Nimrod crash in Afghanistan Tech/Info/Discussion (NOT condolences)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: western europe
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's been a week or so since I read through this thread, but am I right in thinking the aircraft had succesfully completed air-to-air refuelling quite some time before the accident?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Answers on a postcard to, er....
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Up North!
Age: 56
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please lets wait until the board gets back. I know that they are carrying out their business in a very dodgy area of the world and must try to get to a conclusion with some very disturbing evidence. AAR is a very routine but very fatiguing exercise for the poor old airframe...... all aircraft types included nevermind an old airliner.
I am sure that most of us recognise the ' chain of effects' theory that occasionally crop up in our profession, things sometimes go horribly wrong.
I actually believe that the incident was due to an unfortunate chain of unrelated events that took away 14 good colleagues. If I didnt believe this I would never put foot on the the mighty hunter again!
Patience friends, patience!
R-A-E
I am sure that most of us recognise the ' chain of effects' theory that occasionally crop up in our profession, things sometimes go horribly wrong.
I actually believe that the incident was due to an unfortunate chain of unrelated events that took away 14 good colleagues. If I didnt believe this I would never put foot on the the mighty hunter again!
Patience friends, patience!
R-A-E
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
The Herald - Nimrod crew’s funerals delayed
The grieving families of the Scottish-based Nimrod crew will have to wait "days and perhaps weeks" for the remains of their loved ones to be returned for burial, the Ministry of Defence has confirmed.
The Duke of Edinburgh and the Defence Secretary, Des Browne, were among those who attended a moving repatriation ceremony at RAF Kinloss yesterday. But within hours of the remains arriving in Scotland – where the 12 aircrew among the 14 victims of the crash were stationed – the coffins were flown back to RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire last night to await post-mortem clearance......
Up to 100 hearings are still to be held by the single Oxford coroner's court approved by the MoD and the Home Office as fatalities in Iraq and Afghanistan mount and the overloaded system is swamped by the rising casualty toll.....
The grieving families of the Scottish-based Nimrod crew will have to wait "days and perhaps weeks" for the remains of their loved ones to be returned for burial, the Ministry of Defence has confirmed.
The Duke of Edinburgh and the Defence Secretary, Des Browne, were among those who attended a moving repatriation ceremony at RAF Kinloss yesterday. But within hours of the remains arriving in Scotland – where the 12 aircrew among the 14 victims of the crash were stationed – the coffins were flown back to RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire last night to await post-mortem clearance......
Up to 100 hearings are still to be held by the single Oxford coroner's court approved by the MoD and the Home Office as fatalities in Iraq and Afghanistan mount and the overloaded system is swamped by the rising casualty toll.....
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Answers on a postcard to, er....
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For a wider view of the possibilities:-
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk....bfc2c386431eb5
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk....bfc2c386431eb5
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Nottingham UK
Age: 84
Posts: 5,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Herald - Nimrod crew’s funerals delayed
Up to 100 hearings are still to be held by the single Oxford coroner's court approved by the MoD and the Home Office as fatalities in Iraq and Afghanistan mount and the overloaded system is swamped by the rising casualty toll.....
Up to 100 hearings are still to be held by the single Oxford coroner's court approved by the MoD and the Home Office as fatalities in Iraq and Afghanistan mount and the overloaded system is swamped by the rising casualty toll.....
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lincs
Posts: 695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I too am horrified that our dear friends and colleagues, as well as their families and friends are having to go through this utterly pointless and needless so-called 'formality'.
I have personally written to my MP to express my sheer disgust and anger at this being forced upon them, and suggested that in cases such as this (and I fear it will not be the last) then just a fragment of human compassion would go a long way to easing the pain and suffering of those left behind.
To the families and other friends of our dear departed friends, I am truly sorry and ashamed for this latest saddness burdoned upon you all.
TSM
I have personally written to my MP to express my sheer disgust and anger at this being forced upon them, and suggested that in cases such as this (and I fear it will not be the last) then just a fragment of human compassion would go a long way to easing the pain and suffering of those left behind.
To the families and other friends of our dear departed friends, I am truly sorry and ashamed for this latest saddness burdoned upon you all.
TSM
Guest
Posts: n/a
I cannot comment on the delay regarding the Nimrod crew. However, there was a similar delay after the repatriation of the Basra Lynx crew earlier this year. Whilst extremely painful, there were perfectly valid and understandable reasons for a 4 week delay.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May I respectfully suggest that if you are not close to the centre of this tragedy probably best not to sound off about the delay. I understand what Lon Mil is saying. Not necessarily helpful to get angry without knowing the full facts. All the same, very difficult situation
Finally got a reply from the Beeb relating to my and many others complaint about their "shoot from the hip" reporting in the early period after the crash.
Here it is exactly as I received it :-
Thank you for your email.
We can't agree that, as a story breaks, coverage should be limited to what is officially announced by the Ministry of Defence. However, the last thing we would want to do is to distress the families of our Armed Forces, to whom the nation owes so much. That is why we take great care in our reporting of casualties.
