Parliamentary Questions concerning Hercules Safety
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many helicopters of each type (a) have and (b) have not been fitted with fuel tank protection, broken down by service; and if he will make a statement. [71154]
Mr. Ingram: All helicopters have some degree of fuel tank protection. Precise details of the specific fuel tank protection measures employed on particular MOD helicopter fleets are being withheld, because their disclosure could prejudice the safety of our Armed Forces.
883
Mr. Ingram: All helicopters have some degree of fuel tank protection. Precise details of the specific fuel tank protection measures employed on particular MOD helicopter fleets are being withheld, because their disclosure could prejudice the safety of our Armed Forces.
883
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: cambridge
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the usual excuses i see from mr ingram. he's gettting so predictable. he clearly underestimtes the intelligence of the people he is dealing with. there is no way any baddie will know which ones have or have not got any protection on board. any way 925 signatures and counting. hopefully press coverage will help push this. please support the call and sign.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: cambridge
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mike, i have done. very good point made. i've suggested to the powers that be we sort something. over a thousand signatures this morning. well done everyone.
i will be away/offline for all of next week as i'm taking my daughter away to the seaside to have a break and spend some quality time. she needs to remember what mummy looks like without being attached to a computer. i'm left hoping that there is nothing that i'm needed for next week but i'm on the end of a mobile phone so please do not hesitate to contact me.
i don't know how many of you remember that i'm trying to arrange a meeting with des browne?! well, i think we have a very worried defence secretary, as if we need any more confirmation after his bumbling interview on C4! anyway, there is an MP who has been fantastic in helping us in the campaign. he is friends with the honourable des browne and had a word in his shell like about me meeting with him. the response.....apparently he has met with the families already! so, i think that he is clearly using avoidance tatics and is very worried. if there are any other family members online please can you PM me asap. unless there was a meeting that my family wasn't invited to then i think it's pretty definite that i'm the last person he wants to meet. don't worry, i'm not giving up.
i'm waiting to hear back from our sparring partner james gray to see what tales he can tell. will keep you posted.
please keep spreading the word about the petition. i hope when i get back it will be in the thousands...!
i will be away/offline for all of next week as i'm taking my daughter away to the seaside to have a break and spend some quality time. she needs to remember what mummy looks like without being attached to a computer. i'm left hoping that there is nothing that i'm needed for next week but i'm on the end of a mobile phone so please do not hesitate to contact me.
i don't know how many of you remember that i'm trying to arrange a meeting with des browne?! well, i think we have a very worried defence secretary, as if we need any more confirmation after his bumbling interview on C4! anyway, there is an MP who has been fantastic in helping us in the campaign. he is friends with the honourable des browne and had a word in his shell like about me meeting with him. the response.....apparently he has met with the families already! so, i think that he is clearly using avoidance tatics and is very worried. if there are any other family members online please can you PM me asap. unless there was a meeting that my family wasn't invited to then i think it's pretty definite that i'm the last person he wants to meet. don't worry, i'm not giving up.
i'm waiting to hear back from our sparring partner james gray to see what tales he can tell. will keep you posted.
please keep spreading the word about the petition. i hope when i get back it will be in the thousands...!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Liam Fox replies to James Gray complaint
It appears Liam Fox is taking this issue much more seriously than the hapless james gray MP. More power to the Doctor's elbow. It appears he is supportive for the call to fit foam across the fleet. Wonder where this leaves Mr Gray now his own boss has decided not to "let it lie".
"I have been forwarded a copy of your e-mail to David Cameron, who has
asked that I respond on his behalf in my position as Shadow Secretary of
Defence.
I know that the other members of my Shadow Defence Team would want to join me in expressing our sorrow. I hope that I can respond to some of the points you have raised.
In Iraq our Armed Forces are doing a tremendous job under very difficult
circumstances. While we hope the situation will improve, Iraq is likely
to remain a dangerous place for the foreseeable future. It is not
possible to protect our servicemen and women against all eventualities,
but where a protection is feasible and practical the Government has a
duty of care towards those who serve to provide the optimum protection.
In the case of the C-130 aircraft, serious questions have been raised
over whether or not the Government failed in this duty of care.
Although the Government has provided the aircraft with the necessary
defensive aids suites essential when operating in an area like Iraq,
unlike the US and Australian Air Forces, the UK fleet of C-130s has not
been provided with fuel inerting technology. While there is no
guarantee that the introduction of this technology would save lives, the
chances of survival are increased. For this reason alone we have
supported the calls to provide this protection. Following the report on
the crash earlier in the year I wrote to the then Secretary of State,
urging the Government to adopt this measure.
