Did he ever actually produce the correspondence he says he has from Airbus?
- doesn't look like it's been changed for a while.External Quote:NB: For legal reasons, and also so as to not divulge the full extent of what we know, we are not willing to publish records of the communications with Airbus or EASA at this stage.
His website still says:
- doesn't look like it's been changed for a while.External Quote:NB: For legal reasons, and also so as to not divulge the full extent of what we know, we are not willing to publish records of the communications with Airbus or EASA at this stage.
Given that "what he knows" is in emails from Airbus or EASA it isn't going to be a secret to them!!![]()
Would those be in the way back machine?? No...it isn't alas. It has snapshots from August last year and 2 March this year - neither have anything actually substantive.
His website still says:^
- doesn't look like it's been changed for a while.External Quote:NB: For legal reasons, and also so as to not divulge the full extent of what we know, we are not willing to publish records of the communications with Airbus or EASA at this stage.
Given that "what he knows" is in emails from Airbus or EASA it isn't going to be a secret to them!!![]()
Read it again. The Airbus guy wrote that there were no drains on the pylon.Thanks - looks to me like he got a full and complete answer, doesn't belive it, insists they provide him with more evidence, and they say - no, you've got enough with a subtext of "we don't want to waste any more of our time on your nonsense"
I'd forgotten the aspect that the pipes can be "indicators" - a leak may occur somewhere not visible, they put in a pipe to drain THAT location - so if there is a leak it becomes visible.
thanks for this. I was searching for something along these lines as I wasn't sure where Jay got his original pic from (the link in the OP doesn't seem to work)I'm not sure if somebody already linked this, but here's Chapter 54 of the A319/A320/A321 Aircraft Maintenance Manual which describes the pylon and the nacelle on Scribd (an 1027-page document!).
It describes the pylon drain system, the various inspection procedures, and even how to replace the drain pipes, with a number of detailed drawings.
Unfortunately this huge document is difficult to handle, but if you enter "drain" into the text search on Scribd, it will find all pages where drain is mentioned.
For example:
![]()
I agree on the face of it, but I think Ian's 1st email is the key.To be fair to Ian Simpson here, if these emails are genuine, then (although it would certainly be helpful to know What email he actually sent them in the first place) they did tell him that as standard they are fitted with a drain in the nacelle but none in the pylons. I can understand someone with a conspiracy mindset also thinking it suspicious that they suddenly clammed up when asked fro more information.
I suspect that they found out WHO he was and how he would spin anything they told him anyway and decided it was no further use to keep communicating.
If these extra pipes seen on Easy jet planes etc ARE added by the engine manufacturer, I am surprised they didn't say so. they are fitted like this as standard, however different engine manufacturers may add more pipes in the pylon to suit their specifications.
I'm sure they can't be exhaust pipes.
Gravity!!! Yeah....gravity....that is the final 'arbiter' for us all.
well we know that. I was just wondering what Airbus would tell me if i just asked a question like that and didn;t mention spraying or anything nefariousThey vent....that's all...that is their sole function. They don't 'spray' of course....I mean....just look at the diameter!!!
Ian Simpson seems to be lacking a bit in many areas of knowledge, including the science of fluid dynamics....and of course, basic aviation knowledge, which include simple Weight & Balance considerations, not to also mention Performance and Limitations that ALL aircraft must abide by, merely because they operate here ON EARTH! Gravity!!! Yeah....gravity....that is the final 'arbiter' for us all.
Let me know if you do or not, I was thinking of getting in touch myself.I might just send them an email myself. but more general on the lines of, what are all those funny little pipes for? I'm sure they can't be exhaust pipes.
The latest from Ian Simpson. He is still working on the court case!
I thought it should be Terry is trying to convince atheists that a god exists. If that is impolite please remove it.External Quote:'We also described the task as similar to going to a meeting at the Vatican and trying to convince the pope and his assembled cardinals that not only did God not exist, but that religion was harmful.'
i think Ian said the Vatican quote. ?At least Terry is trying to 'prove' ... something. I hope he isn't too proud to admit defeat when it comes. I do say good on him for trying it is better than just pointing at the clouds and saying 'they are killing us'. Also by going to the climate conferences and talking to the scientists etc. he may eventually see things clearer. I may not have faith in a god but I do have great faith in mankind.
