SQ321

 n 29/05/2024 15:26, Kelvin Davies wrote:
Hmm! Do I smell a rodent or a paint job (whitewashing). According to the news source which is always 101% accurate (smirk here) the BBC, Singapore Airlines has announced that the flight that went bump last week "dropped 178 feet over 4.6 seconds". Not a huge fall but I suppose significant enough to make your eyes water. It equates, in aeroplane terms to 2,321 ft/minute. Not actually that far out of the ordinary.

They then go on to quote the airline thus: "Their preliminary report said rapid changes in gravitational force (G) caused the altitude drop - which is just shy of the height of Italy's Leaning Tower of Pisa - and likely injured those who were not wearing seatbelts". Well, I never! Gravity was involved!

More from the airline: ""The rapid changes in G over the 4.6 seconds duration resulted in an altitude drop of 178ft (54m), from 37,362ft to 37,184ft," the report said. This is a rate of descent of -2321 ft/min.  Now we get into the whitewashing/fibbing bit. Data from ADSB shows the following time line:

At 08:06:42 it was flying at 37,000ft and the selected altitude on the Flight Management System was 36,992 ft, near enough to 37,000ft and there was 0 altitude change.

At 08:06:57 the altitude was 37,000ft but there was a change in the altitude selected on the FMS, when it was changed to 31,008ft. And therein lies the origins of the smell. Nobody is mentioning that. Someone changed the selected altitude on the FMS and the data was recorded before the plane had had to begin its descent to the newly selected altitude. The actual altitude was shown as 37,000ft with a rate of descent of 64ft/minute at this time but this is insignificant.

From 08:07:07 to 08:07:41 (34 seconds) the rate of descent starts changing rapidly through -512, 960, 1344, 1792, 2176, 2496 to 2,880ft/min

At 08:26:50, while still descending toward the selected altitude of 17,000ft, the FMS altitude was changed to 14,000ft.

Singapore Airlines's statement goes on to say "Approximately 17 minutes after the turbulence event, the pilots were able to make a "controlled descent from 37,000ft", the report said, adding the aircraft did not encounter any more severe turbulence during its diversion to Bangkok". I don't think even that is accurate. The plane reached the FMS altitude of 31,000ft after 3 minutes at 08:10:34. Next, the FMS altitude was changed to 17,000ft at 08:07:57 This was reached at 08:09:24. But at 08:26:50 while still descending at 20,800ft the next FMS altitude of 14,000ft was selected and this was reached at 08:31:47, 20 minutes after the intial upset. How approximate is "approximately"? Something else they don't mention is that the rate of descent reached -2496 ft/min. This is a bit faster than the rate reported by the airline of 2,321ft/min during the upset and this was while the pilots were in charge of the flight, not the weather, turbulence etc.

What do I think? I think it is entirely possible that the whole thing was kicked off when someone changed the FMS altitude to a level 6,000ft lower. But, that is only a possibility. Whatever the cause was, it seems to me we will never discover.

Finally, a piece about my experience with Singapore Airlines: In the late 1990s, I used to travel a lot to the Far East and I always used one of 3 airlines; Thai, Cathay Pacific and Singapore. They were the absolute dog's dangly bits. However, one night flying on a Singapore 747 from Singapore to Heathrow, we stopped at Bangkok. While on the ground, the driver announced we had burst a tyre on landing so there would be a small delay while they got the John Bull outfit out. Well, OK, they changed a wheel. We left in the dark with some fierce thunderstorms nearby. Shortly after take off, the seat belt and no smoking signs were switched off. About a minute later, the chief purser (a Sikh bloke) was called to the phone from the flight deck. His eyes went the size of dinner plates and he put down the phone, picked up the PA and announced in the most dramatic and obviously terrified manner that "We have a problem. Please return to your seats and observe the seat belt and no smoking signs" which had just come back on. The problem turned out to be the thunderstorm with some moderate turbulence which was no big deal. The memory of that purser's face still haunts me to this day and I vowed never to fly with Singapore again. And I never did!

So there!