This pressure, together with calls from the families of those killed and
those serving in the RAF, seems to have had some limited success, as the
Government has now agreed to fit this technology to those aircraft
operating in the most dangerous theatres. While this represents a step
in the right direction and will enhance the safety of our servicemen it
does not provide protection to the entire fleet, leaving them vulnerable
in some areas. The Government also has provided little detail over what
constitute the most dangerous circumstances.
There is therefore still progress to be made on this issue, but rest
assured that we on the Opposition Front Bench will do all that we can to
bring pressure to bear on the Government to try to ensure that the RAF
is afforded this protection."
"I have been forwarded a copy of your e-mail to David Cameron, who has
asked that I respond on his behalf in my position as Shadow Secretary of
Defence.
I know that the other members of my Shadow Defence Team would want to join me in expressing our sorrow. I hope that I can respond to some of the points you have raised.
In Iraq our Armed Forces are doing a tremendous job under very difficult
circumstances. While we hope the situation will improve, Iraq is likely
to remain a dangerous place for the foreseeable future. It is not
possible to protect our servicemen and women against all eventualities,
but where a protection is feasible and practical the Government has a
duty of care towards those who serve to provide the optimum protection.
In the case of the C-130 aircraft, serious questions have been raised
over whether or not the Government failed in this duty of care.
Although the Government has provided the aircraft with the necessary
defensive aids suites essential when operating in an area like Iraq,
unlike the US and Australian Air Forces, the UK fleet of C-130s has not
been provided with fuel inerting technology. While there is no
guarantee that the introduction of this technology would save lives, the
chances of survival are increased. For this reason alone we have
supported the calls to provide this protection. Following the report on
the crash earlier in the year I wrote to the then Secretary of State,
urging the Government to adopt this measure.
This pressure, together with calls from the families of those killed and
those serving in the RAF, seems to have had some limited success, as the
Government has now agreed to fit this technology to those aircraft
operating in the most dangerous theatres. While this represents a step
in the right direction and will enhance the safety of our servicemen it
does not provide protection to the entire fleet, leaving them vulnerable
in some areas. The Government also has provided little detail over what
constitute the most dangerous circumstances.
There is therefore still progress to be made on this issue, but rest
assured that we on the Opposition Front Bench will do all that we can to
bring pressure to bear on the Government to try to ensure that the RAF
is afforded this protection."
Last edited by nigegilb; 29th May 2006 at 04:48.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Points West are on their way up. Might be wirth catching the local news tonight.
They are doing a piece for breakfast tomorrow morning.
NG
They are doing a piece for breakfast tomorrow morning.
NG
Last edited by nigegilb; 29th May 2006 at 15:30.
For those with digital satellite TV, if your home region of BBC1 on Channel 101 is not BBC West, you can view BBC West on Channel 986.
One presumes that they know this in the MoD box and will be glued to one of the several hundred plasma screen TVs that hang on the walls there....
One presumes that they know this in the MoD box and will be glued to one of the several hundred plasma screen TVs that hang on the walls there....
Good piece on Points West this mornig, nige, well done.
Interesting that the dull 'Strangely Browne' should also be on the news. The man can indeed bore for Britain.
Interesting that the dull 'Strangely Browne' should also be on the news. The man can indeed bore for Britain.
There has just been a news item on HTV West which mentioned the petitition.
(If you have digital satellite TV and ITV1 (West) is not your local version on Channel 103, you will need to tune manually to 10832 MHz, Horizontal polarisation, with Forward Error Correction set to 5/6 and Symbol Rate to 22.0)
1199
(If you have digital satellite TV and ITV1 (West) is not your local version on Channel 103, you will need to tune manually to 10832 MHz, Horizontal polarisation, with Forward Error Correction set to 5/6 and Symbol Rate to 22.0)
1199
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAS is due at Lyneham for a visit. Not sure if he is taking questions, but if I was still putting my a$$ on the line in a Herc I would like to know why he saw fit to give a blanket assurance to HCDC that every aircraft being sent to Afghanistan has appropriate defences for the perceived threat.
Specifically, when not a single Herc has foam fitted 16 months after the tragedy. The original plan was to fit 5 airframes only. The J DAS programme was cancelled 2 years ago. No passenger is protected by kevlar matting. Not a record to be proud about.
Let's hope he has better news for his visit.
