Parliamentary Questions concerning Hercules Safety

[AHORSE]

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=77492
Full fuel load no foam, but nitrogen supressant. No flames!!! Need I say more.

[Vage Rot]

[QUOTE=nigegilb]
...... I believe that the balance of probability is that the crew of XV179 were more likely to have survived the attack if the aircraft had been fitted with foam. QUOTE]

maybe a valid point if it was small arms that brought her down - !! Doh!!

Nobody is arguing that we should have better kit - but you cant blame somebody for everything that happens. Perhaps the troops on the ground would like all over mortar and IED proof armour too? i bet they would.

If foam counters small arms, there is a cheaper method - fly higher - not like there's a radar threat to get under is it?! anything is vulnerable on take-off/landing/TLZ's

I would have more sympathy with your arguement if I thought FOAM would have changed the incident you argue about - it would not given the weapon involved and you all know it. We are all vulnerable to SA but this was not SA. It's a risk of the job - speak to the helo boys if you want to know more. Not nice but true.

And, before the tirade of abuse arrives - at least I'm keeping your thread at the top!

[nigegilb]

Quote from RAF BoI page 25

"...the Board has concluded that the explosive separation of XV179's wing was caused by the ignition of the fuel/air mix in the number 4 fuel tank ullage. Furthermore, the Board concluded that the lack of a suppression system within the fuel tank, such as foam or inert gas, was a contributory factor."

The other Hercules hit by small arms fire 6 months before had just been fully refuelled with cold fuel. These two facts probably saved the lives of that crew. I am trying to save lives. This is what this whole thing is about. Politicians do not seem to care, neither seemingly do some members of HM Forces.

The BoI never released the information on the size of the projectile(s) that brought down XV179. It was deemed too sensitive.

[fat albert]

Still intrigued to know what your problem is really.

So, we have a tactical transport aircraft that flies regularly within the SMARMS threat band (take off and landing) in countries where every man and his dog has at least an AK in the cupboard and possibly a 12.7 in the back garden. Said individuals like nothing nothing more than loosing off a few rounds at passing aircraft. I fail to see what is so difficult to understand.

Surely it's just crass to risk the loss of an airframe, pax and crew to a 10p round when £50k would take most of that risk away? I think if you were perhaps flying in said threat band anything like as often then you might be singing a different tune.

Still, keep up the good work - I've not seen a single sub north of Basrah yet so you must be doing a good job :ok:

[Vage Rot]

Still, keep up the good work - I've not seen a single sub north of Basrah yet so you must be doing a good job :ok:

Not got a problem - you boys have - just argue a proper case and you will get more sympathy. This whole arguement and thread is based around 1 ac loss that was NOT due to Small Arms. get the drift. make a proper arguement - not lean on sympathy for an aircraft/crew loss - ive been around this game too long and lost too many friends for that one to wash.

Also, I refer you to the previous comment on this thread of checking what people do!

[rudekid]

Vage Rot

You're entitled to your opinion, but unless you've seen something different to everyone else about weapon types and a DEFINITE CONCLUSION to the event I think you're misguided. I think you have the wrong information, or drawn the wrong conclusions. I think any further discussion on specifics would be classified and I advise against further release. Get the drift...

I agree with some of your thoughts on the altitude and flight profile but the foam may well have saved the aircraft in this case. Noone will ever know for definite.

More importantly, to my mind, is the possibility that it may save an aircraft in the future. We (as the RAF) have learned some lessons from this sad event, some of which we are implementing, some we are not. As you incontrovertibily point out, everything is vulnerable at some point in a sortie, in whatever profile. With that level of tactical insight, I thought you must teach tactics on the KOCU. Upon checking your profile, I see that you must complete the VEG ROTA. I now understand why you fail to see the issues involved here. It's amazing that people can listen without hearing...

At the most critical point, I would rather have an aircraft with foam than without. It's simple.

I don't think you need to patronise about risk. Everyone understands it. The rotary guys are in a different scenario for tactical implementation than we are. We haven't lost a rotary asset in the same way as the US guys have (hostile fire) unless I'm very much mistaken. Suggest you speak to them and find out more...

I get the feeling you're looking for a controversial bite, rather than informing the debate.

[chappie]

uh oh......i did something stupid. i looked at those photos. can anyone imagine how i feel right now after i've seen them. then i turn and look at the photo of my brother because thats all i've got left. so while you talk about wether foam saves or the certain kind of bullet does enough to bring down a plane remember what this is about. life. the preservation of life in the future.

just so that we are clear... the report that was handed to the families was redacted.

it seems to me vage rot that all you are interested in is being controversial. you leave your reply with comments "before the tirade of abuse begins" and "at least i'm keeping your thread at the top"......oh be still my beating heart my hero! you are simply too kind with your favours......not. you really think that you are adding something worthwhile don't you. by all mean bring forward facts. that is always appreciated but i see your spell away from the thread has shown that you have still not learnt how to put your point across approriately.

a point you should all consider. whatever hit the wing there was no element of explosive found in it. there was no explosive head, no gun powder nothing,the explosion/ fire was caused by the explosive fuel vapour mix. wether it was a spark caused by the weapon/ bullet or heat associated with any thing travelling at a high speed is not known but that ignited the mix there.

[rudekid]

Giblet

Prior to May 4, do a bit of digging reference my earlier post and find out if the AOC is aware of HIS ac tasking in theatre without a DAS. I would be very surprised if that was an authority he is willing to delegate to the ACC.

I can't be more helpful at the moment as I am out of the country and don't have access to the specific information, or the players involved. Keep an open mind about all 2 Gp ac, it's not just the C130. There are other assets inter and intra theatre which are part of 2 Gp. I'm sure I don't need to tell you this!

Chappie

Don't take to much to heart from the photos of the C5. It crashed in Dover USA following a probable engine failure and probable compounded errors. It certainly wasn't hostile fire. I'm sure that seeing them doesn't help, but hopefully Nige's campaign and your efforts wiil keep the issue in the limelight enough to make a difference to us in the future. By the way, there is a feature on PPrune where you can block individuals from your view, if you wish.

Regards

RK

[nigegilb]

RK,
No worries, I understand your concerns. I have had some help with other 2Gp assets. You should know that I have already brought up the subject of current daylight ops with the HCDC. I share you view of it. It is an area of serious concern in both theatres. I did enough of the no DAS thing with my own crew. Hopefully we will put that to the sword once and for all.

Take care,

NG

[fat albert]

VR, this isn't about 1 aircraft loss, this is about deficient defensive aids on our AT fleet that was highlighted by the loss of 179. Who knows what would have saved 179? Foam may very well have prevented the fuel tanks going up and thats all that matters. The proper argument for fire retardent foam has been made countless times on these pages - we certainly aren't looking sympathy. I fail to see what your point is.

:hmm:

And yes, we know what you do - the comedy of you boys "big-timing" it round bsr is enough to keep us all amused :rolleyes:

[Pylot]

Other types flying in this theatre do not have foam - can it be fitted to other types?

[nigegilb]

There are many ways to protect the ullage.
Fuel Tank Ullage Protection

Passive (in-situ):
• Explosion Suppressant Foam (ESF) on P-3, C-130, F/A-18
• Aluminum mesh

Inerting:
• Halon 1301 was used on now-retired A-6 platform
• Alternative: On-Board Inert Gas Generation System (OBIGGS) - provides nitrogen-enriched air; maintain O2 concentration < 9% for military applications –Implemented on V-22, H-1Upgrades

Active Systems (within ullage, reacts to event):

Legislation by the FAA that would force airlines to retrofit their fleets appears to have stalled for now. From the research I have done inerting fuel tanks or fitting ESF is relatively straightforward. It is not so expensive but it is time consuming. I am aware of OBIGGS on C17 ac. Fuel tank protection can be fitted on anything from fast jets to C5. It is just a matter of political will.

[chappie]

i just want to make myself clear. i was not saying that i was upset in an angry way as the photos were shown. i chose to look at them of my own free will and as a result accept the consequences. thankyou for those of you who have taken the time to offer explanations. it has been appreciated that you have tried to help. i know that those two crashes were two separate incidents. it is important though that we do take time to dwell on what might have been re: C5 and what was on XV179 despite the fact that the causes were different.

WE MUST HAVE SUPPRESSANT TECHNOLOGY ON ALL HERCULES.

the message is simple.

i have been approached by a news agency and given the opportunity to tell my story about why i'm taking part in this campaign. it is felt by the journalist that it will be most effective doing it woman to woman. i'm talking to other wives/mothers/sisters/daughters and the like. they will be made aware that all the protection that their countries afford their troops counts for nothing when they have the honour of being on a british albert as we don't have foam. the feature will go to the nationals overseas. i've been told that it will likely be US and australia. i will get this message across. my parents want all hercules protected. this may be idealistic but a few token planes lucky enough to win the lottery of funding is not sufficient .

please watch the news tomorrow. the military families who have lost their children in iraq will be lobbying MP's and delivering the petition to downing street. thankyou to those of you who have signed the petition. it will make a difference. thankyou for your support.:)

[nigegilb]

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make it his policy to advise relatives of deceased armed services personnel to seek independent legal advice before signing pensions contracts; and if he will make a statement. [64040]
20 Apr 2006 : Column 769W

Mr. Touhig: Dependants of deceased service personnel do not have to sign a pension contract to receive death benefits from the armed forces pension schemes. The benefits are paid in accordance with the terms of the appropriate pension scheme. The only requirement is for the dependant to confirm they are an eligible beneficiary and to sign a claim form to that effect. The Ministry of Defence already advises in its explanatory armed forces pension booklets that, if individuals require financial or legal advice regarding pension matters, they should seek independent advice.

DEFENCE

A400M Aircraft

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with his counterparts in other countries on the merits of fitting a fuel tank inerting system to the A400M aircraft. [63224]

Mr. Ingram: The A400M does not come fitted with a fuel inerting system, although a portable removable on board inert gas generation system is available as an option. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence has not discussed the fitting of a fuel tank inerting system to the A400M with his counterparts in other countries. Officials have discussed the merits of fitting such a system with counterparts in other countries. The UK will make a decision in due course on whether to fit the system to our A400M aircraft.

Maybe if the MoD had discussed the merits of fitting foam to Hercules ac with our good friends the Americans we could have saved an ac. Seems the Flight International article was either wrong or the Govt is now back peddling. I have other info saying that we did reject fuel tank inerting. I also believe that widows and relatives should be provided with legal advice. I now wonder if the pensions clause is valid.

[nigegilb]

It seems that the answer to the PQ regarding pensions and clauses is confusing people. I have to admit I do not understand it either. Please seek clarification through your MP/Lawyer and/or if you wish PM me and I will compile a list of questions for HCDC to investigate. I have already requested legislation to remove the clause.

Regarding A400M. Here is an interesting timeline. Some dates approx

Jan 14 - No decision on Herc Foam
Jan 15 - MoS Article on Herc crash.
Jan 19 - Widows/relatives receive letter from RAF saying decision soon.
Jan 19/Mar7 -K to get foam. Not J. Initial no. airframes increases over time.
Jan 30 - 2nd MoS article. Foam costs £50,000
Mar 07- HCDC Meeting/Ingram Letters of evidence handed over
Mar 07/ April10- Decision reversed on J. J to get foam.

This is what I understand to have happened. Usual warnings apply. If you can help me to firm up dates please do.

Now expect a decision soon on the A400M. The MoD obviously did not consider the A400M to be vulnerable to small arms fire when every other European Nation buying it, did. I have no doubt that the MoD will suddenly see the light and agree to fit an inerting system. Thank you to everyone helping out there. We are winning small battles every day.

Chappie, will be thinking about you and the Boys at 1400 today. Good luck.
NG

[South Bound]

The BBC website today reported the MoD's intention to fit some Hercs with additional safety equipment.

...A statement from the ministry said: "The safety of our armed forces personnel is of paramount importance.
"Only Hercules with appropriate defensive countermeasures are deployed to operational theatres. "Furthermore, we have decided to fit Explosion Suppressant Foam (ESF) to some of our aircraft; concentrating on the aircraft that operate in the highest threat environment."

Would feel better if the decision read 'we have decided to fit ESF to all our aircraft operating in a threat environment, with priority being given to those operating in the highest threat...'

[nigegilb]

SB,
Just heard about the news from Points West. News crew coming to see me later. I will make your point known.

NG

[Northern Circuit]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/4945370.stm

[flipster]

Nige et al

Have been unable to post for a while, due sick IT! So FWIW I thought I'd add my pennyworth.

Well done Nige - great result on the foam - shame about the limited numbers tho' - what about other (AT) assets in theatre?! Sadly, them with egg on their hats ( + faces) will keep denying everything until someone tracks the advice given from below. Surely, that is what all that filing was for!? Have you tried the FOI route? If you'd rather not say, PM!
Chappie - keep going, we're right with you!
Rude kid - I'm also with you and find it hard to believe that night ops aren't de rigeur!
Mike J - spot on!
V (distasteful) Rot - I don't agree with your points, Queen's shilling or not! Nige, FA and RK have covered the glaring holes in your argument.

Nonetheless, as Voltaire said
"I disapprove of what you say but will defend to the death, your right to say it!"

Just have a little more empathy with those who read this thread, please.

Flipster:ok:

[nigegilb]

SB

Duly plugged. If you are in points west/look east region. Check out local news combo report

NG

[nigegilb]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4948080.stm

Link to today at the cenotaph.

Powerful stuff Chappie. You are a strong one...

[ase engineer]

sorry to be a couple of days behind in the argument but .....
""If foam counters small arms" etc...
Yes it does counter the effects of small arms, but not just small arms. Many big arms work by producing lots of bullet sized bits of metal, the effect of which is remarkably like, well, bullets!

[chappie]

i have tried to post a reply....it was removed i will try this version!

today i think i managed to get my point across. i have got a standing ovation from families and politicians alike with my facts......and tears. i'm ashamed to say that i cried but that only served to emphasize that i'm one of the realities of war and the effects of loss.

we have got politicians on side and i will PM anyone who wants names. they now know that you are flying without defensive aids in some planes, you are flying in them without the protection of foam. we are in this partly, some would say to support the americans, yet we are unable to work as an equal as we have not got the same basic equipment that they have on all their hercs. while they are offered protection from their own aircraft when they have the priviledge of being on our hercs they are not. reid speaks of lucky shots. as i said previously this is not about luck. it is a lottery as to which planes can offer the defensive aids system and if the MOD statement are to be believed in time which plane has got EST.

these politicans now know that the americans have foam in all their ac and there are no complaints about manouvreability. i told them about the off the record MOD comment that they are keen to fit foam but the pilots are the obstructive ones as there are complaints that the manouvreability is affected by this technology. i also highlighted that there are the comments made by the MOD that they were not aware that there were vunerability risks on this plane. i told the politicans that the risks were pointed out shown costed and promptly ignored, there are very raised eyebrow in parliament tonight. they know that i want foam for all planes.

i just hope i did you proud.

[nigegilb]

Chappie you surely did. Point West led the program on the Hercules tonight. It was another powerful piece on TV and you were at the centre of it. There is a feeling that something changed today. The MoD has nowhere to hide now. Do not worry, still got plenty of stones to throw. I am very much looking forward to meeting AOC 2GP on May 04. Let's hope he has some good news.

NG

[nigegilb]

Trial Bishop Report

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make the Trial Bishop report available to members of the Defence Select Committee; if he will place a copy of the report in the Library; and if he will make a statement. [65099]

Mr. Ingram: The Trial Bishop report contains information that if released could prejudice the safety and security of UK armed forces. Therefore it would not be in the public interest for a copy of the report to be placed in the Library of the House at this time. I will consider a separate request from the Defence Committee in the usual way.

He didn't say no then......

[flipster]

Nige

Trial Bishop is obviously very sensitive and, certainly, should not be open to the public (and the enemy). Nonetheless, the limitations of our 'old kit' have been known about for some time and, to a major degree, these probs have been rectified by getting 'new kit'. However, there are threats out there that are very hard to defend against - I won't mention what they are, though it is fairly obvious to those whom know. Furthermore, it will be nigh on impossible to defend against them - unless of course, every ac is weighed down by lots of expensive gear in an effort to produce the proverbial 'deflector shield'. I'm sure the AWC are working on this, however!

What worries me is how far does this 'action' against the politicians go? I believe that if foam is to be fitted urgently, then we have helped this happen - well done. The 'other kit' must be next and equally as urgently acheived, as it should have been done years ago. But what next?

I don't think the corporate manslaughter route is one we should get involved with. Obviously, I don't know for sure but I don't think the families would really want that either - it would take yonks and loads of everyone's valuable time and money, all the while raking over old ground, when what people need to do is get on with rebuilding their lives. The only winners will be the lawyers. Maybe what everyone needs is for someone in the gov't to put up their hand, just take responsibility and say sorry?

For sure, I think it would be most apt if Mr Reid and the Gov't would admit that

"Yes, we got it wrong. Yes, we should have listened and the funds should have been made available - but now its being sorted. Yes, we will pay some compensation to families.....Sorry."

Maybe Tony B should meet the families and say the same, while giving his personal assurances that this should not happen again?

Perhaps honesty is the best and only course for the gov't - it might even prevent anyone bringing corporate manslaughter charges against Hoon and Tony. Sadly, I believe the gov't accepting such responsibility would be highly unlikely. It is also likely that they would wriggle out of any charges, while putting put the blame on Their Airships, who are guilty of only failing to listen to advice from their own experts (it might be good CRM if Their Airships admitted as much?).

If nothing else, this episode should then serve as a reminder that:

a. Our Armed Forces need the proper kit to go to war.
b. They need to be more fully supported and listened to by their chain of command.
c. The families of the fallen are not to be overlooked nor 'avoided'.
d. The threat of corporate manslaughter to the politicians is very high if they don't comply and act in good faith.
e. The legal bandwagon is wrong to always search for someone to label as 'culpably negligent' because we are all human and, as a result, occasionally make mistakes!

