Martin Baker Aircraft to be prosecuted

[SamHH]

Eric Mc said:

Save 10,000 lives - nobody notices.

Lose 1 and you get sued to kingdom come.

Is the point of this statement that Martin Baker should not be prosecuted? If so, that seems to equate to an argument that you should be able to pay your way out of being prosecuted for crimes.

[aeropilot]

telecat said:

aeropilot said:

jamieduff1981 said:

V8 Fettler said:

The assumption should be that the manufacturer holds ultimate expertise, although that assumption can be flawed. Is there an O&M manual?

Yes and undoubtedly, but the former is why the operator has a duty to consult with the manufacturer (design authority) before taking it upon themselves to dismantle things and put them back together and the latter will cover how to operate the seat and perform any maintenance the manufacturer prescribes.

That's why, looking back to cars, the manufacturer provides the dealer network with detailed manuals explaining how to perform maintenance and assembly replacements, but also why the dealer networks generally are neither qualified nor equipped to rebuild complex sub-assemblies, such as engine or gearbox rebuilds. If the manufacturer is expected to warranty these tolerance and assembly critical items, then they also want to tightly control who does this.

Post #105 dated today on the PPrune thread is very interesting......

This impact of this court case could have far reaching consequences.

So No Contract to Maintain the seats makes this MOD/RAF responsibility?

You would think so......but I guess we'll have to wait until it all gets to court.

The PPrune thread also seems to be hinting/suggesting that the RAF/MOD may have now done away with the traditional seat bays for seat work which is a shocking but not unsurprising MOD cost cutting exercise!!

[Ginge R]

The barrister for HSE was pretty sharp, the one put forward by the MoD was, well..

In my opinion now, and with access to some of those involved, it is the right move.