Third Freedom from Inept Civil Servants

From: "Jim Quinn"
To:  "The Cabinet Office UK" <pscorrespondence@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk>
Cc:
Subject: UNSAFE AAIB report 4-2010
Date: 04 September 2010 21:30

The UK AAIB have done it again with their report on a Boeing 777 incident at St Kitts, West Indies (airport ref SKB) on 26th September 2009. See:
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/sites/aaib/publications/formal_reports.cfm

Their report AAIB 4-2010 dated 2sept10 is the fourth poor one this year (and thus every one this year has been poor!) that I have commented upon, and it again has insufficient safety recommendations.

The UK AAIB report says at para 1.18.1.1:
"Also the low sun was directly over the western end of the ramp."
According to the following website, http://www.sunrisesunsetmap.com/ , sunset was at 1802 hours Bolivia time, and the 777 aircrew started to talk to ATC (Air Traffic Control) about taxi at 2059:57 hours (three hours later, and Boliva is on the same longitude as SKB, but there may be an hour time zone difference of course), so the sun was well below the horizon. Since St Kitts is only 17 degrees North of the Equator, I would have thought the Sun would set at about 1800 hours for days are as long as nights on the equator at almost all times of the year, so I also mindfully conclude that the Sun was actually set for some long time previous to taxi out, and thus it was dark. Thus my safety recommendation ON THE UK AAIB, that they always check local time, and quote local sunset time in this case, for their reports.

So, it was dark, yet the UK AAIB report mentions no lights on the taxiway. Were there none, and thus why the co-pilot taxied blindly? Or was it his fault for not having a recce of the taxiway map before flight? Do SKB have big maps at aircrew lounge departure doors? Two more safety recommendations.

If the taxiway lights had been on, the co-pilot would have seen alpha taxiway to A departing to his left as he approached B. So importantly, were there no taxiway lights? Because the co-pilot was only following his own head lamps it seems. A safety recommendation to fit taxiway lights.

The UK AAIB mention the British Airways NDA, but do not show it. Why not, since it seems to me to indicate that BA should have their St Kitts flight clearance withdrawn – useless NDA still not corrected? A safety recommendation.

Why is there no ATC sound recorder? The UK AAIB report did not even mention it, even though they recognised difficulties in memory recall from the staff in the ATC room. I agree with the UK AAIB report 4-2010, that SKB is obviously not performing as it should, for they were lazy in their approach to safety. So they should be more stringently scrutinised before flights are allowed there again – but no UK AAIB recommendation anywhere near strong enough. Suspension hurts the whole island, so pressure to improve much better if flights were suspended. Two more safety recommendations.

If the departure via beta (B) was so regular, why was there no woman standing at the junction to ensure the 777 aircraft went down alpha to A? There are not that many flights into or out of SKB, so it should be easily setup. A safety recommendation.

The UK AAIB mention June 2010 as the date for work to be completed at the airport. Their report is September 2010. Was it done? Why publish the lazy report, if they do not know? Similarly for the training necessary for ATC crew. Another safety recommendation UPON the UK AAIB.

Count those safety recommendations up, and I think the UK AAIB will find they should be up to about number 2010-056 by now (not just their 2010-049), with an additonal two from ME onto THEM, which obviously EASA/CAA will have to think about.

Thus the UK AAIB are again quality audited. The UK AAIB should send many senior managers back to school (or sack them), and make sure those left know how to conduct an investigation in future. A safety recommendation on the UK AAIB, for our skys are only safer, if they report well.

NOW please.
IMMEDIATELY, for our future flight safety depends upon these people.

The UK Cabinet Office to follow up actions please.

Jim Quinn FIMechE

Why is this idea important?

From: "Jim Quinn"
To:  "The Cabinet Office UK" <pscorrespondence@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk>
Cc:
Subject: UNSAFE AAIB report 4-2010
Date: 04 September 2010 21:30

The UK AAIB have done it again with their report on a Boeing 777 incident at St Kitts, West Indies (airport ref SKB) on 26th September 2009. See:
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/sites/aaib/publications/formal_reports.cfm

Their report AAIB 4-2010 dated 2sept10 is the fourth poor one this year (and thus every one this year has been poor!) that I have commented upon, and it again has insufficient safety recommendations.