 

Sheet1
Page 1
Time             Alt       Vert Rate   Wind Speed/   Squawk     FMS
                                (ft/minute)        Direction                 Alt Select
08:06:42     37000         0                 N/A               5213      36,992
08:06:57     37,000     -64            14/213               5213      31,008
08:07:07     36,925     -512          14/213               5213      31,008
08:07:11     36,875     -960          14/213               5213      31,008 282 miles to BKK
08:07:14     36,800    -1344         14/213               5213      31,008
08:07:16     36,750    -1792         15/216               5213      31,008
08:07:22     36,575    -2176         15/216               5213      31,008
08:07:32     36,175     2496         15/216               5213      31,008
08:07:41     35,775    -2880         15/216               5213      31,008 15 miles after incident
08:07:50     35,375    -2880         14/203               5213      31,008
08:07:55     35,175    -2432         14/203               5213      31,008
08:07:59     35,025    -1984         14/203               5213      31,008
08:08:10     34,650    -1984         14/203               5213      31,008
08:08:21     34,275    -1984         12/209               5213      31,008
08:08:32     33,900    -1984         12/209               5213      31,008
08:08:43     33,525    -1920         12/209               5213      31,008
08:08:55     33,175    -1920         12/209               5213      31,008
08:09:06     32,800    -1920         11/220               5213      31,008
08:09:17     32,400    -1920         11/220               5213      31,008
08:09:28     32,050    -1920         11/220               5213      31,008
08:09:40     31,675    -1920         11/220               5213      31,008
08:09:49     31,425    -1472         12/224               5213      31,008
08:10:03     31,125    -1152         12/224               5213      31,008
08:10:10     31,050    -704          12/224               5213      31,008
08:10:16     31,025    -256          12/224               5213      31,008
08:10:34     30,975    128          11/212                5213      31,008
08:17:49     31,000     0               5/240                5213      31,008
08:18:22     30,900    -896          5/240                5213      31,008
08:18:29     30,750    -1792         3/253               5213      16,992
08:18:32     30,650    -2240         3/253               5213      16,992
08:18:40     30,350    -2688         3/253               5213      16,992
08:23:57     23,425    -512           12/280             7700      16,992 Squawk 7700 1st time115 m to BKK
08:26:50     20,800    -1024         15/297              7700 14,297
08:29:24     17,250    -1728         8/306                7700     14,016
08:31:47     14,075    -2496         343/340        7700 11,008

