Military AircrewA forum for the professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforces of the World, all equally welcome here.
I note from my, and others' recent replies from the Mod's redoubtable Mrs Bellchambers, that their tone is a lot less frosty. No longer the tired old 'no new evidence' mantra, but an assurance that they are looking carefully at their Lordships' report.
The delay, is, I hope, due to the efforts to withdraw without too much loss of face.
The First Precept was never to accept anything as true until I knew it was such without a single doubt. Rene Descarte 1641
It must be getting close to that time when lots more letters are required. This time perhaps we should be getting a little mean. This is in danger of becoming a constitutional issue and will unless the MoD agree that the HoL were correct. This means that the conclusion should be changed until new evidence is produced which proves otherwise i.e. innocent until proven guilty!
Lord Chalfont has a question on Chinook coming up to be debated/answered in m'Luds chamber...it is to ask HMG whether they expect a response to the Select Committee Report on the Chinook Accident ZD 576 before the summer recess...he is obviously a PPRuNe regular!
Hi folks,
sorry things appear quiet. In reality, they're not. The campaign is still irritating people where necessary (in other words - constantly).
Latest rumour is that a response will be given prior to the Summer recess, although exactly when before the recess is not yet known. I promise that I'll let you all know as soon as I do.
Please keep the pressure on.
Regards as always
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
Given past performance, it will probably be contained in an obscure written reply lodged in the House of Commons library at about 15:30 on the day before the recess.
Rest assured - Wherever they decide to publish their finding, I will find a way to link to this thread!
Almost three months have passed since the findings of the Lords Select Committee. Time is rapidly running out.
Yes, dearest MoD, I'm still here and I will continue to irritate the hell out of you.
Your evidence is in tatters and the honour of the RAF is being tarnished with each day that is allowed to pass. Do the correct, honourable and long-overdue thing:- give the reputations of two fine young pilots back to their families.
Thanks to everyone for keeping the pressure on.
Regards as always
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
Brian, unfortunately we don't know each other. I just wanted to put on record my admiration for and my thanks to you for your unstinting work on this issue.
EVERYONE knows that this is an injustice but, all the same, it takes someone like yourself to point it out to the masses. It is good to know that there are still people who don't lie down to injustice and, every time I am airborne that fact is of comfort. Without question, your day is fast approaching.
Set 18,
thank you so much for your kind words. I am, though, one of many who fight to clear the names of Jon and Rick. I just choose to shout my mouth off on the internet!
Shy,
Fear not my friend, I have my shovel ready
Best wishes to all
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
sorry not on CAS, but latest news from Lords is as follows. This was from last week in Lords chamber:
Chinook ZD576
Lord Chalfont asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they expect to provide a response to the report of the Select Committee on the Chinook ZD576 accident before the Summer Recess.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Bach): My Lords, the Government have said that they intend to respond to the Select Committee's report, which was published on 5th February 2002, before the six months allowed for responses to such reports has elapsed. That remains our intention. Moreover, I hope that it will be possible to publish our reply and debate the issue in your Lordships' House before the Summer Recess.
Lord Chalfont: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that encouraging reply. However, in the light of the fact that correspondents' letters addressed to the Government on this matter are being answered by the Air Staff secretariat, can he give the House an assurance that, before the response arrives in the House, Ministers, and not only officials, will have read the Select Committee's report and that they will not simply be relying on an Air Staff briefing?
Lord Bach: My Lords, I can reassure the noble Lord that all Ministers in the Ministry of Defence have read the Select Committee's report. But that will not preclude us from listening to the advice of our officials before final decisions are taken. I know that the noble Lord will agree that that is the best way to proceed, not least because of the time that he spent as a distinguished Minister in the MoD some years ago.
Lord Vivian: My Lords, does the Minister agree that staff at Boscombe Down reported to the MoD that they could not recommend controller aircraft release
1 May 2002 : Column 682
for the Chinook Mk2 owing to the unquantifiable risk associated with the unverifiable nature of the FADEC software, and does he agree that they recommended that it be rewritten? Can the Minister say now, or in the future response to which he has just referred, whether the software has been rewritten and independently verified and who authorised the return of those aircraft to operational service against the advice of Boscombe Down?
Lord Bach: My Lords, with great respect to the noble Lord, whose questions I always listen to with enormous interest, the answer to his question will be very much a matter for this House when we come to debate the report. I am conscious that today the Question is about the timetable. This Question should not be an excuse for a dress rehearsal for a debate that the House will have.
TL Thou,
many thanks for the update. I hope they will not keep the families hanging on much longer. They must be running out of excuses by now! Should be an interesting debate in the House!
Chippy,
I had the audacity to ask the MoD if they could advise me of the retirement date of the Air Marshal. The detailed reply simply said, "No." I believe that he mentioned resignation should the decision go against him, although this is unconfirmed.
So close ............. keep the pressure on.
Regards as always
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
It was a couple of years now since I posted my own wishlist of questions that needed answering. How glad I am to see some of these highly relevant questions finally asked in the house!
Although I believe it was threatened at one stage, I can't really see a resignation in the offing. Any allocation of responsibility will probably drag on until after a retirement.....easy way out, old boy, protocol, upkeep of stiff upper lip, waffle waffle and all that....
Thanks, I imagine you weren't too surprised at the response. It must be quite tough for some of the serving officers in MoD to witness all performance, especially the ones who can see that they could be victims of the same process...
Anyway, best regards and let's hope for the right result eventually.
Indeed. I think there is a Defence Debate in the Lords next week (15th). If any PPruners know any luds this might be an occasion to press them to speak up about Chinook just to give it another Parliamentary airing.
I dare say the "Great and the Good" (ex CDSs et al) will be taking part, but I don't imagine they are particularly predisposed to seeing the pilots cleared. This is a shame as such an intervention would be newsworthy and helpful.
Linear Mode
