Your Airline does WHAT??

[bluetail]

ER

Didn,t our beloved Pres B.LIAR storm into Basra in a "Long J" (C4) last Christmas, I recall loads of footage of it on SKY

Must mean that the J is a cracking VIP platform then.

[FJJP]

Jackonicho, you do make a number of very valid points, worth commenting on in turn.

I'm with you 100% on procurement cock-ups. Indeed I have been at the receiving end of a number of them, usually finance-induced - 'chop this off the specification to save a bit of money' syndrome, which usually means that the bit of kit will perform way below what is NEEDED and will cost much more than the original costings to rectify. The infuriating thing about this is that those individuals that make the decisions to chop are NEVER HELD TO ACCOUNT. It all gets swept under the carpet - promotion, medals and home for tea. Sod the man in the field who doesn't have the kit to do the job.

I agree that political expediency is often the cause of secrecy - maybe if the politicians had the guts to name names and actually become honest for a nanosecond in their miserable lives and admit to having got it wrong, then maybe the public would have more faith in those making decisions on our behalf, not to mention spending vast sums of our money in the process. The latest screw-up is in its infancy right now - I refer you to the impending c*ck-up in computerising the NHS. Another project that is beyond the capability of contractors in this country (witness the IT blunders of recent years with billions poured down the drain for no return). We need people like BWoS to be held totally to account, as is beginning to happen now - but with them, so should those faceless wonders who screw up procurement.

Nuclear affairs should never be discussed IMHO. It is bad enough that rogue governments and terror groups can lay their hands on seriously nasty weapons, but the thought of Bin Laden laying his hands on even the crudest and most simple of nuclear weapons just doesn't bear thinking about. 9/11 would seem a picnic compared with what some terror groups would do if able. Those of us who held special clearances to work on and with nuclear weapons are uncomfortable discussing the subject, if for no other reason than we were indoctrinated into the need for secrecy, to prevent detail falling into the enemy (Eastern Bloc) hands. Now for Easter Bloc, read Terrorist/rogue governments. Besides, nuclear deterrence is still around - the fact that such weapons exist is all that anybody needs to know; the detail is irrelevant.

I agree that the concept that politicians and generals 'know best' is outdated, and rightly so. They must be held to account for their reasons for a particular course of action. Within reason. A witch-hunt in the media trying to create max embarrassment for the PM or even trying to drive him out of office is counter productive and frankly tedious to watch. Media think that the public have an insatiable appetite for scandal and falling politicians. Well, forget the opinion polls, conducted with carefully chosen groups of people; the average conversation, certainly in my pub, indicates that few bother to watch the news or read the papers these days because of this factor. If the balance is right, the public will follow the debates with interest, and make informed choices at the ballot box.

You are right in your assertion that the public will demand to know why vast sums are being spent on 'boys toys'. So do I. When it is explained to them that a radio for the guys in the field costs x squillion pounds, but the money will guarantee to provide them with a device that will work in ALL conditions, and that it is essential in the modern battlefield and that it will save lives and help towards the ultimate victory, then they will be happy with that. But it is not helpful if that debate starts to make public shortfalls in performance that the manufacturer and users are trying to fix or work round. However it was caused, be it money, bad procurement, poor manufacturing or what, it is not good for the man at the sharp end to have the enemy know of your weaknesses. Wars are won and lost on one side finding out and exploiting the weaknesses of the other. The Israelis were good at that...

Secrecy and transparency both have their place in the modern world. Getting the balance right is a trick called common sense. If disclosing something could bodily harm others, them perhaps it is best left unsaid.

[Edited for spelling]

[BEagle]

Jacko,

You wrote:

".....anything relating to the V-Force (which vanished 22 years ago) or indeed to the nuclear deterrent (already a memory) ought to be something that could (and even should) be talked about."

In a word....BOLLOCKS!

[propulike]

When it comes to stating any weakness or shortfall in kit that is still in use, the 'public' does not have a 'right' to know. To state the obvious, if a weakness is public knowledge it's also known by the bloke that wants to exploit it.

There should and must be accountability, but that is for Parliamentary Defence Committee and the NAO, not so John Smith the Sun reader can tell Jonny Foreigner the Weapon Wielding Madman the best way to take out our faulty equipment and vulnerable troops.