I found this statement from Terry regarding his presentation to the scientists interestingI thought it should be Terry is trying to convince atheists that a god exists. If that is impolite please remove it.External Quote:'We also described the task as similar to going to a meeting at the Vatican and trying to convince the pope and his assembled cardinals that not only did God not exist, but that religion was harmful.'
Someone please show Ian Simpson the maintenance manual I linked above in post #259.![]()
External Quote:
Now, the crazies who have no experience in the aviation industry will claim that these drains are retrofitted and do not come from the factory with them. False. They do. I have worked on brand new A320s from the factory...and there are the drains
Quick Edit: Depending on the type of engine being used on the aircraft, you can have 2 or 3 drain pipes, because the engines are designed a little differently. The airframe can support either the IAE V2500, which has two drain tubes (this is the version I'm most familiar with), or the CFM56, which is a slightly more advanced engine, and has 3 drain tubes, and shown in the picture..
See, here's a quote from crazy people:
Anyone with ANY technical knowledge will realise immediately that the pylon of a large passenger jet does not have any active systems in it
This is mostly true. There is an active fire suppression system in the pylon...but there are no moving parts or anything there, so I'll let that quote go...However, as the drawing shows, and as I can personally attest to witnessing the routing of these drain pipes, the drains do not originate IN the pylon. They connect somewhere else (a different part of the engine), and merely go THROUGH the pylon
BINGO! Someone posted the link to the manual today on the Look-up.org.uk facebook page. Ian Simpson simply deleted it.As you know, they will just say it's fake or make some other excuse. Or just delete and ignore it.
BINGO! Someone posted the link to the manual today on the Look-up.org.uk facebook page. Ian Simpson simply deleted it.
External Quote:From: Dean Tyler
Sent: 31 March 2015 14:33
To: 'info@airbus.com'
Subject: Technical query
Hi,
I wonder if you can help me please?
I've kept seeing things on Facebook saying that UK airlines are using modified planes to release some unknown chemical, and that Airbus UK has confirmed that these pipes are not normally fitted to their planes. I've attached a typical example. Obviously this is quite concerning.
Can you tell me whether this is correct, or what these pipes could be please?
If this isn't the correct contact I'd really appreciate it if you can put me in touch with the right department.
Thanks,
Dean
![]()
The image Robert attached is from Aircraft Maintenance Engineering-Mechanical and dated February 1st 2011.External Quote:Dear Mr Tyler,
Thank you for your query to Jason Impey which has been passed to me to respond.
We are aware of the discussion on social media and I am happy to provide the exact information which has been used to respond to requests about this, and which some of these sites identify as being confirmation from Airbus UK that the equipment is not fitted originally.
Specification and design of our aircraft comply with certification requirements and safety practices to ensure that any potential draining need, linked or not to failure cases, will be adequately performed. As such, Airbus A320 family aircraft have a fuel drain mast fitted as standard in the lower parts of the nacelle (and none for the pylons).
It is an airworthiness requirement that any fuel leak must not pool within the aircraft structure to create a fire risk, must be drained away from the aircraft structure, and must be able to be visibly identified during the pre-flight safety walk around checks. The nacelle fuel drain mast only serves to identify the very rare occasion of a failure where a fuel leak has occurred and, in the case of such detected failure, then the aircraft would be repaired before its next flight.
The mast has no spraying capability, and is only used to drain aviation fuel, in the very rare case of a fuel leak.
Also, it is clear that there is some confusion between nacelles and pylons. In order to assist you, here is a link to a diagram which indicates what is meant by a nacelle (please note that this site is from an internet search and not affiliated to Airbus).
https://www.metabunk.org/data/MetaMirrorCache/97724d96aa3a35e3cf666f6b48965f09.png
As you can see it clearly refers to the same area indicated in the screenshot you included with your original email.
I hope this clarifies this issue.
With best regards
Robert
Robert GAGE
Head of Media Relations, UK
Communications - GDIU
AIRBUS
![]()