Yet more of the Gary Waterman lunacy

 Gary Waterman has responded to my comments on this video: https://tinyurl.com/bdf2xnby with a couple of acid remarks (possibly libellous) but failed to take up my challenge to show me a "link" he claims to have established and I shall do my own research into that link. So, I shall do it for him.
His starting point in this video is not a link at all. I am not sure who or what it is aimed at, either HM Government or Companies House. It is a piece about a Ukrainian man setting up a company in UK some time after he was reportedly sanctioned by HM Government. His piece is based on an article from the Guardian. The Ukranian involved is Volodymyr Saldo and Companies House shows him to be a director of a company named "Grainholding Ltd, Company number 14490381". His appointment date is 17 November 2022.  Both Gary and the Guardian claim Saldo was "under sanctions". A search for this name on the UK Government for Volodymr Saldo shows "No matching entries were found". Slightly inconvenient? Never mind, perhaps they meant to say his company was on the sanctions list; sadly (for some), a search of the UK list again shows "No matching entities were found". Blithely quoting the Guardian, Gary tells us he was registered in November 2022 "5 months after he was added to the sanctions list". Well, we have just seen that can not be true. Further quoting the Guardian (some may call it "parroting"), saying in June 2022 the government placed a freeze on his assets and banned him from entering the country. Despite what the sanctions list says?
Possibly losing his way, Gary now jumps from Grainholding Ltd's incorporation document to some more Guardian gossip (remember when the Guardian was a reliable newspaper?), having a pop at Evgeny Lebedev without any links at all, other than an unrelated article in the Guardian. A quick check on the UK sanctions list shows a collection of people with this surname (9). None of them with the forename of Evgeny but, who knows what is to come down this rabbit hole. Well, in a nutshell, sod all. Getting into Evgeny Lebedev, he shows he has a company Lebedev Holdings then he pounces on the name of a previous director, Andrew Mullins and, in a Gary patented process, "immediately links" this bloke to "Which? Limited". His time at Lebedev was from 2013 to 2014, when he resigned. And yes, Mullins was a director of Which? Limited from March 2011 to February 2016. He has had a laundry list of appointments, the 2 currect Active ones are Independent Television Ltd (Diretor) and LSX Limited, Occupation shown as CEO K&N. Looking at both of these companies, there is nothing of significance so let's move on to Which? Now, from Gary, a few disjointed and disconnected words on the topic of Which?: "So, here's Which? Limited so now of course because they are connected they have a financial interest in these other companies." His words, not mine! Now, if you look within Which? you have Terence Michael Connor. I wonder what he has done? He is apparently linked to the Financial Services Compensation Scheme. Their address is shown as as Lloyds Chambers. Time to go off on one again! Gary's words: "That suggests a Lloyds Bank connection". Does it? I have distant relatives in Wales with the same surname, Lloyd, but I don't think they are connected with any banking group, let alone one the same surname!
Time to slap my forehead, I am afraid. He now goes on looking at Financial Services Compensation Scheme and utters the words: "So remember, we are only a couple of companies away now from that gentleman who is a Russian who has connections through his father to the KGB and who sits in the House of Commons as we speak". First, it is "as you speak". We implies you and I and I am certainly not speaking. Secondly, should Lord Lebedev be spotted in the House of Commons there would be a hue and cry of "I spy strangers" and he would be escorted off the premises. The clue is in the title, Gary. He is Lord Lebedev. Not the Honourable member for Lenningrad.
Soldier on Kelvin: Off now to the Financial Services Compensation Scheme and Gary points to the incorporation document and says "Look, on the incoporation document, you can see Clifford Chance. Now Clifford Chance features heavily to Max Clifford. If you look at the Max Clifford research documents..." I would rather not, thank you. After all, this would be a document concocted by Gary and probably full of mis-information, faulty links etc. He then points to a very long list of directors. If we look at the top of one of the many pages, he points to Fleming Managed Growth Ltd. That name, Fleming, sounds familiar. Aah yes, he goes on to say that name fetures in the links to his company, Exbourne Mansions. So, we might as well take a look at that company. Incorporation doc shows incorporation date of 15 Sep 1999, with 58 pages of various uninteresting info, appointments and resignations of directors etc.
Gary gets on with pointing to all the pages of directors, claiming they have the ability to move money, launder money, evade taxes etc. He spots there are more than a few banks listed. Now Gary, take a look at the name of the company; Financial Services Compensation Scheme. Is it a surprise that the list of diretors should include banks, financial services companies etc? Not to me, it isn't. Gary points out these are all linked to the "international fraud". Now this is where his 18 years with the police should come in; he has not yet, from what I have seen, demonstrated that there is an "international fraud", how can there be links to a non-entity or non-event? Oh yes, they are also linked to the World Trade Centre disaster. Anyway, looking back at this company, he shows it is now known as JP Morgan Elect PLC., a company that went into liquidation in 2023. Not to be deterred, he tells us to "remember, my shareholder within my company, Deborah Fleming, and her husband link through to JP Morgan. How? A check on his company shows Deborah Fleming has 5 appointments, none of which are called JP Morgan.
To be honest, the whole thing just degenerates into seamless and endless drivel and I don't think I shall bother going any further down these rabbit holes.
Except for one last, and significant, point. If we follow Gary's "logic", then we can easily throw Gary himself into the mix because all the "links" are there, according to Gary. And those "links" put Gary as a former director of a company firmly in the frame for the accusation of "Gary Waterman is involved in the international fraud and child trafficking scandal". Your logic, Gary, not mine.
That will do for this video. I think I should go back to his very first video to see exactly how all this tripe and the "magic links" process began.

