Hercules ESF - technical, tactical and service issues. (Title edited)
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: California
Age: 53
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Kim Il Jong
Whilst I would never generally detract from appeals for kit that would increase safety I really feel that this foam stuff is a load of Boleaux. Why bother having kit that will not really increase surviveability in an op theatre? Lets get a better DAS and better radios and stuff that will make us operationally more effective. to buy This foam stuff is just a pander the multi fleet who are having to operate in a more threatening environment than they are used to. MAN UP and DRY YOUR EYES.
moron.The lost of one plane that would have survived if it had had ESF would be a larger cost then fitting out entire fleet with ESF. The cost of crew and other onboard is beyond putting a price on.
Your desire to throw away both money and people lifes for no reason disgusts me.
Perhaps with all your vast experience you can explain how " a better DAS and better radios and stuff that will make us operationally more effective" will improve the survivability of vulnerable large aircraft at risk from small arms fire, you utter ar$e.
Show some respect for the dead - and their families - and delete your ignorant post forthwith.
Show some respect for the dead - and their families - and delete your ignorant post forthwith.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: cambridge
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
kim, while we are all entitled to an opinion there is a way of putting it across. so, now i'll put my opinion across!
i'm bob o'connors sis. he was one of the crew that lost his life on XV179. i am fighting f
hard to help get this system in place fleetwide. this is done to ensure that no other family have to go through what i have had to endure. when i write endure i am not being over dramatic. it is not just a fanciful whim that is being acted on. it is of the opinion from the lead AAIB investigator of the crash that the probability of loss would be significantly altered HAD the foam been fitted. it was the explosive mixture of vapours and air mix that ignited. there was no explosive in the projectile that pierced the tank. so put that in your pipe and smoke it! you may not think that it is necessary or desired. have a look at the signatures on the petition! there are over 1000 in only three days. people are helping to spread the word. whilst you are busy being controversial, as you are unable to back up your views, you fail to realise that having fantastic radios are no bloody use to you when you are tumbling out of control to the ground! at best you will ensure that you will be heard very well as you crash to your death. that will do you no good in your operational effectivness. it is, in my opinion, the real MEN that are doing something about this and getting off their backsides to help little ol me make this a reality.let us not forget that they were real men who lost their lives on jan 30th 05.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Manchester
Age: 52
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kim.. you are clearly a thoroughbred plank!!!
Originally Posted by Kim Il Jong
Whilst I would never generally detract from appeals for kit that would increase safety I really feel that this foam stuff is a load of Boleaux. Why bother having kit that will not really increase surviveability in an op theatre? Lets get a better DAS and better radios and stuff that will make us operationally more effective. to buy This foam stuff is just a pander the multi fleet who are having to operate in a more threatening environment than they are used to. MAN UP and DRY YOUR EYES.
My heart goes out to the families affected and i will be signing the petition, and reccommend others do if it helps save other lives.
Rant over!! happy flying everyone!!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would like to remind our two narrow minded contributors that 47 Sqn is the most highly decorated Sqn in the RAF in modern times. For the record LCP is an exceptional person, who was awarded a very distinguished gong for an extraordinary piece of flying. To suggest that multi-crews do not know what it is like to experience warfare displays an outrageous inability to face facts. There is nothing I hate more than ignorance and arrogance. You seem to possess these "qualities" in abundance. Kim,have some respect for the bereaved, do some research and when you are ready to contribute in an adult fashion you can start with an apology.
NG
Leon, I would be very interested to see the breakdown in Tornados lost in GW1. In particular how many were brought down by lead.
NG
Leon, I would be very interested to see the breakdown in Tornados lost in GW1. In particular how many were brought down by lead.
Last edited by nigegilb; 28th May 2006 at 19:58.
Note, no personal insults...
Can we please be ladies and gentlemen about this difference in opinion.
I would say none, but we can never be sure (the 2 Johns may have had an uncontained engine let go and not been hit by a missile if you read the mini-BOI on the subject - same result either way so it make no difference). However, it wasn't just lead that brought down XV179 was it now? Something akin to SNEB rockets springs to mind.
This is the last time I will post on this subject as I feel I have had my say, may you like it or loathe it.
LJ
Can we please be ladies and gentlemen about this difference in opinion.
I would be very interested to see the breakdown in Tornados lost in GW1. In particular how many were brought down by lead
This is the last time I will post on this subject as I feel I have had my say, may you like it or loathe it.