Whilst I live in hope, I have also bought a ticket to cloudcuckooland!:ok: :ok:

Flip

[Desert Bat]

I haven't been following this all that closely; has anyone drawn a parallel with the following?
http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2000/aar0003.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TWA_Flight_800
http://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/systems/fueltank/intro.stm

[flipster]

Its not strictly the same, as the ignition sources are different but the end result definitely was. Foams and other inerting systems prevent/retard the explosive advancement through the ullage of the flame-front from the ignition source (ie spark). In some cases, fire will still occur but there should be less of a bang!
Just yet another possible threat to ac - but little legislation has been produced.
It is intersting to note that the C17 has on board inert gas generating system or OBIGGS, I think?

[MarkD]

In British Columbia they are introducing legislation to allow government to apologise to families without automatically screwing themselves in court actions, which will hopefully allow a bit more humanity into the government-citizen relationship.

[chappie]

dear guys, it's very commendable that you wish the government would claim responsibility but i'm afraid that you are in cloud cuckoo land. as i was in parliament yesterday i was sat next to the guy who had been sent to report back to the prime minister. he said to tony that when there is a death in the armed forces you place a note of sympathy in the despatsch box. now is the real chance to offer your sympathies in person to the families. 5 minutes of your time will show goodwill. tony's response was a long winded blustered response. he was then asked is that a yes or no? the more tony blair refuses the more he looks as though he has got something to hide. what is the lure of parkinson versus face to face with grief. it does not make you more of a peoples person because you are on a chatshow.
i did not have the ability not to cry when i was putting across my arguement and saying the name of the dead in parliament. i wanted those names to be talked about in those walls. i want them to talk about my name as well. why do we have to fight for compensation? why is there resistance. i hope i did not let anyone down because i ended up crying. this would not have made my arguement very profesional. i am sure they heard what i had to say.there are politicians who i are aware of all the facts that i managed to say. they willbe given the facts as i email them then sit back and see what happens.....or am i living in cloud cuckoo land?

[nigegilb]

It is very easy for everyone to move on now that some Hercs are going to get foam. I am sorry, but agree with Chappie. I think we are approaching the final phase, but we have not finished, yet.

[flipster]

Chappie,

You are being very brave - don't stop.
Sadly, I don't believe for a minute that our politicians will have enough courage to 'come clean', nor to look the families in the eye while giving an honest answer. This is basically because most of the reasons for us being 'over there' are being shown to be highly dubious, if not illegal.

Unlikely though honesty from TB etc is, we should, however, keep giving them the opportunities to do so, whilst also keeping up the pressure on them - as you did very well yesterday - with dignity and honest passion. Sooner or later, they will have to face facts that we hold them ultimately responsible - morally, if not legally and 'payment' is long overdue. The longer they insist in stone-walling you, the more ridiculous they will appear.

But we can't really expect them to admit to anything while the legal-vultures are circling - I like MarkD's idea, tho.

May the force be with you,

Flip



Nige

How was it today?

[FormerFlake]

There are 5 standard excuses used for mistakes by ministers, as briefed by Sir Humphrey Appleby. The government will no doubts use all ofthem, here they are:

1. The is a perfectly satisfactory explanation for everything, but security forbids it’s disclosure.

2. It only went wrong because of heavy cuts in staff and budgets which stretched supervisory resources beyond their limits.

3. I was a worth while experiment now abandoned, but not before it provided much valuable data and considerable employment.

4. It occurred before certain important facts where known, and couldn’t happen again.

5. It was an unfortunate lapse by an individual which has now been dealt with by internal disciplinary procedures.


Sadly, rather that admit to a mistake and sort it out, they will waste time, money and effort finding someone to blame etc.

Another relevant quote form Yes, (Prime) Minister:

"Britain should always be on the side of law and justice, so long as we don't allow it to affect our foreign policy."

Keep up the good fight one and all.

FF

[nigegilb]

There is another way out for the Govt.
Out of court settlement and apologise.
Give the Hercules boys/girls the kit they need.
2GP AT asset self protection overhaul.
Hey Presto.

Maybe we could even promote people for trying to look after their own as well.

[flipster]

Nige,

I've got a spare ticket to cloudcuckooland......wan't to join us?

Flip:D :D

[nigegilb]

Hey, it's a Bank Holiday weekend! Trouble is the brother in law put the metal tray to catch the ash inside the weber when he started it up last year. Doh!

[flipster]

Wrong thread Nige!

[nigegilb]

I know, just read it and it put me in a good mood. I have been contacted by a very well connected gentleman who reckons we have a fair wind at our backs now. Let's hope so!

[flipster]

Aye-aye captain,
Unfurl the mizzen tops'l, ready about, lee-hoh and splice the mainbrace!

[chappie]

hee hee, stand back and watch the fireworks begin! have been a busy girl this week. i'm only just getting warmed up!

[BEagle]

Well done, chappie!

You are truly an inspiration to us all!

Keep up the good work - and have a good weekend.

[nigegilb]

I'm not joking Chappie, you have come in here, forcefully made your points, taken a few knocks in the process and held your own throughout. Congratulations. You deserve it. If you can take this lot on and earn their respect, you will have no problems with the politicians!!!!!

[airsound]

It's quite clear, Nige, that Chappie is already having no problems with the politicians! I've seen you both on telly, and I just know we're going to see and hear more of you.
And, as well as being optimistic, as you have every right to be, I believe that the two of you should be very proud of what you have achieved so far.
In awe
airsound

[dalek]

Frederick Forsyth raises the issues in todays Daily Express. He is particularly scathing about Buff.

[flipster]

Fred's not alone then!:8

[nigegilb]

The article is titled "Shame on those who let our boys fly in deathtraps" and is extremely critical of Buff!


Maybe we should get him on board??

[chappie]

consider it done. i'm sure he'd like to help. i've also contacted trevor mcdonald the tonight show to help, so we should get all planes sorted quite soon. i'll get back to you.

[chappie]

just thought that i'd let you all know that i have had contact with itv so looking promising on getting some more help. once i know more then i'll let you know. hope you are having a good weekend. unfortunately my husband is watching ultimate force as i type and so i'm trying to be a busy girl as it's had the hercs, explosions and funerals on it! he also reckons that the herc was XV178! needless to say i'm off to bed now.

[monkeybumhead]

Chappie

Indeed it was 178. Lots of continuity errors with regards J & K though.

I'm out of the loop with herc matters as I have been recently posted from Lyneham, trying to keep my finger on the pulse though.

Hope all goes well. Keep up the good work.

[Logistics Loader]

DISGUSTED....!!!!!!!!!!

Whowever quoted that !!!

"Crew of XV179 were complacent for flying the way they did".......

Take yourself away and have a F@*&%$G word with yourself !!!!

I fully agree the a/c Capt has the final word of the flight profile to be followed given all known facts/intel....!!!

Even as groundcrew i knew a few of these guys, and if i happened to be onboard flying with these guys who i would trust to make the best judgement call they could make given all known issues....!!!

What altitude would you fly given known AAA/RPG threats....????

Fast as hell/Low or Med/High and slow ish ???

As for the argument, would XV179 survived with foam is pure speculaltion/conjecture..!!!!!
£50,000 per a/c !!!

What cost per life on that task...????
Imagine if our other lads were on it....!!! Think of the Mull......!!!!
Think back to X Decking in Op Corporate...!!!
We lost some highly expericenced guys there !!!!!!!!

Also, later than '82, didn't we lose a Sea King on SAR that had collided with a C130...???
IIRC the C130 landed minus 10-15ft wing that was sliced off, but maybe just maybe, XV179 suffered more serious damage than any of us who are still here to bitch/moan/critisize about seem to realise...

Lets not besmirch the memory of those dedicated individuals who paid the ultimate price....!!!!!!!!!!

Crew XV179 RIP......from a respectful ex colleague....!!!!

[nigegilb]

Top stuff LL.
Regards,
NG

[chappie]

i am now going to show my niaevity or even naiveity or however you spell it?you get the idea.......what is buff? nigel said that fredders was extremely critical of buff. que??? what is it, does it do? i am afraid that to make myself feel less stupid i now have to expel some nursing abbreviations as you boys do like to use yours!! bob was always using his , needless to say he received some very long awkward silences at the end of the conversation. here goes....SAH,SDH,RIND,TAH BSO!! Ahhh, that's better. while i'm on the quest for more info would one of you boys please explain the different between C130 K and J class hercs. is the difference ones a fat albert one's a fast albert?

last thing before i depart. military families against war are extremely supportive. they have forwarded the idea to do a hercules campaign page and would like to help set it up so itr can help our campaign. i think that the idea is great so i'll be setting that up. anyone civvy wise who wishes to support the campaign have a contact. any other (clean) ideas will be received with open arms, if useful.

[airsound]

No shame in you not knowing that Buff is Geoff Hoon, late unlamented Sec of State for Defence - on account of he is thought by many to be a buff'oon.
Keep up the good work with the meeja.
airsound

[Logistics Loader]

Thanx Nige....

Chappie...
think ref is to Geoff Buff Hoon....

As for J & K....

K is the older C130...30yrs service ish
J is newer faster /higher operating....????? model

However, it flies slower than 737 at same altitude so CAA wont let it fly in the same airways so it is in a few peoples eyes a white elephant....

Good microwave though on flight deck !!!

[nigegilb]

Oh no LL, severe risk of thread creep now. Can I just say that the J is a fantastic beast and the K is equally wonderful. And we would dearly love to see both fleets have the best possible self-protection!!!!

[Logistics Loader]

Nige,

My dealing with J model were limited, so only going on knowledge gained at the time and some overheard critiscism's...

My hope is all C130's/SH fleet get the kit they need and deserve...

After all the MOD/RAF has a "duty of care" !!!!!!

[chappie]

thanks boys. i've just realised that by asking the question about difference between J and K i've opened up a large can of worms. i did not mean which if any is the best. what does one have that the other doesn't? please do not go off at tangents and start competing. for the herc virgin here they are both beautiful. wow, i did'nt think i'd be calling myself a virgin again! fnar fnar.

does the buff mean buffoon??? he was a grade a t**t when at the repatriation. made sure that he stayed away from the little people, that being us the bereaved. he stayed in the officers section for as long as he could. made sure he left pretty sharpish. he had no interest really. i guess he realised what had happened as a result of his ability to not have the balls to spend money correctly. i have to say that the wives were far from brill;iant as well. the usual crap it must have been a shock. you must feel awful, how do you feel?!

as for duty of care.......are you sure? at least it's not a figment of my imagination that i've heard it's rumored that the RAF and MOD are supposed to have it, as clearly they're unaware or have forgotten.

[Logistics Loader]

Chappie,

My condolences for your loss, whoever/whenever it was....!!!!

Most politicians wont give a rats harris who your family member was, as long as they get the vote for now, not what happens in next conflict....

The MOD/RAF as with any employer has a duty of care....
As Crown Exemption was lost several years ago....

Under Freedom of Information Act you should be able to find this out if no-one here knows the exact year...

[The Gorilla]

LL

Had you bothered to read through this thread you would know the answer to that!

See chappies post on 27th March.
:uhoh:

[Logistics Loader]

Gorilla...TVM....

Chappie,,

May i apoligise sincerely..............!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ignorance is no excuse.....
In general i only read back a week or so........!!!!

No disrespect to you or your family was ever intended....

yours respectfully

LL

[The Gorilla]

LL

No problem Sir.

TG

[chappie]

boys what can i say. the sentiment is there. so thankyou. and thanlyou for sticking up for me. that does n't happen very often!the media is being very helpful and i have my finger in a lot of pies! that's all i'm prepared to say for now in case of prying eyes on this site. lets just say i'm going to hit them hard.

[Logistics Loader]

Chappie,

You have my vote and support ...!!!

Best wishes

LL

[Filthy]

I have watched this forum with interest over the past few months and I am fully suportive of the great work being done. Having sat close to Flipster on a number of occassions with only a cloiled chain for protection any action that heightens awareness of the plight of the crews who are in essence without voice is laudible.

However, despite understanding the motivation behind the case to ensure the tragic events on Jan '05 never happen again I am a little disappointed in one area. I understand that Nige has the support of at least two of the families but his recent news appearance on BBC West came as a suprise to others who are not so informed. Would He consider contacting the others too explain his motivation and to keep them informed so that these ad hoc appearances do not upset families that are still to date trying to deal with their loss.

Please do not take this as a hit against the laudible work you are doing but there are the feelings of those who have already suffered a loss to consider. A little effort to keep them informed, should they wish, would be appreciated.

Chappie - It may be of interest to you that Buff's pepole were briefed on the families that may be potentially hostile to him, at the repatriation, and thus He was steered clear to avoid any conflict on what ws a V Sad day for all.

Bob 'O was a good man and I very much enjoyed my time with him in Afg. As ever you have my full support for voicing the concerns of those who can not.

[flipster]

Filthy - check PMs!

You raise a valid point and I'm sure Nige and Chappie will contact you, as we could do without brassing off any families.
Sadly, I would suspect the gov't and the few friends they have left in the media may try to 'divide and conquer' by exploiting such raw nerves - be careful everyone.

However, I am sure that the families, together with Nige and Chappie, are far too strong a force to allow that to happen.

Nige,

Sorry, I missed R4 this am - what news?

Flipster

[chappie]

please PM me with the details of those families that are left concerned or upset as a result of any media work. i have checked and double checked that we got in touch with as many of them as possible that continued to have contact. it must be remembered that not all families have stayed in touch as we will always be associated with loss and sadness as we were thrown together by tradegy. :{

the families can get in touch with me if they so wish. i do not wish to upset any family member with this campaign. please remember filthy that i too am experiencing the raw ugliness of grief every second of every day. talking about what has happened and what i go through is not an easy task but a necessary evil to help lend support to nigels work.

i do not know what the format was of the bbc points west interview so i do not know in what way i was shown. it is not my intention to offend any member of the armed forces either along side. i am confident that nigel would be horrified that he had caused upset to the families.

i was given assurances by the family members (2 separate families) who had contact with the others that they had got in touch with all that they could. i have no reason to disbelieve them. i also wish it to be known that this campaign was not entered into without due consideration being given to the crew members loved ones.

[chappie]

while i'm on line i thought i'd let you know that i have had an interesting call tonight.

i have heard what is going out tomorrow on radio four. it will firstly be broadcast at 07.30 then i think the follow up will be at about 0800/0810. it's not normally presented to the participants but the reporter involved felt that i had been through enough and wanted me to be prepared. no doubt that anyone who is listening in on my line will have heard it. i've not lost the plot and i'm sure that i'm more than a little paranoid but there are very strange things going on with my computer as well. it took me three attempts before i could post my previous reply.

anyhoo, please listen to it guys. it should get a bit of attention anyway. nigel is amazing on it. please support us tomorrow. i've made sure my point is made with impact.

[FormerFlake]

Good luck tomorrow.

[nigegilb]

Sorry I am late on this I have been in transit. Would like you to know that the very first article in the MoS happened very fast and I was not able to touch base with the families. Since then I arranged to meet some of those concerned and I have tried to keep them in touch with events. I am trying to coordinate through one particular family. Please, if you know someone out of the loop put them in touch with me through this thread. Many of my former colleagues know how to contact me. The R4 sequence will be powerful but very emotional.

[airsound]

Radio 4 'Today' (0600 to 0900) is running it big time today Tuesday. Reporter Angus stickler has got it onto the main news as well as a feature in the prog itself. He has just done a 'teaser' at 0640, and the main report will probably be between 7 and 8.

The fact that it's on the news as well as the programme means it will go on other BBC outlets as well.

V well done Nige and Chappie!

airsound

[JessTheDog]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4963746.stm

RAF pilots 'asked for tank foam'

The deaths were the single biggest loss of life in Iraq

The deaths of 10 UK personnel in Iraq in January 2005 could have been avoided if a safety device was fitted to their Hercules plane, the BBC has learned.
RAF pilots requested that explosive- suppressant foam devices be fitted to fuel tanks two years before the attack in which the men died, RAF papers show.

The Ministry of Defence said none of its planes in Iraq or Afghanistan have the foam, but some will be fitted soon.

The foam has been in use in US Hercules aircraft since the Vietnam war.

The attack happened on 30 January, 2005, when the Hercules was hit by ground-to-air fire which caused an explosion in the right hand wing fuel tank.

A board of inquiry said the crash was not survivable but did admit that the lack of a fuel tank safety system could have contributed to the crash.

The crash was the single largest loss of British life in Iraq since military action began in 2003.

With the continued lack of foam on Hercules planes, campaigners say they will sue ministers for corporate manslaughter if any more lives are lost because of a lack of protective equipment.


Lions led by lying cowardly mendacious deceitful neglectful swine.

[flipster]

JTO - Absolutely!

Nige, Chappie I salute you both and pray for those still 'out there'!:ok: :ok:

Flipster

ps I wonder how long it will be before another journo adds this to the growing list of
c0cks-up by 'nu laber'?
The best thing the gov't can do is to sort it out PDQ - ie foam/DAS for all ac, compensation for the families and an apology. If they did this, they could actually use it as a example of quick, efffective gov't action to sort out previous mistakes.

[airsound]

'Today' has just broadcast Angus Stickler's report at 0735. It was very hard hitting - Nige hit all the right spots technically - and Chappie was tear-jerkingly brilliant. If you missed it you can hear it on the Today web page - scroll down to 'listen again'. It's not there yet (0750), but it will be soon. The MoD would not comment except by statement, but the LibDems came on to excoriate them
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/index.shtml

Also, the story is now appearing in the BBC News webpage - which should mean that BBC tv will pick it up, and probably the papers will want to follow up as well.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4963746.stm

A VG result all round.

airsound

[nigegilb]

A very big thank you to Airsound!! Two invitations to go on air in 6 days and the MoD are still hiding. It does speak volumes for an organisation that is not prepared to engage in public debate and defend its record on safety.

