Re:Somebody should take his pills here ...
on
Airbus A380 Under Fire
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Have you ever heard about the McDonnel Douglas DC-10, known defects by Convair subcontractor for the cargo door were hidden by McDonnell Dougals and Convair from the FAA. Several fatal crashes occured before an AD was issued to finally correct the defects.
June 27, 1972 Daniel Applegate, Director of Product Engineering for Convair, the fuselage contractor, wrote a memo to his supervisors detailing potential problems of cargo door. The problem was first recognized in Aug 69. The same thing had also happened in a ground test in 1970.
Recognized design flaws - floor, latch
FAA director John Shaffer and McDonnel Douglas President Jackson McGowan reached a gentleman's agreement to voluntarily fix problem, but no further official action was taken.
In July 1972, Three inspectors at Long Beach plant certified that Ship 29 had been modified (but it was not). Two years later, after leaving Paris, its cargo door blew off at 13,000 feet, killing 346 people.
McDonnel Douglas was in precarious financial condition - trying to beat Lockheed L1011 to market
Convair did not push too hard, since by contract, they may have been held liable for the costs of all design changes
Engineers pressed the matter through normal channels to the highest levels within both companies, but did not take it any further action, Standard operating procedure at McDonnell Douglas and Convair was for engineers to defer to upper management, even though they were aware of serious design flaws
NTSB determined as a primary contributory cause the AA587 crash was the AIRBUS rudder defect. The American Airlines adverse attitude training in the use of the rudder would have been discontinued, and therefore no crash would have occured, with the disclosure of the AIRBUS memo. The NTSB has directed the French DGAC to correct the rudder defect.
A suggestion, before you judge me for what I have done, you owe it to yourself to review the evidence on www.eaawatch.net.
I did not file criminal charges against TTTech because this is exactly what TTTech attorneys wished to occur. With a filing of criminal charges against TTTech, it could be made to appear that my motives were not purely driven by public safety interests.
The Vice Chancelor of Austria, Hubert Gorbach, as the Minister of Transportation, was required to investigate the charges and take actions for the interest of the EU state of Austria as a member of the EASA Executive Board, as required by the EU safety directive "Occurance reporting in civil Aviation".
A duty which he failed to perform after he was notified on November 11th 2004.
From: "joseph mangan" To: ; Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 10:56 AM Subject: TTTech Criminal Incident Reporting per EU 32003L0042 Occurance Reporting in Civil Aviation
Mr. Günther RAICHER, Mr. Hubert Gorbach, I wish to report an incident under EU 32003L0042 Occurance Reporting in Civil Aviation. Directive 2003/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2003 on occurrence reporting in civil aviation I understand that you are responsible for this activity in Austria for the European Co-ordination Centre for Aviation Incident Reporting Systems. Article 8 of 32003L0042 states. 4. In accordance with the procedures defined in their national laws and practices, Member States shall ensure that employees who report incidents of which they may have knowledge are not subjected to any prejudice by their employer. I have made a report to EASA (European Aviation Safety Agency) on October 1st of this year, in regard to criminal activities by TTTech, Vienna Austria CEO Stefan Poledna, CFO Georg Kopetz, Head of Aerospace Sales Kurt Doppelbauer. The board of directors of TTTech was also notified, the Chairman of the board is Prof. Hermann Kopetz of TU Vienna. This issue is related to defects, incomplete testing and documentation, as well as false documentation TTTech has developed for the Airbus A380 Cabin Pressurization and Control System, which can result in the total destruction of the aircraft. The investigation has been assigned by EASA to Mr. Remy Jouty of the French DGAC. All evidence, and statements have been provided to Mr. Jouty. His investigation has now confirmed some of my allegations. Mr. Remy Jouty can be reached at 33-1-58-0945-09, or via email at remy.jouty@aviation-civile.gouv.fr TTTech terminated my employment, in retaliation for my reporting. Legal documents from TTTech confirm the reason as "disclosure of confidential information". This is clearly in violation of Article 8 of 32003L0042 section 4. It is the responsibility of the Member State, Austria, to prosecute Gross Negligence, which the evidence delivered to EASA clearly shows occured. I have filed a wrongfull termination lawsuit in the Austrian Labor Court, the first court date is December 22nd.