Mr. Waterman's latest Part 3

 Well, here we go again! Following on from the removal of Part 2 & 4 by YouTube, I got into Part 3 and within one minute Waterman was talking crap!. He singled out a company, D&D Law Agency Services Ltd. He tells us it was incorporated in 1998. It was actually incorporated in 1974. As Mr. Waterman is constantly reminding us, one can go to Companies House and look at the records. Presumably the same records he looks at, so how can he get this so wrong? He then goes on to say 1998 was the same year some political ne'er do well started his "sex parties". I have to keep pausing the video to check on the nonsense so this is getting a bit tricky, so bear with me here: At the very beginning of the video he is doing the God Botherer thing, rambling on about the end of the world and how the term "brimstone" came into his head. Then he says this term appears in the address of D&D Law. Waterman states that D&D Law was linked to Nicola Bulley and God knows what else. Well, the original address of D&D Law was Lincolns Inn Fields, later changed in 1996 to Temple Chambers.In September 2001, the address changed once more to 312B High St. Orpington, followed by another change in Feb 2006 to an address in Chelsfield in Kent. In May 2013, there was another change to Lansing, W. Susex and in 2018 there was the final change back to the Chelsfield address which remains the current address. Should I report a theft to the police? Someone has stolen this Brimstone address. D&D Law etc, according to Waterman has links to Dwyer. Staggering news! The principal behind this company was a Mr. Daniel Dwyer. Imagine that! Dwyer is linked to Dwyer!

There now follows what I would call an "imaginary link" To McLellen International. Aaah! One of the previous directors 25th December 1998 to 15th January 1999 was Daniel John Dwyer and his address is/was 6 Brimstone Close Chelsfield. Recognise that town? He was listed at that time as "Nominee Secretary". This role is defined as: "A nominee secretary is a person or company who consents to be named as the secretary of a company. This is usually in exchange for a fee." (Definition from the web site of Complete Formations) This Daniel Dwyer is shown as having 5,061 appointments. Well, that is to be expected from a company that deals in the setting up of businesses, isn't it? How about the address of Brimstone Close? Well, I assume we can assume he didn't name it that; it existed when he moved into it so what is the link? There isn't one! McLellen International is an active company and their business shown as "facilities support". In my experience, this means caretaker type services and lo and behold, among the previous names is "Checkclean Ltd". Which I would assume also relates to caretaker type of work. So how on earth does this company "link" to 9/11, Nicola Bulley et al? Sod all, as far as I can see, other than Daniel Dwyer. Mr. Waterman seems to have a fixation on Mr. Dwyer, a man in his 80s.

Oh! Here we go again. All this is apparently a chance for Mr Waterman to save the world. I kid you not! Have a listen to what he says around the 2min 30s mark. Following this, he goes on about a company Named New Forest something. Talk about a serious case of the non-sequitur. No obvious links to any of the people or companies he has been defaming up to now. Still; Soldier on!

Change of mind; the idea of "soldiering on" has become distasteful, having watched another 10 minutes of this unutterable shite!. I am serious; from something to something else, he pounced on Trident nuclear weapon system. Now he is going mad for any company with the name "Trident" anywhere in it. It just beggars belief. Now he is talking about the failed Trident test launch back in February. He "proves" he knows what he is talking about by telling us about how there 2 such failures, while pointing to a collection of media quotes which all refer to a single failure. You can't beat that sort of genius, can you! But wait! It seems you can, if your name is Gary. His argument now is "why should the media report this at a delicate time in terms of current conflicts etc". Well, it is down to all the media companies being linked to something or other and that they are all involved in this cover up. Well, that's clear then.

Moving on, he gets to have a go at Interserve Ltd. The first major, "Stop the press!" moment is when he claims this company is (was) an illegal entity, claiming there is a discrepancy in their incorporation document. Let's see... Gary says the company should be listed as Tilbury Contracting Group Public Limited GroupCompany, which is shown on the precis front page ifno. He says it should be listed as Tilbury Contracting and Dredging Company (1906) Limited. Well, that is indeed what the document syays. In May 1908, the name was changed, dropping the (1906). In 1964, it was changed again to Tilbury Contracting Group Limited. That dosn't stop Mr. Waterman from proclaiming it has never been lawfully registered. Why does Companies House bother? There have been other name changes over the years but that is all academic.

From here, it all reverts to standard bizarre mode. And I give up!

