"Meat Plow" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 28 May 2009 01:52:41 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:


"Meat Plow" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 27 May 2009 14:10:55 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:


"Adrian Tuddenham" wrote in
message
news:1j0c3um.1l6pfnsuahyycN%adrian@poppyrecord s.invalid.invalid...
Arfa Daily wrote:

"Adrian Tuddenham" wrote in
message
alid.invalid...
Eeyore wrote:


The EU Commission should be strung by their necks from lamp-posts
for
being a
bunch of technically ignorant ****s. Why do they think lead was
used
in
solder
in the first place ? For fun ?

In the past I have many times agreed with your facts, but I have
often
disagreed with your way of expressing them. On this occasion I am
with
you all the way.

Let's hope the first aeroplane to crash because of lead-free solder
has
only Brussels diplomats and anti-lead campaigners on board.

--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

As far as I know, at this point in time, the avionics industry still
has
an
exemption from having to use the stuff. Now I wonder why that could
be
... ?

They may be exempt, but what might they do when they can't get the
proper stuff any more because no manufacturer can afford to run two
production lines for the same product simultaneously and daren't risk
getting them muddled?

1) Set up special production lines.
2) Stop making avionics.
3) Change the rules and use lead-free.


--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

There are no plans at the moment, from what I can gather, for
manufacturers
to stop producing leaded solder, nor for distributors to drop it. There
is
much 'legacy' equipment out there, which is manufactured in leaded
solder,
and should not, as a consequence, be repaired using lead-free solder,
according to published wisdom from those who should know. There is no
legal
requirement to use lead-free for the purposes of effecting such repairs.
As
well as avionics, there are a number of other exemptions in important
fields
such as medical equipment, and some military areas. Again, I wonder why
that
could be ... ? As far as I understand it, the American military will not
tolerate the stuff being used in any of their equipment. How eminently
sensible of them. Pity we haven't got the same courage of our
convictions
to
stand up to the green mist brigade on this side of the pond ...

Arfa


Maybe after the Eurofighter fleet is grounded because of avionics
failures linked to LF solder?

Hope they don't use it to solder them Airbuses together

So do I, my friend, as I am about to get on one for the first time in
October. All of my previous cross-pond jaunts have been in properly built
747s, which have a proper yoke for the driver to hang on to, and
'automatics' that can be switched off. There's something fundamentally
wrong
about a plane that has to be flown with a left-handed joystick, and which
employs a robot driver hidden away somewhere, which believes it knows more
about how to fly a plane, than the human guy and his chum in the co-seat,
who have 40 years flying experience between them ... :-\

Arfa


I've flown the A320 back and forth to Florida from here several times.
A 2.5 hour trip. Except for the seating that seemed to be maximized
for cramming as many passengers inside as possible it was a pleasant
and quiet aircraft. Only scare was once landing in a 30 knot crosswind
but the pilot got us down in one piece. I personally know a Ryan pilot
who flies the Airbus line but now is training on the 767. He says
Airbus is easy to fly and the computer system is reliable. So no
worries mate

Fly by wire is nothing new to aviation. Some of the best fighters
could not fly without computers flying them as all are designed to be
aerodynamically unstable to be highly maneuverable. The F/A 117
Stealth couldn't fly without triple redundant computers and 3 pitot
tubes constantly sampling outside air dynamics to tell the computers
what the aircraft is doing and to make minute corrections in
fractional seconds.


Yeah, you're right of course. I just don't like change. Only reason that I'm
flying on one this time, is that I'm at war with Virgin about their loyalty
points scheme, that won't allow me to use points to offset the cost of my
fare, so I've booked with a different airline as a protest. Its an A330-300
that we're booked on. Seat pitch is a little better at 33" cattle class,
than most of the seats on the 747-400, which are 31". There are a few at
33", but Virgin charge thirty quid each way extra for them. Width is a tad
over 17", which is a bit tight on my lardy arse these days, but I guess
we'll make it there. Mind you, the Airbus has only got one redundant engine.
The 747 has got three ... Not so long back, they didn't allow two-engined
planes to fly the 'straight' route across open Atlantic, did they ? Not
gonna be in Florida in October are you ?

Arfa