To jbqwik thanks for that, you have a good day.

(Written on 08/13/2016)(Permalink)

Agree, but AW&ST is a specialist news organisation specialising in Aviation, Space e.t.c. The poor fellow above was writing for the guardian. The most he probably knows about aircraft is when his boss tells him to get the cheapest seats he can and fly and do a story on an escaped tiger from the zoo. If you want the nitty gritty you buy a specialist piece of news. I really can't see the problem with what the Guardian reported. If it was to go into more details and specifics, non aviation types would be saying, my God, I didn't want a paper about flying, where's my paper about boating:-)

(Written on 08/12/2016)(Permalink)

Give the journo's a break, he isn't apparently, an aircraft expert like you. Tomorrow he probably will be reporting on a ship crashing into a wharf or a lion escaping from a zoo. Their job is just to inform the basic if you want more then donate some money to that fine Aviation News avherald.com that's where enthusiasists like you can fill your boots.

(Written on 08/12/2016)(Permalink)

I agree with Ian Deans, I think Geoff Healey maybe looking a bit one eyed:-) Nothing like being proud of your own country, but we should be honest and maintain an equal balance to maintain our credibility. Thank goodness Boeing and Airbus make good and safe aircraft, although and I am an Aussie, I do prefer Boeing, you know the old saying 'if it ain't Boeing I'm not going', they just seem like a more solid aircraft, but I do travel by Airbus occasionally. Everyone, have a nice day and fly safely either as pilot, crew or passenger. May whoever your God is bless America and bless Australia..

(Written on 08/12/2016)(Permalink)

Lawrence Green, I think you misunderstood what I meant about A before J.I wasn't replying to your comment, I was replying to the people who were asking why Air Asia was being written first instead of Jetstar. I am not making any comment about fault simply about how the article was written and that writers will naturally put something beginning with A before J. I think when the journalist wrote the article, he was just writing it as news and not as a factual report apportioning blame. No doubt when the results of the investigation come, they will say the Guilty aircraft (name) infringed on the air space of and then the name of the innocent party. I hope this makes sense. I don't know who was at fault neither did the reporter hence the use of alphabetical order. God I seem to have written gone with the wind here trying to explain myself:-) Have a good and safe day.

(Written on 08/05/2016)(Permalink)

Maybe the reason Air Asia comes before Jetstar is that it's alphabetical, come on people you read too much into these things. We naturally put A before J.

(Written on 08/04/2016)(Permalink)

As I mentioned previously, I make no pretence at being a technically literate or anything near that only thinking of a simple solution, but I am having trouble understanding your reply. Does that mean from what you are saying about retrofits and afterthoughts, that Airbus fitted newly designed wings to the A380 when they had wind problems or did they make a retrofit to cure their problems. I would have thought doing a retrofit as the initial design is faulty would be the natural way to go. I can think of plenty of aircraft that have needed retrofitting to make them safe. Maybe I am misunderstanding your comments in some way. And my dear friend, I to do not wish to sound impolite!

(Written on 02/16/2013)(Permalink)

From one that is technically illiterate, I look at the the Tesla electric motor vehicles powered 100% by lithium Ion batteries. To keep those batteries from thermal runaway affecting the adjoining cells, they run coolant past each of the cells. Even some laptops and mobile phones have had problems with lithium batteries overheating. I don't know why the Boeing Company don't run coolant through their batteries.

(Written on 02/14/2013)(Permalink)