NG

[airsound]

'Twas an honour to be slightly involved, Sir. I don't think we're finished yet.......

airsound

[chappie]

thankyou for the messages of support.i knew it would be hard hitting and make the point that this is peoples lives that are being fought for.

i'm a little disappointed that there was so little of me as i had alot to say and views i wanted the world to know. the point ,however, is that this is not about me. it's about getting the protection for everyone.

do the muppets in MoD not grasp that the suppressant technology makes financial sense against having fingers crossed and heads in the sand as an option. the costs involved in the aftermath of the crash which i outlined earlier in the thread are phenomonal and surely next time they might not be looking at only ten families to face. the ac that is next might be packed out with the troops. surely they don't want to take that gamble again?!

while i write this i have got tears in my eyes. this is partly due to the fact that hearing my brothers voice on the interview piece was an emotional moment.i am also so frustrated by the MoD and their ignorance. i have not listened to the tape that i have as it's too painful. it was necessary to use. i just hope that now the media will follow this up. the MoD need to know that i mean business. i will not go away. the MoD have refused to meet just little old me on a tv interview. it's not just refusal of meeting nigel. the more they refuse to take part in this and come and put forward their arguement and justify their actions the more it looks like they have no arguemnet contrary to that of mine and the more it looks like they have something to hide. running scared are we?

hope i have not let you all down again. please remember that it is paramount to me that i do not offend any member of the armed forces. i hope you are pleased with all that i've done so far. if there is something that has not been done yet please PM me and let me know what i can do.

[Almost_done]

hope i have not let you all down again. please remember that it is paramount to me that i do not offend any member of the armed forces.
Far from it, keep on going and I wish you the best of luck.

[nigegilb]

lots of things happening, I will give a heads up as soon as I have confirmation of what is being covered on the news tonight.

Would like to thank Angus Stickler for putting together a powerful piece of radio.

[Captain Gadget]

As an ex-Herc operator, I just wanted to add my own round of applause for a vital job being very, very well done.
Keep it up nigegilb, chappie, Airsound et al!
Gadget :ok:

[The Swinging Monkey]

Yes, well done to all concerned. You have my respect, all of you.
Kind regards
TSM

[nigegilb]

Do not have easiest access to beloved pprune web site today. No confirmation yet but C4 news might be worth a look tonight.

NG

[miles offtarget]

Nigel,

It was a truly stunning piece of radio.

Keep up the good work, and thanks from myself and the other former Albert aircrew that I have spoken with today.

MoT

[nigegilb]

Thanks guys and doris day. I know a lot of people have followed this from the start. If you missed R4 Today prog just follow Airsound's advice, a few clicks and you can hear it again via the web.

[chappie]

hi, i'm afraid that i cannot get onto the news tonight and i'm very upset about it. please understand that you have my utmost support and good luck for tonight. i'll be thinking of you.

i have made contact with the producer of another investigative programme that will beam into all the houses in britain and get the message home.

i also have made contact with the solicitor that may be taking our case and therefore the right steps are being taken to take action against the MoD.

[airsound]

I think I can confirm that Channel 4 News (1900-1950) will be covering the story this eve (Tue). Of course there's always the proviso that some other disaster could knock the story off the programme - but prospects are looking good so far. Sad to say, Chappie will not be involved (something to do with availability of studios local to her, I understand) - but Nige will be there, and some other significant contributors.

If anyone feels like contacting the two programmes - Today http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/contact/
and Channel 4 News, email [email protected]
with their comments, I'm sure it would be appreciated!

Thanks for support and kind words. We all know it's worth it.

airsound

[nigegilb]

I can also confirm that C4 featuring XV179 tonight. Should get chance to say a couple of things

NG

[exvicar]

Well done Nige & all. Cracking interview. Enjoy LA

[Facilitator]

Well done Nige, spot on. Bottle of real champers laid aside for you on Saturday night.

[FormerFlake]

Well done all.

Anyone know who this BBC Defence Expert (Andrew Brookes) expert is? His quotes don't suggest he is an expert at all.


"We've been flying Hercules in Iraq since 2003 and lost one, which is tragic. But when you crash a car, do you stop everyone driving?"


Full Article

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4964866.stm

[JessTheDog]

Excellent interview on C4 tonight, much respect due! :ok:

[airsound]

He's not BBC - he's from International Institute for Strategic Studies.

And, clearly, he misses several points about the whole problem.

I tried to get various media outlets to take the story on and refute his comments, but none was interested.

MoD comment seems pretty desperate - fitting of foam "would not definitely have prevented....." Um, sounds like a statement of the blindingly obvious to me. And irrelevant. We're not talking certainties - but we are talking reducing risk. Which foam would undoubtedly have done.

But since the MoD won't be interviewed, that point (and others, beautifully outlined by Nige) cannot be put to them.

I think they're wondering what to do next.

We're still here!

airsound

PS Wasn't Nige faneffingtastic

[nigegilb]

Sorry my PM box is full can't clear it quick enough. Very much looking forward to the meeting with facilitator on Saturday. fantastic support from everyone. Only one question where is the MoD in all this?

[The Gorilla]

Well done Nige, Chappie et al.

Excellent interviews today.

The MOD are as always lost!

TG

[An Teallach]

MoD will be playing its standard 'Tomorrow's Chip-Wrapper' game. They are counting on the mainstream media being interested in Prezza's Pants and Rooney's Foot, not foam for Hercs. C4 News is one of the few outlets that may actually follow a story up, vide the Chinook thread. Top marks to you boys and girl(s) for some excellent campaigning, though.


I wonder if, to combat the slough of pension-loitering mediocrity that repeatedly survives these scandalous occurrences, we should look at a site dedicated to those taking on the MoD whatever the issue. Experience and expertise gained in one campaign could then be passed on to others. We could even have a "Lessons will be Learned-ometer"! How many times have you heard that old chestnut trooped out by Ingram et al after lives or £M have been wasted?

[nigegilb]

Good points. 3 invites no sign of MoD. They are hoping this is going to pass. We may well have to go back to Parliament now and fire up some MPs. The Lib Dems have been very strong in this area. Maybe we should approach their leader.

NG

[Lockstock]

Well done Nige, excellent work.

As for so-called analysts like Andrew Brookes, you couldn't analyse my pants :mad:

To use your car crash analogy Mr Brookes, I'd like you drive up the M1 for a few hundred miles; there may be up to half a dozen snipers on the way. We could give you protection against these snipers which would cost us about 1/50th the price of the car but we won't. Your life? Not even in the equation mate.

[nigegilb]

This email was sent to Channel 4 news. It is written by a current RAF pilot. If you feel strongly about it let them know and they will revisit the subject.


"I would like to thank you wholeheartedly for the excellent item on MOD failings regarding Hercules protection. I would also wish to ask for your continued support for this campaign.

As a serving RAF pilot in 2001, I sat on coils of chain for protection whilst flying operational sorties in Hercules aircraft. This was due to a lack of flight deck armoured protection across the fleet. The lack of foam protection for all RAF Hercules is nothing short of scandalous. As Nigel pointed out, presently the UK is the only lanch partner involved in the A400M (Hercules replacement) to opt out of fitting a fuel inerting system as a protective measure.

As a former collegue of Nigel Gilbert, I am exceedingly proud of the representation he has made on behalf of serving Officers' and bereaved families. I am also saddened and angered by the apparent total failure of the MOD to address this issue with the gravity it deserves."

[Archimedes]

Well done all.

Anyone know who this BBC Defence Expert (Andrew Brookes) expert is? His quotes don't suggest he is an expert at all.



Full Article

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4964866.stm


You mean this chap?

http://www.iiss.org/staffexpertise/list-experts-by-name/andrew-brookes-

Also, unless I am very much mistaken (which I often am...), a Ppruner.

[An Teallach]

FF
C4 Report can be downloaded here: http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=2282

[nigegilb]

I am still due to meet AOC 2 on Thursday. I want everyone to know that this argument is in no way restricted to SF. That is the tip of the iceberg.
I am trying to secure a fundamental agreement to improve safety across the board. I do not care if MoD say nothing in public as long as they right what is so obviously wrong. Actions will speak louder than words.

[FormerFlake]

FF
C4 Report can be downloaded here: http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=2282

Thanks, it is not working at the moment but hopefully i will get it to work at some point.

[An Teallach]

FF

It took me 3 or 4 attempts to get it to start to play; it must be a popular download. Good luck!

[Smoketoomuch]

Well done Nige, excellent work.
As for so-called analysts like Andrew Brookes, you couldn't analyse my pants

Did I hear him right on BBC 24 this evening? He mentioned the army's original SA-80, the one that didn't go 'bang' as required; "Well there was no shooting going on at the time, so no one really thought about it". Is he really saying that nobody thought it was important that the main weapon in the British Army actually worked?

And is it just me that suspects an increasing number of so-called "independent experts" interviewed by the BBC have "government approved" stamped on their backside?

[4fitter]

Nige, Chappie

Keep up the good work. You have a lot of support in many places. The Ch4 piece tonight was spot on. Enjoyed our times in the bar at Lyn late 90s :ok:

[Where R We?]

Excellent work Nige, just viewed the clip on Channel 4.

[nigegilb]

I understand we are attracting International interest. Australian Broadcasting Company are interested and I have used my contacts in Norway to help raise awareness in Scandinavia.


NG

[flipster]

Great stuff all round - everyone.
Well done - nige - great interview!
Good luck on Thu.

I've tried to find this chap Brook's comments verbatim, as I don't want to rubbish him without first checking - anyone know exactly what he said?

Even without the chapter and verse of his 'analysis', his car analogy is a bit 'ragged'. Not least because if 'cars crash' - he's right, you don't ban driving. But if it is discovered that wearing seat-belts improves the chances of survival - well, you do make it law to wear a seat belt!

I know for a fact that, given the option, I would have liked to have foam fitted rather than not - and I am certain that Steady and his crew would also have stood a much better chance with foam.

[flipster]

Kam,
Yr link doesn't seem to work, sorry.
Flipster

[propulike]

ABC? Ch4 news? Radio 4 Today programme?

Dragging it back down to my level :

The Sun - 03 May 06 (http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2006200395,00.html)

Well done all.

(Chappie and families - there's piccies of the boys included with the story. Just mentioning it so they don't take you by surprise.)

[airborne_artist]

ABC links are:

Transcript (http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2006/s1629379.htm), Windows Media (http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200605/r84278_246236.asx), MP3 (http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200605/r84278_246234.mp3) and Real Audio (http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200605/r84278_246235.ram).

Page is http://www.abc.net.au/am/, but links above may not be on the page after May 3rd.

[flipster]

Thank you airborne artiste - yr links seem to work fine!

I cannot begin to wonder what are the thoughts going through the minds of Pards' dad and the other relatives. It doesn't bear contemplation.

All this was, however, so sadly predictable and my heart is so heavy for the families. I just hope that they are being brave as they go through what must be an incredibly difficult time.
Hang in there with Chappie and Nige - the sane world is with you!

Flip

[chappie]

just to spread tidings of joy on this lovely morning.

i have been very reliably informed that john reid was on the today programme on the 08.10 interview. he was asked about the hercules right at the very end of it and his reply was....

"with the benefit of hindsight i think that the crash would have been survived if there had been foam on board"

please bear in mind guys the sentiment is there but the emotion has got in the way. all i can see is a red mist that has desenced over my eyes and a mixture of pure joy at the statement as we've got him over a barrel now and pure and utter helplessness at the fact i'm without bob because of what they've done.

it can be checked on the web site on radio 4 0810 interview on the today programme.

it's a good job that i've got the solivitor booked for next week now, eh?!

i've been through the papers and the guardian, the independent, the times, the express and the mirror are covering it but only very small columns.

i feel so helpless at the moment. while the MoD are playing hide and seek with us. i don't understand why the media haven't grabbed this thing by the balls! i am so proud of nigel. he his amazing. the ironic thing was that C4 can set up a link from LA but were unable to set one up in cambridge! the interview was fantastic and it helped seeing it all visually for those of us that aren't plane minded.

what we need to do to keep the pressure up on the government is lobby our MP's to help us call for this and to start asking questions and add pressure on blair and his governmnet.

[k3k3]

www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/index.shtml

You need RealPlayer to listen to this (I hate RealPlayer).

[flipster]

JTO,

Yep, I've just listened and tend to agree with you - typical, if not unexpected!

Dr Reid mentioned that we (the RAF) were more concerned with SAMs - this is debateable and if it were so it was only because we were flying at high-ish level and at night. As soon as the pressure to fly 24/7 and at LL increased, Small Arms became more of a threat - as we predicted - that is why the sqn (SF and Main, IIRC) requested foam to complement the flight deck armour in 2002.

To say that cost was the only reason foam was refused would be naive - sure, the loss of AT capability would have been significant but worth it. I can even empathise with the budget holders as the MOD's paltry war-fighting 'extra' pot from Mr Brown was gobbled up quickly by other Services. Perhaps the Chancellor is ultimately responsible? Who knows?

But as far as I'm concerned, MOD were made aware of the risks and good friends of ours were fighting our corner - but not being listened to.

So, the ultimate blame MUST fall at the feet of MOD and Ministers - that is how a hierarchy should work, n'est pas?

Nonetheless, as Dr Reid implied (on behalf of Charles Clarke's Home Office shambles, strangely enough) that "Yes, mistakes are made" and "have to be rectified".

If he follows his own advice, the def minister remains responsible for

1. Making sure mistakes don't happen again (or on different ac types)
2. Admitting his deptarment's mistakes

but also, I believe

3. Apologising to the victims for the errors
and
4.Making sure they (or the relatives) are recompensed.

It seems to me that the ministers are (reluctantly) getting better protection for some our ac and even admitting to gov't mistakes - now, Dr Reid, it is time to ensure protection for all ac and also for responsibilities 3 and 4.

flipster

[500days2do]

I agree with all that has been said before but it seems to me it would be an inevitable outcome. The 'Airforce' recieves huge sums of public money to buy and implement what it percieves to be important equipment.If they decide to spend it on flashy 'gate guards' then the politicos will just wash their hands of us.

[daughterof]

Not helpful Mr Gray.

http://www.thisiswiltshire.co.uk/search/display.var.748352.0.mp_shrugs_off_airmans_claim.php (http://www.thisiswiltshire.co.uk/search/display.var.748352.0.mp_shrugs_off_airmans_claim.php)


Try telling my 11 year old daughter to let it lie, she has no intention of either!

[Kitbag]

500days2do

Gate guards? do you mean those celebrations of former glories when the Air Farce was a Force, or the little blokes with guns stopping the baddies getting inside the wire?

[500days2do]

I think its called eurofighter or something like that....

[Kitbag]

From Grays website, he asked this Q on 26 Jan:
'Would the Secretary of State mind if I asked a detailed question of key concern to my constituency? In his statement before Christmas on the loss of the Hercules, the largest single loss of life in Iraq, he stated that the only thing that he could find that was wrong was that the Hercules did not have foam retardant systems in the wings. Will he give the House an assurance this afternoon that the four Hercules aircraft to be deployed in Afghanistan will have full air defensive suites of all kinds supplied to them, as I am sure they will? Also, I know that he is in discussions with Marshalls of Cambridge about the fitting of foam retardant to the wings. Will those discussions have achieved some kind of outcome by the time of the deployment?'
I think we know the answer to the questions by now. Perhaps Gray felt that too much publicity by Nigegilb would out his apparent lack of tenacity in looking after the interests of his constituents? :yuk:

[Kitbag]

I think its called eurofighter or something like that....

Ahh, I understand where you're coming from now:ok:

[flipster]

Mr Gray (I will be writing to you) - how dare you?

I'm spitting at the suggestion that Nige is a self-publicist - you couldn't hope to meet a more genuine guy - perhaps, you don't recognise one, as there are so few of them in the House of commons?
I thought you, Mr Gray, were also 'a good guy' but you have gone way down in my estimation and you have probably lost yourself a whole load of votes in your constituency.
Nigel and Sarah have done more to get this urgent debate moving than perhaps you realise, or maybe you wish you had done more yourself?
Whatever your reason for your ill-considered comments, please wake up, smell the coffee and get on the right side of the fence - with those whom are morally correct. Come and join us - don't be weighed down by party politics.
You know it makes sense.

[nigegilb]

UK's Reid says plane safeguard may have saved lives
By Kate Kelland
LONDON, May 3 (Reuters) - Defence Secretary John Reid
admitted on Wednesday that the lives of 10 Royal Air Force
crewmen killed in Iraq could have been saved if their Hercules
aircraft had been equipped with fuel tank fire protection.
Reid told BBC radio the "tragedy might have been averted" if
a fuel tank inerting system, used as standard by the Americans,
had been fitted.
"With hindsight ... of course it is possible to say that
this tragedy might have been averted if we had done that," he
said.
But he insisted the decision not to fit the fuel safety
system had been right at the time.

[nigegilb]

Military economy measures cost lives
THE article in your paper last week, Testing Time for Base, over the RAF Lyneham Base and the safety of the C130 Hercules aircraft currently flying in Iraq and Afghanistan, quoted a surprising reply from North Wiltshire MP James Gray.

Mr Gray had the effrontery to say he did not think it was true'' when pilot Nigel Gilbert accused the MOD of penny-pinching and not putting safety foam in the wings to prevent fires and explosions.

What else would he call it?

I know Mr Gilbert and he is not a liar, he has a distinguished flying record as a pilot over many years, with the RAF (with jets and Hercules) and now with a major civilian airline.

For more than 20 years, the military has asked for either foam, or inert gas, to be inserted as safety measures in the Hercules, but due to installation and other problems, the decision to proceed was postponed for a while''.

Several subsequent requests have all been declined by the MoD on the grounds of cost, a fraction of the total aircraft cost, and the fact that it takes several weeks to install each one, but it does stop a single rifle bullet from bringing down this huge aircraft.