TTTech attempted to silence me in the Civil Court with a Preliminary Injunction. An interview took place with the Judge 3 weeks ago, and my Attourney, Mag. Stefan Kuhteubl with Engelbrecht and Piplits, filed responses to TTTech's statements. Thus far, the Judge has taken no action in this case, and my response has cost 12,000 Euros. My Attourney Mag. Stefan Kuhteubl can be reached via telephone at 43-1-513-44-41. He has all of the evidence as well as all filed documents in both the Labor Court and Civil Court actions. Gross Negligence has been commited by TTTech, and must be prosecuted for the sake of saving the lives of the 550 passengers and crew who will ultimately fly on each and every Airbus A380. Thank you in advance for your attention in this matter. Joe Mangan Telephone: 069910446552
This is what TTTech falsely stated to EASA and the FAA.
My legal council recomended agaist filing charges as this would have played into the hands of TTTech
Read below about the pilots union, which violated a US federal court gag order to disclose evidence that AIRBUS failed to disclose a known defect in the rudder control system of the A300 to the FAA and NTSB which would have prevented the American Airlines Flight 587 Airbus A300 crash.
A memo was written in June 1997 by Thomas Thurnagel, an Airbus engineer in Hamburg Germany.
From: Union: Airbus knew of crash risk
"People died because this memo wasn't disclosed, in my opinion," said John David, deputy safety chairman for the Allied Pilots Association.
Again, as an engineer, the highest duty is to public safety. When a gag order prevents the proper notification and disclosure to the government authorities, and when the government authoritiese fail to act, the public must be informed. My actions are completely justified. I suggest you go to the web site www.onlineethics.org and further educate yourself about the other case examples where engineers have performed their duty to the public safety.
I would rather do my duty now, than to later be blamed for the serious injuries or loss of life that can be prevented by informing the public.
Did you not read the previous post where I identify the Boeing 787 Fly By Wire system issues, and provide you with 3 emails which show that TTTech failed to correct the defects which it promised Honeywell in order to have TTP/C incorporated in the system? Take a look at the history of the formation of the FLEXRAY consortium. Look up the failure reports of the EU funded program "Fault Injection Testing for TTA". Then speak from knowledge rather than speaking from ignorance.
The Commercial Aircraft Industry economic business model is
seriously flawed, and is actively engaged in transferring financial risk from
Corporations to threats to the lives of the passengers and crew without their
informed consent.
This issue is not about AIRBUS vs BOEING, this is AIRBUS and
Boeing, and FAA, and EASA, and the Aircraft system suppliers and their sub
suppliers. This is about all of the elements of the system being under
tremendous pressure to be overly aggressive in the use of untested, unproven,
low cost technology containing high uncertainty. The use of technology of high
uncertainty always results in projects taking far longer to complete and
costing far more than originally planned. This is project risk, and risk is
nearly always significantly underestimated in project planning of modern
Aerospace Programs. In essence we have the worlds biggest game of ?Russian
Roulette?. With Boeing and Airbus gambling that the other will
Pull the trigger on the chamber containing the live round,
thus ending the game. I believe that what we are about to see if the combatants
do not ?throttle back? is the ?story of the 3 Japanese fighting fish?, where
the smart fish (China, India, Japan) allows the other 2 fish to fight to the
death, leaving the survivor too weak to defend against the attach of the
stronger smarter fish who wins unopposed.
I feel a great sympathy and compassion for those who failed
the morality test, challenged with facing the agonizing decision over career
and wealth, vs the cost to human lives of their choice. My Christian conscience
would not allow me to look the other way, realizing that for my own comfort and
security, I would have to knowingly rationalize my own selfish interest, and
thereby place at risk the lives of innocent Men, Women, and Children.