LJ
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Hyperspace...
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Leon - you obviously know -all about current front-line ops, how we operate, what kit we have and it's capabilities.
The reason all of this kit has been fitted / has been asked for is that the AT fleet is very much part of the front line nowadays. We can't shoot back when attacked and our role is essential to theatre ops.
Kim, I STRONGLY suggest you do not reveal your identity after that comment. Feel free, however to "MAN UP" yourself and come and join the front line, instead of tooling around 14T in your fag-chariot, you prize tw@t.
-all about current front-line ops, how we operate, what kit we have and it's capabilities.The reason all of this kit has been fitted / has been asked for is that the AT fleet is very much part of the front line nowadays. We can't shoot back when attacked and our role is essential to theatre ops.
Kim, I STRONGLY suggest you do not reveal your identity after that comment. Feel free, however to "MAN UP" yourself and come and join the front line, instead of tooling around 14T in your fag-chariot, you prize tw@t.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The Pub
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Firstly let me apologise about the tone of my post and the offence I've caused, please accept my humble apologies.
Err I think what I was trying (Badly) to say was that we all operate ac that have safety flaws in one way or another, and that sometimes there is a trade off in where money (if any available at all) is spent. Sometimes go for the safety enhancement, Sometimes the operational gizmos. We'll never get everything.
Chappie: I stand corrected on the nature of the foam and can see your valid point.
All: Soz. pse look at the time of post
Back in my box and winding neck in.
Err I think what I was trying (Badly) to say was that we all operate ac that have safety flaws in one way or another, and that sometimes there is a trade off in where money (if any available at all) is spent. Sometimes go for the safety enhancement, Sometimes the operational gizmos. We'll never get everything.
Chappie: I stand corrected on the nature of the foam and can see your valid point.
All: Soz. pse look at the time of post
Back in my box and winding neck in.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Line drawn under the subject gentlemen. Leon you would be very surprised by what brought the ac down. Please trust experienced Herc operators when they ask for foam. I do not know what the AAIB have found re. 206, but I would not be surprised if a lack of foam contributed to the destruction of this ac.
Guys, please empathise with the wide ranging people reading this thread and the other Herc thread. We want to hear the other point of view but just ease back in how you deliver it. I wish the RAF would come clean it would make our job easier.
Kim thanks for taking it on the chin.
Cheers,
Nige
Guys, please empathise with the wide ranging people reading this thread and the other Herc thread. We want to hear the other point of view but just ease back in how you deliver it. I wish the RAF would come clean it would make our job easier.
Kim thanks for taking it on the chin.
Cheers,
Nige
Join Date: May 2006
Location: hotels
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FormerFlake
DIRCM/LAIRCM does more for the politicians and CAS than for the crew. It sound impressive, but of course no one can tell you what it does. But it must be good becuase it is expensive. A bit like stealth.
Originally Posted by Leon Jabachjabicz
On the DIRCM issue, hot bricks and flares will most likely not fully protect you from the later bits of kit (I mean anything that was built in the last 15-20yrs). Also it won't protect you from ground fire, rockets and RPGs and alike - that's why in that last few conflicts the Tonka hasn't been anywhere near terra firma (well as far away as you can get it!). Flying at low-level is a dangerous game and you can expect to pay the ultimate price sooner or later (ask the helo mates).
DIRCM will also not protect you from "ground fire, rockets, and RPGs and alike" (in fact, no DAS kit I'm aware of will), but ESF will make taking those rounds (that you cannot defeat with 'trons) much, much safer. When hit, you don't necessarily go "bang" & are able to (hopefully) limp home.
Originally Posted by Leon Jabachjabicz
Now if we believe that ESF would have saved the latest Afghan Herc and the one at Kukes so that we could fly them again, then I might be convinced that it's worth it (also that if it definately would have saved the poor souls on XV179).
If it were down to me, I don't know where I would spend the money, but I'm pretty sure ESF is not the answer to your problems (IMHO). Maybe we should look at neutralising the source of the threat to our AT fleet as they recover (in Force Protection or something else) rather than relying on another system that gets slated when it gets fitted (a la DIRCM which you AT guys have been asking for years and are now slating it).