Little was known for certain for several hours after the MoD's announcement that 14 lives had been lost in an air crash in Afghanistan. This is often the case in conflict reporting, where there may be only the most sketchy details of major developments for hours or days after they have happened. BBC correspondents therefore try to distinguish on air between what is known and what is not; what is fact and what is speculation; to correctly attribute claims and, also, to report accurately what credible sources are saying about an event.
So, while other channels were saying the aircraft was probably a Hercules, our defence correspondent was able to say he was getting "strong guidance from a supposedly reliable defence source" that it was not. In saying it could be a Chinook helicopter, we made clear this was what sources were saying rather than an official announcement or established fact. On News 24, for instance, our defence correspondent said: "We don't know yet for certain whether it was a Chinook. The MoD isn't saying. It's an indication we've had that it might have been."
While the US military has guidelines that aircraft type should be released within two hours of news of a crash, the MoD do not release information until the next of kin have been informed. The MoD’s concern is one shared by the BBC and set out in guidelines agreed by the two organisations. No one should hear a close relative named in a TV or radio broadcast as killed in action without first having been properly, and privately, informed.
On the narrow issue of releasing names, therefore, the BBC does wait until the official announcement. We feel, though, that a wider policy of restricting our coverage to official releases is not realistic in today's world of instant communication from the battlefield and multiple sources of information which are often, on the web, directly accessible to our viewers and listeners. The issues you raise are the subject of constant debate and discussion within the BBC and we will continue to weigh very carefully how we report British casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Thank you, once more, for taking the time to contact the BBC with your feedback.
Regards
BBC Information
__________________________________________
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ - World Wide Wonderland
Here it is exactly as I received it :-
Thank you for your email.
We can't agree that, as a story breaks, coverage should be limited to what is officially announced by the Ministry of Defence. However, the last thing we would want to do is to distress the families of our Armed Forces, to whom the nation owes so much. That is why we take great care in our reporting of casualties.
Little was known for certain for several hours after the MoD's announcement that 14 lives had been lost in an air crash in Afghanistan. This is often the case in conflict reporting, where there may be only the most sketchy details of major developments for hours or days after they have happened. BBC correspondents therefore try to distinguish on air between what is known and what is not; what is fact and what is speculation; to correctly attribute claims and, also, to report accurately what credible sources are saying about an event.
So, while other channels were saying the aircraft was probably a Hercules, our defence correspondent was able to say he was getting "strong guidance from a supposedly reliable defence source" that it was not. In saying it could be a Chinook helicopter, we made clear this was what sources were saying rather than an official announcement or established fact. On News 24, for instance, our defence correspondent said: "We don't know yet for certain whether it was a Chinook. The MoD isn't saying. It's an indication we've had that it might have been."
While the US military has guidelines that aircraft type should be released within two hours of news of a crash, the MoD do not release information until the next of kin have been informed. The MoD’s concern is one shared by the BBC and set out in guidelines agreed by the two organisations. No one should hear a close relative named in a TV or radio broadcast as killed in action without first having been properly, and privately, informed.
On the narrow issue of releasing names, therefore, the BBC does wait until the official announcement. We feel, though, that a wider policy of restricting our coverage to official releases is not realistic in today's world of instant communication from the battlefield and multiple sources of information which are often, on the web, directly accessible to our viewers and listeners. The issues you raise are the subject of constant debate and discussion within the BBC and we will continue to weigh very carefully how we report British casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Thank you, once more, for taking the time to contact the BBC with your feedback.
Regards
BBC Information
__________________________________________
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ - World Wide Wonderland
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Dundee
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reply I recieved. Only a little different from yours El Grifo, I think everyone will get the canned response.
Thank you for your email.
Little was known for certain for several hours after the MoD's announcement that 14 lives had been lost in an air crash in Afghanistan. This is often the case in conflict reporting, where there may be only the most sketchy details of major developments for hours or days after they have happened. BBC correspondents therefore try to distinguish on air between what is known and what is not; what is fact and what is speculation; to correctly attribute claims and, also, to report accurately what credible sources are saying about an event.
So, while other channels were saying the aircraft was probably a Hercules, our defence correspondent was able to say he was getting "strong guidance from a supposedly reliable defence source" that it was not. In saying it could be a Chinook helicopter, we made clear this was what sources were saying rather than an official announcement or established fact. On News 24, for instance, our defence correspondent said: "We don't know yet for certain whether it was a Chinook. The MoD isn't saying. It's an indication we've had that it might have been."
While the US military has guidelines that aircraft type should be released within two hours of news of a crash, the MoD do not release information until the next of kin have been informed. The MoD's concern is one shared by the BBC and set out in guidelines agreed by the two organisations. No one should hear a close relative named in a TV or radio broadcast as killed in action without first having been properly, and privately, informed.
On the narrow issue of releasing names, therefore, the BBC does wait until the official announcement. We feel, though, that a wider policy of restricting our coverage to official releases is not realistic in today's world of instant communication from the battlefield and multiple sources of information which are often, on the web, directly accessible to our viewers and listeners. The issues you raise are the subject of constant debate and discussion within the BBC and we will continue to weigh very carefully how we report British casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Thank you, once more, for taking the time to contact the BBC.
