P8 MMA/MPA thread.

I couldn’t agree more but unfortunately, for some reason the USN didn’t specifiy either and Boeing built it that way.

Were we to add a sink and certainly the electrics for a new boiler, before long you’re deviating from the type certification and facing costs of millions to re-certify UK P-8s.

Regards,
MM
When the blokes can take flasks and sandwiches!!!!
 
Given that - somewhat bizarrely - Boeing elected to fit a toilet but no sink anywhere on the P-8, I’d expect them to be low.

Regards,
MM
I don't need to know Boeing's silly price.

I'll fit hand basins cheaper than Boeing!

Hell, I'll even fit them cheaper than Marshalls!

My rates are very reasonable ;) .

(Do NONE of your "technicians" own a caravan?).
 
I don't need to know Boeing's silly price.

I'll fit hand basins cheaper than Boeing!

Hell, I'll even fit them cheaper than Marshalls!

My rates are very reasonable ;) .

(Do NONE of your "technicians" own a caravan?).
How do you propose getting design authority from Boeing?

Regards,
MM
 
How do you propose getting design authority from Boeing?

Regards,
MM
Well . . . I WAS being whimsical, but . . .

Don't need it. I would not modify, alter, or enhance the aircraft.

I will supply a modest, self-contained, free-standing device, with wheels on the bottom, so it can be taken on/off the aircraft, to re-fill the (cold) water container at the top.

Through a "collection device", sometimes referred to as a basin (with adjacent liquid anticeptic soap dispenser), it will feed a "grey water" collection device below, which - itself - can be emptied while the patented mobile hand washing device, is removed from the aircraft after every flight.

During flights it will be parked inside, outside, immediately adjacent to, the loo.

I seriously wouldn't - otherwise - want to touch anyone's keyboard, knowing they'd been for a shoite on board.

How many cases of dystentery(?) per crew, can the RAF sustain?!

Seriously, give it to a couple of switched-on, "blue-sky-thinking" (SWIDT !!), lads as a "skunk-works" task, for the weekend ;) !

My consultancy fees, are as reasonable as my fitter's rates :) .
 
Last edited:
Well . . . I WAS being whimsical, but . . .

Don't need it. I would not modify, alter, or enhance the aircraft.

I will supply a modest, self-contained, free-standing device, with wheels on the bottom, so it can be taken on/off the aircraft, to re-fill the (cold) water container at the top.

Through a "collection device", sometimes referred to as a basin (with adjacent liquid anticeptic soap dispenser), it will feed a "grey water" collection device below, which - itself - can be emptied while the patented mobile hand washing device, is removed from the aircraft after every flight.

During flights it will be parked inside, outside, immediately adjacent to, the loo.

I seriously wouldn't - otherwise - want to touch anyone's keyboard, knowing they'd been for a shoite on board.

How many cases of dystentery(?) per crew, can the RAF sustain?!

Seriously, give it to a couple of switched-on, "blue-sky-thinking" (SWIDT!!), lads as a "skunk-works" task, for the weekend ;) !

My consultancy fees, are as reasonable as my fitter's rates :) .
So £25k or £50k per aircraft then? Still cheaper than Boeing no doubt.
 
I couldn’t agree more but unfortunately, for some reason the USN didn’t specifiy either and Boeing built it that way.

Were we to add a sink and certainly the electrics for a new boiler, before long you’re deviating from the type certification and facing costs of millions to re-certify UK P-8s.

Regards,
MM
I can maybe understand our USN *sort of if I squint hard* not having a boiler, but not having specifying a single sink on the entire ac? FFS! What the hell were they thinking? Or not thinking...Wonder how much it actually cost Boeing to remove the existing sink from the toilet cubicle.

So lots of hand sanitizers around then and some wet wipes for your face.
 
Well . . . I WAS being whimsical, but . . .

Don't need it. I would not modify, alter, or enhance the aircraft.