NG
Specifically, when not a single Herc has foam fitted 16 months after the tragedy. The original plan was to fit 5 airframes only. The J DAS programme was cancelled 2 years ago. No passenger is protected by kevlar matting. Not a record to be proud about.
Let's hope he has better news for his visit.
NG
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just want to add that I think this petition is unprecedented. A Govt in a time of war being petitioned to spend money on the safety of its own troops because it is incapable of making the right decision on its own. There is an eclectic mix of military, ex-military, bereaved families and others against the Iraq war all on a military families against the war web-site! This must be raising a few eyebrows. Thank you all, especially the serving guys who are under the cosh and have been warned not to contribute to the debate. I believe there are one or two stooges on this thread, it's a good sign. Chiefs of Staff and Ministers do not like accountability, well they are stuck with it now.
Last edited by nigegilb; 1st Jun 2006 at 10:47.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A public meeting with nothing written down?
Contributing to debate is detrimental to safety?
What's next?
Unwritten but implied diciplinary procedures for those that disobey these unwritten 'orders'?
Is this legal........ or are our Services ruling by fear now?
I smell a rodent!
I agree that giving too much away on this site might be unwise but the enemy are not as thick as our leaders think. The militants are clever and in some cases, well organised - so do not believe that anything we say here, they did not know already nor appreciate - they've been there and done that. Our enemy, some of whom trained with the Mujhadeen, are well aware of how vulnerable large multi-engine and SH ac can be - ask the Russians!
We have to think like the enemy and ahead of them. That is why better ac protection is so necessary. Not that there will ever be a cast-iron guarantee but all the stuff for which people have been asking for yonks would make our chances of survival so much better. That said our ac are much better protected than they were but if we hadn't lost aircraft, I'm sure our crews would still be flying dumb frames!
If our debating the pros and cons of the dangers faced by the crews gets the leaders' and ministers' attention - good! We hold these faceless top-neddies accountable!
If those still serving are placed under pressure not to contribute, I would not be suprised - only saddened! Nonetheless, if any of you have fears and worries - write them down and try the chain of command and the flight safety chain (such as it is) ......again and again.
If, however, you feel sidelined or fobbed off, it might be possible for your familiy to write to their MP, or even the Parliamentary Defence Committee. If doing so, they need to be as unemotional as possible, state the facts, details and references, including when you tried and failed with the official channels. Keep copies of everything.
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong on this.
Contributing to debate is detrimental to safety?
What's next?
Unwritten but implied diciplinary procedures for those that disobey these unwritten 'orders'?
Is this legal........ or are our Services ruling by fear now?
I smell a rodent!
I agree that giving too much away on this site might be unwise but the enemy are not as thick as our leaders think. The militants are clever and in some cases, well organised - so do not believe that anything we say here, they did not know already nor appreciate - they've been there and done that. Our enemy, some of whom trained with the Mujhadeen, are well aware of how vulnerable large multi-engine and SH ac can be - ask the Russians!
We have to think like the enemy and ahead of them. That is why better ac protection is so necessary. Not that there will ever be a cast-iron guarantee but all the stuff for which people have been asking for yonks would make our chances of survival so much better. That said our ac are much better protected than they were but if we hadn't lost aircraft, I'm sure our crews would still be flying dumb frames!
If our debating the pros and cons of the dangers faced by the crews gets the leaders' and ministers' attention - good! We hold these faceless top-neddies accountable!
If those still serving are placed under pressure not to contribute, I would not be suprised - only saddened! Nonetheless, if any of you have fears and worries - write them down and try the chain of command and the flight safety chain (such as it is) ......again and again.
If, however, you feel sidelined or fobbed off, it might be possible for your familiy to write to their MP, or even the Parliamentary Defence Committee. If doing so, they need to be as unemotional as possible, state the facts, details and references, including when you tried and failed with the official channels. Keep copies of everything.
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong on this.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Public meeting nothing written down! There is a fear and to an extent I understand it, that contributing to the debate might have a detrimental effect on the safety of the herc crews. Could be that is all that was meant by the warning. I would have more respect for the senior officers view if they were more honest about the need to fight side by side with the US. What I cannot bear is to see senior officers tell powerful policy makers that everything is fine on the Hercules fleet. A bit more honesty please.....
1544
MODS can we merge the fit ESF to Herc thread with this? How many pages before we need n new thread?
1544
MODS can we merge the fit ESF to Herc thread with this? How many pages before we need n new thread?
Last edited by nigegilb; 1st Jun 2006 at 14:02.