Wanna buy a Lightning?

[LonelyplanetXO]

Since im here on holiday in Cape Town I thought to look up Thunder City, who operated BAC Lightnings & Hunters. Turns out theyre closed, operating licence revoked following a 2009 crash which killed the unlucky pilot.
So their aircraft are all up for sale ...http://www.go-dove.com/event-15794?lcid=en&utm_source=ExactTarget&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=15794

Hmm, shame i dont have a few million lying around.

LPXO

[Daveroo]

what were they doing wrong that the lic was pulled after the accident?...were there more than the one crash?...did they lie about facts?..what happened?...if one crash got a lic pulled...no one would have an operating lic for anything


dont mean to come across snarky....im just curious since i dont know the situation

[Willy]

I suspect there was probably a lawsuit or lawyers involved after the crash that forced the sale of assets.

[Allen]

If it is not a P-38 no thanks.

[LonelyplanetXO]

Daveroo, accident Report here:http://jetwashaviationphotos.com/Documents/zu-bex%20report.pdf

[SSI01]

Good morning all - just reviewed the interim accident report. The noteable fuel leak which occurred the day before the show is an eye-opener - I wonder if anyone checked into the cause of the leak, look at Section 8.0 of the interim accident report, wherein the SACAA pledged to look further into the "capacity of the operator to service/maintain these type of aircraft" - which seems to call into question the basic competence of the maintenance organization. The owners of the aircraft were operating a business, where profit and loss matter - the government, when it was operating these aircraft, couldn't have cared less about profit or loss, hence double- and triple-checked everything - redundant inspection is very expensive, it's one of the things that makes the US Navy's "SubSafe" program, initiated after loss of THRESHER, so expensive and yet effective; there are new inspection techniques in place for submarine parts, but a big part of the system is just three different guys inspecting the same part at different times, instead of just one guy - hence the increased cost. Notation is made of inspections of the ejection seat cartridges being put off not once, but twice, albeit (apparently) with SACAA concurrence (I'll bet the CAA inspector who allowed this to slip, if he/she knew about it, is dancing on the carpet over this one). They also want to review emergency procedures in place at the time of the accident - indicating these were somehow modified from RAF practice.

If you want to, read this thing over and we can discuss at length, as this report is interesting. I'm seeing the SACAA admitting there was on the part of their inspector, or inspectors, the allowing of a little fudging of adherence to maintenance schedules, and the degree of compliance with maintenance standards, apparently due to the type of aircraft and its complexity, in addition to its age. I don't know anything about how much fuel leakage, if any, was tolerated on a Lightning (for example, the SR-71 drips fuel constantly on the ground, there's no way to stop it, so it's an accepted norm) but fuel on the tarmac should have been cause for an alarm. The failure of the aircraft to go into or maintain AB on the ground the day before could have been an early symptom of this leak. Maybe one of the pumps to the AB, or its fuel line, had leaked and this didn't show up until the AB was engaged on the ground.

I was offered a hop in a two-seat F-15 once, but the adamant stipulation of the squadron ops officer was I had to be checked out by their flight surgeon for salient medical issues - plus go through the altitude chamber - and this for just a one-time hop. That got quashed right away when they found out I am a heart attack survivor. Language in the report indicates TC was giving rides to individuals with little or no medical examination prior to the hops - probably just a signed release of liability before strapping the jet on.

Speaking from professional experience, once you see something like this in one area, you start bearing down on all other areas and it won't be long before you find a pattern of non-compliance.

My guess, based on what I saw in the report and nothing else, on the bottom line is a combination of what started out as a temporary suspension of flight operations at TC for SACAA maintenance reviews resulting in a full-blown shutdown when they dug a little further into how things were done within TC. Add to this the family of the deceased pilot suing TC when the news about the ejection seat maintenance was surfaced in this report, and you've probably got everything. I'd much rather face a govt review of my practices than a civil lawsuit. It's all just too bad as in my heart I supported TC's mission, for aesthetic reasons as well as historic ones. Young people growing up today think the Cold War was in Korea because of the temperatures involved - if they're even taught about it at all. The aircraft kept and flown at TC were reminders of what we in the West did to maintain vigilance during that period to preserve what we held, and still hold dear. It was a way of teaching the youth about sacrifice and "eternal vigilance."