PDA

View Full Version : All but dropping the weapon


ExRAFRadar
8th Apr 2015, 18:46
The thread about the Shack Co-Pilot offer got me thinking.


When I was young I was fascinated by the role Maritime Aircraft played in the NATO role. As a cabbage I knew about Oscars, Foxtrots, and Victors etc. and had a pretty good idea of how a NATO v Pact war at sea was meant to play out


I have the Tony Blackman book ‘Nimrod Rise and Fall’ and re-reading the prologue ‘The Hunt’ about how the crew of XV262 spent 10 hours in the air chasing a contact that SOSUS had not detected I could not help but think that the crew had done everything but dropped a weapon on the contact.


Would it be fair to say that the crews of 18 Group (as it was back in the Cold War days), especially the MPA aircraft, effectively operated in a state of a silent war?


By the way the book is a very good read.

Rossian
8th Apr 2015, 19:23
......was a Panorama doco by Tom Mangold 1973/74 - ish which spelled it all out. This at a time when if one breathed a word about what we did the Spooks would have been down on one like a ton of bricks as some guys DID find out to their cost. This doco even had the imprimatur of Mr SACLANT himself Admiral Ike Kidd in a personal appearance

We, in maritime, did ourselves no favours at all because everything we did was classified up the yingyang. Even many years later I remember briefing a new VVSO on the multitude of Nimrod roles. At the end when I asked for questions he turned to his minder and asked "Why didn't I know ANY of this"? I had to bite my tongue quite hard to remain civil.

I'm convinced it was because at his level the only people they spoke to, or roles they had any understanding of, were the realm of the FJ pilot mafia.

The long term effect of this "myopia" is the current situation we find ourselves for the protection of our seas and approaches.

The short answer to your original question is "yes!" the aim was to be able to say at the end of the process "If I were to drop a weapon now this guy would be toast" AND WE WERE BLOODY GOOD AT IT!

I'll have the meds later nurse if you don't mind.

The Ancient Mariner

Pontius Navigator
8th Apr 2015, 20:29
I have the Tony Blackman book ‘Nimrod Rise and Fall’ and re-reading the prologue ‘The Hunt’ about how the crew of XV262 spent 10 hours in the air chasing a contact that SOSUS had not detected I could not help but think that the crew had done everything but dropped a weapon on the contact.

SOSUS was good but its coverage may not have been total.

Then not every detection was based on SOSUS which is not to say SOSUS didn't also hold contact. SOSUS information, like ULTRA, was not always disclosed to crews and sometimes it was only briefed to selected crew members.

I just found the following link on the cobweb. Well worth a read. I am pleased to say there is an error but I am not going to say what it is :)
http://www.tacopshq.com/MBX/Globalthunder/Restricted/NorthernTheaterCommand/Documents/Intel/GRU-SOSUS.html

taxydual
8th Apr 2015, 21:08
was not always disclosed to crews and sometimes it was only briefed to selected crew members.

Bit like your missing link, Pontius :hmm:

Shackman
8th Apr 2015, 21:37
Yes, there were quite a few deeply classified sources which were sometimes better than, or instead of, SOSUS. A year in JMIC at HQCC before joining the MR fleet taught me to go where the tasking said, and see what transpired. Even the outdated MR Shack could find things that others (such as P-3s) couldn't/didn't. The Nimrod was a massive step ahead and did so much more, and I still can't believe the shortsightedness of the demise of the role - a true MRCA

Yes Rossian, we were good, but we were, strangely, an extension of the silent service; very few outside the fleet knew more than a fraction of what really went on.

And now it has been thrown away. :sad:

Courtney Mil
8th Apr 2015, 22:33
The rules for nuclear release are, and always have been, pretty clear.

Cold War one thing. Shooting war altogether something else.

No one was patrolling looking for a kill, as long as everything was going OK.

1771 DELETE
8th Apr 2015, 23:13
As far as i am aware, there are very few units/platforms that routinely practice their wartime role with the potential enemy. We did this all the time, sometimes several times in a week. Sleep / fly / sleep /fly happened regularly, even in peacetime we would occasionally get close to max hours limits.
With the exception of dropping a weapon, proceedures were the same in war and peace.

Courtney Mil
8th Apr 2015, 23:18
UKAD does it all the time.

reynoldsno1
9th Apr 2015, 00:17
The intelligence organisations were often out of kilter as well. I recall carrying out a surveillance task on the way to Keflavik in the late 70's . The brief was perfunctory, and the task boring - found nothing. On return two days later, we were given the same task, but briefed by the USN - totally different and we found all sorts going on. The intelligence officer at ISK had a WTF? moment, but was quicky shut up by 18Gp. We were told to forget everything in the USN brief ...:mad: Yep, very silent at times :rolleyes:

RandomBlah
9th Apr 2015, 00:20
Dear Rossian and Shackman,

There are still a few of us left that are still "very bloody good" at the missions you describe.

Regards

RB.

fergineer
9th Apr 2015, 04:35
One day the stories will be told without fear from the mob.

Pontius Navigator
9th Apr 2015, 08:15
Taxydual, fixed, sorry about that.

taxydual
9th Apr 2015, 08:29
PN. Thank You. Worth waiting for.

