Nimrod R1 on a rescue

[Razor61]

Waddo launched an R1 this morning in search of a spanish trawler after the storms in the north. MR2s at Kinloss were unable to take off due to the high winds.

[Sideshow Bob]

The aircraft was an MR2 which was deployed to Waddo from Kinloss.

[FJJP]

It's not unusual for the duty SAR MR2 to deploy to another base if the ISK weather is forecast unflyable...

It is also highly unlikely that an R1 would be used for SAR - the crews are not trained and the ac does not carry the dinghy kit. Neither is it fitted with the radios, etc that the MR2 has for SAR work.

[Ray Dahvectac]

The relative lack of windows in the R1 may prove a hindrance too. :hmm:

Edited for speeling eerors

[Skeleton]

LOL Ray that could prove to be a bit of a show stopper agreed :O

[Jackonicko]

But think of how many pairs of eyes you'd have to look out of the few windows there are, and how many sarnies you could throw....

[rivetjoint]

No disrespect for all the lovely MR2 folk but wouldn't there be a bit some tears if an R1 was lost on a SAR mission?

[Charlie Luncher]

I know they keep the best Navs for the MR2 but the Navs on R1s aren't that bad to get lost, are they?:E

Charlie sends

[Jackonicko]

Navs plural on an R1? Are you sure?

[SpotterFC]

Don't think we should be discussing what an R1 can or can't do on here, or its crew composition. Do you?

[Green Meat]

Need to know gents. Open forum, remember.

[Jackonicko]

Stable doors and horses, chaps. The crew complement of the Nimrod R1 has been widely published, and the 23 operators positions have even been broken down to detail who does roughly what at which console. There has even been a cutaway drawing published, from which I can see that the Navs on 51 have further to walk for a pee than their maritime brethren!

The article I've just dug out (from Air International in 2001) tells us that:

"Later in 1980, the aircraft underwent a major modification. Internally the navigation station was redesigned for single navigator operation. The radar navigator was rendered surplus to requirements when the ASV21 ASW radars were removed and replaced by Ecko 290 radars, which had displays inside the cockpit."

Let's keep it in proportion. No-one's talking about the role, the mission equipment, tactics, doctrine or recent employment, and no-one is staring through the window to extract anything.....

[rivetjoint]

And that's what they want you to believe......

[ACW599]

Since this seems to have turned into a thread about the R1, I thought it might be amusing to pass on something I happened to overhear a few weeks ago. Some of our ATC cadets were looking at a poster we'd just put up in their crew-room showing contemporary RAF aircraft. One said to his mate, with a completely straight face "That's the Nimrod R1. It can re-programme your SIM card from forty thousand feet and disconnect any house from the electricity mains instantly". His wide-eyed oppo said "Wow! Can it really?".

John

[Ray Dahvectac]

Don't think we should be discussing what an R1 can or can't do on here, or its crew composition. Do you?

I'm sorry guys, it's not often I agree with journalists but the number of windows on a Nimrod R as opposed to the MR version; whether it carries one navigator or two, and how far they have to walk for a pee; and the R1's SAR capabilities or lack of are hardly the 'James Bond' stuff of which the 51 Sqn legend was made.

I am all in favour of security and its sensible application, and have lived with it long enough to understand the reasons for it, but we do ourselves few favours by being QUITE so anally retentive over information which has been in the public domain for such a long time. In fact, quite the reverse - a harmless comment about navigators would have drawn no attention had not the security implications of its asking been questioned. :sad:

[Olly O'Leg]

Ray, of course you're absolutley right. BUT, we should be making it as hard as possible for these people to find out this kind of stuff, even if it has been released into the Public Domain. How many times do we see Journos and other people purporting to be serious posters "phishing" for info?

Take the recent Iraq Airfield Approach Tactics thread for example - if anyone had genuinely answered the guy, they could have shot someone right in the foot.

