Nimrod crash in Afghanistan Tech/Info/Discussion (NOT condolences)
Cautiously entering the lions den .... but surely using an airframe that was scheduled to go in for a major is the best frame to be torn down as it should show the 'worst case' position (and, therefore, in theory the rest of the fleet should be in a better position). If they tore down a frame that had just come out of a major wouldn't that of had the potential of hiding all sorts of "normal corrosion" and "wear and tear" issues that had recently been fixed/replaced as part of the servicing schedule? Or am I reading too much into this?
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kinloss
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wrathmonk, your point is spot on. The RAF put up the worst case for examination.
Where it is hurting us, now, is that a number of small defects have been found by an independent organization that have to be addressed. So, in response to the report we are now checking all of the other jets in the same places and dealing with each arising by repair or deferment.
It is important to note that our worst aircraft in terms of hours flown since its last deep servicing has, so far, produced nothing of any significance in airworthiness or routine maintenance aspects.
Where is this project leading us?
On the basis that XV236 will be the fleet leader as it is torn down and all the others will then be checked (and repaired where necessary) where XV236 is less than perfect, we will end up with a fleet of Nimrods that are all nearly perfect but will each have a bulging list of acceptable deferred faults. Just in time to scrap them.
Regards
Ed Sett
Where it is hurting us, now, is that a number of small defects have been found by an independent organization that have to be addressed. So, in response to the report we are now checking all of the other jets in the same places and dealing with each arising by repair or deferment.
It is important to note that our worst aircraft in terms of hours flown since its last deep servicing has, so far, produced nothing of any significance in airworthiness or routine maintenance aspects.
Where is this project leading us?
On the basis that XV236 will be the fleet leader as it is torn down and all the others will then be checked (and repaired where necessary) where XV236 is less than perfect, we will end up with a fleet of Nimrods that are all nearly perfect but will each have a bulging list of acceptable deferred faults. Just in time to scrap them.
Regards
Ed Sett
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well for once light at end of tunnel few months of no time off and much hard work by many and of course the vodka swilling monkeys playing there part , for the Nimrod fleet the last few months we still there and doing good and when required we can still pull together and thats the good thing that comes out in all of it.
Downside people pi55ed off and it dont help these days we have 1/4 engineers we had like 10 years ago.
Happy Balance needs to be restored very soon , like Techie Pay or flying pay for engineers , we could call it FlytechiePaywithoutflying, a few quid a day extra for staying in school a few years extra. Admin people get paid the same now , good on them i congratulate but it has devalued the techie status and this in my place of work has really pissed people off. Question is to the board that decide what trade value is has to decide if technical trades are worth it ?
Downside people pi55ed off and it dont help these days we have 1/4 engineers we had like 10 years ago.
Happy Balance needs to be restored very soon , like Techie Pay or flying pay for engineers , we could call it FlytechiePaywithoutflying, a few quid a day extra for staying in school a few years extra. Admin people get paid the same now , good on them i congratulate but it has devalued the techie status and this in my place of work has really pissed people off. Question is to the board that decide what trade value is has to decide if technical trades are worth it ?
and that has what exactly to do with this thread?
In my opinion, everything, as you need engineers to keep an aircraft serviceable and airworthy. In saying this, I accept MoD disagrees with me but live in the hope Mr Haddon-Cave will mention this in his report and, for example, the practice of permitting administrators to make or over-rule engineering decisions, leading to deaths, ceases.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sure MoD are ecstatic now that Tuc is on first name terms with Haddon-Cave......I am actually looking forward to this report.
Engineers at Kinloss get my vote for a pay rise and a LOT more recognition.
What happened to Nimrod IPTL BTW?
Engineers at Kinloss get my vote for a pay rise and a LOT more recognition.
What happened to Nimrod IPTL BTW?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bridgwater Somerset
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nimrods grounded
News of the World
By Robert Kellaway, Defence Correspondent, 02/11/2008
Nimrods grounded
BRITISH forces in Afghanistan had no airborne surveillance cover for TWO WEEKS after fuel gauge faults grounded two 30-year-old Nimrod planes last month.