I have waited an entire year (October 2004) in a tireless
pursuit to work with AIRBUS, Nord Micro, TTTech, EASA, and FAA to correct these
issues in private. These organizations refused to take any action. I was left
with no other avenue than to pursue the issue in the public domain one year
later. I had simply exhausted every opportunity available to me. I even visited
the CEO of Nord Micro in his booth at the Paris Airshow, spending 40 minutes
with him and his engineers in an attempt to convince them to act in the
interest of public safety. Numerous failed attempts in good faith with TTTech
are documented on my website. In each and every case, TTTech violated agreed to
terms, and demanded in each case a retraction of my official statements to EASA
and FAA, which has always been understood to be non-negotiable.
Are these people who failed the moral challenge evil? No,
they must decide what is more important to them, the lives of people vs profit,
comfort, and security for themselves. The laws currently favor those who choose
profit over safety. Protections and safeguards, even in the United States are
insufficient to motivate a whistleblower to put themselves and their families
in ?harms way?. One only need to look at the Corporate Crime Spree of WORLDCOM,
ENRON, TYCO, ADELPHIA, HEALTHSOUTH and others.
Conscience can only motivate a whistleblower to act first in
the interest of others.
When confronted by Executive Management with data showing
the program is significantly over schedule and over budget, direct pressure is
applied to find a way to ?get back on schedule?. Just as with the WORLDCOM case
of Ebbers, all that must be said, is that ?we have to make our numbers?, and
th
Slashdot Mirror
Have you ever heard about the McDonnel Douglas DC-10, known defects by Convair subcontractor for the cargo door were hidden by McDonnell Dougals and Convair from the FAA. Several fatal crashes occured before an AD was issued to finally correct the defects.
June 27, 1972 Daniel Applegate, Director of Product Engineering for Convair, the fuselage contractor, wrote a memo to his supervisors detailing potential problems of cargo door. The problem was first recognized in Aug 69. The same thing had also happened in a ground test in 1970.
Recognized design flaws - floor, latch
FAA director John Shaffer and McDonnel Douglas President Jackson McGowan reached a gentleman's agreement to voluntarily fix problem, but no further official action was taken.
In July 1972, Three inspectors at Long Beach plant certified that Ship 29 had been modified (but it was not). Two years later, after leaving Paris, its cargo door blew off at 13,000 feet, killing 346 people.
McDonnel Douglas was in precarious financial condition - trying to beat Lockheed L1011 to market
Convair did not push too hard, since by contract, they may have been held liable for the costs of all design changes
Engineers pressed the matter through normal channels to the highest levels within both companies, but did not take it any further action, Standard operating procedure at McDonnell Douglas and Convair was for engineers to defer to upper management, even though they were aware of serious design flaws
NTSB determined as a primary contributory cause the AA587 crash was the AIRBUS rudder defect. The American Airlines adverse attitude training in the use of the rudder would have been discontinued, and therefore no crash would have occured, with the disclosure of the AIRBUS memo. The NTSB has directed the French DGAC to correct the rudder defect. A suggestion, before you judge me for what I have done, you owe it to yourself to review the evidence on www.eaawatch.net.
I did not file criminal charges against TTTech because this is exactly what TTTech attorneys wished to occur. With a filing of criminal charges against TTTech, it could be made to appear that my motives were not purely driven by public safety interests.
The Vice Chancelor of Austria, Hubert Gorbach, as the Minister of Transportation, was required to investigate the charges and take actions for the interest of the EU state of Austria as a member of the EASA Executive Board, as required by the EU safety directive "Occurance reporting in civil Aviation".
A duty which he failed to perform after he was notified on November 11th 2004.
From: "joseph mangan"
To: ;
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 10:56 AM
Subject: TTTech Criminal Incident Reporting per EU 32003L0042 Occurance Reporting in Civil Aviation
Mr. Günther RAICHER, Mr. Hubert Gorbach,
I wish to report an incident under EU 32003L0042 Occurance Reporting in Civil Aviation.
Directive 2003/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2003 on occurrence reporting in civil aviation
I understand that you are responsible for this activity in Austria for the European Co-ordination Centre for Aviation Incident Reporting Systems.
