|
Originally Posted by halls120
(Post 13259162)
If you are only reading the title of threads without the substance of the posts, that's your problem, not mine.
I clearly stated that what I was posting was a rumor. If someone can post something to rebut the rumor, I'll gladly confess my sin and ask the post be removed. :D |
Originally Posted by star_world
(Post 13258854)
Facts? Source for this? Anyone? Or just "rumors floating around certain circles"?
Weren't there some maintenance reports posted on the other TSA incident involving the RJs? |
Forward cabin door version of ATR has an escape window as well as overhead escape hatch in the cockpit. Standard door versions of ATR have just the escape hatch. Climbing the pitot tubes could be used to access either or both.
http://www.brandweerschiphol.nl/inst...r_42_72_02.pdf |
Originally Posted by halls120
(Post 13259112)
An employee who cannot be identified, out of fear for his/her job. I clearly identified it as an unsubstantiated rumor, so you can calm down now. :D
I'm not doubting your story for a second, just like seeing something in writing to substantiate these things. Call it my curious side :) |
Whether the report is based in fact or not it seems that unqualified people should be escorted if they are going to be around aircraft. There are several areas on most aircraft that can cause severe injury to the unknowing along with the distinct possilbity of causing unseen damage to the aircraft thereby threatening those who would fly on that craft.
No one should be allowed to approach the aircraft without the owners knowledge or permission. |
Originally Posted by TSO1973
(Post 13259031)
OK let me start by saying I'm not defending someone using pitot tubes or static probes for handles or steps (by the way, the probes under the windows appear to be static probes, the pitot tubes are located just behind the radome on the ATR). But there is another possibility at work here. Since there have been several airworthiness directives aimed at pitot tubes recently, could that have been why 10 ATR's were taken out of service? Or part of a required inspection? Also, I don't believe the cockpit windows of an ATR42-72 are able to be opened in the first place. Here are 2 different pictures of an ATR flight deck showing all the cockpit windows.
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Binte...e2f67b65502760 http://www.airliners.net/photo/Linea...e2f67b65502760 Airbus yes. |
Originally Posted by star_world
(Post 13260622)
Very calm - thanks though :) It just always helps to have some facts when you post something in this particular forum that causes the natives to start drooling :) Keeps them on the right track.
I'm not doubting your story for a second, just like seeing something in writing to substantiate these things. Call it my curious side :) |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 13260951)
What AWD's have been issued on ATR pitot tubes?
Airbus yes. And to a previous post, I think you're right, it's an AOA probe looking at the shape of it. The pitot tubes are in a different location. |
Originally Posted by TSO1973
(Post 13260971)
Could be a required inspection too. I've looked through some AD's.
No? Stop trying to justify this... |
Originally Posted by avsfan733
(Post 13261811)
For this aircraft?
No? Stop trying to justify this... |
Originally Posted by AngryMiller
(Post 13258871)
Well, Halls120 does run with the big dogs and if he says something it is usually pretty accurate.
I can't wait until this hits the Dallas Morning News/Dead Fishwrapper or whatever MSM outlet. #TSAfail They've had a turbulent few months. |
Originally Posted by TSO1973
(Post 13259127)
But the way you titled the thread implies fact.
It's up to you to read the actual post to find the details. There, he clearly says it's an unsubstantiated rumor. It's a rumor. You believe it or you don't. Certainly doesn't help your credibility or cause if that's what you're trying to nitpick on. |
Originally Posted by codex57
(Post 13262159)
Did he change the title? Cuz I read "Repeat TSA Stupidity". Well, we know that's often fact, but otherwise, it's an incredibly vague statement. Sorta like "my flight got delayed." Happens often and doesn't tell you much.
It's up to you to read the actual post to find the details. There, he clearly says it's an unsubstantiated rumor. It's a rumor. You believe it or you don't. Certainly doesn't help your credibility or cause if that's what you're trying to nitpick on. |
Originally Posted by TSO1973
(Post 13262219)
Saying "my flight was delayed" and then saying the facts behind it is different than stating "repeat TSA stupidity" and then saying that "rumor is..."
|
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 13262734)
So what is the TSA rumor mill saying if anything about this?
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 2:11 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.