Nimrod crash - MoD pay up

[Diablo Rouge]

Reports of £15million being paid to the Nimrod crash families. No idea of how the 'split' went but a settlement such as this must be akin to full admition of liability. Source:Sky News.

Headlines from 2008:
Parents of airmen killed in Nimrod crash in legal battle with Defence Secretary

The families of two airmen killed when their Nimrod aircraft exploded in Afghanistan have served legal proceedings on the Ministry of Defence.

[Sun Who]

Diablo,

What reports, issued by whom, using what mechanism?

Sun.

[k3k3]

Sky News Ticker.

[nigegilb]

Of course it is full liability, the aircraft was not airworthy for 20 odd years before the explosion. But hold your horses on the settlement, as far as I am aware this is news to the families as well. Better not be media spin.....

BTW, I safely predict the same will go with the Chinook. MoD saw fit to send passengers and crew to their deaths in an aircraft that was not airworthy. Doesn't matter how much the MoD pays for its fancy lawyers..

[downsizer]

If, as the families claim, it isn't about compensation can we expect them to donate the settlement to charity?:hmm:

[hoodie]

Only if you donate one of your close relatives "to charity" first, downsizer.

[The Old Fat One]

If, as the families claim, it isn't about compensation can we expect them to donate the settlement to charity?http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/yeees.gif


Troll

(added letters due system)

[tucumseh]

If, as the families claim, it isn't about compensation can we expect them to donate the settlement to charity?


One assumes you've never lost a son to the incompetence and gross negligence of others.


Perhaps Adam Ingram will now feel able to express regret for ignoring the warnings of systemic airworthiness failings presented to him a year before the crash, which he denied the year after it - and which Haddon-Cave reiterated.

[nigegilb]

Don't bother with the very rapid trolls that have appeared already Tuc. The practicality is, how would YOU survive on a third of your previous income with no husband to give any support at all and possibly having to find a new home at short notice?

This is what Ainsworth said at the conclusion of the Inquest when he ignored the coroner's call to ground the fleet, without having read the coroner's summary.

Bob Ainsworth said:

"My thoughts are with the families, friends and colleagues of those who died in XV230. On behalf of the MOD and the Royal Air Force, I would like to apologise again to the families of those who died for our failings which led to this tragic incident.

"I would like to reassure all those concerned that the Chief of the Air Staff has reaffirmed to me that the Nimrod is airworthy, and that we are dealing with all the issues raised by this incident. The independent review of the airworthiness and safety of the Nimrod is ongoing.

"I have noted the coroner's comments and I will consider them carefully. The Nimrod is saving lives in operational theatres every day. However, if it was not safe we would not be flying it; it is safe with the measures we have taken and that is why we will not be grounding the fleet.

[vecvechookattack]

The families have already been paid


BBC News - Families of Nimrod crash victims receive compensation (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11461502)

[downsizer]

Only if you donate one of your close relatives "to charity" first, downsizer.

I have. They were murdered by the IRA.

[Mick Smith]

Absolutely Nige. Its worth quoting Des Browne in December 2007 when he announced that "the families will not have to fight for compensation through the civil courts". Yeh right, but the MoD will push it to the wire before paying up! Downsizer is just a lying troll, I should ignore him.

[tucumseh]

Clearly this case was about the money.

Clearly, and as reiterated by Haddon-Cave, it was about money - to MoD. It was they who knowingly suborned the airworthiness system to "save" money.

Given MoD have been in denial for 4 years on Nimrod XV230, 23 years since the systemic nature of the problem was first notified (11th January 1987 to AMSO) and 20 years since specifically notified on Nimrod (12th September 1990 to AMSO), then I respectfully submit there are demonstrably very guilty people out there who are far more deserving of your ire.

Tapper's Dad et al stood up to be counted whereas others did not, merely emerging from the shadows to have an occasional potshot. A bit like senior staffs in MoD in fact.

[downsizer]

Downsizer is just a lying troll, I should ignore him.

Clearly I must be, you'll note all the troll like posts I've made in the past.:hmm:

Just because I don't agree with the rest of you does not make me a troll.

[Lima Juliet]

I do hope that it is £15M for the whole crew and not each family - that would be outrageous otherwise. Just over £1M per family would be about right (IMHO).

Sadly, that'll be another £15M from the defence budget that will not go to the front line and will probably cost someone else's life as the MoD can't afford the right kit (I know its an unlikely "probably", but the pay out could have this consequence).

Anyway, if it's any comfort I believe that the MoD is learning its lesson from XV230 from all the shenanigans going on with MRA4. They are raking over that aircraft with a very fine toothcomb from what I hear...:D

It's just sad that we had to lose good people to reinvigorate what we had years before.:(

LJ

[downsizer]

It's just sad that we had to lose good people to reinvigorate what we had years before.