[Maple 01]

I have to agree with Jacko to an extent, Stuff that is long past its sell-by date should be in the public domain. And I don't suppose for a minute that he was suggesting free access to current tactical details. But Hell, there's information still being withheld dating back to WW1 - are we worried someone might steal our operating plans for the Vickers Gunbus? I would suggest, IMO, that a lot of the time only reason files remain closed is to protect the guilty

And for those of you who favour the 'secret is secret forever' approach, just wait till the Freedom Of Information act kicks in next year (and elements of it are in now) Then to onus will be on the government department to prove they need to withhold the information

http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/20000036.htm

The historians are going to have a field-day!

Operation Musketeer anyone?

Regards

-Nick

(Not the bloke from Shawbury.......)

p.s. BEags, it's 'need to share' now, 'not need to know'.......

[JohnB]

bluetail ....

storm into Basra in a "Long J" (C4) last Christmas, I recall loads of footage of it on SKY

Is that the "Long J" operated by 99 Sqn. I always thought it was called a C-17 but then my aircraft recognition was never very good

[FEBA]

I note that engines 1 & 2 have four of those paddle things missing. Have the locals nicked them for their canoes ?

[juliet]

very few canoes out there. the blades were most likely removed for maintenance. the J has the ability to automatically balance each prop as well as to adjust power output on each side so that it is quite capable of flying with a reduced number of blades.

[FEBA]

Now that sort of capability really ought to be kept a secret

[StopStart]

The blades are all there.

[juliet]

spoil sport

[FJJP]

Gosh! What a staggering revelation!

[StopStart]

Juliet - it was a double double counter-bluff to cover your having given away our secret blade shedding capability.

FJJP - quite.

[FEBA]

My team of highly trained espionage operatives have tracked down the missing blades. They were removed from the C130J and packed off to a secret airbase in Afghanistan.

[juliet]

now that must explain all the holes in the j's at home, theres about 8 props worth on that thing alone

[WorkingHard]

Military secrets, keep the public in the dark, matters not that info. is available from other legitimate sources, etc etc. How many here are Greek magistrates in disguise? Be reasonable and not paranoid and those items that actually are secret keep them that way. Just a blanket stop on all info. will not work in the 21st century.

[FEBA]

In the picture above, note the radar mounting in between the main spar and the fin. The aerodynamic properties of this mounting are intriguing. Dammed clever fellows, these Afghan's. I wonder if the Pakistani's helped them out?

[betty_boo_x]

Its probably best not to answer the original question directly, but hasten to say ALL types and ALL of our folks are working hard and still out there doing their best in trying circumstances.
Now Jacko has it about right when procurement/political expediency and good old freedom of speech are brought to the fore.
Beags misses the original point by harping on about dark age wonder jets then biting at anyone sticking his/her head up.
The RAF AT long term plot like the whole of Brit Mil Plc is in a curious state of flux and the biggest influence is political (allied to £££ +votes) Now were in the aforementioned places for mostly political reasons. The future of C130k/j and A400 and super nimrod and super fighter and super tanker and super tank and super gun and super boat and super (but much slimmer) UK Mil are all in the melting pot.
Its going to be an interesting time for us all, journalists and politicians included

[FJJP]

We've seen it often enough on this webswite - someone posts that are obviously sniffing around for a bite. If someone makes a statement, however outrageous, and it is ignored, then they will go away and the thread is of no value. But if someone's comment attracts comment that seems to be valid, it may confirm that the contention might be true.

Let me give you an idea of what I mean. Let us say I post the question 'is it true that the Vickers Funbus Mk 55 middle engine vibrates so badly that the whole fin feels as though it is shaking itself to pieces?' Beagle, who has established himself as one of authority in these forums, posts - 'Yeah, when flying at warp factor .95, feels like the whole machine is coming apart, so we're limited to warp factor .7'.

So now the other side knows that the Vickers Gunbus has an airframe limit of .7, and therefore knows that their Miskinov Hero Mk 382, which has a top speed of warp factor .74 can now be used to catch and shoot down our Vickers Gunbus Mk 55.

Ok, so it might be a daft analogy [apologies Beags for taking thy name in vain] but you get the drift. Better to zip shut than give away one tiny piece of info, no matter how inoccuous...

[BEagle]

Would never say "Yeah". Far too Amuuuurican.

Rest's about right though.

Here's another defence secret - the horrible, worthless piece of $hit known as the Jetscream T Mk 1 is actually nicer on 1 engine than on 2. Because the performance is just as poor but it only makes half the noise!