Senior officers believe it compromised safety of our forces on the ground.
An insider said: “Bosses claim unmanned aerial vehicles covered them. But RAF Nimrods have specialist crews who listen in, observe targets and direct ops. The Taliban rightly fear them.”
An MoD spokesman said aircraft were regularly sent to the UK for maintenance but added: “We do not comment on the detail of operational deployments.”
The MoD already faces £20m lawsuits after a Nimrod crashed in Southern Afghanistan, killing all 14 on board two years ago—after a fuel leak.
By Robert Kellaway, Defence Correspondent, 02/11/2008
Nimrods grounded
BRITISH forces in Afghanistan had no airborne surveillance cover for TWO WEEKS after fuel gauge faults grounded two 30-year-old Nimrod planes last month.
Senior officers believe it compromised safety of our forces on the ground.
An insider said: “Bosses claim unmanned aerial vehicles covered them. But RAF Nimrods have specialist crews who listen in, observe targets and direct ops. The Taliban rightly fear them.”
An MoD spokesman said aircraft were regularly sent to the UK for maintenance but added: “We do not comment on the detail of operational deployments.”
The MoD already faces £20m lawsuits after a Nimrod crashed in Southern Afghanistan, killing all 14 on board two years ago—after a fuel leak.
DD
The article didn't say the 'Nimrod Force' was grounded. It said that two specific aircraft were grounded - due to a fuel gauge problem. If the article had said 'unserviceable and not fit to fly' it might have been technically more accurate. Perhaps the word grounded was used so the general public could understand, although the term is emotive.
As to the truth of the article.....who knows, but why make it up....???
The MOD spokemans comments are interesting....'aircraft were regularly sent to the UK for maintenance'....implies there may be some element of truth to the story. As always, a grain of truth and a whole load of spin???
The article didn't say the 'Nimrod Force' was grounded. It said that two specific aircraft were grounded - due to a fuel gauge problem. If the article had said 'unserviceable and not fit to fly' it might have been technically more accurate. Perhaps the word grounded was used so the general public could understand, although the term is emotive.
As to the truth of the article.....who knows, but why make it up....???
The MOD spokemans comments are interesting....'aircraft were regularly sent to the UK for maintenance'....implies there may be some element of truth to the story. As always, a grain of truth and a whole load of spin???
As always, one tiny element truth and the rest made up to make a dramatic story. As someone who WAS out there, I can honestly tell you to just ignore the tabloids here.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: home: United Kingdom
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Biggus,
You are indeed correct to state that the term 'grounded' is emotive; that is why I stated that the article was incorrect. If NoftheW had said something different, they might have been correct; they didn't, hence the article was wrong.
However, I do take your point.
Duncs
You are indeed correct to state that the term 'grounded' is emotive; that is why I stated that the article was incorrect. If NoftheW had said something different, they might have been correct; they didn't, hence the article was wrong.
However, I do take your point.
Duncs
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bristol Temple Meads
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Grounded Nimrods
As I understand it the article is not correct. Nimrods were returned to Kinloss because of an additional task place on the fleet in North Atlantic and there were not enough serviceable aircraft back home to cover it.
DV
DV
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bridgwater Somerset
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It doesn't surprise me the story is incorrect, I had cause to question a Nimrod related story last year that had incorrrect "facts " in it and had an apology letter from them.
TD - I thank you for not believing word for word the stories published in the newspapers. I understand the situation you're in, and despite disagreeing on a lot of things, I appreciate your ability to see both sides of the story, as most of the newspapers seem intent on discrediting the Nimrod fleet at every opportunity.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Techie 101 yep have to agree there too. To use the term grounded when it was not the case is a bit over dramatic and unsensitive and just shows the desperation of some people to make a story up. I now sympathise for these famous people who get slandered so the press can make a few quid.