The total inability of the Government to manage the defences of our country properly means we are now so short of aircraft, they cannot be spared long enough even to make them safe for troops to use.

Mr Gray was himself, for a very short while, Shadow Minister of Defence, during which time he had all these facts readily available to him, so don't come it, Mr Gray. Economy measures in this area always cost lives and this is extremely distressing for anyone connected with the military in all services. Our troops, all volunteers remember, deserve not just better, but the best.

S D Parr.

Pershore.

Worcsestershire


It appears our local Conservative MP Mr James Gray has entered the fray again. O dear I think he is going to regret that. Just when his friend the Defence Secretary has decided my "story" might be right after all........

NG

[ExHerkmate]

Nige,
Good to hear your voice at the end of an internet radio stream, and that you were able to work the words "fireguard" and "chocolate" into your analysis of MoD defensive aids policy.
Keep up the good work the both of you!:ok:

[Myfanwy]

I have read with interest all the comments about XV179. Naturally I totally agree that all efforts should be made to protect our planes and aircrew. All efforts should be to protect ALL our servicemen.
Maybe this campaign should encompass more than just the ESF.
Has anyone asked the families of the 179 crew how they feel about the constant media attention during this effort to force military issues?

[nigegilb]

"Hi Nigel,
Just heard your item on R4 and we would like to say how well you put the case forward and felt that it spoke volumes that the MoD refused to put anyone up in response. Other broadcasting agencies have picked it up too, have just heard it on the news on Radio 5 Live. Well done to ****** too. Following your piece we are writing directly to John Reid, let's see if he responds to us! You are a good pal to ******, and to us,
Love ****** and ******"

I am not for a second pretending that all families see it the same way. John Reid softened his line today in the glare of all this publicity. Would he have done this if we had stayed silent and watched 4 more crews go to Afg without foam? I suggest you write to MoD and demand that all Hercules are provided with foam forthwith and also to ask them why it has taken this long to make a decision.

Kind regards,

NG

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

...the lack of investment in self-protection systems is widespread, seemingly based on premise of
We (the Government) can afford to lose a crew, but not afford to lose hundreds of troops.


In my opinion, Well Travelled Nav has hit the nail on the head here. About 5 or 6 years ago it dawned on me that I was expendable. An acceptable loss. But this is tempered with the thought of a 20 year old squaddie on patrol in Iraq/Afghanistan - a far clearer example.

I know that when the big knobs do their planning, they have a rough idea of what losses the public will accept, and this will vary depending on whether Wayne Rooney has broken his metatarsal, or whatever else takes the front page.

Two incidents spring to mind, but there are plenty more.

1. The Hercules Haj trips - a totally mental PR job

2. A daylight trip to Kabul in a dumb Mk3, with a 'route' crew...and Adam Ingram MP on the bunk!

Good luck to those sticking their necks out (and watch your backs!)
RIP to the XV179 boys, we won't forget you
and those out there - stay safe.

...and treat every beer and every w*nk like its your last.

SPHLC

[Myfanwy]

I am somewhat taken aback by the attitude given to a query which only had the interest of the families at heart. Bearing in mind that all these activities have started because of what happened to them, surely they should be considered.
If it is felt that no one has to give a reply to this question, does that not make you as closed to questioning as the parties you are accusing?
As I said earlier, it is right that action should be taken, however, the emotions of people left behind should also be held high on any agenda and should be considered when issues such as this are aired.

[The Gorilla]

"however, the emotions of people left behind should also be held high on any agenda and should be considered when issues such as this are aired."

Myfanwy

I believe that Nige and Chappie, who is one of those left behind are doing exactly that. At the same time as we all feel the loss it is vital that we don't let it happen again.

[fantaman]

Just been listening to that :mad: John Reid on the Channel 4 news talking about the above. He stated that the C130's that were serving on 47 Squadron are already being fitted with the explosive-suppressant foam devices, is that true as I've not heard of them being done?

He's also quoted a figure of £50,000 per aircraft for the mod, if it costs that little it should have been done a long time ago! How can you put a price on life? Don't suppose he's bothered though, he's looking forward to a crack at home secretary soon!

Makes your blood boil! :*

[JessTheDog]

The snivelling excuse for a minister Reid was ambushed on C4 news tonight.

I think he was expecting to spout some pre-election propaganda, but Krishnan Guru-Murthy managed to squeeze in a 5 minute grilling.

During this grilling, Reid claimed that:

- More knowledgable people than he made the decision not to fit the £50K system.

- The pilots he spoke to didn't want the system and would rather it was spent on something else (JPA?)

- The fact the RAF didn't develop the system was because they didn't have the US experience of anti-aircraft small arms fire in Vietnam.

- The system was being currently fitted to airframes.

- Airframes that were not fitted were still perfectly safe.

Is there anyone out there that can contradict this oxygen thief waste of space? He appears not to understand that learning from experience does not have to be first hand, and has no grasp of elementary logic - if something is safe then why does it need to be made safe?

Yet another attempt to spin corner-cutting and penny pinching, shifting the buck elsewhere and pretending that something is being done about it. If there was any justice, his mallet-impacted head would be adorning an Afghan polo field. I have great respect for those who can campaign dispassionately about this issue, it is something beyond me! :mad:

[Prop-Ed]

Fantaman,

You have beaten me to it! My blood is still boiling about watching that :mad: spout his rot.

The false economy of penny pinching and corner cutting to save a few bucks in the short term is now a well established practice inside the MOD. As the "Airships" pat themselves on the back by saving money as they remove the next safety measure, it is mugs like us left to fly the under protected aircraft around the cr@pholes of this world providing target practice for anyone with an AK47.

The whole issue is rotten to the core.

[N Arslow]

:mad:

Just watched C4 news too.

And he had been talking clap trap about how it was OK when you admitted culpability but should be given a chance to put it right. No need for accountability and LOSING YOUR JOB FOR INCOMPERTENCE! That for the Home Secretary but for him no no no... The boys at the front end were in the wrong for not requesting this (more than twice apparently)...:yuk: :yuk:

Sorry blood just coming down below point it can return to liquid state...

[nigegilb]

I am surprised he does not blame my father whilst he is at it. Unfortunately for politicians the buck stops with them. 2 politicians are named on the notice of corporate manslaughter. Guess one of them. I understand C4 are interested in following up my interview. I am very much looking forward to getting the chance to go head to head with Mr Reid or Mr Ingram.

It can be very difficult to get things up the chain of command. I tried and failed which is why my father wrote to the Govt direct. I was simply told that there was no money available. The notice given to Ministers gives them some foresight for a change. Hopefully they will use it.

[flipster]

Absolute piffle Dr Reid! IIRC the request for input on Lessons Identified on Op Veritas actually came from HQ 2 Gp, in turn, from an HQSTC mandate, so it couldn't have reamined on the Sqn as the Stn Cdr wanted it asap!

But that's not the point, as someone has already said, "why should the worker bees do the queen's thinking for her"? There was work being done on this at HQ 2 Gp, the AWC and MOD so to blame the sqn is farcical. Its probably not even a Gp or Command responsibility, even though some errors certainly happened all through the chain of command. Ultimately, however, the responsibility lies at the feet of the MOD and the Minister - fact.
If they have any honour or integrity, ministers should now meet those responsibilities head on as outlined above.

[tucumseh]

Jess….

“The pilots he spoke to didn't want the system and would rather it was spent on something else (JPA?)

During this grilling, Reid claimed that:

- More knowledgable people than he made the decision not to fit the £50K system.

- The pilots he spoke to didn't want the system and would rather it was spent on something else (JPA?)

- The fact the RAF didn't develop the system was because they didn't have the US experience of anti-aircraft small arms fire in Vietnam.

- The system was being currently fitted to airframes.

- Airframes that were not fitted were still perfectly safe.

Is there anyone out there that can contradict this oxygen thief waste of space? He appears not to understand that learning from experience does not have to be first hand, and has no grasp of elementary logic - if something is safe then why does it need to be made safe?”



I concur.

The point he seems not to understand (presumably in common with those who feed him these answers) is that it is not for the user community to specify an engineering solution; but to identify the problem, and assist DEC and HQSTC (?) categorise it as a Limitation (in which case they develop a work around) or an Operational Constraint (in which case DEC is more or less duty bound to take it forward – although this is subject to deeper categorisations such as Critical, Major, Minor). The trick here is to tag it (legitimately of course) as a Safety Constraint and cry Duty of Care. That way, it hits DEC post haste. Terminology may change, but the basic process stands.

DEC, having successfully bid or identified funding through offsets etc, “task” the IPT. And oversee the work through their Requirements Manager. It is for these people to develop an engineering solution and progress it to delivery. It is therefore ALWAYS disingenuous to say aircrew never said they wanted this or that system.

Why would the RAF need to “develop” the system if it was already fitted to the same aircraft in other countries. Assuming the basic system was approved by Lockheed Martin for other variants, it is a relatively simple job to do this on the RAF’s. Unless, of course, the LM design was unsuitable in some way and, say, could not get through our MAR process.

Given the practice that the aircraft is deemed safe (through the MAR process) at the “as built” build standard (in this case, excluding the foam system / DAS) then this is another disingenuous and meaningless statement. Did he say “airframes”? I’m sure they are safe, but I’d want the whole aircraft to be safe as well. A typical misunderstanding as to safety audit trail. One hopes they have a Whole Aircraft Safety Case which reflects the In Use build standard, not just the As Built one.



I imagine some pointed questions based on the above would make them squirm.

[nigegilb]

The Minister has thrown down the gauntlet to the Sqn. Please contact me if you have info on PXR 1981 requesting foam. Everything you have got gentlemen. I need confirmation of Gatow incident. I would like every exchange officer who served in USAF to contact me if he verbally or otherwise requested foam. Thanks NG

Tucumseh as always thanks I am who you think I am!

[treaty]

I have been keeping up to date with this thread - though as yet have not posted any comments. As a relative of a member of XV179 I give full support to the efforts of Nige and Sarah to have foam and all possible safety measures fitted to to ALL RAF aircraft. Not withstanding the evasive answers of our politicians should not these measures have been implemented YEARS AGO! We the families are still grieving, it will be a long time - if ever- when the sight of 10 coffins being unloaded from the C17 will recede in my memory. ALL possible measures should be taken to prevent any other family members going through what we have/are going through. For goodness sake - when I think of money wasted on other matters what is £50,000 per airframe. How much does an aircraft cost - what price is put on the lives of those who fly and travel in them. Keep battling Nige and Sarah.

[JessTheDog]

Tucumseh - excellent point about the machinery of procurement that avoided mentioning the wretched "customer" word!

[flipster]

Nige,

Don't forget every USAF officer who has served on 47 Sqn - they might have an angle and erudite contribution!

Good luck tomorrow fella!

Flip

[Evalu8ter]

Wise words,
However, to play devil's advocate there are a couple of points to note. Firstly, when we spec a DAS for an ac where do you stop? How much is enough, and how much does it cost (esp whole life costs)? Secondly, the decision not to fit the tank inertion system would have been taken years ago and mitigated under "military risk". A succession of military pers would have endorsed this decision over the years; note the deafening silence of anybody stepping forward, admitting they were wrong and falling on their sword....
50K a pop, sounds like small change. However in this time of EP bow-waves somebody else will lose out to fund it. Maybe we could scrap the JPA cocktail party and cull a few 3 & 4*s, we'll soon have enough then. An old QFI once told me that his measure of sending an abo solo was to consider if he would let them fly his kids; perhaps our airships should start thinking about this when they send inappropriately equipped frames into theatres where the threat is tangible.

[Safeware]

Airframes that were not fitted were still perfectly safe.
This falsely implies that safety is a static concern - make safe once, always safe. Safety is a relative matter and is not just about the 'inside' issues, but about the influence of the 'external' environment. For example, take birdstrike - windscreen A is safe (prob of catastrophic outcome is acceptable) if you want to operate more at medium to high altitude. However, change your exposure to risk and fly more at low level, then you are more likely to come across a bird that could spoil your day. Windscreen A may no longer be safe (prob of catastrophic outcome has increased) because you have changed the operating environment.

So, as regards tuc's "One hopes they have a Whole Aircraft Safety Case which reflects the In Use build standard, not just the As Built one." there is also a requirement to reflect the 'as operated' situation.

sw

[flipster]

A valid point!

I have always said that when the politicial pressure to fly day LL become too great, the threat changed, as did and our kit requirements. All of a sudden, we needed fire suppresants and FDA and damn quickly - which was highlighted to those above. What they did with that info, only they can tell, I would like to ask the Lyneham Stn Cdr what he wrote and why along with AOC 2 Gp. Nonetheless, the stuff had been asked for before - going back to Rhodesia/Zimbabwe - so it can't have come as a suprise to MOD, for goodness sake? So don't blame group captains or even AVMs - its much higher than that!

Having said that, Reid is quite keen to accept that his dept made mistakes but doesn't quite go as far as accepting the responsibility himself. Yes, progress on foam is apparent (not enough and too late in my book) but where is the apology and recompense to the families?

The Gov't can even make themselves look human if they pluck enough courage to do that.

[flipster]

All 3 above - Gents (and Ladies) you are right to criticise Reid for his poorly constructed arguments. But are you aware of the Herc thread that normally sits near the top of the thread board? I suugest your posts would sit well there, rather than start another? Mods, perhaps a 'merge' might be in order?
Flipster

[fantaman]

Brought over from the C130 Explosive-Suppressant Foam thread

Just been listening to that :mad: John Reid on the Channel 4 news talking about the above. He stated that the C130's that were serving on 47 Squadron are already being fitted with the explosive-suppressant foam devices, is that true as I've not heard of them being done?

He's also quoted a figure of £50,000 per aircraft for the mod, if it costs that little it should have been done a long time ago! How can you put a price on life? Don't suppose he's bothered though, he's looking forward to a crack at home secretary soon!

Makes your blood boil! :*

[tucumseh]

Safeware

As always, well said.

I can’t find the precise quote, but the old argument of “there’s always risk” was rolled out on this one. The inference being there were times one could deploy operationally knowing safety was compromised. I accept this, but within limits. I’ve come across this in PE/DPA/DLO where on many occasions a safety problem has been ignored as it was not applicable in peacetime. I know those at Boscombe who conduct testing disagree, as do I, but when their recommendations move up the chain they are often mysteriously downgraded or removed. The upshot is that DPA/DLO will deliver kit which, while meeting the contractual requirement cannot be put to its intended use (e.g. warfighting). (The previous) CDP deemed this acceptable and, it must be said, the Services sometimes don’t help themselves by accepting what they are offered. (Chinook Mk3 is a good example of them not accepting it – I wish they would do this more often).

I’ve never got to the bottom of this (as, unsurprisingly, no-one wants to speak about it) but in conversations I’ve surmised the theory is that, upon carrying out a threat assessment for a given theatre/deployment, a UOR can be raised. I’ve argued, unsuccessfully, that when an aircraft mod is required this rather assumes at least 18-24 months notice of deployment. (It’s ok when you want to buy more ammunition, but even then “lean” extends the production lead time). Also, if you don’t put it in the MAR recommendations, then the Customer (HQSTC for example) cannot make a balanced judgement when considering acceptance into Service. As the saying goes “One mans UOR is another mans total incompetence and lack of foresight”.

I don’t know what happened on this aircraft type, but I do know for certain that what I describe is a weakness in the airworthiness/safety chain.

[flipster]

The procurement chain can't take the full blame for this - though they have made equipment programmes (EPs)more prolonged and painful in peacetime. I war time they can be very effective if Urgent Operational Req'ts (UORs) are needed. In GW1, for example, I saw Jaguars get RWR and Sidewinders overnight in the hangar. If we need something quickly enough, it can be done.

The problem is getting the higher echelons of 2 Gp to say we need UORs and EPs and then let go of the ac, as they don't have enough of them. For them, losing an ac off the line, seriously screws their op capability and essential training, which, understandably, they are reluctant to do. Nonetheless, they could just call 'Stop Stop Stop' or 'Terminate', (I think is more modern) and 'pull' the ac until the problem is sorted. Sadly, everyone at Lyneham knows that the culture 'higher up' in 2 Gp was that there was no money available, so there was no point asking. A point that AOC Gp should take on board - I am sure Nige will be pressing this point home. the AOC would be well advised to ask questions of his staff (past and present) and shake this culture out of High Wycombe.

But whatever could have been done, people at Gp, MOD and AWC have been going around this buoy for years and years and for Reid to say that the chain of command was not aware, or that our inexperience in Vietnam was to blame, is absolutely infantile. It is principally a cost thing, followed by op output and 'risk acceptance' by higher 2 Gp, Strike Command and MOD. But it doesn't matter that they didn't tell the ministers - but its is the ministers' ultimate responsibility - end of story.

That is why the ministers are on notice for corporate manslaughter, not 2 Gp!

[Bluntend]

For info the following is from Defence Net:
MOD responds to Hercules C-130 crash allegations
03/05/2006
On 30 January 2005, a Hercules C130K crashed in Iraq with the loss of all personnel on board. In December 2005 the Board of Inquiry concluded that the aircraft crashed after it became uncontrollable after hostile ground-to-air fire caused the explosive separation of the outboard right hand wing.
One of the contributing factors identified by the Board was the lack of a fuel-tank inerting system. Whilst such a system may have prevented an explosion in the wing, the Board concluded that it would not necessarily have prevented a fire.
Although such a system would have increased the probability of the aircraft’s survival, neither the Board of Inquiry nor the Independent Senior Air Accident Investigator, concluded that it would definitely have changed the tragic outcome. Defensive aides are only part of the protection for the aircraft, which is why the RAF invests heavily in developing the best tactics, force protection measures and flight deck armour.
Since 2001, the defensive aides for C-130s have been upgraded several times. New Directional Infra Red Counter Measures, Missile Approach Warning Systems, Radar Warning Receivers, Countermeasures Dispensing Systems and additional flight deck armour have all been added. Prior to the C-130 crash in Iraq, it was judged that there was a low risk of a fuel tank explosion.
The emphasis was therefore on fitting other higher priority defensive systems. As a result of the recommendations made by the 2005 Board of Inquiry, Explosion Suppressant Foam will be fitted to some C-130 aircraft, concentrating on the aircraft that operate in the highest threat environment.