Hempy
9th Apr 2015, 09:42
the aim was to be able to say at the end of the process "If I were to drop a weapon now this guy would be toast"

This pretty much sums up the cold war in a nutshell imo. Regardlesss of the platform (MRA, QRF, Subs, etc) the aim was to say to the Sovs "don't even think about it.."

p.s as an aside, I read somewhere once that when the wall came down and the ICBMs were coming off-line, a US observer to the decommissioning of Russian silos noted that half of them were filled with ground-water and wouldn't have fired anyway. It may have been that the USSR waged the cold war for 45 years mostly on hubris, but I guess it only took one Bear...

oxenos
9th Apr 2015, 10:13
Courtney Mil

"UKAD does it all the time."

Everyone knows about UKAD doing it. Few knew about Maritime doing it.
In the Cold War there were regularly pictures in the papers of Bears/Bisons being watched by Phantoms/Lightnings, but how can a photograph depict a Shackleton/Nimrod at work, unless the submarine obligingly surfaces to have its picture taken?
During the war, a photograph of a huge convoy carrying food, oil and tanks to Britain, being escorted by a Sunderland, conveyed to the public just what Coastal did. It is the lack of public knowledge of Coastal and 18 Gp's activities in the Cold War that has resulted in a lack of concern at the loss of MPA. If the public were told that there would in future be no UKAD they would be concerned, simply because of its greater visibility

tartare
9th Apr 2015, 10:14
I knew Sosus was big, but looking at the maps, I hadn't realised just how big - thought it only tracked Russian subs coming out of port.
Didn't realise it covered the Atlantic Gap between UK and Greenland, as well as down past Spain!
The more one learns about the technology of the Cold War, the scope and scale is amazing.
The resources piled into operations like Chrome Dome.
Fractional Orbital Bombardment, SDI, IMINT and SIGINT.
And I'm sure us civilians still don't even know the half of it.

Shackman
9th Apr 2015, 15:00
UKAD does it all the time

Just remind me what type of torpedo they can drop?

Flap62
9th Apr 2015, 19:57
As far as i am aware, there are very few units/platforms that routinely practice their wartime role with the potential enemy.

Shack,

Courtney was answering the point raised in the post immediately preceding his. His point is perfectly valid.

1771 DELETE
9th Apr 2015, 20:06
UKAD might do it occasionally, i know recently they have been busy recently, but they never ever did it on anything near the same scale as the MPA. I think there would have been more 10 Bear badges on MPA crews than there was on the F4 crews, but thats another story that cannot be told.

Woff1965
10th Apr 2015, 15:36
What were Bear badges awarded for?

Assuming you don't have to kill me after telling me.

Pontius Navigator
12th Apr 2015, 18:52
BTW, in the early days of the Mk1 Nimrod one of the most guarded secrets was it could prosecute a target but could not kill it.

The Mk30 torpedo was quiet and had a good endurance by even a submerged conventional could out run it. The Mk44 was faster but could still be evaded by a fast nuke but no sweat, even if it got a hit it wouldn't go bang. They didn't fix the fuzes until after the Mk46 came along. From 1980 it was a different game.

What was important was that it was thought it was deadly.

aw ditor
12th Apr 2015, 19:26
Frighten it with a BUB?

Shackman
13th Apr 2015, 10:26
We certainly frightened a Polaris boat in the South China Sea with SUS's in 1971 (that'll teach him to enter an exercise area!). ASV21, 1C Sonics and Mk 1 eyeball strike again.

oxenos
13th Apr 2015, 10:35
Mock ye not the humble BUB. Doing practice bombing with BUBs on a friendly snorkelling O-boat off Singapore, boat suddenly surfaced and became less friendly. Turned out one BUB had hit the snorkel mast and all the smoke had been sucked into the boat.
Came across the boat's captain 35 years later, and his first comment was " You're the B----- who sent all that smoke down my chimney". Apparently it does not smell nice.

Tourist
13th Apr 2015, 10:52
Is it just me, or does anybody else find the whole "I was a nimrod hero, we were doing secret things which make us special but can't talk about it" bollocks deeply unprofessional?

Nimrod will never have the credibility of rotary/zoomy, so give it up. What you are doing seems very waltish.

If you can't talk about it, then don't talk about it!

Just because Nimrod will never impress the girls doesn't mean you should big your part up. If you really were doing something "special", then don't be so insecure about it. Rest safe in the knowledge that you did your bit.

I'm sure many different branches have their own "special" secrets, but most are quiet about them. Often the most important part of keeping a secret is hiding the fact that there is a secret....

Stanwell
13th Apr 2015, 11:27
I just wish I knew what the hell they're on about.

I'm ex-services myself but where people assume that we all know what BUBs and SUSs are, I feel a hankering to go elsewhere.

Gents, please keep in mind that you're addressing a wider audience here.

Rossian
13th Apr 2015, 11:49
.....I suppose all those ex-submariners who covered this field extensively in a doco at the back end of last year were being professional because they were ex-RN. They weren't "trying to big themselves up" were they?

Actually, no they weren't. No more than any of the aviation community are trying to "big themselves up". They gave the public at large a genuine insight into maritime operations during the Cold War - and a fascinating insight it was too. But there were areas they did not venture into in the same way that people here have kept within certain bounds.