This is a Military forum, those people answering the questions should have a responsibility to withold such information. In cases such as this, where things may or may not be cutting close to the bone, it needs someone to step in and say "Stop" before things go too far. In my (humble) opinion, SpotterFC is the man - he's had the balls to stand up and say "Stop".

Need more like it, I reckon.

[Jackonicko]

Olly,

No-one should talk about current tactics. No-one should talk about parametrics or weapons effectiveness. No-one should talk about current deployments. Obviously.

During the Cold War, the 'better safe than sorry' blanket security covering nuclear weapons was erring on the side of caution, and that was absolutely right.

No-one needs to know details of No.51's tasking, nor of its current ops.

Most of us are all for legitimate military security, and only get angry when it's misused to cover up procurement cock-ups and to save politicians or senior officers from embarrassment.

But if Forces folk get too 'Stalinist' and too secretive, they do risk shooting themselves in the foot. Most journos start off from a position of accepting that those who are serving know better than we do what should and should not be discussed.

That applies except when information has already been released, and is already in the public domain, or where secrecy runs against the wider public interest. Start getting secretive about that, and the journos and FOI supporters will lose any respect they had for the ability of service officers to make sensible, balanced and proportional decisions about what can and can't be released. Don't tell me that anything published in Flight or JDW is somehow to be given the same protection as Restricted or Secret information, because it will just make me cranky and contrary.

You aver that: "We should be making it as hard as possible for these people to find out this kind of stuff, even if it has been released into the Public Domain." Why? The press don't have to be the enemy, but making their jobs harder than they need to be will not dispose them to taking your concerns seriously, and will not help in promoting sensible debate or preventing inaccuracy. The press can do good as well as harm - and have done on Deepcut and the Chinook crash, in fighting cuts, and in other areas. Moreover, if you don't have some of the press onside, you risk losing much of the public too, and in peacetime particularly, defence spending is dependent on public support and consent.

And we're getting exercised about people talking about the fact that the Nimrod R1 went from two Navs to one 25 years ago. Is it really something to get quite so uptight about?

I'm not arguing for openness, just for the most basic level of common sense.

[ImageGear]

Gentlemen,

I'm sure that someone will correct me but my understanding of the OSA is that it is non- negotiable.

One's personal opinion as to whether something is or is not already in the public domain is irrelevant. Even if the "information" can be obtained from other sources, it cannot and should not be corroborated by a signatory one way or the other.

As for the FOI act, and historically sensitive information, the authorities can release whatever material they feel appropriate but it does not alter an individuals binding under the act. You sign for life.

Actually I prefer to think that most of what is published/Released is "blown" disinformation anyway, for consumption by journo's.

ImageGear:ok:

[incubus]

The OSA 1989 is available at http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1989/Ukpga_19890006_en_2.htm

Section 2 (which is the most relevant in this general context and those individuals to whom section 1 applies will know who they are) states:
A person who is or has been a Crown servant or government contractor is guilty of an offence if without lawful authority he makes a damaging disclosure of any information, document or other article relating to defence which is or has been in his possession by virtue of his position as such.
A disclosure of information already legally in the public domain would not be damaging and therefore would not be an offence under section 2.

[althenick]

:p :p :p :p :D :D :O

...Sorry guys I've just stopped laughing and had to get my sides souchered back up.

What is it about the Crabs and security? Y'all seem to make a big deal of it yet seem to be the worst at controlling it. (anyone remember tha Wing Co that left his briefcase in the back of his wagon for 5 mins and came back to find it stolen? - Pre GW1 I think) I did a crypto course in 5T block at Locking in '88. The Staff there were so strict it was unreal.:eek: The Comcen door though had such a stupidly simple combination that it could be observed very easily :O Us students wern't supposed to know it, but some 2 striper wasn't too clever at covering the lock when entering the code (Iwont say what the code was as I have real fears that it may be still in use :uhoh: ) ...anyway it took the staff 3 weeks to figure out why no one was ringing the doorbell to get in!:suspect:

[Gainesy]

5T block at Locking :uhoh: :yuk:

Aaaagh, The Horror, The Horror...:)

[The Gorilla]

Nah 5T blocks gone matey, RAF Locking closed as a result of the peace dividend, or was it front line first? No I remember now it was options for change yes that's it!!

