General allrounder said:
"The electorate sets the agenda on expenditure on the doorstep during elections. When voters start to ask politicians what they will do about the parlous state of the armed forces, then and only then will there be any more money. Until then the Treasury will put its money where the voters want it: Health, Education and Social Security."
Absoluteley bang on! This is the cause of this accident. The MR Force ( like the rest of the armed forces ) has always had a positive 'can-do' attitude. It has never been 'why can't we do this' but 'how are we going to do it with not enough crews and knackered jets!'
This has always been the case and with the exception of one excellent boss on 42, I can't ever remember squadrons saying 'no, sorry, we can't do that.' ( Cos it might affect my promotion if I say to 18Gp 'No', said the Wg Cdr ).
Unfortunately, their Airships don't seem to be able to draw a line in the sand - partly due to political manouevring and squabbling between the services for the limited pile of cash, I suspect. The message needs to start being forced back up the chain of command, loud and clear.
This tragic incident goes beyond the nitty gritty of how a Nimrod works. we can argue til we are blue in the face as to whether some sort of extinguisher in the bomb bay would have made any difference but where do you draw the line?
Its about time CDS realistically stated what can and cannot be achieved. Unfortunately, the armed forces have caught the disease of civvy street - performance targets, cost saving initiatives etc and it just doesn't work that way, especially when you are fighting 2 wars.