The Ancient Mariner

PS ~Stanwell BUB = break up bomb -usuallyabout 28 lbs that left a smoke mark on the surface of the sea.
SUS = signal underwater sound - created a small bang which indicated to the sub you were exercising with that you had carried out a practice attack

Hempy
13th Apr 2015, 11:57
Tourist, to be fair the other branches you mention still have relevance. The raison d'être of the vomit comet was all those pesky kilos, alfas and (God forbid) deltas that died along with the USSR, which died along with the Nimrod. It's no so much 'walting' as a 25 year reunion special.

Tourist
13th Apr 2015, 12:01
Rossian

Are you denying that every Nimrod thread is peppered with references to "other" things that Nimrod did?

Very very important things that if only we knew would totally change how we looked at dull Nimroding?

Aint going to happen. Talk about it or don't talk about it, I don't really care. I'm quite sure the Russians know about it by now anyhow. If they didn't, I'm sure all the hinting has led them to the answer by now, and anyway Nimrod has gone!

The semi-telling just hints of kids wanting to appear cool because they have a "secret".

I suspect that just like when we were kids, the hinters are actually worried that once in the open it would be less interesting than they hope it might be.

Hempy, fair point, if it wasn't for how many of the posts pre-dated the demise of Nimrod.

Guernsey Girl II
13th Apr 2015, 12:24
Tourist,

Is that why your current type on your public profile is "secret"?

Tourist
13th Apr 2015, 12:54
Yes.

My current job is so spectacularly boring, I'm trying to big it up a little to impart an air of mystery......hint that perhaps it is secretly where all the special pilots go..

Can't think where I got that idea from...?

Biggus
13th Apr 2015, 13:53
Tourist,

So why, if you know what to expect, do you bother to read obvious Nimrod threads? :=


Is there a part of you that still travels in hope rather than expectation? ;)

Hempy
13th Apr 2015, 14:11
^ he hath a wife, you know.

Tourist
13th Apr 2015, 15:24
Biggus




I ask myself the same question...


To be fair, from the title, this thread is hardly the most obvious of Nimrod "we were awesome, not at all dull monotony no no really" threads.

Biggus
13th Apr 2015, 15:28
Tourist,

True - the title doesn't really give it away.



But as soon as you read the first post...!!

Tourist
13th Apr 2015, 15:29
Ah, but by then I'm hooked....

Janda
13th Apr 2015, 16:02
Rossian, I was a part of the crew that hosted the Panorama team for the Cold Deep War. They were with us for a week. We took them flying and also a sim ride. Always remember being staggered when they asked us about SOSSUS. Apparently the Norwegians had told them all about it. Does anyone know if a copy of programme still exists?

Hempy
13th Apr 2015, 16:46
http://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/529238-those-former--persuasion.html

Janda
14th Apr 2015, 03:32
Hempy if that link for me it is to a different programme. I featured in the one in 1977 (?) called the Cold Deep War. But thanks anyway.

Hempy
14th Apr 2015, 04:35
Did you read more than the first post?

Janda
14th Apr 2015, 08:23
Yes I did see that link Hempy but unless I missed something did not find an answer to my question regarding availability of the panorama programme. However, at my age missing something is a daily occurrence. :confused:

Pontius Navigator
14th Apr 2015, 17:38
Tourist, I don't think it is a case of bigging it up. For many in the RAF, particularly ground crew, all the know is aircraft take off, aircraft pound circuit, aircraft land.

Where there is media coverage such as an RN drugs bust, or a QRA, or Army action then it gives a glimpse of what the Forces do.

Where there is little media exposure then threads like this serve to enlighten rather than Willy waving.

I gave a talk on Bomber operations and in the audience was my ex-boss a fighter man. He said he had had no idea where we had planned to fly.

You may be interested to know that Lord Hennessey runs a parallel history project that endeavours to match archive material with contemporary accounts.

alfred_the_great
14th Apr 2015, 19:18
The RN is also running a historical account of Cold War SM operations, at UNCLASS and various other levels. Contact the RN Historical Branch if you wish to add to this.

Yellow Sun
14th Apr 2015, 20:33
Janda,
Yes I did see that link Hempy but unless I missed something did not find an answer to my question regarding availability of the panorama programme. However, at my age missing something is a daily occurrence.

I don't think you missed anything. I too have looked for Tom Mangold's "The Deep Cold War" and failed to find it readily available. It is listed in the British Film Institute (BFI) catalogue (http://explore.bfi.org.uk/4ce2b6d6c0b29) so we may probably assume that a copy of it lies in the National Film Archive located in the former SSA at Gaydon (https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.1861506,-1.5346619,316m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en)

It was shown on Day 1 of the Nimrod OCU for a number of years and I guess that we had a U-Matic format copy of the programme. This was the pre-digital era and I can only assume that a digital copy never became available. I cannot recall when we stopped showing it.

There is now a great deal of information about SOSUS (http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_25/sosus.htm) in the public domain. As you know this was not the case when the programme was first aired. However there is no doubt that the Soviets had a good picture of the system and its capabilities gained from the Walker-Whitwoth spy ring (http://news.usni.org/2014/09/02/john-walker-spy-ring-u-s-navys-biggest-betrayal) and from observation of our activities. That they certainly knew the location of some of the chains was evident from the number of times SAR was scrambled to investigate a cable break and found a Moma "Survey" vessel (http://www.russianwarrior.com/STMMain.htm?1963vec_Moma.htm&1) departing the datum at best speed!