[Prop-Ed]

Brought over from the C130 Explosive-Suppressant Foam thread



Fantaman,

You have beaten me to it! My blood is still boiling about watching that :mad: spout his rot.

The false economy of penny pinching and corner cutting to save a few bucks in the short term is now a well established practice inside the MOD. As the "Airships" pat themselves on the back when they save money by removing the next safety measure, it is mugs like us left to fly the under protected aircraft around the cr@pholes of this world providing target practice for anyone with an AK47.

The whole issue is rotten to the core.

[flipster]

Bluntend thanks

Nothing new there, however.

Yes, the threat changed when the tactics changed, even when those changes were forced upon us. We knew the theat and perhaps the risk was adjudged lower for small arms fire - by all levels of 'the chain', even. Nonetheless, it was not up to the sqns to find solutions. People in 2 Gp had found possible protective measures BUT there was no funding from MOD who were, mostly certainly, aware of the risks.

Also, who knows which is a high threat environment and which ac are at most risk from small arms fire? How is that defined? (Bearing in mind Afghans, Iraqis, Africans and, in fact, any where other than N America and Europe treat AK47s as we treat mobiles - ie everybody's got one!).
This is why we should have foam/suppressants in all AT and all SH ac (not just the Hercs - what about VC 10/Tri*etc).

Yes, these protective measures are not a panacea for all ills - but they would have improved our chances of keeping alive one of our best (and most expensive) crews, along with their most valuable ac. Who is to say that won't be case next time?

Not to fit ESF just because it is not 'guaranteed' is reverse logic. In that case, we shouldn't fit any DAS as we can't be 100% sure of perfect reliability - but we have fitted some pretty good stuff of late, which undermines his argument totally.

Furthermore, there are loads of other threats out there that need consideration and funding - and yes, 2 Gp, AWC and MOD DO know all about these as they did small arms fire. In fact, this is another banana-skin for the Sec Def in the future.... unless he sorts it out now. Perhaps he would like it if we started asking questions about what has been done to counter these threats? Perhaps the circumstances in which he will face corporate manslaughter charges could be widened?

In my opinion, Dr Reid is running a bit scared - but all he has to do to end his nightmare is to act like a man, put out his chin and accept full responsibility for the genuine mistakes of his deptartment. Then he should apologise, recompense the families and make sure all our ac have better protection than at present - for as many threats as possible (present and future). It will cost money and, yes, it will hurt him a bit but he will, at least, be able to look himself in the eye in the mirror of a morning. We could even admire him for taking a moral stance and not hiding behind political spin?

Lastly, Dr Reid can take some comfort from the fact that he is only sorting out problems left to him by his ingnoble predecessors. Mr Reid does seem like an honourable man and I am sure he has some conscience left, despite him being in politics for a long time. The door is open for him and it is his move.

[tucumseh]

Flipster

I agree with what you say, but may I make two observations;

“RWR and Sidewinders overnight in the hangar”

There is a difference between fitting such kit in accordance with detailed instructions that someone with foresight prepared long ago, presumably underpinned by full installation design, design incorporation, testing and trials etc; and the scenario I describe which ignores the problem in the first place.


“that there was no money available, so there was no point asking”

I know you are correct and that this attitude prevails. But, the procurement system works entirely on the principle that, if you don’t ask, you don’t get. I described, in part, the process by which the operator asks. If you ask, there will always be an audit trail to the decision. Not asking invites the accusation SoS is making – that because there was no request there can be no blame at ministerial or higher MoD level. Then you start arguing about the culture created by political decsions and get bogged down......

[Bluntend]

On 10 May 06 the Deputy Chief of Defence Logistics (DCDL) Mr Tim Flesher has invited all DLO staff to "Ask the DCDL" work related questions. His answers being published shortly afterwards. I will see if I can get a question emailed to him regarding proposals for Explosion Retarding Foam on all RAF AT and those Royal Sqn ac employed on Ops. I make no guarantees that I'll get a reply though.

[flipster]

Tucumseh,

Yep spot on - that is why we DID ask and why 2 Gp did the digging. Proving it on the other hand might require some probing - but it will be possible, so there are no worries there.

I can recall the arguments of getting DIRCM and Flight Deck Armour. HQ 2 gp experts had written countless business cases for such stuff in the past - as they have for fire suppressants, I believe. All they had to do was to dig out the last one that had been refused and try again.

Eventually, people in MOD took heed of our concerns about the threat levels and coughed up - albeit very reluctantly. The procurement guys had also done their stuff and the ac went over to the US quite quickly. Although this had an impact on training and ops, I'd like to think it was worthwhile all the hard work completed by some absolute stars at Gp, HQSTC, MOD and DPA/DLO - at lower levels mind you!

So so you see, MOD is (and has always been) aware - over to you minister!

Bluntend - thanks. Nige- watch this space!

[chappie]

fantaman, remember one thing john reid is a politican so everything that has comeout of his mouth is a lie. i recall a while back that a date mentioned for the fitting of foam was to be july. why ? i have no idea. maybe the wind will be in the right direction and the little leprachauns that the minister clearly sees whilst on his planet have forecast that the moon will be in the seventh quarter or something equally mad! one point i keep trying to make is that this should have been DONE ahes ago. of course, prior to the crash when requests were made. nonetheless, i lost bob 16 months ago the inquiry findings were made public 6 months ago yet we are still talking about it.:mad: :mad: :mad: ! why not shut the F*** UP Mr Reid stop pointing fingers and get it sorted now. NOT SOME AIRCRAFT SOON, ALL AIRCRAFT NOW!!! it's so simple. but no he is another who likes to court the media.

this is the way i see things guys. it may be too simplistic and may not have a place in your debate as i'm not clever enough to know what your abbrevbiations mean. feel free to agree or disagree but i would appreciate some feedback on this simple theory. it doesn't make financial sense. all the money that has been spent on the investigation, recovery of bodies, repatriation, accomodation and travel, memorial services, funerals, pensions, manpower......aircraft and training could have been used sorting out the fleet of alberts and still given you money for your busfare home and a bag of chips! as a grieving relative all i can do is ask why? why does this make more sense? why do you think that you have been very clever by saving money? why do you pride your self on the decision that as a ministry you have made? i see a decision to hang back from the fitting of explosive technology was nothing more than a gamble. rather than follow the example that was made by other forces as a result of their experiences you took a gamble as the pound signs made more of an impact than the lives that you are responsible for. it was chosen to wait and see if we would lose an RAF ac then see if you have to do something, but hope that there will not be too many on board when the INEVITABLE happens. i'm sorry mr reid you say how can you put a price on human life? well , you just have. all because people sign up to take the queens shilling it does'nt mean that they are expendable and they have forfeited their right to life. as i've said before there are risks and then there are unacceptable risks.

sorry for that rant. i'm not too proud to admit that sometimes i get a bit emotional with this. i'm upset that i do. i do not want to be seen as just the emotional bit that gets wheeled on when it suits. there is more to me than that. i want to do more to help. i feel like i'm not helping enough and i've been left frustrated by a lack of willingness by some media to take this issue and run front page full coverage with it. i find it hard to see that we get consigned to small columns deep in the paper.

i have to say that i'm also very ashamed by my recent behaviour. i have to admit to losing it big time last night and nearly threw in the towel. i have had so many problems with the computer at home. i keep trying to post a reply yet when i press submit it's lost. i tied three times and took ages as i'm not the fastest typer in the world, but to no avail. after a hard shift at the hospital interspersed with the farce of john reid then all my work lost again on the 'puter i caved in. i'm sorry if i've let you down becasue of it. there is no room for emotion and wobblies in this. i have come to another computer today to try my luck. last night i was unable to see that clearly to be able to stop myself from giving in. i can't walk away from this i know that, not till i have got all of you protected. i could'nt help my brother and the other guys and if i give in now i'll definitely be making sure their deaths are for nothing.

i will try some more tv contacts today but i have to say i'm starting to draw blanks. i will also be speaking with the MP who has offered his interest and support to see if i can't get this back into parliament. i'm working on the webpage which will work as a blog but not being very computer literate i may be a little time.

keep it going boys. i'm seeing a solicitor that nige suggested next week. i'll let you know what i'm doing then after that. as for the "comments" that james gray has said i'm forwarding that to the families as we speak. i was unable to get on the pprune on tues night as the page would not be displayed. so i'm a little behind....i wish in fact anyone who's seen me on tv knows i've dot a big behind!ha ha!

please don't worry about the families. i have been networking as has my mother and it would seem that there is nothing but support for all of you and this campaign. methinks someone is being crafty and stirring!if there are any families who are concerned and want updating please PM me or get my contact dtails. i will speak with you quite happily. we can't bring our loved ones back but we can stop more going.

[Bluntend]

Do other Commonwealth Air Forces have the foam fitted on their Hercs (or other AT ac for that matter)?

[The Gorilla]

Chappie

Don't throw in the towel, you and nige are the ones who are binding us all together. You are doing all the hard work that will pay off soon. People like me are just nibbling at the edges e-mailing MP's etc.

Don't stop never surrender.

Reid will fall off his perch and we will all be there to gloat when it happens. Any one remember Portillo? No me neither!!

[TheBeeKeeper]

Explosive- Suppressant Foam..... say what? I may be ready to jump straight back into my box, BUT..... what are they talking about foam for? Inhert Gas maybe.... never worked on Hercs so could be wrong, but the Chinook had a cobra fire supression unit...... round fires into self sealing tanks, momentary pressure drop sensed, cobra system fires preventing risk of vapour explosion. Job done!

Can't imagine a can of gap filler in a tank of Jet-A1 would work?

TBK

[flipster]

Chin up Chappie,

You are integral to this and your emotional involvement is a great strength of the whole case - by showing solidarity in the face of such enormous personal pressure, you indicate that you mean business, especially as you have the families' support and I still find myself in awe of your determination.

If ever we talk in TLAs (three letter abbreviations) that you cannot fathom, please don't be afraid to ask. We, like doctors, lawyers and politicians, hide behind these TLAs in case anyone should find out that we are only human and, actually, quite simple and predictable!

As usual, you have highlighted our (techically-minded blokes) errant focus on minor details and procedures. You are absolutely right to draw our attention back to the big picture - other forces had this stuff - why not us?

ESF costs very little and is relatively simple to fit, as the Aussies have proved. A sensible taxpayer (and voter) may well ask why the MOD (who are meant to have the big picture) have not got it sorted and sooner - they have failed to provide any sensible answers yet. You are right, the timescale and the applicability of this relatively cheap modification is a big worry for me and for others, especially when you consider what our forces are presently doing.

I will back you up and repeat "ALL, NOW please".

Why the media have not picked this up and run with it, I'm not sure - probably because they are tied up with the Home Office's 'Lost Foreign Criminals Scandal'. However, I do know that the Parliamentary Defence Committee may still be asking questions. The AOC will be questioned by Nige today and there may be some fall-out from that, which the media might want to follow up, so all is not lost.

However, guys and girls, Nige and Chappie would love some more 'hard' info on the history of herc protection - it doesn't matter whom or when. Please contact them as we are all on the same side.

Keep plugging at it Chappie.

Flipster

Who was Portaloo?

[k3k3]

My understanding is that the foam works in the same way as the gauze in a Davies lamp, preventing flame front propogation.

..but I may be completely wrong.

[A2QFI]

Years ago a concious decision was made that there would be no ejection seat for rear crew members in 'V' bombers. How many lives were lost as a result of that bit of 'saving'? Does anybody have statistics? I'd bet more than 100.

[flipster]

Mike is right and thnaks for the links.
Cost saving cost lives yep A2 spot-on and in this case,

not much cost = 10 lives

What a waste of great people!

I'd love to know to which 'pilots' Reid spoke and what was actually said. I can't believe anyone at Lyneham didn't want foam in the their wings, so it is probably Reid's lot playing with words...again. More likely, Reid probably spoke to the cleaners when he visited Lyneham - because all the crews were away in the desert!

Anyone here prepared to comment about the 'overheard' conversation?

[flipster]

FF

Good post and you are right to point that out. I would suspect that because of the pressure already exerted, the ac actually in theatre ARE as well protected as any of ours have ever been. But we have so few that if one breaks, there is not another to spare, so the pressure to use slick/dumb frames increases. For now, I would think we can't risk that and our crews are better protected in AFG than ever we were in 2002/3.

Also, I'd love to know to which 'pilots' Reid has spoken and what was actually said. I can't believe anyone at Lyneham didn't want foam in the their wings, so it is probably Reid's lot playing with words...again. More likely, Reid probably spoke to the cleaners when he visited Lyneham - because all the crews were away in the desert!

Anyone here prepared to comment about an 'overheard' conversation?

Flipster

[FormerFlake]

Just watched the channel 4 clip from last night. Makes you angry to hear JR talk such utter bo:mad:cks.

In summary it was not the MOD's fault, the enemy were supposed to be using MANPADs.

[chappie]

i know that john reid was on channel four last night but i wonder if anyone had the balls to tell him that he was on the wrong programme! correct me if i'm wrong but surely if you are going to put a play on words then countdown is the prog. you need not the news.

methinks that mrs reid will be cursing her hubby for the stained pants that are in the wash now as he is no doubt s******g himself over what he said on the radio four programme!

thanks for the support. not that ishould be getting any after my shameful inability to face up to pressure last night. feel slightly more sane this am after having slept. i'm pretty confident that i've got reid over a barrel. i'm looking forward to the solicitors meeting next week.

was in the sun this am...with clothes on i hasten to add! i was also in the local paper as well having managed to get my parents to open up. they should be in the birminham times (something like that) and stafford local paper. a few pokes were made at the disgusting way these fine men are confined to nothing more than a few paragraphs.

i have an idea that i'm trying to get voiced. if i'm allowed ( limited because of my exclusive thing i signed stupidly) i want a national to do a petition so that slips get signed and sent on to me or them asking for a vote of yes or no to foam. then and only then can a paper call what they are doing a campaign!...take note daily mail. i'll keep you posted ..again.

time to go and write some angry letters and make angry phonecalls and shout grrr alot! james gray being one of them! i don't know if this is useful but iknow someone who works on the hercs at marshalls so if you want me to contact him just ask. talking of james gray can someone please copy off the article that viv forwarded and put it around 47 squadron and the rest of lyneham so that his local election bid is foiled. i don't know if he is taking part but if one of you can go to his surgery and ask him to justify the bile that has come out of his mouth then please let me know. that man sat and had lunch with me at the repatriation and offered his asisstance and support. the same as reid at the memorial when he stated to families if there is anything i can do please ask.

catch you later. apologies for my sulk at the computer and inadequacies.

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

Has your inadequate computer keyboard got a 'shift' key? ;)

You're doin' my head in!

You can shout louder with capitals. GRRRR!!! :}

[500days2do]

I must admit I did wonder who Dr John Reid was talking to on his latest C130 adventure.Somebody should know...J or K...anyone got the 'gen'.As for blaming the SQN...well,we all know the culture of dont ask dont get,but I can imagine the chat cant you...'You AT boys are always on the want...DAS,new a/c...we only have so much money and with eurofighter and the red arrows to pay for..'

[fantaman]

I'm sure yesterday I heard John Reid touting a figure of £50,000 per aircraft for the Explosive-Suppressant Foam. This from yesterday's intranet.


The cost of the work involved in fitting Explosion Suppressant Foam to the Hercules aircraft is roughly £600,000 per aircraft. This includes all the work associated with the programme


I wish he'd do some straight talking for a change! Keep up the good work Chappie! :ok:

[airborne_artist]

Those of you with a sharp wit might like to append a caption to the good Doctor's image on the caption comp thread (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?p=2558847#post2558847)

[treaty]

Conservative defence spokesman Liam Fox said the cost of installing the foam was only 50,000 pounds per aircraft, on top of a one-off 275,000 pound payment for setting up the installation project.
The above was taken from an article on the Reuters web site dated 2 May

[FormerFlake]

Once again a comedy written 20 years ago has an apt quote fo Mr Reid

"Politicians must be allowed to panic. They need activity. It is their substitute for achievement."

Sir Humphrey Appleby

[flipster]

Former Flake (love the 'yes minister' quote - spot on!)

However, I sincerely hope you are wrong about Albert in Afghanistan:eek: .

Maybe we should further expand the corporate manslaughter terms to include VC10, Trishaw and SH? I cannot believe that Basrah is totally benign - based on the fact that 'everyman and his camel' in the region have AK 47s and RPGs (not strictly true, I know but you get the gist?).

Ex-VC10 ppruners, would you want protection if it were available for your fuel tanks?

[chappie]

i'm sure that when we first looked into this nige got quotes from lockheed direct and the figures were the £275,000 initially then £50,000 for each ac. i can try and check with my friend at marshalls. talking of nige, where is he? i hope AOC 2 Gp aren't thinking of holding him hostage maybe for the price of an ac receiving foam protection!

i have got so p****d off with reid i am doing a letter in the same format we did for blair on meeting with the families on the military families website. you can download the letter and send it off or you can go ahead and sign the petition i'm organising alongside the letter. i will be calling for him to permit foam for all aircraft now. please can you and the world sign it. it's not set up yet but by tomorrow it should be. fingers crossed. the same for the blog campaign web page. i will hopefully get that out around the media. the express are after a follow up so there is still interest there. hope you are all okay with the idea. i know that it's on the military families against war page and there will be many who do not disagree with the war but as far as i'm concerned this call for support is not about the war. it's for protection for all troops on alberts. i hope no one disagrees with this notion.i'll keep you posted.

as for gray, i've got my contacts sorting that out and hopefully making sure that he is mindful of his constituents in the future. bearing in mind this man turned up at six of the funerals without invitation. one would ask who was he there for?

