Page 2 of 4

Re: Safety of older aircraft

PostPosted:Sat Dec 29, 2018 9:26 pm
by Quanta Mechanic
Can’t believe some of the replies here?

Yes it was a genuine question! :?:

And where exactly have I suggested we should down all aircraft that doesn’t meet today’s safety requirements ??????

To be honest I don’t know what the safety standards are or how they are assessed.

I’m also not a “spotty 14 year old”, as suggested. I’m 30 year old solicitor??? What has my profile got to do with anything?

Thanks for the advice to those who actually contributed to answering the question without making ignorant remarks.

Typical forum mentality here. A few people, typically those who have, or think they have, superior knowledge whom like to talk down to people who are not as knowledgeable. Try talking to me like that in person next time :thumright:

Re: Safety of older aircraft

PostPosted:Sat Dec 29, 2018 10:17 pm
by GolfHotel
Quanta Mechanic wrote:Can’t believe some of the replies here?

Yes it was a genuine question! :?:

And where exactly have I suggested we should down all aircraft that doesn’t meet today’s safety requirements ??????

To be honest I don’t know what the safety standards are or how they are assessed.

I’m also not a “spotty 14 year old”, as suggested. I’m 30 year old solicitor??? What has my profile got to do with anything?

Thanks for the advice to those who actually contributed to answering the question without making ignorant remarks.

Typical forum mentality here. A few people, typically those who have, or think they have, superior knowledge whom like to talk down to people who are not as knowledgeable. Try talking to me like that in person next time :thumright:


When you said:
Quanta Mechanic wrote: Are older airplanes, such as a Spitfure, less safe/reliable than newly built aircraft?

If so, how are they still considered airworthy if they are not up to scratch?

I would have assumed that new technology and materials would have set a benchmark, which would make old aircraft deemed unsafe to fly?


I cant talk for the others but from my point of view.

You clearly said old aircraft would be deemed unsafe to fly. I think that answers the bit I highlighted.

Sorry if the quality of your question led some to think you were 14. :D :D :D :D

Love the way you ask a question, admit you don't know the answer, then call those who offer opinion ignorant or accuse them of talking down to you, while insulting their mentality. And a merry Christmas to you as well. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

As for the rest, you will have to untwist your own knickers sunshine. :D :D :D

Re: Safety of older aircraft

PostPosted:Sat Dec 29, 2018 10:20 pm
by GolfHotel
PS. Still think its Cantbeliveitsnotbutter (Marj) having a larf.

Re: Safety of older aircraft

PostPosted:Sat Dec 29, 2018 10:33 pm
by Quanta Mechanic
GolfHotel wrote:
Quanta Mechanic wrote:Can’t believe some of the replies here?

Yes it was a genuine question! :?:

And where exactly have I suggested we should down all aircraft that doesn’t meet today’s safety requirements ??????

To be honest I don’t know what the safety standards are or how they are assessed.

I’m also not a “spotty 14 year old”, as suggested. I’m 30 year old solicitor??? What has my profile got to do with anything?

Thanks for the advice to those who actually contributed to answering the question without making ignorant remarks.

Typical forum mentality here. A few people, typically those who have, or think they have, superior knowledge whom like to talk down to people who are not as knowledgeable. Try talking to me like that in person next time :thumright:


When you said:
Quanta Mechanic wrote: Are older airplanes, such as a Spitfure, less safe/reliable than newly built aircraft?

If so, how are they still considered airworthy if they are not up to scratch?

I would have assumed that new technology and materials would have set a benchmark, which would make old aircraft deemed unsafe to fly?


I cant talk for the others but from my point of view.

You clearly said old aircraft would be deemed unsafe to fly. I think that answers the bit I highlighted.

Sorry if the quality of your question led some to think you were 14. :D :D :D :D

Love the way you ask a question, admit you don't know the answer, then call those who offer opinion ignorant or accuse them of talking down to you, while insulting their mentality. And a merry Christmas to you as well. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

As for the rest, you will have to untwist your own knickers sunshine. :D :D :D



I clearly said “assumed”... I’m not going to debate any further into how the question was worded. The question was pretty clear and some people managed to comment without making nonsense remarks.

I’ve also not said anything about people who tried to answe the question - I thanked them for that.

Can you even read properly? I don’t think you can, clearly!

Saying I must be a 14 year old sporty troll contributes nothing? Just a pointless, rude comment!

Re: Safety of older aircraft

PostPosted:Sun Dec 30, 2018 2:51 am
by GolfHotel
Quanta Mechanic wrote:
Can you even read properly? I don’t think you can, clearly!