The UK AAIB report says at para 1.18.1.1:
"Also the low sun was directly over the western end of the ramp."
According to the following website, http://www.sunrisesunsetmap.com/ , sunset was at 1802 hours Bolivia time, and the 777 aircrew started to talk to ATC (Air Traffic Control) about taxi at 2059:57 hours (three hours later, and Boliva is on the same longitude as SKB, but there may be an hour time zone difference of course), so the sun was well below the horizon. Since St Kitts is only 17 degrees North of the Equator, I would have thought the Sun would set at about 1800 hours for days are as long as nights on the equator at almost all times of the year, so I also mindfully conclude that the Sun was actually set for some long time previous to taxi out, and thus it was dark. Thus my safety recommendation ON THE UK AAIB, that they always check local time, and quote local sunset time in this case, for their reports.

So, it was dark, yet the UK AAIB report mentions no lights on the taxiway. Were there none, and thus why the co-pilot taxied blindly? Or was it his fault for not having a recce of the taxiway map before flight? Do SKB have big maps at aircrew lounge departure doors? Two more safety recommendations.

If the taxiway lights had been on, the co-pilot would have seen alpha taxiway to A departing to his left as he approached B. So importantly, were there no taxiway lights? Because the co-pilot was only following his own head lamps it seems. A safety recommendation to fit taxiway lights.

The UK AAIB mention the British Airways NDA, but do not show it. Why not, since it seems to me to indicate that BA should have their St Kitts flight clearance withdrawn – useless NDA still not corrected? A safety recommendation.

Why is there no ATC sound recorder? The UK AAIB report did not even mention it, even though they recognised difficulties in memory recall from the staff in the ATC room. I agree with the UK AAIB report 4-2010, that SKB is obviously not performing as it should, for they were lazy in their approach to safety. So they should be more stringently scrutinised before flights are allowed there again – but no UK AAIB recommendation anywhere near strong enough. Suspension hurts the whole island, so pressure to improve much better if flights were suspended. Two more safety recommendations.

If the departure via beta (B) was so regular, why was there no woman standing at the junction to ensure the 777 aircraft went down alpha to A? There are not that many flights into or out of SKB, so it should be easily setup. A safety recommendation.

The UK AAIB mention June 2010 as the date for work to be completed at the airport. Their report is September 2010. Was it done? Why publish the lazy report, if they do not know? Similarly for the training necessary for ATC crew. Another safety recommendation UPON the UK AAIB.

Count those safety recommendations up, and I think the UK AAIB will find they should be up to about number 2010-056 by now (not just their 2010-049), with an additonal two from ME onto THEM, which obviously EASA/CAA will have to think about.

Thus the UK AAIB are again quality audited. The UK AAIB should send many senior managers back to school (or sack them), and make sure those left know how to conduct an investigation in future. A safety recommendation on the UK AAIB, for our skys are only safer, if they report well.

NOW please.
IMMEDIATELY, for our future flight safety depends upon these people.

The UK Cabinet Office to follow up actions please.

Jim Quinn FIMechE

Reverse the decision that all new nurses will be required to have degrees

The basic requirement for being a good nurse is surely to have a kind, caring personality, not an ability to write a good essay.  It is therefore hugely worrying that entirely uncaring, but academic people could soon qualify as nurses at the expense of those who are very caring and attentive, but do not have an aptitude for academic study. 

What is more, there is a very real possibility that some of those who get degrees will become ‘too posh to wash’ and think the traditional duties of a nurse below them.  This will do nobody any favours. 

On top of this, has any thought been given to how this ludicrous proposal will be funded?  There are surely only three possibilities, all of which are unpalatable:

  1. The government will fund this unnecessary extra education, through grants and subsidies, increasing the already gargantuan budget deficit, thus further exacerbating the economic woes of this country.  
  2. Nursing will become a career option which is only available to the wealthy, as they will be the only ones who can afford the training.
  3. Trainee nurses will be required to take out large loans, saddling them with huge debts that they may never pay off.

Clearly none of the above, or any combination of them, is in the slightest bit desirable from the point of view either of potential nurses or of society as a whole.

Why is this idea important?

The basic requirement for being a good nurse is surely to have a kind, caring personality, not an ability to write a good essay.  It is therefore hugely worrying that entirely uncaring, but academic people could soon qualify as nurses at the expense of those who are very caring and attentive, but do not have an aptitude for academic study. 