Mr. Waterman's latest (Part 2)

 Having just spotted the latest offering, I thought I would start at the beginning. First company to come under scrutiny in this one is "Association of Conservative Clubs (The)". And off you go, pointing out that the incorporation document shows the original name as "The Association of Conservative Clubs" and the word 'The' appears at the front of the name and not in brackets at the end as is the current name. Well spotted! I think 99% of people, if surveyed, would answer "So what? Who gives a toss  about the word order". Anyway, a trawl through their documents shows the name was unchanged in the Full Accounts statement filed 15th July 2004 but in the filing on 23rd March 2006, change of director's particulars, the company name appears as in its current form. I can't find a filing between those 2 dates showing a change of name. Perhaps Companies House was among the imaginary 99% surveyed who didn't give a toss? I know I am! Mind you, if you take into account that this is the Association of Conservative Clubs, then given the performance of the Conservative Party in government, I wouldn't put it past them to sneak a word salad shuffle into proceedings!

Wandering from there, you come to Alistair Burt and from him, with no real links, you get to Evelyn Partners, which you say has featured in your earlier outputs. You say Evelyn Partners links to Ingenious LLP. So, let's have a look at Evelyn Partners.: Original incorporation 21st October 2013 as Violin Bidco. On 7th May 2015, the company name was changed to Tilney Bestinvest Group Limited. On 27th January 2017, the company name was again changed to Tilney Group Limited. On 1st September 2020 there was yet another change, this time to Tilney Smith & Williamson Limited. On 14th June 2022 the name was changed again to Evelyn Partners Limited. Finally, on 27th June 2022 it changed once more to Evelyn Partners Group Limited. By now, you are pointing at Andrew Sean Lockwood who, it turns out, is an LLP Member of the Evelyn Partners LLP. Hmm. That is not exactly the same as Evelyn Partners Group, is it? Perhaps needs looking at. Oh! It isn't the same company. Evelyn Partners Group has the company number 08741768 and Evelyn Partners LLP's company number is OC369631. A spot incovenient, that. Never mind; at least 1 of the directors of those 2 companies is listed as a director of each; Andrew Martin Baddeley. Perhaps you should be looking at him, not Andrew Lockwood who was never listed as a director of Evelyn Partners Group?

Oh dear! I left this last night, with the intention of continuing today \nd when I tried to re-load the video this morning there was a message from YouTube saying it had been removed due to harrassment & bullying. On the other hand, there was 4 or 5 new uploads, all on the Sunak theme, going up to Part 6. However, Part 4 was alo removed so there will be no comments on that one.

 

Mr. Waterman's latest

 Mr. Waterman's most recent posts demonstrate yet a further descent into madness. In the first of the two, he rabbits on for 7 minutes declaring all manner of shite; from how we are all being controlled by magic stuff coming out of 5G masts. Take a look at it here; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VufK5ornIm4&t=228s&ab. Click on "more" in the description and review a list of some of his whacky ideas. It beggars belief.

In part 2 of his series dedicated to Sunak, he makes  cock up after cock up with his links from from this to that. At least he is consistent with his blunders. While checking out his claims, it got to a point where he got it so wrong that I assumed all further links following his most stupid one that it wasn't worth carrying on checking to the bitter end.

To Mr. Waterman; here are my comments on your sad effort:

Now, the madness intensifies. Barlclays Plc. Overview shows Barclays Bank Plc 20 July 1896-01 Jan 1985 and you go on to point out the incorporation docs show Barclays and COMPANY, LIMITED. Because there is a slight discrepany in the names (as you would expect as the term 'PLC' came into use in 1981. Almost 100 years after the company was registered. The incorporation doc is shown as filed 01 Jan 1900. The company name was changed 16 February 1917 to Barclays Bank Limited. On 15 February 1982, the company was re-registered as Barclays Bank Plc. (look at that! Shortly after introduction of Plc designation). On 1st Jan 1985, the name was changed to Barclays Plc. So, what's the grief here? According to you, "that is a deliberate falsification of the register". It is not! It is a failure of you to do your research properly.
Blundering along quite swiftly, you get to Shell Company of Venezuela Limited (The). Let's see what pearls of wisdom you are about to drop here... Aah! An old favourite of yours, the certificate of incorporation shows company name as Venezuelan Petroluem Exploration and. straight away, you spot that there is "no 'The' at all". After the incorporation document from 1913, the next document available to view on line (I am not paying £3 a pop to see others!) is 5th November 1991 and shows The Shell Company Of Venezuela Limited has been re-incorporated as Shell Response Limited. Aah! Reading the Memorandum & Articles of Association, filed 29 Nov 1991, I see "The name was changed on 15th February 1945 from Venezuela Petroleum Exploaration Limited to the Shell Company of Venezuela Limited and on 6th November 1991 to Shell Response Limited.
Standard Chartered Plc: You say Standard Chartered Bank Public Limited Company incorporation document has a "completely different name. So it does; the name shown is Standard and Chartered Banking Group. On 1st October 1975, a company name change was filed showing the change from the Incorporation name to Standard Chartered Bank Limited. Filing on 1st February 1982 shows the re-registration of the company as a 'public company and the company is limited'. On 1st January 1985, the name was changed to 'Standard Chartered Plc.' So, nothing untoward there! But, according to you "FRAUD"!
Slaughter And May is next. You introduced them as "A flase legal entity company". Best to check on that next then. Companies House shows a current address of 2 Lambs Passage EC1Y 8BB. Incorportation as "A.U.I. (Holdings) Limited on 6h May 1954. Next available document, 4th October 1978 shows a company name change from Trucidator Holdings Ltd to Trucidator Limited at 35 Basinghall St. EC2V 5DB. On 30th April 2019 the company name changed from Trucidator Limited to Slaughter & May Limited. So, still "a false legal entity company"?
There follows an apparently unrelated jump to Black Horse Limited:
Incorporated 1st June 1960 as Gwent and West Finance Company Limited. On 1st November 1962, name changed to Julian S Hodge & Company Limited. On 28th December 1979, name changed again to Chartered Trust Limited and on 2nd Sept 1981, re-registered, changing from Private to Public Limited Company. On 5th July 2001, re-registered as a Private company under the name of Black Horse Limited. None of the froegoing stopped you from failing to spot the links/details I have listed so you charge along blindly, declaring "The Solicitors Law Stationery Society" features on many of your previous documents. Of course it does. It was the outfit that provided all manner of legal documents for companies to use in their correspondece, official documents such as forms required of Companies House for official filings etc. In other words, they were stationers, catering to the legal profession. At this point, you just can't help yourself pointing out there is an address and company, featured heavily elsewhere of Jordans Limited. Stop it! I have pointed out your errors re this company in my other blogs so, for goddness' sake, wake up and smell the coffee!
And now, for the star of the show, Rishi Sunak. You tell us that he was born 12 May 1980. Your search of Companies House shows Rish Sunak with a date of birth of December 1980. To quote you "almost the same date of birth but slightly different". Despite what expedia told you re date of birth, you chose to look at one with a different date of birth, December 1980. How about if you tried what I did and checked Companies House with a name match and DOB of May 1980? Shock! Horror! This shows a Rishi Sunak with DOB May 1980 as director of "East London Science School Trust" from 3 December 2013, resigning on 15th November 2015. Also listed for Rishi Sunak, DOB May 1980 as director of TCI Advisory Servies LLP; appointed 4th September 2006 and resigned 2nd November 2009. You then go off on a total waste of time, looking at Catamaran Ventures. So I can skip that rubbish and in fact I can skip the whole of the remainder of your post as it all stemms from the incorrect you made to Catamaran Ventures.
Referring to his other, related, video re Sunak, I posted the following comment some hours ago and it has attracted no response from either Mr. Waterman or his acoyltes:
"Gary, as I have shown previously, is obviously off his head. There are NO links to anything in his latest Sunak video, only cock-ups. And, hearing what just came out of his mouth re Russain, Ukrainian and Royal family links is beyond absurd. (See the link at the start of this blog)(But if he is pals with the other space cadet, Richard Vobes, what would you expect?) I would say,, from what you spout about 5G masts etc, you know nothing of telecomms etc. Mind you, from what I have seen of your other failed linking videos, I can confidently say you don't have a clue about sensible detective work either!"
STOP PRESS! I have just seen yet another contribution uploaded while I was writing this. So, off I must go to check this one out.