F15 Court Martial
 

This RAF atco and Gatco member is about to be Court Martialled. Any ideas why the CM is being held in Northern Ireland - would it be to discourage friends of the accused from attending? Or am I being cynical? I believe the service being provided at the time of this tragedy was RIS - doesn't it leave you Airforce guys worried that, like him, you could face the very real prospect of going to jail for being part of an accident?
Although I'm not a member, you should all be aware that Gatco have helped the accused enormously; £50K to date - but sadly there is no more money; he's expected to pay an additional £65K before legal - aid is made available. For what it's worth, I think this whole fiasco stinks and brings the RAF into disrepute. Any thoughts?

Just for those of us not up to speed on the case Mick...summarise!:rolleyes:

This is difficult because of the pending court case, suffice to say that one of your own is being hung out to dry. If my memory serves me right, RIS places the onus for terrain clearance on the pilot. Ask around, you'll get more details from the mil atco's - from what I hear, they're watching with great interest or is it horror?

f15 court martial
 

i was on duty in the ops room at leuchars when it happened,im not in the raf anymore. personally i think it stinks, my opionion is the service or should i say certain people are looking to cover themselves. why they should be doing this is a mystery to me after all as has been said they were on a ris. would the fact that one of the pilots was a lt col have anything to do with it? as for the court martial in northern ireland im guessing that as that has a court martial centre and leuchars doesnt may have something to do with it.

NI has a very well-equipped CM Centre. I suspect that this is the only reason it would be held there.

I know nothing of the case. Can't offer any words of guidance at all, but if your conscience is clear, I pray that justice prevails.

It is not unknown, of course, for the various Services to want to cover their posterior regions. "Mull of Kintyre" ring any bells? :(

Good luck.

Could it be that NI interperets EU law slightly differently or prehaps does not apply to allow a CM to proceed which as far as I am aware is currently not possible in this country due to EU ruling? Good luck to the controller concerned, (who I used to work with) hope you shove their noses right where they belong.

As an ex-RAF ATCO, I hope that the RAF gets its arse well and truly kicked over this. Too many high heidyins trying to pass the buck down the line - something stinks - just like the Chinook case. Good luck to the ATCO concerned, my thoughts are with you. Is there a fund available to help him out ?

Are CMs open to the public, or interested parties (ie. ATCOs)? Any ideas of the dates and place ? I can get over there pretty easy.

I was under the impression that courts marshall are open to the public. The entry in SROs allways says "Serving personnel attending as members of the public shall wear No1 HD without medals", or words to that effect. Not sure how you would go about it, probably contact SWO, RAF Aldergrove in first instance?

My thoughts are with the ATCO, may common sense prevail.

Hippy.

Last I heard was the date is 16 Sept 2002 at Aldergrove (to help keep the Press away (!!??!!). There's no fighting fund yet, although I know of one well-known ex RAF Wg Cdr atco who is hoping to donate the proceeds from Christmas card sales to help the accused atco. Courts Martials are open to the public and I too will probably make the effort to get there. As an ex RAF atco myself I think this CM is a disgrace; the accused deserves a medal for even attempting to keep sane! Keep your fingers crossed for him and his family, they're under enormous strain.

For those who are still a little unclear as to the story, I shall attempt a précis.

RAF controller working at Scottish ACC providing radar information service, in accordance with unit rules, to a pair of USAF F-15s over the Scottish Highlands (NB. under a RIS the pilot is responsible for his own terrain clearance). The F-15s then fly into the ground with fatal results, despite having been seen in visual contact with the ground over a period by several witnesses. Scottish legal system conducts a hearing and decides there is potentially a case to answer for unlawful killing, but hands jurisdiction over to the RAF. RAF then convenes Court Martial in Northern Ireland, having changed the rules applicable to the provision of a RIS several times in the interim.

My very best wishes to the controller involved for a swift and just outcome.

I have the same wish for another RAF controller with a pending Court Martial following a fatal crash. This one is quite convoluted - RAF controller on NATO detachment in Yugoslavia working United Nations aircraft flown by French Air Force crew. I gather that this hearing could implicate a significant number of members of the RAF hierarchy as to the handling of the deployment.

I sincerely hope that justice is done, and without delay, but the apparent culture within the MoD of "don't confuse me with facts when I've made up my mind" that characterised the Mull of Kintyre Chinook crash investigation does not bode well.

NN, may I just say that some of your 'facts' are somewhat misleading. Whilst I fully accept that this forum is one for opinion and suppostion, please let us be careful when discussing the details of both these incidents. Finally, my thoughts go out to the controller involved; he must have had a torrid time over the past months and I sure we all wish a speedy resolution.

My understanding of the situation is that NN got most of the info absolutely SPOT on (that's a prophetic acronym!).
Apart from suggesting that the accused was working at Scottish ACC rather than Leuchars (mentioned in earlier comment), the rest seems pretty accurate. The handle "whipping boys satco" makes me shiver.