In the early 1980s I recall seeing an article in an unclassified Soviet Armed Forces magazine that gave a pretty accurate description of the procedures we employed to prosecute SOSUS derived contacts. IIRC Aviation Week published an article a short time late that was almost certainly based upon the Soviet source; the graphics were remarkably similar!

The gradual withdrawal of Soviet Northern Fleet SSBNs to patrol areas closer to their bases (http://americanhistory.si.edu/subs/work/missions/warfare/index.html#) coincided with the reduction of radiated noise levels by Soviet vessels. But fixed SOSUS arrays were now being augmented by passive towed array ships (http://fas.org/irp/program/collect/surtass.htm) and later by active units.

The fixed array system was integrated into IUSS which has itself been significantly curtailed in recent years. (http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a401150.pdf) Whether or not the Russian system remains operational is a matter for conjecture.

It should be clear that NATO and Soviet tactics and purposes were quite different. SOSUS was aimed at detecting and tracking Soviet SSBNs deploying (and on station) in the North Atlantic whilst the Soviet equivalent was aimed at protecting their SSBN assets and bases from intruders.

One does question the reasoning behind some of the security decisions in those days. It was clearly evident that the Soviets had a fairly good knowledge of SOSUS and most maritime crews who put a little thought into it quickly deduced that the Soviets were conducting acoustic surveillance of their own. However crews were very rarely briefed on this, even when tasked against Soviet vessels involved in this activity. I am sure that many will recall "Svanetya" or "Ribachiy" and the heavenly twins "Vavilov" and "Lebdev". One does wonder if a little more openness might have increased the effectiveness of our operations.

YS

nimbev
14th Apr 2015, 21:22
Nimrod will never have the credibility of rotary/zoomy

Tourist ... What on earth are you talking about? Please do explain!!! :ugh::ugh:

nimbev
14th Apr 2015, 21:27
SOSUS was aimed at detecting and tracking Soviet SSBNs deploying (and on station) in the North Atlantic and Pacific and elsewhere ...

O-P
15th Apr 2015, 01:25
Tourist,


Just face it, no rotary will never have any credibility when compared to a "zoomy". I spent more productive time working with the MR2 than I ever did with the rotary down draft.


A very, very, long time ago they all should've been booted off to the Army/RN where they belong.

Tourist
15th Apr 2015, 03:39
Nimbev


I thought I was reasonably clear.


When it comes to street cred, Nimrod is not good due to the dullness of the job and the public image of a large crew of flightsuit extreme load testers.


Nobody trying to impress a girl comes out with "I'm a Nimrod pilot".


OP


Nice try, but ask the recruiters what the young kids off the street want to fly nowadays.....


Incidentally, they won't say "Erm, I would like to spend some productive MR2 time mister recruiter please. I hear the girls really dig MPA"

Roland Pulfrew
15th Apr 2015, 05:16
nobody trying to impress a girl comes out with "I'm a Nimrod Pilot

I don't know, worked for me quite a few times. Great advantage of the Nimrod and its crew was ability to host on board at air shows. Never seen a fast jet crew offering cocktails in the cockpit. Heard hundreds of them droning on about being a fast jet pilot.

Reminds me of all those old jokes: How do you tell when you've met a fast jet pilot? He'll tell you! What's the difference between a fast jet and a fast jet pilot? One stops whining when the engines shut down! ;)

Hempy
15th Apr 2015, 05:32
1BzU1sYPjzo

Tourist
15th Apr 2015, 06:22
Roland

As you well know, all that happens at the airshow is that other pilots of aircraft without the onboard space come to the E3/Nimrod wing party and steal the girls.

You are essentially reduced to the status of facilitator or "madam"

Roland Pulfrew
15th Apr 2015, 06:35
Roland

As you well know, all that happens at the airshow is that other pilots of aircraft without the onboard space come to the E3/Nimrod wing party and steal the girls.

You are essentially reduced to the status of facilitator or "madam"

In your dreams Tourist. We just used to feed FJ pilots lots of innocuous tasting cocktails, light the blue touch paper and retire to watch taking the girls with us.

Tourist
15th Apr 2015, 07:38
That's right Roland.

I blame Hollywood. All the sexy movies based around transport aircraft pulling 1.5g instilling unrealistic expectations of passion with multi-engine aircrew.

All the girls dream of 30 seconds under an overweight Nimrod WSOP.....

"....oh please tell me again about the secret missions you can't really talk about...*sigh*...."

Sandy Parts
15th Apr 2015, 08:00
Please stop feeding the troll known as Tourist. Your are merely encouraging him/her and causing him to fill up this otherwise interesting thread with his obvious fishing attempts :rolleyes:. Thanks.

Hempy
15th Apr 2015, 08:04
It's a catchy tune though!

O-P
15th Apr 2015, 13:22
Tourist.


Nice try, park an egg whisk and a Typhoon in front of a newbie and give him the choice.....We all know what the answer will be.

Tourist
15th Apr 2015, 13:25
OP

Go ask your recruiters....

It's not really important. We all agree where Nimrod comes on the role disposal dreamsheet.

p.s. I personally would try the Typhoon, but then I've done rotary so a change would be nice...

