote]

Dave - you've been mistaken for many things. But the above must be a definite first.

Paul P

I am not sure whether anyone is interested in the following but hopefully it will close this thread.
As you can see from below, Malcolm, the company responsible for the changes are EADS and I am certain that their ideas to implement a change to the fuel tank lining was not based on your ideas but on a well understood and widely available method.

The following is the latest extract from the Times and BA's official response:

Monday, January 8, 2001
Times p 10

BA plans joint relaunch of Concorde: BA and Air France executives will meet this week to discuss plans for a simultaneous relaunch of Concorde in April. They hope a unified approach will help to restore Concorde's image after last July's Paris crash. BA plans to introduce a daily service to New York initially instead of its former twice-daily flights. It is fitting a new lining to protect Concorde's fuel tanks. The first Concorde to have the Kevlar lined tanks takes off from Heathrow next month to travel to a remote airport for flight tests.

BA's POSITION: We are continuing to work closely with the two accident investigation bodies - the AAIB and BEA, the two regulators - the CAA and DGAC and Air France. The progress of this work is encouraging - but there is still detail to be agreed and the full certification process to be completed before we can set a firm timetable in place towards a resumption of flights. The programme of measures being developed focuses mainly on preventing fuel leaks of anything like the scale suffered in the Paris accident, and to overcome potential ignition sources. To prevent fuel leaks, the manufacturer (EADS, the former Aerospatiale) has developed a liner for the wing tanks in its wings, made of a kevlar-rubber compound, similar to materials used in fuel tanks in military helicopters and Formula 1 racing cars. Initial tests on this potential modification are proving encouraging. To overcome ignition sources, the manufacturers are looking at means of providing additional protection to wiring (and indeed hydraulics systems) in the undercarriage areas.

Dave T-S

AWD
I think you are probably right M8

Dave T-S

So, now that we have finally established this thread is total bollox, can we consign it to the trash can where it belongs (it's not fit for the Muppet forum - we have standards )

Malcolm RC

Dave: you seem to be spending a lot of time in this thread, you obviously like spending much of your time here reading this load of bollocks!
(so here is some more!!)

Paul P: Yes I read prune too, infact pilots
talk of Concorde using remoulds there so maybe you should start posting and correcting their errors. You are right, they
were talking about armouring the tanks right from after the accident, armour as in heavy
stuff when there is very little extra capacity to add weight. If you spend a few hours searching through you will find that my
article was the first to suggest how this could be done, with the emphasis on possibly
allowing missiles or projectiles to enter the fuel tanks with the rubber sealing the resulting holes in the tanks. The working group at the CAA after looking at the Ace Concorde page gave the URL to companies like Thomson Racal Defence who then quickly came up with an improved version which was to use a Kevlar layer with a rubber lining on top. So what we are really saying is that the Ace Concorde article played an important part in helping the working group come up quite quickly with a sensible cost effective solution. If you doubt this which I'm sure you do, then ask yourself why Theresa Sabin bothered to reply after I had spoken to her on the telephone. She checked into my enquiry and when she found there had been an involvement she pointed me in the direction of BAe Systems. However as Kate W.. at BAe Systems said to me on the telephone, 'It would be very difficult to prove' and of course she was right.

Malcolm RC

55 and counting...not bad for a load of bollocks...

Chris L

Haven't read a thread as good as this in ages. Can we now start one about who shot JFK? We've got about as much chance of solving that as we have of resolving this

Malcolm, I wish you all the luck in the world, but you haven't got a hope in hells chance, they are just going to laugh at you. Forget this nonsense and get on with your life.

Chris

Paul Wilson

Malcom, I am Paul Wilson, Paul P is another bloke, you have admited that "your" idea was brought up by others within hours of the crash, the responses on pprune mentioned kevlar among the first posts, ( unfortunatly the search function is disabled there as well as here, so I cannot link to the thread). Do not mistake "armour" for heavy.

I know enough to know that I don't know enough to get involved with this sort of thing, just to point out glaring inaccuracies . Take this thread to PPRUNE, or better yet muppetize it, you obviously have a problem. A 12-bore is not a recognized testing tool for aircraft , its a bit indescriminate.

Your "Solution" has been used before

The fact that it was not used before on this aircraft is irrelevant

Your "testing" regime is a joke

small high energy pellets of metal , do not compare well to , relatively , low energy chunks of rubber.

And as to saying that the test should be videoed, no $hit sherlock, that has been standard since Jesus Christ was an alterboy

[This message has been edited by Paul Wilson (edited 09 January 2001).]

Dave T-S

Chris
Exactly M8

Malcolm
Yes you are right I am spending much time in this thread - but then I am one of the biggest Muppets on this BBS - think about it

Good luck with your fools errand