Indeed. We should never have been in this situation.

[Two's in]

Surely the Haddon-Crave report should have settled the famlies concerns. Clearly this case was about the money. Why should compensation in wartime differ between a fire/expolsion caused by an explosion and that by the enemy.

...because as has been discussed here ad infinitum, one is an unquantifiable risk, because the probability of it happening can not be reasonably assessed i.e. losses due to combat action.

The other - Airworthiness - is not only quantifiable, it was assessed, measured, documented and subsequently ignored by those whose job it was to provide a duty of care to the crew who lost their lives.

[hoodie]

I have. They were murdered by the IRA.
In that case, downsizer, I apologise for having impugned your integrity.

However, I will not apologise for pointing out that your original comment is highly inappropriate as, itself, it impugns the integrity of the Nimrod families and their reasons for maintaining their successful campaign.

[JFZ90]

One wonders if (hopes?) it will be split between the negligent - i.e. BAES, QQ and MoD sharing the bill?

[Diablo Rouge]

A million equates roughly to 16-20 years service based upon PA spine fiqures. Sounds like a fair deal to me rather then a billy bonus. The budget that pays is unlikely to be the same as that for operation procurement and the emotional stress that such comments will invoke are IMHO unfair. I am quite sure that most would prefer not to be in this situation in the first place, although I have met a merry widow in the past :E

[Lima Juliet]

Red Devil

The budget that pays is unlikely to be the same as that for operation procurement and the emotional stress that such comments will invoke are IMHO unfair.

Mate, you need to take a look at this:

UKDS 2010 - Chapter 2 - Personnel (http://www.dasa.mod.uk/modintranet/UKDS/UKDS2010/c2/sec5intro.php)

Principally, the line "The Department self insures against loss" answers the question for you.

LJ

[Two's in]

I disagree. OA (Operational Analysis) is 60 odd years old and well proven - some say it was critical to winning the Battle of the Atlantic. OA techniques have many similarities to modern SMS practices. The risks of both airworthiness and combat hazards can be quantified and managed.

In the example given, the OA would have determined the risk of losing that asset to combat related risks, which would have hopefully informed the tasking and missions around that risk.

In the case of Nimrod XV230, the risk that went unidentified was that senior officers, civil servants and the OEM would wilfully and knowingly fail to execute their duties in establishing and maintaining the airworthiness of the aircraft in a flawed and fatal (for the crew) attempt to penny pinch. Not my opinion, but that of Charles Haddon-Cave QC. This was the result of many years of neglect and wilful ignorance surrounding airworthiness, and was not the result of operational action.

Most people on this forum accept that when you signed the dotted line, if you found yourself at the sharp end then you might encounter more day to day risks than somebody on the bacon counter at Tescos. What we didn't accept was that the risk would ever be a function of whether those charged with a Duty of Care felt like doing their job properly or not. In this case not.

By all means mention OA and its value, but please not in the context of such disgraceful and wanton dereliction of duty.

[Shell Management]

If the MOD had a Shell style SMS everyone would know what they were accountable for and they would be held accountable by that system in a just way. Its a opity that the controversey over the Mull of Kintyre accident has lead to the RAF having a no-blame culture since.

[EdSett100]

One wonders if (hopes?) it will be split between the negligent - i.e. BAES, QQ and MoD sharing the bill?

Why do you think the Haddon Cave enquiry was set up by the MOD? It was obvious from the BOI report that there were other organisations at fault as well as the MOD. The H-C enquiry, as an independent commentator, was set up by Des Browne to prove that fact. The families could not sue the other organisations. They could only sue the MOD as the employer of their breadwinners (sorry to use that word) MOD can now sue the others for their failings and seek an apportionment of the compensation paid out.

Someone asked about Des Browne's statement after the BOI report that compensation will be paid immediately. Although he didn't say it, he was referring to the standard Armed Forces Compensation Scheme, which is a pittance in the case of death (and other causes). If a widow wishes to claim that the RAF was culpable and should pay out more, she has to make that claim through the courts. The standard compensation payment is then witheld by the MOD until the claim is settled and then the standard amount is deducted from the court (or out of court) settlement.

If this news is true, I am comforted by the fact that my good friends' bereaved families are now able to resume, in financial terms only, the quality of life they quite reasonably expected before the crash. Money will not replace the love and companionship of the men, but children need schooling, homes need maintaining, and cars need fixing etc.

There's never any good news in this sad story, but this development is the news we've been waiting for.