BEagle
15th Apr 2015, 16:10
Notwithstanding that, to the average Spam airshow spectator, anything painted hemp must be a Nimrod, when we attended the Houston airshow with our big brown Vickers FunBus not long after the Toronto Nimrod crash, it was clear that the previous year's Nimrod and its crew had achieved huge admiration amongst the locals. They were terribly sad at the loss and it was abundantly clear that the grief was genuine.

As for RW or FJ, I recall the tale of someone who'd been through the NATO JPTS course. When the postings were announced, he found that he'd been posted to fly the Wessex. "What in hell's a Wessex?", his US course mates asked, whilst pondering their forthcoming F-15 postings. When he told them, they couldn't believe it, "A helicopter? Jeez - who did you upset? That's a job for a goddam Army NCO!".....:hmm:

teeteringhead
15th Apr 2015, 17:17
"A helicopter? Jeez - who did you upset? That's a job for a goddam Army NCO!".... Or just possibly ..... errrr: CAS, AMP, AOC 2 Gp, AOC 22 Gp, Air Sec, Comdt Cranwell etc etc etc........ ;)

Oh - and me! :O

Shadwell the old
16th Apr 2015, 14:56
I feel really sorry for tourist having to rely on his aircraft type rather than good looks and personality to pull the girls. Mrs Tourist (if there is one) has my sympathy.


Everyone knows that the one the girls really go for is/was the Nimrod AEO. To a man they are handsome, possess a sparkling wit, were intelligent and like the aircraft, they have a long satisfying endurance (and are much bigger where it matters) - all the qualities the ladies seek. AEO's like the aircraft they used to fly (and often captained), had a long endurance, whereas with the fast jet boys it was all over quickly (unless they had a refuel (Viagra?)).


So, there you are Tourist, the secrets laid bare for you to learn from. And you thought the secrets were associated with the mission!

Pontius Navigator
16th Apr 2015, 14:59
StO, your opinion or that of your knockers?:}

BEagle
16th Apr 2015, 15:24
Shadwell the old wrote: AEO's like the aircraft they used to fly (and often captained).....

Ah yes, the old kipper fleet nonsense of backend 'captains'....:rolleyes: Whenever they turned up on other fleets and were asked in what they'd previously flown (note that only the two wing master race actually 'fly' aircraft, Shadwell, half-wingers do not), they'd never say "I was on Nimrods" - it was always "I was a Nimrod 'captain'".....:uhoh:

A Vulcan chum of mine had been unfortunate enough to have been on Nimrods and was very glad to have escaped. He told me how one miserable wet and claggy night they were trying to get back in to Kinloss and had gone around from the first approach at DH...then they tried another and had to go around a second time. As they were climbing away, up came the ar$end 'captain' on the intercom, some wireless operator or sextant-monkey, I gather, who announced "Pilot, can't you go a bit lower next time?"....

Wherupon the First Pilot handed over control to the co-pilot, unstrapped and went aft... "All yours then, Captain!", he announced and went to make himself a coffee.

They diverted!

Rossian
16th Apr 2015, 17:54
.....settle - you may be in danger of "over-egging the pudding" (if I may risk mixing metaphors). Yes we are wonderful chaps but the likes of Beagle are unconvincible. Save your breath.

I always remember the utterly, utterly lovely young lady I was talking to at the RAF reception at the Tronno airshow. We were getting on famously until no6 of the Thunderbirds eased in
"Hi I'm with the Thunderbirds" Pauses for "OMG I'm yours."
(I of course didn't exist).

Her response "The who??" made me explode with laughter pick her up whirl around give her a great big kiss and put back down
"You, sweetheart, have just made my day"

He slunk away not seen again for the rest of the evening.

FJ pukes? Huh!!

The Ancient Mariner

The Old Fat One
16th Apr 2015, 20:23
Beags,

I was one such backend Nimrod Kapitan and I agree with you...it was nonsense. It was also trivial, as everybody knew what their jobs were and got on with them, be that Tac Nav, P1, Lead Dry, lead wet whatever.

See good crews and good aircrew understood the name of the game was to be a team...and by large 95% of kipper fleet were very very good at being a team.

Of course, all fleets had their dodgy 5% (you know, the guys who could not quite cut it), but on Nimrods, these chaps, whatever their brevet, would not have got the captaincy gig.

Which is why your story - as oft repeated as it is - is bollocks.

PS not saying it didn't happen - it probably happened a thousand times...but not from the captain...from every other outspoken ****er on the crew. And if the pilot bit...more fool him.
PPS All yours then, Captain!", he announced and went to make himself a coffee That bolded bit alone gives the game away.

Lonewolf_50
16th Apr 2015, 22:00
This conversation has drifted from "all but dropping the weapon" on hostile forces to "all but dropping the hammer" on various pilot fans and groupies.

Some may wish to mark on top of the buoy and stabilize the plot! :}
(Plot error can lead to not hitting the target, be it Sub or Sheila).

BEagle
16th Apr 2015, 22:11
Which is why your story - as oft repeated as it is - is bollocks.

