Bad pilots, bad maintenance ruining general aviation

On Jun 6, 2:06 am, Mxsmanic wrote:

Look for leaks. A leak will manifest by an excess of water at some point on
the lawn.

This dork actually posted this.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...

United 232 was faulty maintenance. There was a crack in the engine that
had
gone undetected, even though it had been inspected. If it had been
properly
maintained, there would have been no crash.

You really are clueless. How, specifically, did mantenance fail 232?

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Viperdoc writes:

Now how would you know if my airplanes are half broken, or that I fly
recklessly?

If you have an accident, that's prima facie evidence of one or the other.
If
you're an excellent pilot in a properly maintained aircraft, you won't
have an
accident.

If life is that simple, why do you confine yourself to a basement and
simulator?


It sounds like you're envious of the fact that while many of us actually
fly
real airplanes, you'll never have the experience of flying anything other
than a chair.

Pilots like to think that everyone envies them. More generally, most
people
who like a particular activity like to think that everyone else not
engaged in
that activity envies them. Of course, this is all wishful thinking.

You're the best example of wishful thinking around here, on most any topic.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Skylune writes:

Since you are expert in everything, I am having a problem with low
pressure in one of the zones on my lawn sprinkler system. Could you
provide some advice on how to diagnose the problem and then fix it?

Look for leaks. A leak will manifest by an excess of water at some point
on
the lawn.

Take your meds.

On Jun 6, 12:02 am, Mxsmanic wrote:
tom418 writes:
Too bad you weren't aboard United 232 back in 1989. I'm sure you could have
averted the disaster.

United 232 was faulty maintenance. There was a crack in the engine that had
gone undetected, even though it had been inspected. If it had been properly
maintained, there would have been no crash.

Bull****! The crack in the engine had absolutely nothing to do with
maintenance. It was a flaw that existed when the turbine blade was
fabricated. It was not detected in initial inspections of the parts
by the manufacturer, and there was no way that maintenance could have
ever detected it until it failed due to its microscopic nature. If
the manufacturer couldn't see it, what makes you think that Joe
mechanic should have tools that would allow him to see it?

Mxsmanic wrote:
Bertie the Bunyip writes:

Could be worse, you could be flying, or trying to.

I'm actually almost pathologically safety-conscious in vehicles, and I would
be an extraordinarily safe pilot.

Doesn't matter how safety-conscious you are if
you're having an anxiety attack and loosing
bowel control on final....

Maxwell writes:

You really are clueless. How, specifically, did mantenance fail 232?

They performed multiple FPIs on the failed fan disk (proved by the presence of
traces of the dye on the part that failed) without actually noticing that the
results indicated a problem.

See NTSB/AAR-90/06 for details.

writes:

Bull****! The crack in the engine had absolutely nothing to do with
maintenance. It was a flaw that existed when the turbine blade was
fabricated. It was not detected in initial inspections of the parts
by the manufacturer, and there was no way that maintenance could have
ever detected it until it failed due to its microscopic nature. If
the manufacturer couldn't see it, what makes you think that Joe
mechanic should have tools that would allow him to see it?

A failure to see it is a failure to see it. It's not excusable.

Maxwell writes:

If life is that simple, why do you confine yourself to a basement and
simulator?

I don't.

On Jun 6, 1:49 am, Mxsmanic wrote:
Skylune writes:
What mistake? Did you obtain gainful employment?

I guess it was an ironic coincidence, then.

Best not to criticize others for a perceived lack of research unless one does
at least as much research oneself.

Listen fool: Some of the pilots here with whom I have quarreled with
in the past even acknowledged that I attached references to studies on
things like the FAA funding formula, etc.

You on the other hand just spew trash about anything and everything.