Article 8 of 32003L0042 states.
4. In accordance with the procedures defined in their national laws and practices, Member States shall ensure that employees who report incidents of which they may have knowledge are not subjected to any prejudice by their employer.
I have made a report to EASA (European Aviation Safety Agency) on October 1st of this year, in regard to criminal activities by TTTech, Vienna Austria CEO Stefan Poledna, CFO Georg Kopetz, Head of Aerospace Sales Kurt Doppelbauer. The board of directors of TTTech was also notified, the Chairman of the board is Prof. Hermann Kopetz of TU Vienna. This issue is related to defects, incomplete testing and documentation, as well as false documentation TTTech has developed for the Airbus A380 Cabin Pressurization and Control System, which can result in the total destruction of the aircraft.
The investigation has been assigned by EASA to Mr. Remy Jouty of the French DGAC. All evidence, and statements have been provided to Mr. Jouty. His investigation has now confirmed some of my allegations. Mr. Remy Jouty can be reached at 33-1-58-0945-09, or via email at remy.jouty@aviation-civile.gouv.fr
TTTech terminated my employment, in retaliation for my reporting. Legal documents from TTTech confirm the reason as "disclosure of confidential information". This is clearly in violation of Article 8 of 32003L0042 section 4.
It is the responsibility of the Member State, Austria, to prosecute Gross Negligence, which the evidence delivered to EASA clearly shows occured.
I have filed a wrongfull termination lawsuit in the Austrian Labor Court, the first court date is December 22nd.
TTTech attempted to silence me in the Civil Court with a Preliminary Injunction. An interview took place with the Judge 3 weeks ago, and my Attourney, Mag. Stefan Kuhteubl with Engelbrecht and Piplits, filed responses to TTTech's statements. Thus far, the Judge has taken no action in this case, and my response has cost 12,000 Euros.
My Attourney Mag. Stefan Kuhteubl can be reached via telephone at 43-1-513-44-41. He has all of the evidence as well as all filed documents in both the Labor Court and Civil Court actions.
Gross Negligence has been commited by TTTech, and must be prosecuted for the sake of saving the lives of the 550 passengers and crew who will ultimately fly on each and every Airbus A380.
Thank you in advance for your attention in this matter.
Joe Mangan
Telephone:
069910446552
This is what TTTech falsely stated to EASA and the FAA.
My legal council recomended agaist filing charges as this would have played into the hands of TTTech
Read below about the pilots union, which violated a US federal court gag order to disclose evidence that AIRBUS failed to disclose a known defect in the rudder control system of the A300 to the FAA and NTSB which would have prevented the American Airlines Flight 587 Airbus A300 crash.
s _id/argval/924/argname/back_link/argval/index
A memo was written in June 1997 by Thomas Thurnagel, an Airbus engineer in Hamburg Germany.
From: Union: Airbus knew of crash risk
"People died because this memo wasn't disclosed, in my opinion," said John David, deputy safety chairman for the Allied Pilots Association.
http://www.slackanddavis.com/news_article.php/new
Again, as an engineer, the highest duty is to public safety. When a gag order prevents the proper notification and disclosure to the government authorities, and when the government authoritiese fail to act, the public must be informed. My actions are completely justified. I suggest you go to the web site www.onlineethics.org and further educate yourself about the other case examples where engineers have performed their duty to the public safety.
I would rather do my duty now, than to later be blamed for the serious injuries or loss of life that can be prevented by informing the public.
CORRECTION, the addresses in the previous post contained a period separator between joseph and mangan
the correct links are to be found here.
Check www.josephmangan.com [josephmangan.com] and www.josephmangan.name [josephmangan.name] for the addresses of all related websites.
Did you not read the previous post where I identify the Boeing 787 Fly By Wire system issues, and provide you with 3 emails which show that TTTech failed to correct the defects which it promised Honeywell in order to have TTP/C incorporated in the system? Take a look at the history of the formation of the FLEXRAY consortium. Look up the failure reports of the EU funded program "Fault Injection Testing for TTA". Then speak from knowledge rather than speaking from ignorance.