TOFO, I assure you that it was 100% true.

nimbev
16th Apr 2015, 22:52
Beags

A Vulcan chum of mine had been unfortunate enough to have been on Nimrods and was very glad to have escapedThat statement alone shows that your story is utter bo****ks

Perhaps
a) your 'Vulcan chum' couldn't make it on Nimrods and had to move to a less demanding role, hence his vitriol and spreading of malicious rumours

or

b) he was having you on

or most likely

c) both a and b

I ask you, how could anyone want to escape from Nimrods?:E:E

John Eacott
16th Apr 2015, 23:52
Tourist has my support in his mutterings: no aluminium death-tube driver ever has a valid response when it is pointed out that you all look the same on the end of a rescue hoist :p

As for back seat captains, we had the same issue in the ASW game, but it was never a problem that I came across. Except 2/3rds of the way across from the South Island to the North to spend a night ashore at RNZAF Ohakea when the boss didn't like the look of the swell and ordered a return to mother. He was the CO, but sitting in the back narrowed his view on what was important in life!



This thread title obviously confuses, since those of us who played would see it as a reference to "the" weapon, whereas I suspect it was intended to be about dropping "a" weapon? Thus a difference of replies depending on the mindset of the poster :hmm:

O-P
17th Apr 2015, 02:42
Quoting an Army song;


"The wings on the bus go round and round, round and round, round and round.


The wings on the bus go round and round. ALL f#^king day long"

Tourist
17th Apr 2015, 03:41
Nimbev

Isn't "couldn't make it on Nimrods" just a nice way of saying "chopped"?

You know, as in "Algy is a lovely chap Biggles, but from what I've seen of his flying skill, he couldn't even make it on Nimrod!"

Shadwell
I'm considering trialling "I'm a Nimrod AEO" as a chat up line, but I'm concerned that I'll be asked where I've left my gut for the evening and how I removed the smell of wee.

Party Animal
17th Apr 2015, 05:53
reception at the Tronno airshow


Rossian - many of us are familiar with the Toronto airshow but I guess with your crew, you meant it was a case of volunteering to participate in the 'Tranny' airshow?

;)

fergineer
17th Apr 2015, 09:15
Flew with some great non pilot captains who when the chips were down just said get us home you guys at the front, no questions on anything we did cos when it came to flying we were the boys, when it came to tactics they were.

oxenos
17th Apr 2015, 10:44
Well put, feringeer.

Unfortunately, BEAgle is off on his hobby horse AGAIN, and won't listen, and Tourist's only interest in aviation is pulling birds.

Tourist
17th Apr 2015, 11:22
erm.....it's not my only interest, just the main one.....

Pontius Navigator
17th Apr 2015, 11:24
Freg, indeed. Without a tac display, and hurtling around a mad trap at night would stretch any pilot captain.

On an aluminium pursuit ship it may well have a captain and a GIB, but even BEagle must admit that opcon in a Vulcan would swop from front to back throughout the sortie. The only crew member that only had an advisory roll was the copilot.

I know BEagle could argue that the captain could ignore the 'advice' but so to do would jeopardise the mission. As an aside, I once ordered an Air Cmdr, later CDS, who complied with my instruction and post-flight debriefed my captain that I had given the order prematurely.

Rossian
17th Apr 2015, 11:44
.....I was trying to phoneticise the locals' pronunciation of the name of that fair city. It seemed to be deemed a bit naff to go for "Tor-on-to" 3 syllables with even stress - it had to be "Tronno" with 2 syllables.

That all said this is a classical Pprune thread drift. Maybe we should reset the plot as per LW50's suggestion or go off task and have a couple of beers in the Scruffs.

The Ancient Mariner

I'll buy

BEagle
17th Apr 2015, 12:39
Pontius Navigator alleged: ....opcon in a Vulcan would swop from front to back throughout the sortie. The only crew member that only had an advisory roll was the copilot.


Nope. Of course guidance came from the lower deck at times and most IP-to-release and visual bombing was conducted by the co-pilot. But never at any time was 'opcon' ever removed from the Captain.

For example, during fighter affil., fishpool information from the Nav Radar, RWR information from the AEO and visual information from the non-flying pilot was passed to the pilot flying, to enable the threat to be honoured, but the Captain always made the decisions.

I always thought that FJ mates were very restrained at air show parties when invaded by a Bandar-log of teenage plastic sergeants from the kipper fleet, banging on about how wunnerful they all were and how FJ flying was sooo inferior. "Why do you put up with such utter BS", I asked an F-4 mate once. "They don't know any better - but we do", was the reply.

LeadDry
17th Apr 2015, 15:19
I'd like to suggest - and hope - BEagle that your appreciation for what we all did is actually universal and your tales are purely banter. Like others have said, some suited the Nimrod's unique role, stresses and team-led ways of working whereas for others the system helped them find a better place. There was certainly no tolerance for the type of you talk you repeated in the early-2000s era.




Going back to the topic, does helping someone else drop their weapon count?

West Coast
17th Apr 2015, 15:20
It's convenient to have a story for every situation.

BEagle
17th Apr 2015, 15:36
RAF Finningley about 20 years ago, since you obviously doubt me, westie....:rolleyes:

Lonewolf_50
17th Apr 2015, 15:44
... and Tourist's only interest in aviation is pulling birds. Tourist is in good company, if that's even remotely close to true. I doubt that we in the USN were the only ones who considered our wings to be "chick magnets." :}

ACW342
17th Apr 2015, 15:48
Trawler from Ardglas, NI, snagged by submarine.:

Trawler skipper tells of 'submarine dragging incident' in Irish Sea | UK news | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/apr/16/trawler-skipper-submarine-dragging-incident-irish-sea-karen)

No MPA - No deterrent?