Nicest of all the blocks was 5T and full of tottey too!! Happy Days!

And you are absoultely spot on althe.

:ok:

[althenick]

eh??? - The RAF's Premier comms training establishment has gone? :sad:

That was a good six weeks, did the course then got back to faslavatory to find that said equipt had been replaced with the 'other stuff' Being a civvy on £50/night subby, Hobbits, Slack women, ah happy days:ok:

[hyd3failure]

I remember serving on a ship which had been fitted with a piece of euipment so sensitive that even its name was classified. At the end of the trial process, the manufacturer presented us with a set of table mats which had photographs on them and the name of the eqiupment.....yep, youve guessed it. The tablemats became classifed and had to be locked into the safe and mustered daily....!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Jackonicko]

Incubus,

"A disclosure of information already legally in the public domain would not be damaging and therefore would not be an offence under section 2."

Generally, I'd agree, and I'd want someone to show how discussing something already in the public domain was damaging before I suppressed it. But I wouldn't say that "if it's been published before, then it's entirely legit," even if it's been cleared for publication through proper channels.

With my Devil's Advocate hat on, I'd say that:
The repetition of damaging information CAN produce further damage. Something can be published in a limited circulation, defence-friendly magazine without harm, but the same information splashed across the front of the Mirror might be damaging.

The publication of several pieces of information together - all previously in the public domain separately could be considered to 'do the enemy's work for him'.

But I would ask what a 'damaging disclosure' is. Damaging what? If all that's being damaged is a Minister's reputation, or the Department's reputation, or public confidence, I don't think that the OSA should be used. But if the security of the country, or the Forces' ability to carry out their work is being damaged, that's an entirely different matter.

That's why common sense is relevant.

[SpotterFC]

Points all taken gents. I wasn't particularly concerned about what had been written before my post, more that as the thread developed other things might have been discussed - it's happened before, and as quickly as the Mods might shut the thread the damage is done (Google cache anyone?) Best to draw the line I thought, or at least highlight the potential for inadvertant disclosure, since it doesn't necessarily take a disclosure of PM material to be a problem. In forums (fora?) like this the way open source intelligence works is for people to string lots of little bits together, make a couple of assumptions and then get pretty close to the more closely held information.

Whatever.

[Jackonicko]

Spots,

You said: "Don't think we should be discussing what an R1 can or can't do on here, or its crew composition. Do you?"

Which inferred that you did have a problem with all and any discussion about 51. It's nice to know that we're basically in agreement.

Now can we go back to silly remarks about lack of windows and large numbers of crew?

[FJJP]

Of far more importance and interest - did the MR2 find the fishing vessel?

[WE Branch Fanatic]

According to this it did:

http://news.mod.uk/news_headline_story.asp?newsItem_id=3056

[ImageGear]

Crew of Spanish trawler rescued

14 January, 2005
-
The 19-strong crew of a Spanish trawler are now recovering after being successfully rescued from it on Wednesday.
The fishermen were on the Cibeles, which got into difficulties in severe storms 180 miles west of Stornoway.

imagegear

[buoy15]

Gentlemen

To fly for the best part of 6 hours on task, manually, on a dark and ****ty night at 300 feet in 70mph winds, with a sea state of 6+ and wave heights touching 90 feet requires a special ability which is not easily learned flying at 29,000ft in 3 degree banked turns.

Of course the SAR was diverted when the weather deteriorated. That's why we employ the Met Office, Ops staff and all other agencies to ensure 365 day cover.

We don't guess at this - We are always ahead of the game: it's planned in a safe and timely fashion ensuring the ready crew are well placed and rested prior to any call-out.

Suggesting a MR1 is launched on SAR (if available) is akin to asking a police underwater diving team to carry out a mountain recue search for lost climbers.