What is more, there is a very real possibility that some of those who get degrees will become ‘too posh to wash’ and think the traditional duties of a nurse below them.  This will do nobody any favours. 

On top of this, has any thought been given to how this ludicrous proposal will be funded?  There are surely only three possibilities, all of which are unpalatable:

  1. The government will fund this unnecessary extra education, through grants and subsidies, increasing the already gargantuan budget deficit, thus further exacerbating the economic woes of this country.  
  2. Nursing will become a career option which is only available to the wealthy, as they will be the only ones who can afford the training.
  3. Trainee nurses will be required to take out large loans, saddling them with huge debts that they may never pay off.

Clearly none of the above, or any combination of them, is in the slightest bit desirable from the point of view either of potential nurses or of society as a whole.

Why switch off DAB?

DAB is more inefficient in terms of the power required to power the radio

DAB does not have full coverage of the country

DAB is not currently standard kit within the vast majority of cars

 

Why are you insisting on fixing something that isn't broken? Keep FM and can DAB, which is an inferior digital product that I can't get, so I will just lose my radio signals in 2015.

 

Bloody ridiculous…haven't you got better things to be doing rather than forcing peiople to spend unecessary hundreds of pounds on radios?

Why is this idea important?

DAB is more inefficient in terms of the power required to power the radio

DAB does not have full coverage of the country

DAB is not currently standard kit within the vast majority of cars

 

Why are you insisting on fixing something that isn't broken? Keep FM and can DAB, which is an inferior digital product that I can't get, so I will just lose my radio signals in 2015.

 

Bloody ridiculous…haven't you got better things to be doing rather than forcing peiople to spend unecessary hundreds of pounds on radios?

Government Must Change The Law Governing White Papers


White Papers Waffle and Waste Planning time and Money.

I wrote this, and showed my chart, in 2007, asking Government for change. Nothing happened, yet surely White Papers are drawn up because the Government wants to tell us something. The White Paper here was a total failure in this respect, and presumably there is a Statute somewhere that gives the Authority for spending money on such expensively written White Papers.

The Future is bleak. The DTI (or the BERR) published a White Paper in 2007 “Meeting the Energy Challenge” in which all they did was frighten everybody off investing at all, because they would not risk investment themselves. It said that we are due to lose 22.5GW of electricity generation through shut-downs of capacity by 2020, and details in para 5.1.13 that a new 25 GW of capacity is needed to be operating by 2020, and a further 10GW by 2030.

It presents 91 pages of waffle in Section 5.1 (Electricity Generation – Investment Framework) of the White Paper, with only one chart – showing minimal renewables growth over the last ten years and no chart at all about the predictable future. The whole section talks endlessly waffling about the need to invest, and the support that investors need over resource prices, and the electricity market prices, but nothing is said about those prices or investment returns, presumably because there is risk in every prediction and the Government was avoiding commitment itself. Is OFGEN up to the Long Term Investment Job?

White Papers need to be brought up to Industry Standards – they need clear charts and just a few pages of clear and concise text. It took me a while to construct my Investment Chart attached here, because the data was not easily available (and virtually nothing in the totally inadequate Energy White Paper where it should have been of course), and it was easiest to collate and draw it for nuclear power, but its concept is equally applicable to every other Project that anybody is asked to invest in. The negative cash flow region is of course that required to build the Project, during which time there is no Sales Income, and the Bank and Stock Market returns were those prevailing in 2007. It is time the Government reduced costs by reviewing White Paper Strategy based as it must surely be on Law and Policy, and by planning for the Country clearly enough.

The chart helped me to understand why Investment in Energy of any sort is so slow – the returns shown are simply not good enough in comparison with other investments.
 

Why is this idea important?


White Papers Waffle and Waste Planning time and Money.

I wrote this, and showed my chart, in 2007, asking Government for change. Nothing happened, yet surely White Papers are drawn up because the Government wants to tell us something. The White Paper here was a total failure in this respect, and presumably there is a Statute somewhere that gives the Authority for spending money on such expensively written White Papers.