Marcantilan
17th Apr 2015, 16:35
mmm, a russian submarine... or another blue-on-blue?

Back in the days, they blamed the soviets also, but own boats are mostly responsible.

The day an Irish fishing boat was sunk by a British submarine (http://www.thejournal.ie/shelga-state-papers-1984-1837788-Jan2015/) (Specially this one - mostly because HMS Porpoise was hidden after the incident, but one worker spoke to the press about the damage, and no longer the soviets were the culprits)

Revealed: MoD admits to 16 nuclear submarine crashes | Herald Scotland (http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/transport-environment/revealed-mod-admits-to-16-nuclear-submarine-crashes-1.1066455)

So on and so on.

Pontius Navigator
17th Apr 2015, 17:56
If it was a bomber sneaking south through St George's Channel then it clearly wasn't one of ours, if you see what I mean.

Then if it was out of Barrow then it wasn't one of ours either.

Then if it was one of ours it clearly wasn't as we don't do that sort of thing and own up immediately.


:)

Bannock
17th Apr 2015, 19:33
I smell BS,
Did the fisherman say how big it was before it got away ?

JW always atracts dubious claims followed by compensation request.

Lets see how long it is before the tree huggers start blaiming the Navy for a dead haddock washed up on a beach!

Theres no sex like a Casex!

Dimmer Switch
18th Apr 2015, 07:29
Everyone knows that the one the girls really go for is/was the Nimrod AEO

Jeez Shadwell, did you HAVE to spill those beans ?! I've spent years successfully concealing how awesome I was :sad:

The Old Fat One
18th Apr 2015, 07:44
TOFO, I assure you that it was 100% true.

The point escapes you beags...

Whether the tale is established in an actual incident or not, is irrelevant. It is bollocks because it purports to represent a problem that never, ever existed (and not in a banterish way either).

As fergineer so adroitly points out, we all knew what out job was and we got on with it as the ace team we were - "labels" were irrelevant. Of course we had knobs, but they did not get awarded captaincy...or for that matter, lead operator slots or first nav slots.

Regrettably, quite a few AEOs were of the knobbish variety, mainly in the early days, but that was entirely because OASC had an iron fist over AEO selection. If the fleet had had a veto, that would never have happened either.

Apologies for the thread drift.

PS

Tourist...thinking back quite a while now, we had our fair share of legendary ladies men and they were pretty much all rear crew. More time on their hands to hone their skills I guess.

LeadDry
18th Apr 2015, 08:07
Sounds like it was more fun when it was all blue seas and air shows rather than sandy deserts! Even on R&R the 'behaviour expectations' blunties were always close enough. Something else that I'm sure will rattle BEagle is that there's often more graduates down the back than sitting at the front since he retired. And yes some of that education could make a difference in the outcome of the more technical parts of the mission.

John Botwood
18th Apr 2015, 08:23
TOFO
Regrettably, quite a few AEOs were of the knobbish variety, mainly in the early days, but that was entirely because OASC had an iron fist over AEO selection. If the fleet had had a veto, that would never have happened either.


You're not whistling Dixie there Tofo.


Mo

Wander00
18th Apr 2015, 09:06
I recall at least one AEOp turning up at the Towers in the earlyish 80s and DDIOT being told that the student would pass, come what may, as his skills were required to fill a commissioned post. ISTR he actually did rather well on IOT, but the "system" seemed to have the whip hand in at least that case, not IOT.

ExRAFRadar
18th Apr 2015, 09:51
As the OP I’d like to say thanks all for the replies even if some did some of them did stretch credibility a bit.
I mean, female choosing FJ Pilot over Nimrod Crew.

As if.

Imagine the scene. Nimrod crew member and FJ Pilot vying for attention of very attractive lady.

She already knows what the FJ Pilot does because he told everyone within the first 30 seconds of meeting them and then spent the next 60 seconds explaining that he doesn’t have a rare facial birthmark it is the marks of his Oxygen mask, which he has to use because “I like to fly really high, don’t I”

She asks the Nimrod chap “What do you do in the RAF then”.

Nimrod God takes a small sip of his ice cold Chardonnay, looks into her eyes and says “I’m afraid what I do is so secret that even the Prime Minister does not know what it is. But because of our incredible endurance we stay up for absolute ages, making sure every position we find our self in is perfect, and that after the mission climax we can get back on task with a very short turnaround time”

Quick flash of the pearly whites and a suggestive wink and that’s it.

Job Jobbed.

But on a somewhat more serious note.

I am finding it slightly hard to articulate exactly what I mean but it is along these lines.

I’m thinking mainly of the Cold War years so no offense meant to any aircrew post 1990 or thereabouts

Air Defenders and the Strike/Recce groups obviously practiced their missions and at Spade had the privilege of seeing them in simulated action. As a young ScopeDope fresh out of training at Drayton having learnt about CRC/CRP’s, Type 84/85, Nodding Height Finders, UKADR etc.

I suddenly found myself having to learn what a ‘4 Ship FRA on Prior Lancey’ meant along with a whole crap load of new TLAs and Exercise names.