Thank you for your email.
Little was known for certain for several hours after the MoD's announcement that 14 lives had been lost in an air crash in Afghanistan. This is often the case in conflict reporting, where there may be only the most sketchy details of major developments for hours or days after they have happened. BBC correspondents therefore try to distinguish on air between what is known and what is not; what is fact and what is speculation; to correctly attribute claims and, also, to report accurately what credible sources are saying about an event.
So, while other channels were saying the aircraft was probably a Hercules, our defence correspondent was able to say he was getting "strong guidance from a supposedly reliable defence source" that it was not. In saying it could be a Chinook helicopter, we made clear this was what sources were saying rather than an official announcement or established fact. On News 24, for instance, our defence correspondent said: "We don't know yet for certain whether it was a Chinook. The MoD isn't saying. It's an indication we've had that it might have been."
While the US military has guidelines that aircraft type should be released within two hours of news of a crash, the MoD do not release information until the next of kin have been informed. The MoD's concern is one shared by the BBC and set out in guidelines agreed by the two organisations. No one should hear a close relative named in a TV or radio broadcast as killed in action without first having been properly, and privately, informed.
On the narrow issue of releasing names, therefore, the BBC does wait until the official announcement. We feel, though, that a wider policy of restricting our coverage to official releases is not realistic in today's world of instant communication from the battlefield and multiple sources of information which are often, on the web, directly accessible to our viewers and listeners. The issues you raise are the subject of constant debate and discussion within the BBC and we will continue to weigh very carefully how we report British casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Thank you, once more, for taking the time to contact the BBC.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Closer than you think...
Age: 65
Posts: 390
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Finally got a reply from the Beeb relating to my and many others complaint about their "shoot from the hip" reporting in the early period after the crash.
Here it is exactly as I received it :-
Thank you for your email.
We can't agree that, as a story breaks, coverage should be limited to what is officially announced by the Ministry of Defence. However, the last thing we would want to do is to distress the families of our Armed Forces, to whom the nation owes so much. That is why we take great care in our reporting of casualties.....
..............n which are often, on the web, directly accessible to our viewers and listeners. The issues you raise are the subject of constant debate and discussion within the BBC and we will continue to weigh very carefully how we report British casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Thank you, once more, for taking the time to contact the BBC with your feedback.
Regards
BBC Information
__________________________________________
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ - World Wide Wonderland
Here it is exactly as I received it :-
Thank you for your email.
We can't agree that, as a story breaks, coverage should be limited to what is officially announced by the Ministry of Defence. However, the last thing we would want to do is to distress the families of our Armed Forces, to whom the nation owes so much. That is why we take great care in our reporting of casualties.....
..............n which are often, on the web, directly accessible to our viewers and listeners. The issues you raise are the subject of constant debate and discussion within the BBC and we will continue to weigh very carefully how we report British casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Thank you, once more, for taking the time to contact the BBC with your feedback.
Regards
BBC Information
__________________________________________
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ - World Wide Wonderland
Mmm funny enough exactly the same as the one I recieved in my mail box today.... Must be the party line no doubt cleared by nue ......
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My reply (just arrived from the Beeb) says:
"So, while other channels were saying the aircraft was probably a Hercules, our defence correspondent was able to say he was getting "strong guidance from a supposedly reliable defence source" that it was not. In saying it could be a Chinook helicopter, we made clear this was what sources were saying rather than an official announcement or established fact. On News 24, for instance, our defence correspondent said: "We don't know yet for certain whether it was a Chinook. The MoD isn't saying. It's an indication we've had that it might have been."
A pretty weak explanation, which does not justify their damaging speculation. 'Not a Hercules" is a very big jump to 'could be a Chinook'.
"So, while other channels were saying the aircraft was probably a Hercules, our defence correspondent was able to say he was getting "strong guidance from a supposedly reliable defence source" that it was not. In saying it could be a Chinook helicopter, we made clear this was what sources were saying rather than an official announcement or established fact. On News 24, for instance, our defence correspondent said: "We don't know yet for certain whether it was a Chinook. The MoD isn't saying. It's an indication we've had that it might have been."
A pretty weak explanation, which does not justify their damaging speculation. 'Not a Hercules" is a very big jump to 'could be a Chinook'.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think part of the explanation for jumping from Herc to Chinook is the description by MoD that an aircraft had gone down. No clarification on helicopter or fixed wing. Once it was established that Hercs were safe, the amount of people missing probably led to conjecture that it was likely to be a Chinook. Not at all helpful to the relatives, and something that the Beeb should not have transmitted. But it also comes down to the initial handling by the MoD. No clarity and hours slipping by.
Like I have said before, I do not think this was handled well by either the MoD or the Media.
Like I have said before, I do not think this was handled well by either the MoD or the Media.
I wonder whether any of those who angrily wrote to the Beeb, whining and demanding an explanation and apology for their speculation did the same to whoever is ultimately responsible for the MoD press desk, which was at least equally culpable.
Thought not.
After all, journos are the real enemy......
Thought not.
After all, journos are the real enemy......