Poignard
Well-known member
Cheese that tastes like cheese?They should start serving Edam on board His Majesty's Ships.
That would be a break with tradition!
Last edited:
Cheese that tastes like cheese?They should start serving Edam on board His Majesty's Ships.
I think they still had plenty in stock when I joined in 1957Suffolk cheese no longer exists; Pepys ordered it to be supplied to the Navy but it was so inedible that the Navy banned it in 1756:
Foods of England - Suffolk Cheese
A bit like Brickwoods then?Suffolk cheese no longer exists; Pepys ordered it to be supplied to the Navy but it was so inedible that the Navy banned it in 1756:
I believe two-thirds of our cheese is imported - a disgrace.Suffolk cheese no longer exists; Pepys ordered it to be supplied to the Navy but it was so inedible that the Navy banned it in 1756:
Foods of England - Suffolk Cheese
The BIG error here seems to be not having a foolproof system for preventing such a foreseeable human error.All humans make errors. Punishment has never been a very successful method of prevention of errors.
The BIG error here seems to be not having a foolproof system for preventing such a foreseeable human error.
As has been noted by other posters, other simple steps could - and should - have been put in place to make this impossible / foolproof.
Yup. If we recruit pilots with eyes in the back of their heads they could use hindsight.The BIG error here seems to be not having a foolproof system for preventing such a foreseeable human error.
As has been noted by other posters, other simple steps could - and should - have been put in place to make this impossible / foolproof.
Vile stuff!A bit like Brickwoods then?
Yup. If we recruit pilots with eyes in the back of their heads they could use hindsight.
I think they do...those new, F35 top secret helmets mean that you can look anywhere (including at the floor) and it’s like there is no aircraftYup. If we recruit pilots with eyes in the back of their heads they could use hindsight.
When the engine is run up to speed before launch wouldn't the engine management system have detected the problem?I don't doubt there was a "foolproof" system in place unfortunately there were at least two people one of which was the pilot that ignored it.
Perhaps nobody could imagine anyone doing something so obvious...and is it an official F35 cover...or an after market, like the one I have on my Tesla from Amazon?When the engine is run up to speed before launch wouldn't the engine management system have detected the problem?
When the engine is run up to speed before launch wouldn't the engine management system have detected the problem?
Perhaps nobody could imagine anyone doing something so obvious...and is it an official F35 cover...or an after market, like the one I have on my Tesla from Amazon?
That’s not a foolproof system then, so the people who designed the system made the bigger error. Most system/procedures can designed to almost entirely eliminate the risk of catastrophic errors like that.I don't doubt there was a "foolproof" system in place unfortunately there were at least two people one of which was the pilot that ignored it.
That’s not a foolproof system then, so the people who designed the system made the bigger error. Most system/procedures can designed to almost entirely eliminate the risk of catastrophic errors like that.
The physical tokens on single track railways was an early example of that.
British car makers didn’t design foolproof manufacturing methods, but the Japanese car designers used poka yoke to think of very simple ways to make assembly much more reliable - eg changing symmetrical parts to be asymmetric so could only be assembled the right way.
The posting earlier about simple teechniques to ensure an ROV could not be launched with key components out of place was another excellent example.
Would not have taken long to design a physical procedure which guaranteed that covers could not be left on pre-launch (eg all such components attached to a storage rig and only when all connected could a component be extracted which allows pilot to start up).
Major failure of forethought and procedure design.
Why not share your suggestions with the Panel? They might just introduce Hackett's procedure.There is not a system ( H&S) including mirror boards and even personal safety locks that can't be and have been overridden by an inventive idiot. At it's simplest two people at least failed in their basic responsibilities through indolence or carelessness, perhaps there is another reason and no doubt a back story that encompasses others but I can think of nothing that would excuse the flight deck crew and pilot from their responsibilities and the fact that they failed to carry them out makes them a future liability.
Why not share your suggestions with the Panel? They might just introduce Hackett's procedure.
View attachment 142735
https://assets.publishing.service.g.../1099593/20220819-ZM152_SI_Interim_Report.pdf
The "channels" giving rise to "homeward bounders" meaning, amongst other things, long untidy stitches on sail repairs.[...]
On the other hand, merchant ship people recognise a condition called “Channel Fever” - “sod it, we will soon be home”.