Saying I must be a 14 year old sporty troll contributes nothing? Just a pointless, rude comment!



LOL Got to love it when someone asks if I can read properly. Concluded I can’t. Then makes several mistakes in the next para. :D :D :D :D :D :D

1. I never said you MUST be a troll.
2. Someone asked ARE you a troll? Someone else said EITHER that or.
3. The word used was SPOTTY not SPORTY.

If you really are a solicitor I really hope you take a lot more care at work. :lol:

Also you know what making assumptions did don’t you? ASS is a donkey like animal.

Chill out Lado. Your original assumption is wrong by miles. That’s what made people wonder if you were trolling. I still think you might be. If your genuine then. Listen to the advice you’ve been given. Don’t make it pearls before swine. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Re: Safety of older aircraft

PostPosted:Sun Dec 30, 2018 8:12 am
by GrahamB
A couple of sloppy mistakes in your last paragraph too, GH.

Just saying. :roll:

Re: Safety of older aircraft

PostPosted:Sun Dec 30, 2018 9:54 am
by GolfHotel
GrahamB wrote:A couple of sloppy mistakes in your last paragraph too, GH.

Just saying. :roll:


Since some people can’t tell the difference between sloppy and deliberate it’s a good job I’m not claiming to be a solicitor. :roll: :lol: :wink:

Re: Safety of older aircraft

PostPosted:Sun Dec 30, 2018 10:08 am
by Sooty25
Just had a quick look at @Quanta Mechanic previous posts, it's not Marj!

Posts indicate he's not started his PPL yet, but is aiming towards something pretty hot with the aid of Microsoft Flight Sim. All this suggests he's right at the bottom of the learning curve.

I suggest we cut him a little slack, encourage him to get stuck into his PPL and see what his comments are like when he's 20 hours in, in a C150!.

We need 30 year olds with cash in our hobby at the moment!

Oh, @Quanta Mechanic don't get upset, this lot are ruthless, welcome to the shark pool!

Re: Safety of older aircraft

PostPosted:Sun Dec 30, 2018 2:56 pm
by tomshep
It isn't that bad. We crocodiles have eaten all the sharks. Now go and take some flying lessons. 75% certainty the aircraft you learn in will be older than you and, initially, safer.

Re: Safety of older aircraft

PostPosted:Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:01 pm
by Sooty25
wouldn't be ironic if in 5 years time he rocks up at a fly-in in a Cub! :lol:

Re: Safety of older aircraft

PostPosted:Sun Dec 30, 2018 7:58 pm
by Rob L
Unlikely, Sooty.

I'm the one who suggested this might be a spotty 14-year-old. From subsequent posts, I have not changed my view, apart from it appearing to be a spotty 30-year-old. Which is even more disappointing; I'd expect a 30-year-old to have done a little internet research beforehand about the serviceability of aircraft.

I'd normally welcome fresh (especially younger) folk into our ever-ageing world, but not with that rather arrogant attitude that appears in the original post.

Rob

Re: Safety of older aircraft

PostPosted:Sun Dec 30, 2018 8:19 pm
by tomshep
Certainly his postings don't display the maturity nor the clarity of thought of a thirty year old solicitor. Nor yet that required of somebody ready to be sent solo. Still, the thing you learn the most about when learning to fly is yourself.

Re: Safety of older aircraft

PostPosted:Mon Dec 31, 2018 12:34 am
by GolfHotel
Sooty25 wrote:wouldn't be ironic if in 5 years time he rocks up at a fly-in in a Cub! :lol:



If he appears I bet he will have loafers on. :thumright: :thumleft:

Re: Safety of older aircraft

PostPosted:Mon Dec 31, 2018 1:07 am
by Quanta Mechanic
I’ve had an hour flight experience in a piper which I believe is from 1970s.

As for the rest of the comments... I’m not going to dive into any arguments. I was simply asking a question.

Re: Safety of older aircraft

PostPosted:Mon Dec 31, 2018 1:25 am
by Sooty25
I think in answer to your original post, modern aircraft may be considered safer, but it doesn't mean that older designs are unsafe.

We also need to consider that warbirds such as Spitfires were not built with occupant safety and comfort high on the priorities list, unlike a Dreamliner where occupant safety and comfort is very much top of the list.

What I would suggest at such an early stage of your flying career is not to define what you want to achieve, you might find that the carbon fibre rocket ship doesn't actually do it for you and you end up in love with vintage biplanes or microlights, the things today you possibly think "why on earth would anyone get in that!"

There is a lot to experience and the 70's Piper may just be a stepping stone, like the Ford Fiesta you learned to drive in.