With all due respect to those involved in the Mull of Kintyre incident, and I know there has been a LOT of comment on the flying sites, I think the comment "the apparent culture within the MoD of "don't confuse me with facts when I've made up my mind" that characterised the Mull of Kintyre Chinook crash investigation does not bode well."
I was an ATCO at Scottish Centre and my next door neighbour was the last guy to get a call from this chopper. IMHO and that of everyone I worked with during that period there could be no other explanation for the CFIT, given the Met conditions, than that found by the RAF Board of Enquiry.
As to the F15 CM that does seem very curious, although I do wonder whether they were given descent below the En-Route safety altitude without being informed of same? Although that said they were indeed responsible for their own terrain clearance.

T5C3

I think you will find the the original BoI found that there was too much uncertainty to make a recommendation of Gross Negligence against the crew. 2 Senior officers took a decision to overrule the BoI and they alone declared that the pilots were Grossly Negligent - a decision since, at best "queried" and at worst ridiculed, by a Scottish Fatal Accident Inquiry and a House of Lords Select Committee.

Off thread I know but I could not let that pass.

back on thread!!
 

My God, how glad am I that I am an Ex-Mil ATCO!! The individual concerned was an ARTS instructor of mine some years back (Course 141 - what a drink-ex that was!!). I wish him all the best and I hope he is coping well.

WBS whilst it might be true the N-N may not be strictly correct in all that was posted, my understanding is that the flight was under a RIS at the time of the accident. If that was the case, then Terrain Clearance ultimately remained the pilot’s responsibility.

Mickydrip, now that the date has been published do you know what charges are actually being levelled. I have been unable to get any info on that and I am at a loss to know what the RAF hierarchy and the MoD legal people think that they can get away with. Whatever it is they are pushing on regardless and I think this raises a huge question for other controllers – both mil and civil. That is, if it happens to you how the hell do you pay for it? I know many RAF controllers joined GATCO for the simple reason that Legal costs were provided as part of their membership and all could see the direction in which the MoDs view of corporate liability and the support (or total lack of it) of the troops was going.

On an earlier thread in this forum there was a discussion as to how much Legal support was available from GATCO (a question raised in response to this issue I believe). The informed opinion at the time went for £50K (as it turns out, an all too accurate figure) and it is frightening to think that before the case has even made it into a courtroom this sum has been used up completely. What are controllers supposed to do at that point – roll over and say to the MoD, “yeah O.K, I know you haven’t got a case but as I haven’t got any money, so you win”. I should bl**dy well hope not! It may be that civil controllers could also use their Union to augment the GATCO money (can someone offer a yea/nay on this please) but that option is not open to the boys and girls in Blue (light or dark). It seems to me that individual (or group) professional liability insurance is fast becoming a must – but how much will that all cost, will you get help towards paying it, etc?

On the Mil Aircrew forum (under the thread about HMS Nottingham) somebody expressed the opinion that Courts Martial could, potentially, also be used to provide formal, conclusive proof of the innocence of an accused. So is this all a big ploy to appease the Americans, whilst at the same time making it patently obvious that the controller has done nothing wrong – looking at recent history (Chinook, Mull of Kintyre), I think not!! If it is, it is a damned expensive way to go about it and it is despicably cruel on the poor guy at the centre of it all – surely there is somebody with b*lls big enough to have stopped this in it’s tracks.

This is the first step onto what could become a very slippery slope, in the words of my sex education teacher - don't go out without protection!!

This whole case is very strange.

The USAF conducted their own Board of Inquiry into this accident. The findings have not been passed to the RAF controller concerned. Surely an RAF Court Martial can not be held until his defence team have this information?

The RAF have not conducted a Board of Inquiry but have passed straight on to Court Martial - why ?

The choosing of Aldergrove as place for Court Martial seems very unfair to the accused controller. It will only add to his defence costs - already over budget - and makes close support from family and friends very difficult. I suggest he appeals to his MP if the RAF are not prepared to be more reasonable.

Hopefully we will be able to post the specific charges soon

'Short & Shapeless' hello if you are who I think you are. How is the pointy finger?. You are correct in everything that you say. Was it a requirement at the time of the incident to advise the aircrew of the 'Sector Safe Altitude? We should all stand behind this guy and support him. On the other case, there could and should be some wooried 'Senior ' people out ther who should be thinking did I do right.
At least the RAF believe in IIP, Ha.

IIP = Investing in Paper :)

F15 Trial
 

Although I don't know the specific issues involved, I have known the ATCO both professionally and personally for many years. There is no doubt that a lot of arse-covering is going on which, unless justice and common sense prevail, will be to the detriment of all ATCOs whether military or civilian. As for "Whipping Boy's SATCO" what can I say? That individual shows utter contempt for the ATCO concerned by selecting such a pseudonym - clearly this SATCO has no courage. Or perhaps I mean no balls!

Interesting that a new Miltary Form 8000 has just been introduced which is for your LEO reports etc. etc. to follow you around from unit to unit. So rather than just having your 'sheet' at the ATCEB and starting afresh at a new unit there's now a record of any misdeeds following you around.
Rather begs the question why?!!