If it were down to me, I don't know where I would spend the money, but I'm pretty sure ESF is not the answer to your problems (IMHO). Maybe we should look at neutralising the source of the threat to our AT fleet as they recover (in Force Protection or something else) rather than relying on another system that gets slated when it gets fitted (a la DIRCM which you AT guys have been asking for years and are now slating it).
As for begging for DIRCM - I've been fighting it since it was announced - never believed in the technology & it doesn't do what they say - wish I could say what is wrong with it here - it might make a bunch of folks uncomfortable about its alleged effectiveness...Having said that, given the choice between ALQ-157 & DIRCM, I'd "beg" for DIRCM any day of the week & twice on Sundays.
Lastly, good luck neutralising the threat from small arms, MANPADS, RPGs, & light AAA - "heavily proliferated" doesn't even come close to describing the sheer quantity out there...
Originally Posted by nigegilb
How many ac have we lost to SAMs? There is a preoccupation with anti-missile defence.
You're spot on - There is a tremendous preoccupation with MANPAD threat, but as the crews on the "Ugly Baby" mission (same mission Harley 37) can attest, AAA is still a very real threat - particularly at the altitudes the Hercules operates. Because it's older technology, there is a "belief" that we've done all we can to counter AAA - we can jam the radar (if you're so kitted out), have it jammed for us (good luck on that one), or if optical, fly at night & hope they shoot at the noise & aren't receiving off-site cueing...
So if taking a few rounds of AAA is more likely than being shot with MANPADs (which I believe it is) - what can we do to mitigate that risk and protect the plane, protect the crew, and protect the passengers? Sounds like ESF, cockpit armour, & kevlar matting fit the bill nicely - none of these is expensive when compared to most blinky things that emit 'trons to protect us & other than the foam, require no further maintenance, upkeep, or care & feeding once installed...
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: cambridge
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
kim, all i would like to say on the matter is thankyou. i really appreciate your apology. in my view you have just shown me that you can also be the man about it. there is so much speculation about what brought down bob's plane. that is what makes this so hard. it's hard to lose someone you love, and in some peoples opinion because bob took the queens shilling it was the downside to the job, even i accept that. i am a realist after all. however, he didn't need to die and that is what makes all of this so very painful, but necessary. while there is speculation what there isn't is the truth. the more that is hidden the more concerned i get. so, yet again kim, no hard feelings. i hope you still feel able to contribute. i am always keen to hear other views but there are ways etc. thanks.
now, leon. not that there is any point to me writing this, as if what you say is true, you will not return to the thread. this is a disappointment as you are clearly not interested in a debate, just getting your point across and no intention of hearing others. however, i will try anyway. while you talk of what brought down bob's plane i would ask this a) the report that was made public was redacted and so any spec about weapon type was classified. b) despite this you seem to be very confident of what brought the plane down, therefore who the hell are you? c) if what you say is true then you have proved my point that the truth has not been circulated and therefore i need to push extra hard to find out the source of the cover up! just a thought.
now, leon. not that there is any point to me writing this, as if what you say is true, you will not return to the thread. this is a disappointment as you are clearly not interested in a debate, just getting your point across and no intention of hearing others. however, i will try anyway. while you talk of what brought down bob's plane i would ask this a) the report that was made public was redacted and so any spec about weapon type was classified. b) despite this you seem to be very confident of what brought the plane down, therefore who the hell are you? c) if what you say is true then you have proved my point that the truth has not been circulated and therefore i need to push extra hard to find out the source of the cover up! just a thought.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Signed
Just reading through the thread and i cant believe it was Jan 05, still feels like last week, good on you for keeping it at the forefront of the media....keep up the goodwork and remember .....you WILL succeed
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Norfolk England
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hercules Protection
The DPA Accounts for 2004/2005 show a contrsuctuve loss of £1.791M for "cancellation of a classified programme on C130J". Presumably this was linked to some form of defensive aids and this was the money already spent or committed, with the savings being much higher. The point is, of course, that somebody in Customer 1 (the ECC) had to have agreed such a cancellation - the DPA does not operate alone, and if it was part of the defensive aids the cancellation took place in full knowledge of what was already happening in Iraq and with UK troops already in Afghanistan. Still the RAF and other services did, as I understand it, find the money, indeed rather a lot of it, for a new admin system!
I wonder where JPA fits in the "fitness for purpose" and "duty of care" considerations!