[nigegilb]

Long day. AOC 2 kindly gave me 2 hours or so of his time. Fair to say we had a meeting of minds. I did not hold back on anything. Tonight I am content that I have passed on the concerns expressed by so many people via pprune. I feel he deserves some time to sort things out. We shared a lot of common ground. We disagree on the management of risk but that is a burden for him to bear and for me to criticise. We talked about the failure to fit foam and we came to an understanding. He is a good man and I respect him.

NG

[RileyDove]

What I cannot understand with all this is the notion that we didn't have the U.S experience of Vietnam to help us prepare our transport fleets. Surely the use of Nitrogen bottles to inert the Tornado fin tank was something which came from ground AAA fire research? Similarily pictures of Harriers/Sea Harriers returning from sorties over the Falklands with bullet holes in them should have atleast have promoted an understanding of the risks to fast jets let alone transport aircraft to groundfire.

[John Blakeley]

Nigel,

Can you make some space in your PM box please.

Best wishes


JB

[nigegilb]

JB Spac e now avail.

NG

[flipster]

For the MOD managers out there, lets take that a bit further

Cost of Ac (anywhere between £1 - £10m) lets say, £4m.
Cost of trg the flight crew (5) lets say approx £2m each = £10m
Cost of trg the rest of the crew (5) lets say approx £7m
Savings due pension vice salary approx £100k
Saving on NOT fitting foam (worst case) = £ 50k + £350k = £400k

So for the taxypayers sake,

We saved £0.5m but lost £21m

and now

we will have to spend another £21m to replace the crew and aircraft (if possible), while still losing all the crew's invaluable experience.

Ask yourself if this is good accounting or management? I fear the answer would be negative!

The old adage of "For a hay'p'th of tar the ship was lost" rings too true in our ears.

[nigegilb]

Little birdie tells me that Des will be receiving a letter of congratulations to his new job.

[airsound]

I have just sent this email to James Gray, with copies to David Cameron and Liam Fox

Dear James Gray
If your words, published in a Wiltshire newspaper about one of your constituents, Nigel Gilbert, are a correct quote, then you, Sir, should be ashamed of yourself. The paper quotes you as saying "He seems to be a self-publicist. He keeps going on about the same story. I think he should just let it lie."
http://www.thisiswiltshire.co.uk/search/display.var.748352.0.mp_shrugs_off_airmans_claim.php
In writing this, I am assuming that the words are correct.

This man that you criticise has been an operational pilot on the front line of dangerous military operations for his - our - country. He knows what he’s talking about. As you well know, he is now engaged in a courageous campaign to make the MoD provide some long overdue safety measures for aircraft that are at great risk in operational areas.

I know, from close contact with Nigel Gilbert, that he is anything but a ‘self-publicist’. In fact, I believe that it is largely because of the media appearances of Nigel Gilbert and Sarah Chapman that the then Secretary of State for Defence felt obliged to admit, on the ‘Today’ programme on Radio 4 on 3 May, that “with hindsight....... of course it is possible to say that this tragedy might have been averted if we had done that” (installed explosive suppressant foam). You will be aware that the MoD had not admitted this previously.

When you suggest that “He keeps going on about the same story. I think he should just let it lie", you may wish to consider whether it is because people like you and the crassly uncaring MoD have been prepared to ‘let things like this lie’ that 10 courageous soldiers of The Queen died unnecessarily on 5 January 2005.

I suggest that you should immediately apologise publicly to Nigel Gilbert, and reapply yourself, as his Member of Parliament, to helping him right this disgraceful wrong.



standing by for incoming
airsound

[Biggus]

I don't want to detract from the excellent work of this thread, but......

It would appear that the UK has a long history of not providing it's airman with the best equipment to enhance their survival. I seem to remember reading that in WW1 the RFC/RAF did not provide its pilots with parachutes (the crews of observation balloons had them!) as they thought the pilots would 'bail out' at the first sign of trouble. As a result if the aircraft caught fire at height the pilot had to either to, try and ride it down, burn to death, or jump without a parachute to a certain fate!!

[nigegilb]

Airsound, I am honoured that I have friends like you. I would like to add that Mike Hancock, Lib Dem Portsmouth, has asked 20 or so searching questions of our Defence Ministers. He has grilled them and harried them. He has probed a range of serious issues. He isn't even our local MP, but I truly believe he cares. I think the voters in North Wiltshire should take a careful look at how Mr Gray (Con), has behaved before they go to the polls next time.

Biggus lessons from History from a US perspective:

"Denying the lessons-learned from Vietnam is equivalent to ignoring the American Civil War's lessons on charging across open stretches of level ground towards entrenched troops armed with Maxim guns (Petersburg 1864). Might have made a difference in front of Serre and Beaumont Hamel in 1916.

If the RAF believes that the Hercules is adequately protected against the threats that it might face, they should be especially vigilant in ensuring they don't task the aircraft against threats the frames can't defeat. Can't defeat SA-10, don't fly against SA-10. Don't need DAS or foam to fly into Nellis, Bruggen and Akronelli, don't fly anywhere other than locations similar in threat level to Nellis, Bruggen and Akronelli."....
Simple threats don't attract the attention (money) that hi-tech ones do. But the USAF baseline for their Herks is with foam in the tanks, and all the rest of the kit is added on top of/after that. I never viewed foam as something that would be tough to get installed since it was an aftermarket addition to the first Herks, and added as a standard fit to later marks - including early C-130E's."

[airsound]

aw shucks, nige.

airsound

that's enough of that
ed

[nigegilb]

"You have prompted me to put something on the Chinook thread, which in case you have not read it is as follows:

This thread has been quiet for a few days, and I guess many people like myself have been following the Hercules saga and the outstanding efforts by Nigel and chappie to both improve safety for the future and see justice done. Indeed it was in comparing what is happening on the Hercules and our continuing fight on the Chinook that it struck me that there may be another way to make MOD and indeed the RAF (in this case) management chain face up to its responsibilities.

Nobody can pretend that military operations will ever be safe, or indeed that there will not be accidents, but with the Crown no longer able to take advantage of Crown exemption it seems to me that the words “fitness for purpose” and “duty of care” are just as applicable to military operations and training (in peace and war) as they are to any other part of society.

If we take “fitness for purpose” it seems to me this must include giving the serviceman the most effective equipment to do the job – whether this is an assault rifle that works, a radio that works, an airworthy Chinook, or a Hercules with proper defensive aids and fuel tank inerting. How do you judge “effective” – well the obvious way is to compare what we have with the equipment standards of our allies and indeed enemies – sadly we too often fail on both counts.

If we send a serviceman or woman to fight with equipment that has obvious deficiencies and we then use tactics or make them “fight” in a way which makes those deficiencies more dangerous eg by authorising or insisting on low-level daylight operations where the threat regime highlights the deficiencies, then it seems to me that the commanders who took this decision may have now failed in their “duty of care”. The level at which this failure may have occurred could be quite low eg the officer of SNCO who allows military policemen to go on patrol with less than the required levels of ammunition or a radio that works. It could also be quite high – for example I am sure that Reid was correct when he said that it was a RAF decision not to fit tank inerting systems to the Hercules (they obviously saw JPA as more important!). The final link in the duty of care consideration must be that at command level you do not accept a task for which you do not have the right equipment – that might make the politicians more supportive! Given that the responsibilities would also feed back to the procurement of equipment the DPA might find a need to improve in a few areas as well.

Nonsense – totally incompatible with military operations – possibly – it would certainly make life much more difficult. We will always have casualties in military operations and training, but the fact remains that as far as I am aware the law applies equally to the Armed Services as to other walks of life, and one could argue that because military operations are so inherently dangerous they should only be undertaken when the command chain has made certain that they have met the most exacting “fitness for purpose” and “duty of care” considerations – and that would not, for example, have included selecting a Chinook Mk2 with ZD 576’s airworthiness history for a passenger flight against the captain’s recommendation and request.

Like war crimes this general issue comes down to being not just a command issue but also to an individual’s responsibility as, for example, a few MT officers found out in somewhat more benign circumstances, when some MOD MT operations did not meet the laws of the UK. It will be interesting to see what happens when the first family goes to the police to complain that MOD, or an individual, has failed in its/his “duty of care” responsibility and asks for a criminal investigation – it could never happen? We shall see – the words “Corporate Manslaughter” have appeared several times on the Hercules thread.

I look forward to hearing other people’s views.


AOC 2 Group may have his own ideas on the management of risk - but they still have to pass the duty of care requirements - which often have to be tested in court."

[Logistics Loader]

Chappie/ NigeGilb Et Al,

I have backtracked through most of the recent postings on this sorry state of affairs....

Time and time again i see a common denominator.....

CASH !!!!

WE cant or WONT be able to afford the cost of modding every aircraft that flies into hostile areas....

Where has the duty of care gone ???
Where has the rationale of providing equipment that is fit for purpose gone ??

Early '80's all Op Banner a/c had to have SDS fitted if not they werent used !!

OK, we have lost an airframe in XV179, that is replaceable by 1 of a fleet of (xxx) what is not replaceable, is the dedicated crew that fly/operate them.....!!!

All of us old enough to remember the Falklands will recall that we lost 3 Chinooks, Bravo November being the sole survivor, and flew her rotors off providing support to all and sundry...
What if the worse case scenario was we lost all the crews to fly them...maybe then the powers that be would listen ???

Although this next statement may be off tangent a bit, it's just my view opinon...

Someone mentioned about "downing tools" , well, while flying at an airfield in RAFG in a glider, i was downwind to land. My landing area was blocked by a slow recovery of another glider. I extended my base leg and landed on the runway.. One of Brize's finest was due in shortly behind me and had to "go around" due to "black runway"....!!

SATCO wanted my blood, as a SAC i took my roasting on the chin and then pointed out the letter of the law, power gives way to gliders and that as the "a/c capt" i had a decision to make and made it!!! My glider, my approach , my landing !!! i got no option as i got no means to go around...
If he had a problem lets go see Staish !!!! He declined....!!!

My point being if more people stood up to the spineless wonder that are supposedly the peers n masters then things may change...Sadly there are those that prefer to safeguard their careers first and foremost without a care for those whose responsibility they are entrusted with...!!!

For the Government to threaten to withhold pension payments is like saying you have to pay to be killed in the defence of your country or those you are there to protect...!!! this stinks !!!! Also i guess it's how the Government fund repatriation/recovery of downed aircraft...!!! Just my view....

No intention to offend anyone here .....
Rgds
LL

[nigegilb]

LL, your point is well made. I was very impressed with AOC 2 yesterday, but I am not convinced that he is going to get enough hard cash to achieve what our partners are doing. It is an area in which I intend to fight the Govt hard. There is a realisation in the military that transport/helos must be given a higher priority now. I am not sure it will come about by increased funding more like reorganisation. Sadly the boys/girls on front line duties need protecting right now. The lack of experience will only worsen as more aircrew leave the service. I had not read pprune for a long time til recently. I have become a keen reader of JPA. I cannot believe the RAF is struggling to pay its people. The immediate future in terms of manning looks grim. Hey politicos, hope your listening.

[Logistics Loader]

Nige,

I know for a fact the guys n gals in AKT are having major probs with JPA....!!!

Simple answer No Pay No Work !!!!

I work to live !!!
Not live to work !!!

LL

[chappie]

i would like to say nige, despite my earlier wobble on tues i intend to stand by your side and fight alongside you to get the government to initiate foam fitting with immediate effect on all ac. yes, there are alot of areas that are short of money but what we are asking for is not unreasonable or undoable (if that is a word!) what is needed along with one of the spineless idiots that enjoy high office is to get their heads out of whoevers a*** they have got it up, grow some balls and start doing what they are paid to do. we are not living in dreamland asking for this technology fleet wide. there are gross misuse of funds in the government on a daily basis that the cash can be released from, so i do not and will not buy the notion that there is not the money.

i want to make it clear to those of you who may wonder what the hell is a nurse doing getting involved in this. bob o'connor that's what. those men died on election day in iraq and as a sister i struggled to find a sense of purpose in the loss i felt. i thought of peace in the new iraq. well, we can see how that turned out. this is not a replacement for my brother, nor is this a stage for me to use. this is about fighting for a legacy to be left from the downing of XV179 and ensuring that no one, and i mean no one has to go through what i've had to endure again as a result of the measures that weren't taken. i have heard that there is concern that i am using my brother as political bait and i'm being disrespectful to his memory. how that conclusion has been reached i do not know. if this view is the opinion of those of you who have watched and supported this please let me know. needless to say i am distraught at this notion but i am keen to recieve feedback as it is essential that this does not happen. i have had to talk of bob to rationalise why i am here in this fight. i await your views.

[flipster]

Chappie,
You do not need to justify yourself to anybody - we know where you are coming from and are with you.... 100%.

I did not know Bob well but I am certain he would have been very proud of your obvious courage and true grit. Hold on to that thought.

You draw our attention to the big picture, once again. Yes, this protective foam is absolute peanuts in the great scheme of things, so why is it not fitted, especially after the BOI? Only the minister knows that.

The only reason why there is not enough money in the Herc 'pot' is because because the right people 'up high' have not stamped their feet and jumped up and down until MOD finds some spare cash - it is there but thiose same people cannot be bothered to rock the boat/shake the tree to find it.

Sadly, it is only the threat of ministerial criminal proceedings or loss of career that grabs peoples' attention (was Reid's reshuffle as a result of that sort of pressure?).

I cannot believe it is so hard to find the cash, even in the RAFs budget.
Given the choice between JPA, UASs or the Red Arrows and better protection for all our OPERATIONAL ac - I know what would get my vote!

Keep going lass, you are doing fine!

[propulike]

Airsound,

Good letter - but it was a typo that you put 5th Jan wasn't it? As you know, the tragedy occured on 30 Jan 2005. Don't want your position to be discredited!

An easy way for anyone else to get through to their MP - try this: http://www.writetothem.com/

[flipster]

Airsound,

A hard-hitting epistle - well done! I have sent a similar letter too , though nowhere near as erudite, of course.

I would like to think that most Lyneham families have done the same.

If not please do so as soon as you can - try this address

[email protected].

Mr Gray will have to do a lot of back-peddaling to recover his lost votes and his credibility.

Flipster

[nigegilb]

Chappie you deserve a rest we can continue whilst you sort out your situation.

NG

[chappie]

thankyou for the offer nige. i really don't want to step away from this because of unreasonable scare tatics. i will only leave this campaign if i absolutely have to.

i appreciate the support flip. i'm annoyed that yet again i'm in the position in which i'm asking for reassurances. i'm finding it annoying and so i'm sure that everyone else is. it's just that myself and mr chappie are in the middle of the situation and therefore are unable to make an impartial opinion on this matter. thankyou for your tolerance in the matter.

i will continue until/unless it's been made clear otherwise that i can't as i stand to jepordise the families attempts at getting bob home.

i think a need to regroup and rethink might be in need to see if for one last time we can't get the media behind us. frederick forsyth was in the express yesterday stating that considering john reid has admitted that his piece in the paper last week was perfectly true about the men need never being lost why aren't the families chanting their rage at the door of downing street? why aren't the media creating a roar. he clearly has lived on another planet as i was at the door of downing street the other week, but tony did not want to come and play! this man is in the media so why won't he help us and go and bang on a few desks, shake his fist and shout? i plan to write to him. as i said i'm using the weekend for a bit of quiet time to avert anymore emotional moments. i will be rethinking about how to wake up the lion of fleet street and seeing if we can get the column inches away from the size of prescotts willy and onto the lives and welfare of our troops. from what i've read prescott needs all the inches he can get....!

[daughterof]

Chappie please check PM

[airsound]

omigawd - how very embarrassing! Sorry, everyone. Yes, an orrible typo - and me normally paranoid about fact-checking, too. Anyway, thank you for pointing it out. I'll see what happens.

Flipster - thanks. Interesting - I emailed Mr Gray at [email protected]
as listed in his website http://www.jamesgray.org/Contact.htm
and it hasn't bounced back. I've not had a reply, though, and I have had acknowledgements from the copy addressees, D Cameron and L Fox. Perhaps [email protected] is an alternative.

Anyroadup, I'll try and do better next time......

airsound

[chappie]

please stop the world i want to get off. i've heard on the news about the helicopter crash in exactly the same way i heard of bob's crash. we need all of you home now. remember there is alot of families feeling raw, that is even if they know.

talk about our techology superiority....forget it. we will be waiting for the news of our hercs coming down soon. god help them all.

i've just watched all the iraqui's cheer, why can't that prick blair's conscience?

[nigegilb]

On a weekend when we have been reminded, once again, of the ever present dangers our servicemen are facing, and the terrible loss of life that can result, I wanted to bring some good news.

A400M. 25 ac on order. A few days ago 9xDAS, NIL Fuel tank inerting kits.

Well I understand that following R4 and C4 on Tuesday some pretty major decisions have been taken. So much so that I believe that this aircraft is now sorted and can go on our mission just about complete file! All this unofficial by the way...........

[PhoenixDaCat]

There's a blunt comment on this whole sorry issue over at http://www.chickyog.net/2006/05/04/hercules-crash-latest-harold-wilson-to-blame/

It’s impeccable logic. Just because a Hercules had never been brought down by small arms fire before there was no need to shell out a mere £50,000 per plane on speculative future attacks.

Look out for Reid in the papers in the next day or so saying the the Prime Minister and his wife should give up their bullet-proof and bomb-proof cars and be given simple umbrellas. “The whole history of New Labour,” he will say, “has illustrated that the least threat to them is from bullets and bombs and the biggest threat is from being pelted with eggs and rotting vegetables.”

[nigegilb]

Interesting link. I would caution people about the comments by Edward Teague, they are way off the mark. The politicians learnt nothing from the Vietnam War, but they appear to be learning quite quickly now the heat has been well and truly applied on them.