The Future is bleak. The DTI (or the BERR) published a White Paper in 2007 “Meeting the Energy Challenge” in which all they did was frighten everybody off investing at all, because they would not risk investment themselves. It said that we are due to lose 22.5GW of electricity generation through shut-downs of capacity by 2020, and details in para 5.1.13 that a new 25 GW of capacity is needed to be operating by 2020, and a further 10GW by 2030.

It presents 91 pages of waffle in Section 5.1 (Electricity Generation – Investment Framework) of the White Paper, with only one chart – showing minimal renewables growth over the last ten years and no chart at all about the predictable future. The whole section talks endlessly waffling about the need to invest, and the support that investors need over resource prices, and the electricity market prices, but nothing is said about those prices or investment returns, presumably because there is risk in every prediction and the Government was avoiding commitment itself. Is OFGEN up to the Long Term Investment Job?

White Papers need to be brought up to Industry Standards – they need clear charts and just a few pages of clear and concise text. It took me a while to construct my Investment Chart attached here, because the data was not easily available (and virtually nothing in the totally inadequate Energy White Paper where it should have been of course), and it was easiest to collate and draw it for nuclear power, but its concept is equally applicable to every other Project that anybody is asked to invest in. The negative cash flow region is of course that required to build the Project, during which time there is no Sales Income, and the Bank and Stock Market returns were those prevailing in 2007. It is time the Government reduced costs by reviewing White Paper Strategy based as it must surely be on Law and Policy, and by planning for the Country clearly enough.

The chart helped me to understand why Investment in Energy of any sort is so slow – the returns shown are simply not good enough in comparison with other investments.
 

Retake driving test for some traffic offences as opposed to points and penalty.

Instead of issueing fixed penalty notices drivers should be given the option of retaking their driving test for minor traffic offences i.e. crossing solid white lines, failing to observe traffic signs etc. The lack of understanding of the highway code by some motorists is alarming. This would improve driving standards.

Why is this idea important?

Instead of issueing fixed penalty notices drivers should be given the option of retaking their driving test for minor traffic offences i.e. crossing solid white lines, failing to observe traffic signs etc. The lack of understanding of the highway code by some motorists is alarming. This would improve driving standards.

GET MORE POLICE ON THE STREET

As the title says….WE NEED MORE POLICE ON THE STREET.

I can not recall the last time I saw the police patrolling my area.  They are never there when cars are speeding or people are fighting or doing drugs etc etc

There needs to be more police on the beat. No more form filling.  Lets get some real police out there protecting us.

Why is this idea important?

As the title says….WE NEED MORE POLICE ON THE STREET.

I can not recall the last time I saw the police patrolling my area.  They are never there when cars are speeding or people are fighting or doing drugs etc etc

There needs to be more police on the beat. No more form filling.  Lets get some real police out there protecting us.

Life should mean life

Prison sentences should be much longer, all too often I read about some horrific crime, pleased to then learn they have been found guilty but the sentencing has become a joke. Terrorists, murderers and paedophiles should get a minimum of 40 years with no chance of parole. These people believe they have the right to take away a life(or lives) and no one should have that right. They should be punished properly, not let out after a few years because they feel rehabiliated.

Why is this idea important?

Prison sentences should be much longer, all too often I read about some horrific crime, pleased to then learn they have been found guilty but the sentencing has become a joke. Terrorists, murderers and paedophiles should get a minimum of 40 years with no chance of parole. These people believe they have the right to take away a life(or lives) and no one should have that right. They should be punished properly, not let out after a few years because they feel rehabiliated.

Leave the European Union

Leave the EU. It is invasive, petty, undemocratic, costly, pernicious and unnecessary. We would save billions over a year – and help to pay off Labour's deficit – by leaving. We are assailed by more and more laws and leaving the EU would rid us of most of the stupid ones at a stroke. It would give us our voice in the world back and restore our democracy – whether in a proportional or first-past-the-post system. WE CAN RUN OUR OWN COUNTRY, THANKS – and it was a far better one when we did.

Why is this idea important?

Leave the EU. It is invasive, petty, undemocratic, costly, pernicious and unnecessary. We would save billions over a year – and help to pay off Labour's deficit – by leaving. We are assailed by more and more laws and leaving the EU would rid us of most of the stupid ones at a stroke. It would give us our voice in the world back and restore our democracy – whether in a proportional or first-past-the-post system. WE CAN RUN OUR OWN COUNTRY, THANKS – and it was a far better one when we did.