I will supply a modest, self-contained, free-standing device, with wheels on the bottom, so it can be taken on/off the aircraft, to re-fill the (cold) water container at the top.

Through a "collection device", sometimes referred to as a basin (with adjacent liquid anticeptic soap dispenser), it will feed a "grey water" collection device below, which - itself - can be emptied while the patented mobile hand washing device, is removed from the aircraft after every flight.

During flights it will be parked inside, outside, immediately adjacent to, the loo.

I seriously wouldn't - otherwise - want to touch anyone's keyboard, knowing they'd been for a shoite on board.

How many cases of dystentery(?) per crew, can the RAF sustain?!

Seriously, give it to a couple of switched-on, "blue-sky-thinking" (SWIDT !!), lads as a "skunk-works" task, for the weekend ;) !

My consultancy fees, are as reasonable as my fitter's rates :) .
Please feel free to make an unsolicited bid to the MoD and enjoy finding out about the post Haddon-Cave world.

...So lots of hand sanitizers around then and some wet wipes for your face.
That’s exactly how it works.

At least RAF aircrew will have their own headsets; the USN ones stay on the jet!!!!

Regards,
MM
 
Last edited:
Blimey, I never realised a throw away comment about the absence of a sink on the P-8 would generate so much discussion!

Will the MoD be getting Type Airworthiness Authority for its P-8s though? I'm sure we could introduce them as a Service Modification for a lot less.
We’re relying on USN data. I’m sure we could introduce Service Mods but right now we’re focussing on getting it into service and regenerating a UK MPA capability.

A sink and water boiler can wait.

Regards,
MM
 
Blimey, I never realised a throw away comment about the absence of a sink on the P-8 would generate so much discussion!
You've highlighted a critical capability gap in our new MPA, which was bound to excite comment. You'll be telling us that the galley is smaller than on any other aircraft and only one hot comestible per member of crew can be conveyed by the P-8 next...
 
Please feel free to make an unsolicited bid to the MoD and enjoy finding out about the post Haddon-Cave world . . .

Regards,
MM
Such negotiations will be handled by @Civvy Scum, my Chief Financial Officer :) .
 
So £25k or £50k per aircraft then? Still cheaper than Boeing no doubt.
Sounds about right.

Are you busy just now?

You've just become our first Executive appointment ;) .
 
Last edited:
And this is typical US thinking. When you serve and work with them they have many good qualities but occasionally you see/hear something which makes you have a WTF moment!
They will do something for instance which you will think "**** that for a game of soldiers" and they think its normal/or not dangerous. But then taking the example of having a hot brew in a P8, they will look at you as if you have just spoken Swahili and cant comprehend why you would want to make life easier for yourself.
 
A quick Google for hot drinks on board aircraft turns up the rather interesting claim in numerous major news sources that the on board water supply in airline aircraft is frequently contaminated with bacteria.

The supply used for airline tea and coffee machines is generally piped into a central water supply, and that supply is often contaminated. Boiling water to make tea or coffee apparently doesn't kill all the bacteria. The source of the contamination is apparently the trucks which bring water, and once contamination gets into the plane's system it is apparently very difficult to remove.

Numerous newspapers quoted anonymous flight attendants as saying that flight attendants won't drink the tea or coffee themselves because of this issue.

I'm not sure if the P8 configuration of simply removing any sources of water is a reaction or over-reaction to this, but it is an interesting aspect to this situation.

Crew may have to get used to insulated carafes and hours old lukewarm tea.
 
Do rules on liquid in bottles still apply?

(Purell hand sanitiser)
The funny thing is that hand sanitiser also has another useful quality other than germ killing that could be an issue for safety.

Hand sanitiser is also a good fuel for burning to cook food, and is nearly identical to the gel fuel sold in outdoor stores or issued by the MOD.

If you haven't tried it just squirt some hand sanitiser gel out and light it, it's also cheaper to buy in supermarkets than gel cooker fuel :)
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Top