NG

[FJJP]

Chappie

Please make space in your Private Message box - incoming!

FJJP

[nigegilb]

Big plug for the campaign in the Sunday Express today. Michael Knapp has a go at the Hercules. I bet the MoD wished they had not canx anti-missile prog now. John Nichol also has kind words to say about the campaign, and at the same time has a massive side swipe at James Gray. I wonder if his leader will have anything to say to him tomorrow! I do not think this is available on internet so thought it best to scribe the paragraph here. Words of John Nichol.

"Former RAF pilot Nigel Gilbert has been at the forefront of exposing the scandal surrounding the Hercules crash in Iraq. Yet his local MP James Gray attacked Nigel saying "He keeps going on about the same story. I think he should just let it lie." I am truly astonished by such arrant and insulting nonsense.

Our Armed Forces are willing to take incredible personal risks to ensure the job is done. They do it despite puerile jibes from politicians who would never have the courage to pick up a weapon. They do it regardless of the penny-pinching and bickering over a few pounds that can cost lives. They do it because they are proud, brave, dedicated and honest - qualities sadly lacking in many of their political leaders."


NG

[LynehamVillage]

Has the C17 that the RAF lease got the safety foam fitted?, and will the MoD learn and ensure the new A400M will be afford this essential safety feature.

[flipster]

I believe the C17 has an onboard inerting system that purges oxygen from the fuel and ullage - called OBIGGS. The A400 on the other hand.......will have zilch at the moment!

[mbga9pgf]

you will find that James Gray's email address is [email protected]

was recently contacted by Wiltshire conservative party, that is the email address on the advertising bumpf they send out. :ok: Hope that most certainly helps.

[flipster]

Thanks - will resend my 'Mr Grumpy of North Wiltshire' letter.:ok:

Flip

[chappie]

morning ladies and gents of the british armed forces, hope you are well today. having enjoyed a little rest away from campaigning for the weekend i return restored and ready for action. usual activity is checking the papers for any links to the campaign. this morning got a shock and i need help please.

today's daily mail (8 May) has a snippet of info that there is someone on ebay who has put stills from the terrorist video of the wreckage of crash that my brother was killed in on sale. i'm shocked that there is someone who has them but also thinks there is someone who wants to buy them. there is talk of human bodies/parts on display. i think that they have been withdrawn from sale. this is only after a barrage of complaints.

being an e bay virgin i don't know how to track them down. the person who was selling is from scotland. i need to know if there is any way i can get them out of this lunatics hands so that none of the families are aware of this. the t:mad: :mad: t mat try to do it again. i want to give that heartless foubarred idiot a piece of my mind. so please can any one help me?

[daughterof]

check PM re ebay

[chappie]

FJJP, Filthy, please can you PM me again. i have cleared out my inbox and there is trace of your messages.

i told you that i'm not computer literate. after having had my rest away i am now definitely sure that any speculation of me using bob as political pawn is rubbish. i think that i got too wrapped up in everything and unable to see clearly. sorted now. thankyou.

i was shown how to email blair the other day here goes. www.pmo.gov.uk then follow link to email blair. i think a daily reminder of who i am and how you all suffer because of his inability to spend money correctly has meant that i'm now in his life!

ref express article which bright spark thought that having the hercules fly goods from next/boots was any less of a target? the article states; aircraft supposedly supplying arms and equipment to british forces in iraq and afghanistan have turned into flying "shopping trolleys" to keep them away from enemy fire! this is thought to have been brought about as a result of the shooting down of xv179 in jan 05. has anyone stopped to think that the terrorist on the ground is not going to give a :mad: that the plane has got immac and rasor blades on board and not 50 troops?! is this a ploy to say that foam is not needed as those are the only missions that the albert does now?

just to say, myself and steady's parents are off to the solicitor's on wednesday this week. watch this space.

take care and please be safe. my thoughts and prayers are with you all.

[BEagle]

Hello, chappie.

A PPRuNer tipped us off about a DVD being advertised on eBay yesterday. Immediately, a number of us independently reported the item to the eBay Community Watch team as it was in clear breach of eBay's clearly stated policy which prohibits the auction selling of such items.

The item was removed from sale very shortly after the Community Watch team were informed.

Surprisingly, not only did someone try to sell this item, but someone else actually put in a bid for it. Appalling - I hope that both are investigated to establish whether any link with enemy insurgent groups exists.

Good luck on Wednesday!

[November4]

Heard the statement from the Defence Secretary about the loss of the Lynx on the 6 O'Clock news this evening. He said that the Lynx had "a suite of defensive aids..........."

Now where have we heard that phrase before?

[nigegilb]

If there were a few noses out of joint at DEC yesterday, I can tell you that you have been saved a whole heap of trouble coming your way from a certain media channel!!! Just remember we may be saving lives.

Kind regards,

NG

With regard to Nov 4 posting, I cannot speak for the Lynx, but with regard to the C130 the phrase provided no reassurance.

[chappie]

morning chaps and chapesses!

hope you are all well. it is with a heavy heart that again the papers are full of headlines stating the RAF lose more personnel. i am so very sorry for everyone.

FJJP i tried to PM you last night but i think the ol' puter decided that it was going on strike just when i pressed send! bear with me, i will get round to answering my PM's.

i need inspiration. please can any of you get in contact if there is something that you feel is not being adressed in regards of the campaign. i seem to have come to a standstill and not sure which direction to take things next. i do not want this to go away and as i have stated before i will not rest until foam is secured for all hercules. please do not think that the fight is over yet.

i know that you have all been fantastic in sorting out the ebay fiasco ut i seem unable to make contact with them, as i have questions of my own. each time i get to the bit where it says email us it does'nt go to email!

[nigegilb]

Chappie,
There is a lot going on in the background not all of it stemming from us. Sorry for sounding conspirational but it could be major. Nothing you can do so just sit back and have a cup of tea, just like I am doing at the mo!!

Regards,

NG

[pazmanga]

there are gross misuse of funds in the government on a daily basis that the cash can be released from, so i do not and will not buy the notion that there is not the money.

i have heard that there is concern that i am using my brother as political bait and i'm being disrespectful to his memory. how that conclusion has been reached i do not know. if this view is the opinion of those of you who have watched and supported this please let me know. needless to say i am distraught at this notion but i am keen to recieve feedback as it is essential that this does not happen. i have had to talk of bob to rationalise why i am here in this fight. i await your views.

i understand why you are here chappie what i don't understand is why you felt it neccesary to use bob's voice on the radio, there were ten men on board that herc, so why single out just one of them? i cannot comprehend the unbearable pain and angiush that bob's friends, wife and children must have felt when they heard his voice on the radio without prior warning.

in regards to the cost of fitting the foam, the 600,000 price tag that people have been mentioning is for the foam alone, then take into concideration the cost of labour to fit the foam and the time it takes to fit the foam and that price tag suddenly shoots up to about 900,000 thats pretty much 1 million per plane!!!

[chappie]

thankyou for your views and concerns. they have been filed so i can give them thought over time. it's important that there is a balance.

bob's voice on the radio was done to ensure the point got across of the awful reality of the true cost of this crash....the loss of a life. we can talk about life but words can be empty. this makes sure that the point is underlined in capitals, bold, italics and shouted out loud from the highest building. it isn't comfortable is it being reminded that because of the need to cut corners the result is loss of life. well, it's not comfotable for me either facing the loss of my brother every single day. it may be distressing for some people for a few minutes but every time i look at his photo i'm beside myself with grief. each time i go to pick up the phone and then realise he's not there. the ugliness and the rawness of grief do not go away and do not pass. they are simply endured.. not that i need to justify what i have done, ultimately the decision lay with the journalist of how best to make the impact with the report. the report made the point well.
you ask about why no one elses voice was used. no one from the crew called me before the plane took off and no other family did the report. so i hope that will allay your concerns.
speaking off concerns it's nice to know that there are people looking out for the loved ones of bob although you seem to have omitted any family members. as you did not know bob i shall try to offer reassurance in that department as it seems as though you are a little distressed which i would never wish to be the case. he was'nt married and there are no children but thankyou for looking out for them.
i have recieved blessings and support from the other families who were sadly involved with the crash as it was important that they were happy for me to fight for the legacy that these men must have in their memory. there was concern only that the tv appearance by myself and nige were the issue for families. that has been cleared up now the families in the local area have all been spoken to. there has been nothing but praise for the radio piece, so i hope you will see the point to the report as did others.

let's not worry about the cost. that is for the government to sort. you cannot put a price on life....one of them or ten of them. there is no limit in my mind. it needs to be implemented and therefore should be. there may be conflicting figures thrown about but that doesn't mean that it lessens the need to protect the troops. i will continue to fight all the way.:)

i'd be more than happy to correspond with you on a personal level about any other concerns that you have on this matter if you PM me.

[propulike]

paz,

We started out hearing about a setup cost of approx £600,000 then £50,000 per aircraft.
Next, the MoD stated approx £600,000 per aircraft.
Now you've just quoted £600,000 per aircraft just for the foam, with labour on top. (plus VAT and the callout charge?) ie around about £1million per aircraft.

I'm curious where you've got your figures from.

[nigegilb]

Money. When one of the 47 pilots looked at the cost of the foam in 2001 it was $25,000, per ac. When Liam Fox wrote to LM in January they were quoted £50,000 per ac. The actual cost is considerably higher than that. Lets say £600,000 per ac, which is the highest Govt quote I have seen. Last time I checked 3 days ago the cost of a brand new J Herc was £50 million. Lets ignore the cost of human life for a second. The whole fleet at Lyneham could be fitted out twice over for the cost of one ac. Does it make sense to you now? Compare it to the price of a sexy new DAS and it is piffling. Remember for the USAF this is baseline protection on which every other type of defensive measure is built. This is no longer an optional extra, this is a basic requirement.

[treaty]

Paz
We are family members of one of those who died on XV179 - We support Sarah and Nige in all their efforts to get foam fitted on ALL Hercules and any other aricraft that it is needed. We don't CARE what the cost is - 50,000 pounds or 1 million pounds - what cost are you putting on lives. I have read the many messages of sympathy posted for those unfortunate to have lost their lives on the helicopter, and I for one DO know what their relatives and close friends are going through. We read the same messages when we lost our relative. If ANYTHING at all can be done to prevent further loss of life then it should be done -NO MATTER WHAT THE COST.
You are not alone Sarah.

[Safeware]

Nige, 'Lets ignore the cost of human life for a second' - maybe not.
Paz, it doesn't matter if the cost per ac is £50k or £1 million, because even the govt's own openly available guidelines support the campaign. This taken from The Green Book Annex 2 - http://greenbook.treasury.gov.uk/index.htm 'Green Book, Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government' with my bold :
The Value of a Prevented Fatality or Prevented Injury

26 A benefit of some proposals is the prevention of fatalities or injuries. The appropriate starting point for valuing these benefits is to measure the individual’s WTP for a reduction in risk of death (or their willingness to accept a new hazard and the ensuing increased risk).

27 The willingness of an individual to pay for small changes in their own or their household’s risk of loss of life or injury can be used to infer the value of a prevented fatality (VPF). The changes in the probabilities of premature death or of serious injury used in such WTP studies are generally very small.

28 In the UK, the main measure of VPF incorporates the ‘extra’ value placed on relatives and friends, and any further value placed by society on avoiding the premature death of individuals. Accordingly, the addition of an individual’s WTP for the safety of others to his ‘own’ WTP for ‘own’ safety may lead to double counting.

29 A lower bound on the value of a prevented fatality may be determined by revealed preference and stated preference studies. This lower bound is useful for determining a threshold of value for money for safety expenditure and also for comparing proposals concerning increased safety.

30 Revealed preference studies can derive individual WTP for risk reduction from, for example, the size of wage differentials for more or less risky occupations; or price versus safety trade-offs in choosing transport modes; or WTP for safety devices such as smoke alarms or car air bags. However, in practice, these estimates of the revealed value of a prevented fatality are not precise. Stated preference approaches have also been used to provide estimates of VPF using questionnaires.

31 In the UK, the Department for Transport (DfT) values the reduction of the risk of death in the context of road transport at about £1.145m per fatal casualty prevented (in 2000 prices). In addition to the WTP measures, these estimates include gross lost output, medical and ambulance costs.Values are uprated in line with assumed changes in GDP per head.

32 DfT also attributes monetary values to the prevention of non-fatal casualties, based on a WTP approach. Serious and slight casualties are valued separately and the values are uprated in line with changes in GDP per head. Values currently in use for preventing a serious and slight road injury are £128,650 and £9,920 respectively (at 2000 prices). Costs of police, insurance and property damage are added to these casualty values to obtain values for the prevention of road accidents. The HSE tariff of monetary values for pain, grief and suffering begins at £150 for the most minor non-reportable injury.

33 There is evidence that individuals are not indifferent to the cause and circumstances of injury or fatality. For example, in their estimate of benefits from asbestos proposals, HSE currently doubles the VPF figure to allow for individual aversion to dying from cancer, and the additional associated personal and medical costs.

So, given the number of deaths on the road, saving one life is worth spending £1.145m on. Now put this in the context of an aircraft carrying a number of military personnel ....

There is other information out there - I did a google on value prevented fatality - with one by a Richard Maguire on military VPF at £8.5m.
sw

[nigegilb]

This is extraordinary information. One of the arguments used against me was that of quoting how many people die on the roads compared with ac. Now we can see it is cheaper to insure against loss of life in the air. Add in 70 pax to the mix and you get a better idea of cost per head.

There is no doubt that we are winning the argument. I did an interview for Canadian TV that went out coast to coast. The Defence Minister there, had never heard of foam before but now the Canadian Military are looking closely at it for their Hercs (30 or so). The momentum is undeniable. You will get the odd person who objects but in my experience they do not fly in Hercules ac. The army movers are on side, regular customers and of course the aircrew. Operationally there may be a problem with J range, but the RAF was offered external tanks at a knock down price when the J was procured. They are now 3 times the price. But Hey Brindisi is a good night stop.

[Safety_Helmut]

Safeware

JSP550 Reg 445 (?) VPF = £4M

S_H

[Squirrel 41]

Chappie, Nige et al.

Safeware is quite right and remember to up-rate those 2000 figures in line with inflation since 2000 (2-2.5% p.a.). Also, you could have a look at the supplimentary budget documents which may show the amount spent on UORs.

AFAIK, UORs are paid for from the additional funding for ops - the so-called Net Additional Cost of Military Operations (NACMO). This is new money, over and above the defence budget. (See John Reid on 14 Dec 05: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2005-12-14c.37043.h) Therefore, if you can show that the green book costs are met, and that this is an operationally required UOR, things should be looking up.

As "Deep Throat" said - follow the money!

S41

[Safeware]

S_H,

yeah, but JSPs aren't open source and, unlike you :) I don't keep one by my bedside.

sw

[nigegilb]

What I do not understand is if there is a UOR for foam why is it not being fitted on every single Herc going sausage?

[Where R We?]

Nige, I would suspect is depends on how the UOR is written and under what conditions the foam is required. The old chestnut of only tasking suitably equipped aircraft into 'dodgy' areas.

The problem with this is, how do you define 'dodgy'?

[nigegilb]

This is the very thing that raises my suspicions. Why are MoD being so coy about J figures? The relatives will not rest until they know that every Herc facing the same threat is protected or is at least planned to be. We have all learnt not to trust reassuring phrases from MoD. There are signs of a learning curve though. Bit like the flowers in my garden they are only showing an interest now after a long hard winter!

[Safeware]

What I do not understand is if there is a UOR for foam why is it not being fitted on every single Herc going sausage?

I don't think that is what Squirrel was saying. I think he was trying to show a comparison against spending on UORs ie money being made available for such mods vs money that could have been spent on improving safety.

But I could be wrong. Squirrel?

sw

[chappie]

what i don't understand is ....what the bloody hell are you talking about?!

remember there are non military reading this and as such the abbreviations mean diddly! i may be forced to use my nursing abbreviations again! be warned!

hark, is that the collective sound of knees shaking with fear?

pazmanga, a liitle something i'd like you to clear up before i away for a bit. you had worried about any distress that may have been felt for his non existent children and wife, etc because of the radio piece yet you stated that this was done without any prior warning?! how do you know there was no warning given, i'm a little confused. please let me allay your fears as his family did know it was going out. you seem to have forgotten not only to mention his family but also stop to think that it may have been hard for me to part with something so precious and private.:{ as mentioned previously please PM me if there any other matters i can help you with. in fact, i hope it helped that you will since be able to see that there is nothing but love and support from the other families that are involved and my fellow ppruners.

night night chaps and chapesses. think of me at the solicitors tomorrow.

[nigegilb]

I think I am too tired to understand Squirrel's point. Remember my methodology is not exactly by the book. My method is to to pressure the politician direct. However if I am missing a trick with the correct way of seeking finance I will look again at the vagaries of military operational spending. I guess after my Stn Cdr told me what needed to happen to release money from MoD I kind of lost interest in budgets and accounting!

Best interests,

Nige:}

[propulike]

Like Nige says, the story from Canada. From the final sentence it also looks as though the Canadians value their guys more than the MoD value us.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/05/08/foam060508.html

Yet more good work Mr G!

[nigegilb]

prop, the nogs and hopefully swedes are about to get the same. i am always impressed by honesty in politicians. would our devotees of spin note that ca defence minister admitted that it was the first he had heard of it (ESF), but thought it a good idea. no pat phrase like all our hercs have a suite of defensive aids. they care, so should you. and if you do, give all hercs foam please.

[BEagle]

Chappie - it's good to hear you cutting through all the bluster and flannel of JSPs, UORs and the rest to put your demands in a clear, unequivocal manner.

nigegilb, is it really wise to rely on 'plans' to fit ESF? Clear programme dates with mandatory deadlines, perhaps. But some hot air uttered by a faceless, non-accountable Monastery of Definance statement? Err, no. In my opinion.

