Dan O'Hagan wrote:XR219 wrote:Dan O'Hagan wrote:pbeardmore wrote:[i] Act with reasonable care and skill like .... employing aircrew who won't roll the aeroplane contrary to it's Permit To Fly weeks after the most publicised airshow crash in the UK since 1952
On that specific point then, can you elaborate as to what policy the Trust should have adopted in terms of employing aircrew? On the flight in question, as is well known one of the pilots was a chief test pilot of an aerospace OEM and a CAA DAE, while the other was a long haul airline first officer and held a valid DA. I propose that their competencies and experience would have passed the threshold set by a reasonable person charged with recruiting a Vulcan display crew. By extension, the decision to do so would have been unlikely to raise alarm bells for those charged with oversight of the Trust.
It speaks very poorly for the standards of workplace discipline if employees felt able to flaunt the rules in that manner, especially at that critical time in the weeks immediately after Shoreham. Likewise the hangar practices that saw a silica gel bag left in the intake - how and why, and by whom (the identity of the person responsible on the day has, to my knowledge, yet to make it into the public arena) was such a mistake made? The polar opposite of "reasonable care and skill" in anybody's language.