A10’s on CAS, Jags doing BAI, F4G Weasels doing SEAD and GR1s on OCA. Not to mention that F-111’s wanted to bomb various villages in Cumbria for some reason.

The Air Defenders were there as well. RAF F4s, USAF F15s and F16 on things like Mallet Blow.

And all of them lost aircrew at some point practising for what they all hoped would never come, but if it did come they would be the very best at the job they had to do.

But I think the point I was trying to make with ‘All but dropping the weapon’ was that the MPA fleet were practising against, for the most part, the actual Soviet Subs and Surface craft they would engage in War. And over the actual ‘ground’ they would be doing it over. The plans they made and missions they flew would require very little changes to go from ‘Track Target’ to ‘Engage Target’.

I know that is a simplification but I hope it makes sense and please correct me if I am wrong.

So when I said ‘A Silent War’ I meant it as no disrespect to any of the other Aircrew that flew the vast disparate types that hurled themselves all over Europe during that period.

Thinking about it I should give a nod to the Royal Navy Hunter-Killers and ASW types bit this an aviation forum after all and ANY RAF Aircrew trade would pull the lady before the Navy got a look in.

By the way I believe a poster thought I should have said ‘All but dropping a weapon’ instead of ‘the Weapon’. I think they felt I was implying a nuke but I wasn’t. The weapon could have been a Torpedo, depth charge etc.

Did MPA carry depth charges?

Have a good weekend all.

Tourist
18th Apr 2015, 12:13
ExRAFRadar

Beautifully done. You had me going with that post.

Hook line and sinker.

I would never have realised it was a waaa if it wasn't for the "ANY RAF Aircrew trade would pull the lady before the Navy got a look in." line.

Just too outrageous for even a crab to believe.:ok:

ExRAFRadar
18th Apr 2015, 13:23
:)

Hope Courtney is in a good mood or I am toast.

Pontius Navigator
18th Apr 2015, 14:15
ERR, good post, the only depth charge on the Nimrod was about 10kt :)

Quite right, the Nimrod got to play with many of the live radars although many, for obvious reason were not heard much. For those radars we used the SIM with, hopefully, the proper modes and tactics. Playing with the real hardware was easier and sometimes we got some cracking results even a sonobuoy inside a submarine.

JointShiteFighter
18th Apr 2015, 16:10
Everyone knows that the one the girls really go for is/was the Nimrod AEO. To a man they are handsome, possess a sparkling wit, were intelligent and like the aircraft, they have a long satisfying endurance (and are much bigger where it matters) - all the qualities the ladies seek. AEO's like the aircraft they used to fly (and often captained), had a long endurance, whereas with the fast jet boys it was all over quickly (unless they had a refuel (Viagra?)).

You know the saying, Shadwell:

"It's not all about the size of the boat, it's about the motion in the ocean." ;) That's the difference between FJ and ME!

oxenos
19th Apr 2015, 10:28
Did one of the early Nimrod courses (1970 ), and depth charges were still on the list of cleared weapons. Saw some loaded on an aircraft we were due to fly, planning to drop them for training. (We had dropped some for training on the Shack course , 1964 ) They were rusty as hell, you could just make out the date of manufacture, 1944, and they were weeping some nasty looking liquid. We said we were not happy with them, they were off loaded, and shortly afterwards they disappeared from the menu.

Lonewolf_50
20th Apr 2015, 12:51
The bucket of sunshine that was usable could be deployed by S-3's but I don't recall whether or not our P-3's had it in their cert: probably did. Memory foggy regarding the halcyon days of playing tag with Ivan.

There was at least one rotary wing that could carry same bucket of sunshine, but there was some question about whether it was fast enough to get out of the blast radius once it delivered. :eek:

This whole lash up reminded me of that tactical nuke Mortar the Army developed back in the 50's. :ugh:

Tourist
20th Apr 2015, 13:26
Yes, our seaking certainly had the bucket. We could fly away not too bad. The wasp, however...

MAINJAFAD
20th Apr 2015, 18:39
This whole lash up reminded me of that tactical nuke Mortar the Army developed back in the 50's.

I assume your thinking of the M-28 / M-29 'Davey Crockett' nuclear recoilless gun. It only had a variable yield of 10 or 20 tonnes (yes, 0.020 kT), though the radiation was at instant lethal levels at ranges of over 400 meters, the weapon itself having a range 2000 meters. Needless to say if you fired it with the wrong winds or at too close a target the weapon effects would kill the operators, but in correct operation the weapons 17 second flight time gave the firing party enough time to dive into a slit trench to avoid the majority of the weapon effects. The stated fact that the weapon instant effects exceeded the weapon's maximum range is a load of BS. This site has a good powerpoint presentation link on it showing the attack profile of a WE-177 NDB from a Helicopter (along with the V-force / FJ attack options for the weapon) which is not as suicidal as it sounds.

http://www.nuclear-weapons.info/vw.htm

Lonewolf_50
20th Apr 2015, 20:41
I assume your thinking of the M-28 / M-29 'Davey Crockett' nuclear recoilless gun.
Thanks for the details. :ok: As we mere mortals hardly control wind direction and velocity, the DC remains a "sorta good idea but not really" from where I sit. I do realize that it was a product of its times.