Are all the other AT/AAR assets based in theatre also being provided with a comprehensive defensive aids sub system. Not something like the useless antique kit we had on the Vulcan, but something which is both state of the art and actually works?

The 'fast jet-centric' RAF seems intent to spend billions on the EuropHoon which has about as much chance of being used in Afghanistan or Iraq as a Tucano. Bliar's little 'come as you are and bring a bottle' wars have provided RW, AT, AAR, Recce and 'Nimrod' fleets with massive tasking levels - and they should be the ones receiving the largest chunk of the ever-shrinking budget - not some pointy thing which rushes around Lincolnshire and makes a lot of noise at RIAT.

[South Bound]

Beags - well said, spend the money where it is needed right now, rather than where it might be needed if we ever fight a major air war again. Sadly, don't think it will happen as long as CAS is a fast-jet mate and we remain hog-tied by the need to partner ourselves with the cash-cow that is B:mad: :mad: Systems that of course is only interested in fast-jet!

Sorry to say it guys, but in the main (small Harrier dets excluded!) fast jet is not the front line anymore, SH and AT is. Personally I would argue that the SH world is the most in need of some cash...

[airsound]

One of my spies has just drawn my attention to this exchange in the House of Lords on Monday 8 May (Text from Hansard - I have added 'bold' to some text)

Lord Craig of Radley, cross-bench peer, Marshal of the Royal Air Force, Chief of the Defence Staff 1988-91 (David Craig)
My Lords, ..........there have been a number of reports in the press of inadequacies, such as body armour not being available and that a Hercules aircraft unhappily shot down had not been provided with the right protection against a fire outbreak in its fuel tanks. Indeed, on that occasion, before the full board of inquiry conclusions came out, one was led to believe that adequate protection had been provided. The Minister has just suggested to noble Lords adequate protection is in place for our Lynx helicopters. I hope very much that when the board of inquiry reports, that will indeed prove to have been the case in this instance. More generally, does the Minister agree that when our forces face hazardous operations, there can be no excuse whatever for any penny-pinching or short-changing on the essential protective measures and equipment with which they should be provided?

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence, Lord Drayson: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble and gallant Lord, who knows from his own experience the challenges that our troops face. I absolutely agree that there is no excuse for failure to provide our troops with the equipment they need to do their job properly. We are doing that in response to the threats as they emerge and change. The threats have presented us with significant challenges in certain areas and we need to respond to them with speed and diligence. We need to learn any lessons which may come out of the board of inquiry and apply those lessons speedily to our helicopters if that is required.

airsound

[nigegilb]

On Monday, the new Sec Defence said that the Lynx had a range of defensive aids. Last time I heard that phrase I was sitting on coils of chain. A range of defensive aids does not refer to certain other protections. Specific questions are now being asked. If the guys are short of equipment we are not waiting 1 year for BoI result. We will be taking action forthwith.

[FJJP]

I wouldn't write off the CAS so lightly. Yes, Typhoon is the latest toy in the arsenal and gets all the glamour breaks, by you don't get to be an ACM [and CAS at that] without being well aware of the issues surrounding ALL fleets and their operations.

I don't know the man, but what I've heard from guys on the fast pointy things is that Sir Glenn is no slouch. I have no doubt he reads this thread to get a feel for how things are perceived at grass roots level, and I wouldn't mind betting that he has raised this issue at a very high level within the MOD.

The unfortunate part about it is that he and the other Service Chiefs are often lip-buttoned by the politicians and the advice of very sernior civil servants. He can do far more behind the scenes quietly than he can by shooting his mouth off in public and embarrassing the govt - it was tried before, remember, and the individual was firmly and publically locked back in his box with a large dose of humiliation thrown in.

As usual, the politicians will want to make the bad image go away and save face at the same time. Remember that this is not an issue for the great unwashed British public, who is more interested in Joe Bloggs who got caught for shoplifting last week and upped the local crime statistics.

Nige and Chappie are going about things the right way, talking to those that count and bringing the pressure to bear where it can do most good. Every interview that Nige has had will have been reported up the chain with positive comment as to his credibility because of his background; Chappie's comment because of the loss of a family member and giving Nige her full support.

The loss of the Herc will have focussed minds on the vulnerability of the non-pointy fleets. The groundswell of professional opinion will have high level of MOD attention on the question of protection systems/devices. The issue at stake is releasing the funding to do something about it and in timely fashion; the latter could prove to be problematical, because those companies capable of carrying out the modifications may not have the capacity to achieve the DESIRED timelines.

I believe it will happen, but not as fast as we would like. What we DO need, and what would scotch much of the discussion and adverse publicity, is a credible statement on WHAT and WHEN it is going to be done.

How about it CAS?

[FJJP]

Now I DO know David Craig [as AOC 1 Group]. His chasing this topic in his own way is typical of the man, and he is adding subtle weight to the arguements. Keep an eye on his pronouncements - he won't let this go...

[nigegilb]

FJJP,
There is a lot of interest in the Lords. The Lordships are also batting for helos as well. I thought CAS got off to a slow start with his answers to HCDC on 07 Mar. Since then, there has been a very interesting decision made concerning Hercules. Cannot discuss here, but I agree with you there are signs of a learning curve. With ref to Beagle's point, I spent a long time with AOC 2, if he says it is going to happen and there is a timeline I am OK with that. I am looking for a guarantee that Herc crews will not be sent into hostile zones without "modern DAS", foam and passenger protection. I am not interested in numbers just the guarantee.

If we can help helo world we are willing!!

If I may just correct you on one thing with regard to this thread. This is not a grass roots rebellion I have had messages of support all the way up. There is a realisation that a lot of people made the wrong call on foam and self-protection. Now it is time for Des Browne to act.

[nigegilb]

Just like to add that Hercs were regularly targetted by small arms fire and worse in 2001. This obviously predated the threat assessment in 2002 which concluded that Hercules was not being exposed to this kind of attack. FF you are spot on. Now everyone knows it, the Defence Ministers have legal notices hanging over them and hey presto they are finally doing something about it. What a way to run a war!!!


I am sure Mr Browne is a busy man just now, but he should be aware that this issue is not going away. At least the previous Tory Govt was prepared to debate the issue of the day. The refusal to put up MoD spokesmen last week, spectacularly backfired. They should have the guts to appear in public and defend the cancellation of essential counter measures on the Hercules fleet.

[BEagle]

"We are doing that in response to the threats as they emerge"

Wouldn't it be rather better to have a better idea of the threats long before they emerge? Isn't there an Air Warfare Centre in addition to various desks in the MoD-box who are all supposed to be assessing future threats and making sure that the Armed Forces are protected against such things?

Link 16, DASS (including DIRCM and 'clever' pyrotechnics) - I seem to recall discussing the need for those in AT/AAR aircraft when I did my EWO course back in 1993......

[nigegilb]

Talk to any of the SF guys involved in Sarajevo airlift in the 90's, they were regularly getting shot at. That airlift resulted in the shooting down of an Italian transporter. The Italians then decided to get DAS. It is totally unacceptable to cite our lack of involvement in the Vietnam war being the reason to not know about small arms. A procurement "expert" took an active decision not to fit foam in the J. Even following the shooting down of XV179, the Govt did not want to fit foam to the J, or to the MK3. This is a scandal. I have respect for the guys at AWC. They need a bigger say in all this. Sadly the cost of retrofitting this stuff is a lot higher than having it on board at the time of procurement. So if it costs £600,000 don't blame the pilots!

[Squirrel 41]

Nige, Chappie et al
Sorry if my post yesterday was unclear - all I was saying is that Safeware et al have pointed you to the official costs of saving a life. I understand that there is some flex in the numbers - road transport values a the amount spent per life saved lower than the railways, which, because they are intrinsically much safer, need to spend much more money to save the same number of lives - but these green book numbers are the ones you need to overcome the argument of "it costs this much and how many lives will it save anyway?"

This is a real consideration because senior types do have to take hard decisions within a finite budget. I'm not saying that the powers that be got it right with the omission of foam until now - I would want all of my crews to have it every time they go sausage side. This is not to say that all frames would need it - we have lots of mini-fleets across the fleets - but ideally it would be a standard fit.

This is especially true as it's so cheap - but if it cost £250m per airframe, you could understand that people would take a risk based view. (Or gamble, depending on you point of view.)

Therefore, it's really important to be able to quantify the potential gain using the system's own numbers - ie, 70 pax at £Xm protected from a threat that is real by spending £Rk. I suspect your numbers do stack up - so use them to bolster your case.

Honest question: if foam is standard on all US Hercs, did we have to specify that we didn't want it when we bought the J? If so, well done to whoever came up with that one. :*

S41

[nigegilb]

Thanks Squirrel. The AOC kindly showed me a set of probabilities concerning the safety of various ac. It is a completely new area for me. I did not realise it was quantified in such a definite way. I realise how difficult it is to be making these kinds of decisions. I assume from the way you are talking that you are responsible for people. In the situation of XV179, when a weakness or vulnerability is identified in such an obvious way, is it morally correct to continue to ask the crews to risk their necks until the safety protection can be fitted? In the case of the Afg deployment, this is a new deployment seemingly at the request of the FO. Should crews be sent on a new deployment, with no obvious security threat to UK, without such a safety feature? Are we asking too much of our military leaders to say no in these circumstances? I know that many service personnel wouldn't think twice about going, believing it to be their duty and they might be offended by merely suggesting this. The thing that really troubles me is the threat assessment. Without hostile fire indicators I do not see how an accurate type specific assessment can be made. Perhaps you can enlighten me, but I would rather we erred on the side of caution just now.

I understand your point about mini-fleets. However, after my own experience I simply do not trust the military commanders to make the correct safety calls. In Afg in 2001, dumb Hercs were sent in because they were the only ones available. The temptation to send crews to war without adequate protection will surely happen again. The Hercules fleet needs a common standard of protection, so the guys/girls are given some protection from those in charge of managing their own risk.


PS I believe Foam has been a standard fit since 1973/74 when USAF were purchasing C130 E Model. The K Model at Lyneham dates from around 1967. If we decide to buy some new wings for the venerable beast foam is standard.

[Squirrel 41]

Nigel,
The minifleets point is well taken - the fear I would have is that a burst of pressonitis from Group or above could mean that people were coerced into taking a frame that wasn't fitted "just this once" because "we have to hit our numbers". Sorry, senior people need to accept that if you go the minifleet route (and presumably only because of money), it comes with a health warning that says "not fitted, not going" in all but the most extreme circumstances. As you say, this is why you have the whole lot done, asap.

In the case of the foam - which is CHEAP - the risk vs. cost trade off would be so far in the right direction that it's a no brainer to do it, and it shouldn't arise. All I'm saying is that this won't always be true - some systems are extremely expensive and in a given scenario would be of marginal, if any benefit. At some level, in voluntarily signing on, we are accepting that there will be more risk in our lives than those who do not. Not all of our missions are safe, nor could some of them be made safe.

So, if I were an Airship (which I'm not, and won't be) I could imagine occassions where I would commit crews to very dangerous missions from which I knew a proportion would likely not come back. Ultimately, this would be for the sake of UK foreign policy. And I'd do it with a heavy heart, but if it was mission critical, then it's got to be done: this is presumably the challenge of senior command.

Not sure if this is an answer, but just my 2p.

On the new build foam point, very interesting. I can fully understand that the K's (nee E's) didn't have it from new - because contemporary US built aircraft didn't either as built.

But presumably new build US J's do. So if our Js don't have foam, and it's standard on the American ones, we would have had to specify that we didn't want it: so a really good procurement call there by someone. Did they pay with their career and their pension? Guesses on the back of an envelope. :*

S41

[nigegilb]

SQ You make your point loud and clear. It is my belief that on one specific occasion in Afg in 2002 fatalities were actually pencilled in. I think crews would have understood the requirement to undertake such a mission if the effect to UK foreign policy had been explained at the time. It wasn't and it was very badly handled. Most people should remember the one-way missions in the cold war. It is a fact of life and I fully accepted I might have to pay the ultimate price. What I could not accept was a politician telling my father how well protected I was in my aircraft, when it was so obviously not the case. It is clear from the telegram sent from Strike at the end of Afg conflict that they expected to lose ac and crews. We were lucky, sadly that luck ran out on 30 Jan last year. I am genuinely trying to change the culture at MoD. I will investigate further the procurement of the J. Accountability is a relatively new thing for politicians and chiefs of staff to handle. They would be advised to get used to it.

You make an adroit point about the cost/effectivenessof foam. I was startled over the weekend to hear talk of preferring the option of more DAS fit frames to the fitting of foam to existing frames. Even after the crash there is a lack of understanding about its benefits. It really is the baseline protection for USAF Hercs. I glanced at some other US ac today, foam, fuel tank inerting, self sealing tanks, it is ever present. The USAF truly understand it, we are still to grasp it. But this is helping. I know I am right on this and you are helping lots of people to understand why.

[nigegilb]

On a lighter note here is what a concerned citizen wants us to do;

Write to: [email protected]

SHAME THEM INTO ACTION

10:30 - 09 May 2006
I saw a BBC story this morning regarding the largest loss of British personnel in Iraq to date, namely the 10 people who lost their lives in an RAF Hercules crash in January 2005.

Again it would appear that this loss of life may have been prevented if the right protective equipment had been fitted.

Apparently, such equipment has been fitted to similar American aircraft since the 1970s.

Yet, was it only a couple of weeks ago that we heard that I and other taxpayers had allegedly paid some £7,500 (one-third of my annual income) to keep the unelected wife of the Prime Minister's hair in order?

I believe, in the Second World War, groups of people would band together and save to purchase hardware such as Spitfires to assist our armed forces in their fight against our then enemies.

Would it not be a good opportunity, through your fine publications, to take a straw poll of public opinion to see if the British public, which is most generous in giving to all good causes at home and abroad, would give to a cause providing our armed forces, who are risking their lives every day, with the right equipment to keep them as safe as any can when they are engaged in warfare.

This could possibly become a national issue or campaign and at long last embarrass the Government, for all the right reasons for once, into doing something good for the nation and those who defend it at home and abroad.

R J Limpenny, Leicester.

[scroggs]

PS I believe Foam has been a standard fit since 1973/74 when USAF were purchasing C130 E Model. The K Model at Lyneham dates from around 1967. If we decide to buy some new wings for the venerable beast foam is standard.

Nige, I wish that were true! The K went through a centre-section wing replacement programme in the early '80s. If foam was 'standard' on Lockheed C130 production wings at the time, then you would expect that all surviving Ks would have at least centre-wing suppressant foam. As you know, that is not the case - it must, at best, have been a 'delete option'. Also, as you are aware, it's not fitted to the J, so again we presumably paid for the standard fit to be modified. Nothing new there!

As for vulnerability to ground fire, that's something that the C130 fleet has been aware of pretty much since the aircraft first came into service - in fact, ever since the UK began tactical AT in WW2! I've experienced ground fire in some odd places - including Gatow (not during the Airlift, before anyone has a dig at my advanced age!), and from the Royal Navy! More seriously, small-arms ground fire was recognised as a problem requiring defensive tactics in campaigns in Rhodesia, Ethiopia, Beiruit, Oman, and several others now disappearing into the mists of time. The benefits of suppressant foam were well known among the SF community at least as early as the mid-'80s, and I recall talk of it having been requested around that time, though I have no specific evidence of that (I was a South Atlantic specialist by then!).

Anyway, I've been watching your campaign with interest and admiration. I have pointed out this topic to at least one retired Air Officer (some of you will know who that is!) who will hopefully ask a few pointed questions of the current Airships at the next opportunity. Good luck and Well Done!

Edit: my age is telling. Of course, I meant 'outer wing replacement programme', not centre wings!

[chappie]

while we realise that in comparison to alot of mis spending by the government foam is cheap. let's also realise that talk is cheap. there is only so much talking that can be had before it looks like the shirking of responsibilities,yet again. i understand the need to approach this from every angle but one would hope that the end result is the implementation of this safety system. the longer this talking goes on the less warm the cockles of my heart are. this may, yet again, be niave but enough now. by now the first ones should be rolling out. does any one know how long it takes? i heard an interesting thing yesterday. the view of opinion was that the crash can be quite easily seen as one of the militarys recent biggest scandal. it was also stated that by english law the cost of a human life is £10,000. makes me more determind to ensure protection for troops.

paz, still waiting for a PM! where are you? hopefuloly i answered your queries satisfactorily.

[nigegilb]

Scroggs,
It seems the worry about FOI has beaten us to it. I have been told about Gatow, Rhodesia, Corporate, Afg, you have added a couple more. Sadly file shredding is de-rigeur. Many of the requests have simply disappeared. The SF community had a knowledge of foam. This knowledge came about from exchange guys both US and UK. However, the lack of paperwork is overwhelming. Fortunately, some paperwork survived, just about.

Thanks for your support, I doubt if we would have come this far without this institution. It really is remarkable.

Nige G

[scroggs]

Nige,

there are undoubtedly many, many incidents of which there never was any record - especially if ground fire didn't make contact. There are others, a few within my own experience, where the nature of the operation meant that details of any kind will be sparse or non-existent. Neither of these helps you particularly, but the anecdotal evidence may still be available from some of us older Alberteers. Whether anyone would listen is another matter... Nevertheless, seems like you're getting quite a lot of verifiable info anyway!

That said, it might be worth looking into books about the Beverley, Hastings, Andover and others for historical evidence of the dangers of small-arms ground-fire. The idea that there could have been a relatively cheap protective measure against this risk up to 40 years ago is galling in the extreme. It's long overdue.

[nigegilb]

I am receiving a lot of assistance. I can't disclose everything here for obvious reasons but if any former Herc crew can help it would certainly be most welcome. I fear that this specific type of self-protection has been overlooked over a range of ac including helos for a number of years. I know it is painful to keep this subject high profile but I still do not believe the Military has sufficiently learnt a very big lesson. We intend to keep beavering away until we can be certain that the required self-protection is in place.

Cheers,

Nige