JB
I wonder where JPA fits in the "fitness for purpose" and "duty of care" considerations!
JB
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
John, I think you will find that this project was to equip the J with a modern DAS and it was cancelled. Sir Glenn Torpy did not appear to be aware of it when quizzed on 7 Mar by Def Com. Belies the myth that MoD was concentrating on anti-missile system before XV179 was shot down. They cancelled the bl***y thing due to cost!
Last edited by nigegilb; 29th May 2006 at 12:37.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Norfolk England
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C130J
Nigel,
Thanks - I do not know if you ever got answers to the original questions on the PQ thread, but I found this interesting snippet on Hansard:
C130J Progamme
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence why the classified programme on C130J referred to in Chapter 18 of the Ministry of Defence's annual report and accounts was cancelled; what assessment has been made of the operational implications; and if he will make a statement. [52270]
16 Mar 2006 : Column 2434W
Mr. Ingram: This programme was cancelled in light of emerging costs and competing priorities. The impact on operations was assessed and steps were taken to provide the capability where appropriate.
I do not know whether the Js are being used in Iraq and Afghanistan, but I assume so. It would not be approriate to ask for details, but I wonder if the J crews would agree with Ingram's last sentence?
JB
Thanks - I do not know if you ever got answers to the original questions on the PQ thread, but I found this interesting snippet on Hansard:
C130J Progamme
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence why the classified programme on C130J referred to in Chapter 18 of the Ministry of Defence's annual report and accounts was cancelled; what assessment has been made of the operational implications; and if he will make a statement. [52270]
16 Mar 2006 : Column 2434W
Mr. Ingram: This programme was cancelled in light of emerging costs and competing priorities. The impact on operations was assessed and steps were taken to provide the capability where appropriate.
I do not know whether the Js are being used in Iraq and Afghanistan, but I assume so. It would not be approriate to ask for details, but I wonder if the J crews would agree with Ingram's last sentence?
JB
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
John this is the subject of a letter I am writing to HCDC.
Will PM you when it is done. Needless to say I will not be agreeing with the MoD!!
This is a link to the Scotsman story about the cancellation of J DAS prog.
http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=290482006
This is what Sir Glenn Torpy (CAS) said to HCDC on 7 Mar 2006.
On the subject of cancelled program.
Robert Key. "Can you confirm that in 2004/05 the programme to equip 15J Hercules with the latest generation defensive aids suites was cancelled.?"
Air Marshall Sir Glenn Torpy. "I cannot confirm that."
On the subject of DAS in theatre.
Sir Glenn Torpy. "...We will never put an aircraft into Afghanistan which does not have a defensive aids suite that we think is capable of taking on the threat which they may be faced with." He went on to say."All our aircraft will have an appropriate suite of those capabilities to match the threat our intelligence indicates is going to be faced in Afghanistan." You couldn't make it up.
I wonder, slick Herc Afg 2002.......J Herc 2006.
J and K Herc no foam.......But I suppose AAA, small arms, RPG does not count. That's OK then.
Will PM you when it is done. Needless to say I will not be agreeing with the MoD!!
This is a link to the Scotsman story about the cancellation of J DAS prog.
http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=290482006
This is what Sir Glenn Torpy (CAS) said to HCDC on 7 Mar 2006.
On the subject of cancelled program.
Robert Key. "Can you confirm that in 2004/05 the programme to equip 15J Hercules with the latest generation defensive aids suites was cancelled.?"
Air Marshall Sir Glenn Torpy. "I cannot confirm that."
On the subject of DAS in theatre.
Sir Glenn Torpy. "...We will never put an aircraft into Afghanistan which does not have a defensive aids suite that we think is capable of taking on the threat which they may be faced with." He went on to say."All our aircraft will have an appropriate suite of those capabilities to match the threat our intelligence indicates is going to be faced in Afghanistan." You couldn't make it up.
I wonder, slick Herc Afg 2002.......J Herc 2006.
J and K Herc no foam.......But I suppose AAA, small arms, RPG does not count. That's OK then.
Last edited by nigegilb; 29th May 2006 at 14:14.
Taken from the stills of the Terrorists video - this is an unguided rocket like a SNEB and ESF will probably not protect you from this (certainly not half a dozen or so).
The picture came from open-source on the internet (Daily Telegraph) - any other info that I have is not for me to disclose.
Sorry I can't help you more...good luck
LJ