Regards
Ed Sett

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

Ed:-

The standard compensation payment is then witheld by the MOD until the claim is settled and then the standard amount is deducted from the court (or out of court) settlement.
I find this quite alarming! Do you have a reference for that, Ed? Were interim awards made?

SPHLC

[Shell Management]

Standard practice when people choose to sue, surely.

[EdSett100]

I find this quite alarming! Do you have a reference for that, Ed? Were interim awards made?
Clearly, I didn't like to pry into this sensitive area, but a Visiting Officer told me about it. It didn't seeem right but, unless he didn't have all the facts or I misheard him, it appears that this is the policy. Although unpalatable, I guess it is legal.

One widow mentioned to me a few weeks ago that she was still "waiting for the money to be sorted out", so I think she didn't receive much, if anything, for 4 years.

Ed

[nigegilb]

Ed Sett, this is something I am working on at the moment. As I understand it, Defence Sec has powers of discretion over compensation. In this case (culpable negligence) there is the possibility that he will order that compensation can be made in addition to any previous settlement. The actual position is not clear WRT Nimrod.

[Tappers Dad]

Family of Nimrod Marine awarded £150,000
Family of Nimrod Marine awarded £150,000 | Edinburgh and East | STV News (http://news.stv.tv/scotland/east-central/202566-family-of-nimrod-marine-awarded-150000/)

A civil jury decided that the Ministry of Defence should pay £90,000 to Joe Windall's mother and a further £60,000 to the dead serviceman's sister after formally holding it responsible for the fatal accident which also claimed another 13 lives.

[tucumseh]

Good. I hope their legal costs don't eat into the award.


But one is left wondering how much the jury would have awarded had they been told Adam Ingram was specifically advised the previous year (2005) of the systemic failings, and did nothing. Not a general or vague warning, but exactly the same words used by ACM Loader over 2 years later, which led to the H-C Review. Those in a position to prevent the accident continue to get off the hook.

[[email protected]]

The new MAA appear to have been passing the message that senior officers who 'manage' risks just by having them on a risk register, will end up in court if airworthiness issues are not addressed and cause accidents. Not having the money doesn't appear to be an excuse when the concept of ALARP is involved.

[tucumseh]

The new MAA appear to have been passing the message that senior officers who 'manage' risks just by having them on a risk register


Unfortunately, that is precisely the practice advocated/condoned by, for example, the Chief of Defence Procurement and Director General Air Systems 2 (Chinook, Nimrod etc) in the late 90s/early 00s. Detailed evidence and official References were submitted to Haddon-Cave.

Both these officers also ruled that a 2nd and 3rd Risk Register could be created whose sole purpose was to eliminate any record of embarrassing risks that had not been mitigated. Such as, the above rulings. (Mitigation - press "print" and tuck away for future inquiries so you can justify your actions).

As such, entire generations of PE/DPA/DLO/DE&S staffs have grown up with this practice and now form much of the DE&S hierarchy. And not just Air systems.

Good on the MAA. Shame it took so many deaths.

One question. Why only "Senior Officers". When the Crown Proceedings Act, Section 6, was repealed (early 90s), this threat of legal action applied to everyone.

[VinRouge]

Thats why any good RR should include a record of decisions; including all "risk" that was deemed unworthy of the register.

[tucumseh]

Vin

Spot on. MoD regs require all RRs to record all decisions, and retain all notified risks, even if they are subsequently eliminated as risks - in case the decision is subsequently proven wrong.

For example, all aircraft and aircraft equipment RRs should contain a risk saying DGAS2 and CDP were notified the airworthiness regs were not being implemented properly - the risk being that they ruled this was acceptable, thus compromising the safety case. The recommendation was that this should become a standing risk in all programmes, to be mitigated before Initial Gate. I entered it in two RRs at the time of notification - they were subsequently removed from the 2nd and 3rd versions. Originals retained.

[Shell Management]

Perhaps MAA should do what Shell do

http://www.ihst.org/portals/54/2010ihss/Day2_02_02%20IHSS%20Simplified%20Hazard%20Management_Tony%20 Cramp.pdf (from a recent conference sponsored by Shell)

In addition Shell is very hot on competency and accountability.

[vecvechookattack]

Whilst not wanting to dismiss the good work compiled by the venerable TC (Hope your well Tony)... Shells definition of a Hazard is a cross wind or inadvertant entry into cloud. There is no mention of being engaged by small arms fire, not a word on the penetration of SA threat bands...?

The MAA should not do what Shell do because Shell do not send their Aircrew into harms way. Shells aircrew would not lay down their lives for the sake of others....


As I'm sure Tony would understand....Different ships.....Different cap tallies

[Shell Management]

You clearly have no concept of the hazards operating in the Niger Delta and how they are managed!