Might be difficult and take time, so always use your specialists.

I was involved with the rescue of "La Parraine" last year which resulted in the spectacular lift, at extreme range - 220 miles - (18 crew in 22 mins) by that magnificent Lossie Sea King crew in similar (frightning) conditions.

[Ray Dahvectac]

We don't guess at this - We are always ahead of the game: it's planned in a safe and timely fashion ensuring the ready crew are well placed and rested prior to any call-out.

There has been a dramatic change since I last did SAR Standby then !! :hmm:

[FJJP]

Bouy 15 - if you re-read the posts from the start, I think you will find that the notion of using an R1 for SAR was, within the first few posts, pretty well discounted for just those reasons...

[beerdrinker]

All for security but it can be funny sometimes.

Did a trip down to the Malvinas after the war on a MOD Charter.

On departure from the secret shared USAF base in mid Atlantic had to sign for the secret comms folder. On arrival in the Malvinas first bod on board was a RAF plod who took said file back and signed for it.

All good stuff except all the frequencies in the "secret" folder were in the Aerad supplement which was a standard part of the a/c library.

[richlear]

Incubus - While I agree generally with your point the problem is that there is a lot of conflicting and unverified material around claiming to be valid and correct.

Discussion of this material gives credence to certain facts/figures/whatever and whilst maybe not technically a breach of the OSA certainly contradicts the intent.

cheers

[BEagle]

Ah - the good old 'adds credence' bolleaux.....

:yuk:

[richlear]

care to elaborate Beagle?

[Akrotiri bad boy]

I think there is a lot more to this than the difference twixt R and MR versions of the Mighty Hunter.
It 's been explained that the MR was positioned at Waddo to avoid the expected weather. Why Waddo?, could it be that the powers are carrying out a proving trial? If a SAR sortie west of the Hebrides can be carried out successfully from a centrally located airfield then what is the point in maintaining a fleet of similar aircraft at the end of a very long logistics supply chain that is quite often affected by adverse weather?

What's that noise? could it be the death knell sounding for Ice Station Kilo?
:E

[500days2do]

Top point there fella...but sadly i think that decision has already been made. Anyhow since when did MOD plan and evaluate anything...plans require good reason and effective leadership...and to evaluate you need to learn from past mistakes...nuff said

Vote with your feet....

[ZH875]

MR2's have been pre-positioned at the Secret Wilts airbase in the past, does that mean that there is a rescue plan at hand, of course not. When it comes to saving lives, who cares what joe public reads into things.

[FJJP]

Oh for Pete's sake! Let's stop reading too much into the repositioning of the one SAR MR2 to Waddo because ISK was likely to be weathered out!

Could it just be that Waddo was the most logical choice - most northerly base used to handling Nimrods, whose weather forecast was suitable for launch? Who are available H24? Who is a ready source of manpower and spares to keep it serviceable?

I do wish people wouldn't grab hold of the slightest event and turn it into a major talking point to fit their sensasionalist theories.

[Lionel Lion]

Well I saw one at Brize.......and went on a VC10 to Kinloss. Maybe it's like wife-swop. Except I'd get the fat one

Edited to add perhaps Desperate Housewives may be a closer analogy

[Ray Dahvectac]

What's that noise? could it be the death knell sounding for Ice Station Kilo?

:rolleyes:

What complete and utter cr@p !! The SAR Nimrod has been deploying when the weather is forecast to go out of limits since about ....errrr..... 1970. Often from St Mawgan to Kinloss or vice versa. Given the ever-decreasing number of active H24 airfields HMFC now owns, Waddington seems a more than logical choice, without bringing the conspiracy theories into it. Although, thinking about it, we used to deploy to Prestwick. Maybe the RAF are making a takeover bid for HMS Gannet? ;)

And ISK is probably weathered-out on far fewer days a year than places like Linton, Leeming or Valley! And even allowing for weather, it will still get in about three times more operating hours than Akrotiri !