The statements by TTTech CFO Gerog Kopetz are defamatory libel and slander
The web site at www.eaawatch.net contains evidence to prove that these issues were known by
TTTech and Nord Micro since March 22 2004.
www.eaawatch.net/CAT_Documents Index.html
My employment contract began on April 1st 2004 and was terminated on October 5th 2004 for disclosing
Confidential documents to EASA, the memo disclosed is contained on the front page for you to read.
Do the math, April 1st to October 5th is more than 6 months, thereby my employment contract in Austria was unlimited,
As of September 30th.
Do not comment on a subject when you have failed to investigate the evidence.
Joe Mangan
This is a very dangerous issue, the system is not yet certified.
If I was trying to be an "ass" about this, do you really think I would sit here in Vienna and wait for the police to arrest me?
Go on my webpage, read the evidence, and then only respond when you are knowledgeable..
You are interfering in a legitimate effort to save the lives of the passengers and crew.
Your comments are not constructive to this process.
This is a topic too serious to tolerate your trollish behavior.
Joe Mangan
This message is from Joe Mangan
www.eaawatch.net
www.joseph.mangan.name
www.joseph.mangan.com
The Commercial Aircraft Industry economic business model is seriously flawed, and is actively engaged in transferring financial risk from Corporations to threats to the lives of the passengers and crew without their informed consent.
This issue is not about AIRBUS vs BOEING, this is AIRBUS and Boeing, and FAA, and EASA, and the Aircraft system suppliers and their sub suppliers. This is about all of the elements of the system being under tremendous pressure to be overly aggressive in the use of untested, unproven, low cost technology containing high uncertainty. The use of technology of high uncertainty always results in projects taking far longer to complete and costing far more than originally planned. This is project risk, and risk is nearly always significantly underestimated in project planning of modern Aerospace Programs. In essence we have the worlds biggest game of ?Russian Roulette?. With Boeing and Airbus gambling that the other will
Pull the trigger on the chamber containing the live round, thus ending the game. I believe that what we are about to see if the combatants do not ?throttle back? is the ?story of the 3 Japanese fighting fish?, where the smart fish (China, India, Japan) allows the other 2 fish to fight to the death, leaving the survivor too weak to defend against the attach of the stronger smarter fish who wins unopposed.
I feel a great sympathy and compassion for those who failed the morality test, challenged with facing the agonizing decision over career and wealth, vs the cost to human lives of their choice. My Christian conscience would not allow me to look the other way, realizing that for my own comfort and security, I would have to knowingly rationalize my own selfish interest, and thereby place at risk the lives of innocent Men, Women, and Children.
I have waited an entire year (October 2004) in a tireless pursuit to work with AIRBUS, Nord Micro, TTTech, EASA, and FAA to correct these issues in private. These organizations refused to take any action. I was left with no other avenue than to pursue the issue in the public domain one year later. I had simply exhausted every opportunity available to me. I even visited the CEO of Nord Micro in his booth at the Paris Airshow, spending 40 minutes with him and his engineers in an attempt to convince them to act in the interest of public safety. Numerous failed attempts in good faith with TTTech are documented on my website. In each and every case, TTTech violated agreed to terms, and demanded in each case a retraction of my official statements to EASA and FAA, which has always been understood to be non-negotiable.
Are these people who failed the moral challenge evil? No, they must decide what is more important to them, the lives of people vs profit, comfort, and security for themselves. The laws currently favor those who choose profit over safety. Protections and safeguards, even in the United States are insufficient to motivate a whistleblower to put themselves and their families in ?harms way?. One only need to look at the Corporate Crime Spree of WORLDCOM, ENRON, TYCO, ADELPHIA, HEALTHSOUTH and others.
Conscience can only motivate a whistleblower to act first in the interest of others.
When confronted by Executive Management with data showing the program is significantly over schedule and over budget, direct pressure is applied to find a way to ?get back on schedule?. Just as with the WORLDCOM case of Ebbers, all that must be said, is that ?we have to make our numbers?, and th