I am greatly hoping that the comment about 'serviceability' of XV 230 that day are not levelled in any way at my post yesterday about ''was XV 230 airworthy that day'' (which I posted for factual accuracy reasons) I would be deeply hurt and horrified if that were the case. I am utterly convinced that my late husband, his crew, and the ground engineers who serviced XV 230 on September 2nd, were carrying out their jobs to the highest of standards; as was always the case. I am 100% certain that XV 230 would not have taken off that day if there were any doubts in any of their minds as to its safety. The problem arose directly after an AAR event; the risks of which, in my mind, were not properly assessed many years ago and could not have been known by the crew or ground crew.
I went to great pains to mention that the 'airworthy' question arose after many statements of fact that I made on 4th December e.g. that the design of the Nimrod, SCP add-on and the safety case were all done by BAE, I also mentionned that 'correlation of information' over many years was not carried out i.e. at an office some-where! None of this refers to 'serviceability' and I deliberately did not mention 'serviceability' on 4th December or in my post.
I also asked a question about tank 1 i.e. ''why the limiting of tank 1 from 16,000 to 15,000 lbs was accepted as a viable solution''? The reason I asked this was because it is widely assumed that the blow off valve from tank 1 blew off and that this fuel tracked down the outside of the Nimrod and entered the SCP housing. It was in no way said or meant as a stab at any one involved with the servicing of XV 230 that day. I was searching for reasons why the suspected 'blow-off' occured, as I was told that this event was thought to be a strong contender in the causes of the crash. The reason I mentionned what Sir Glenn said was because I wanted to accurately tell you i.e. 'word for word' what I said and what was said in reply; without emotion or slant on the facts. I am sad that I have felt the need to clarify what I said, when I had hoped that the original post spoke for itself, and can only hope that the post that appeared after my post did not actually refer to mine; though I feel deeply that it did which upsets me to the core.
helgar33
Last edited by helgar33; 20th Apr 2008 at 12:38.