Yet in GW2 the MOD were treated to very special treatment from the forces to get there stories, just a shame it dont work the other way around. I would be less inclined to give them anything from now on if thats the way they are going to be. No doubt ill have half the family calling me up now asking why the fleet is grounded as it was in the news.....
yawn
Yet in GW2 the MOD were treated to very special treatment from the forces to get there stories, just a shame it dont work the other way around. I would be less inclined to give them anything from now on if thats the way they are going to be. No doubt ill have half the family calling me up now asking why the fleet is grounded as it was in the news.....
yawn
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Durham
Age: 49
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just been having a quick read through of this thread since I last had a wander over here and some of the comments are simply astounding.
The fact that the Nimrod being used in the fly past for the Queens celebrations. It would have been a crime not to have her involved, if she were absent from the fly past it would have provided more fuel to the media scare tactics. And in my opinion she looked fantastic. The comments made by the BBC in relation to her appearance and direct comments to the loss of crew 3 were out of place and should never have been made, but that is my opinion.
In relation to family not being invited to the 120 reunion, why would we be included? It was a private affair for those serving and ex serving squadron personnel. We all have been given full invitations to attend any family days, open days and other such events. We also are welcome any time we may wish to visit 120, to see the various memorials in place for the crew or simply to call in for a coffee.
I've just spent another week at Kinloss and as usual made very welcome. This time having my kids with me, who were also made very welcome, given a full tour of a Nimrod, inside and out, and given the full works. Thanks guys, they loved it and now fully understand why I feel the way I do about those at ISK. 120 and Kinloss in general have not forgotten us and never will. They continue to show support and continue to care, as I always will for them, you could do with some better coffee though
As for what gets said in the papers and in the media. I've never taken notice of what journos say, most is based on very loose facts, the majority is written to scare us and to elicit a negative reaction. All the good which the fleet does tends to be ignored. They are very adept at mis-quoting.
As always, my deepest respect to all the groundcrew and the growbags
The fact that the Nimrod being used in the fly past for the Queens celebrations. It would have been a crime not to have her involved, if she were absent from the fly past it would have provided more fuel to the media scare tactics. And in my opinion she looked fantastic. The comments made by the BBC in relation to her appearance and direct comments to the loss of crew 3 were out of place and should never have been made, but that is my opinion.
In relation to family not being invited to the 120 reunion, why would we be included? It was a private affair for those serving and ex serving squadron personnel. We all have been given full invitations to attend any family days, open days and other such events. We also are welcome any time we may wish to visit 120, to see the various memorials in place for the crew or simply to call in for a coffee.
I've just spent another week at Kinloss and as usual made very welcome. This time having my kids with me, who were also made very welcome, given a full tour of a Nimrod, inside and out, and given the full works. Thanks guys, they loved it and now fully understand why I feel the way I do about those at ISK. 120 and Kinloss in general have not forgotten us and never will. They continue to show support and continue to care, as I always will for them, you could do with some better coffee though
As for what gets said in the papers and in the media. I've never taken notice of what journos say, most is based on very loose facts, the majority is written to scare us and to elicit a negative reaction. All the good which the fleet does tends to be ignored. They are very adept at mis-quoting.
As always, my deepest respect to all the groundcrew and the growbags
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bridgwater Somerset
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF to replace Nimrods with 46-year-old US planes | The Sun |News|Campaigns|Our Boys
Boeing Boeing wrong
A disgruntled senior officer said last night: “It’s ludicrous that we are replacing three tired jets with three even more clapped-out old crates. Yet, with the current state of the defence budget, it’s about all we can afford.
“But rather than going cap in hand to the Yanks for second-hand jets, we should first have had a look at second-hand airliners that haven’t clocked up as many flying hours as these have.”
Boeing Boeing wrong
A disgruntled senior officer said last night: “It’s ludicrous that we are replacing three tired jets with three even more clapped-out old crates. Yet, with the current state of the defence budget, it’s about all we can afford.
“But rather than going cap in hand to the Yanks for second-hand jets, we should first have had a look at second-hand airliners that haven’t clocked up as many flying hours as these have.”