Sky Man Stuck in Kabul
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Manila Philippines
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and as for a jack? a jack alone weighs over 550 lbs and its not known as a toe crusher for nothing...oh and we only own 2-3 servicable ones.. 1 in seeb, 2 at Brize.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it just me?
I have a question......... I left the RAF in 1988, having flown Hercs for 15 years. Whenever we operated to new or remote airfields, we carried a fly-away pack which always included a jack and spare wheels. Since leaving, I've been flying the 747 Classic - and still do. We sometimes fly to unsupported airfields and carry a comprehensive spares pack (with, of course, a wheel and jack). The weight of the pack is 1 Tonne which, against a MTOW of 377 Tonnes, has very little effect on performance. I have no idea what the operating limits of the RAF Tristar are, but are you really trying to tell me that the weight of a jack (265kg) plus wheel are so prohibitive that you can't carry them?
As for lack of jacks........why don't you talk to those nice people in the Mojave Desert, they must have lots lying around (for you, special price
).
Preparing to duck behind the parapet...............
As for lack of jacks........why don't you talk to those nice people in the Mojave Desert, they must have lots lying around (for you, special price
). Preparing to duck behind the parapet...............
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Mostly here, but often there
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once again the tail appears to be wagging the dog....sure, the TriStar could carry spare wheels, jacks etc - hell you can even sling a spare engine under the wing (honest!). I have been many places with main wheels as part of the TPU/FAP, indeed it used to be SOP on a trail, but they do take up space and valuable payload, especially when faced with having to restrict pax as it is given the fuel constraints mentioned.
The point is, surely, that operations to regular destination(s) should be properly supported on the logistics front; there is no excuse for not having the basics in place. Only 3 jacks.....let's give http://www.aviatorsale.com/aix972/ a call, see if they'll sell just the jack (never mind the spare ex-Transat TriStar). We could use some of that spare £6 million that's kicking around.
Anyway, rant over; the problem will soon go away. No matter how much you tell the guys doing the job that "it's not your fault.." and "no-ones blaming you.." and "we'll support you.." I'm sure the folks on two-sixteen are getting pretty pi$$ed off with the constant negative press surrounding the airbridge. Once they've decided that enough's enough and come to the "I won't get this sort of treatment from easy/BA/Virgin/Monarch" conclusion, where do we go then?
The point is, surely, that operations to regular destination(s) should be properly supported on the logistics front; there is no excuse for not having the basics in place. Only 3 jacks.....let's give http://www.aviatorsale.com/aix972/ a call, see if they'll sell just the jack (never mind the spare ex-Transat TriStar). We could use some of that spare £6 million that's kicking around.
Anyway, rant over; the problem will soon go away. No matter how much you tell the guys doing the job that "it's not your fault.." and "no-ones blaming you.." and "we'll support you.." I'm sure the folks on two-sixteen are getting pretty pi$$ed off with the constant negative press surrounding the airbridge. Once they've decided that enough's enough and come to the "I won't get this sort of treatment from easy/BA/Virgin/Monarch" conclusion, where do we go then?
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Manila Philippines
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be an ideal world if we could have wheels and a jack prepositioned at every airfield we fly into but in these days of penny pinching it just is not possible.. The aircraft that fly into Kabul are mainly C2's (Laircm) Aircraft,
The FAP (fly away pack) is held in the rear cargo bay, if we were to carry wheels and a jack the space for pax baggage would be limited. So there is just no space for them.
Even on a KC if we carry an enhanced FAP (including wheels) it takes up another pallet, therefore limiting other freight or pax bags.
The FAP (fly away pack) is held in the rear cargo bay, if we were to carry wheels and a jack the space for pax baggage would be limited. So there is just no space for them.
Even on a KC if we carry an enhanced FAP (including wheels) it takes up another pallet, therefore limiting other freight or pax bags.
Last edited by L1011GE; 21st Nov 2006 at 22:49.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Mostly here, but often there
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is possible - someone just needs to prioritise it. Same with the carriage of spares on board - risk management.
Out of interest, I wonder what the fuel costs for all the Typhoon diamond nine practises were?
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/diamondNineDebutForTyphoon.htm
Sure it looked great, but was it really necessary? And no, it's not a different budget these days!!
Out of interest, I wonder what the fuel costs for all the Typhoon diamond nine practises were?
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/diamondNineDebutForTyphoon.htm
Sure it looked great, but was it really necessary? And no, it's not a different budget these days!!
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
BBC: RAF transport fleet 'out of date' Aircraft in the RAF's fleet urgently need replacing, MPs and armed forces sources have told the BBC......
There was a quite good, and reasonably factually accurate report on the BBC 10 o'clock last night (perhaps redeeming themselves a bit with this after the "sources are indicating it was a Chinook" 
reporting fiasco).
Some good publicity for the ESF campaign also.
reporting fiasco).Some good publicity for the ESF campaign also.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately I missed the Beeb last night. I was assured several weeks ago that there was going to be an acceleration in the foam fitting program, I hope the BBC were using out of date info in their piece.
Back to the thread. i am curious about Tri* ops. Why do they want to fly in the day time? I understand, I think, the reasoning behind no night ops. I assume it is something the Sqn has decided amongst themselves, however chances of being shot at are reduced by 90% at night, so, in many ways it is far safer to fly at night. With this in mind, why does Kabul have no nav facilities to speak of 5 years after we first went there? Why are we fighting the World's 21st Century war with 1940s technology? That airport should be bristling with decent radar and approach aids. Is this another case of empty statements and promises from our so called leaders? So much so, that hundreds of troops are being put at risk by the insistence of flying day ops.
A strange set of priorities indeed.
Back to the thread. i am curious about Tri* ops. Why do they want to fly in the day time? I understand, I think, the reasoning behind no night ops. I assume it is something the Sqn has decided amongst themselves, however chances of being shot at are reduced by 90% at night, so, in many ways it is far safer to fly at night. With this in mind, why does Kabul have no nav facilities to speak of 5 years after we first went there? Why are we fighting the World's 21st Century war with 1940s technology? That airport should be bristling with decent radar and approach aids. Is this another case of empty statements and promises from our so called leaders? So much so, that hundreds of troops are being put at risk by the insistence of flying day ops.
A strange set of priorities indeed.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nige,
I don't think we should talk about tactics here.
I just hope that whatever transport aircraft we end up with for FSTA, it is properly supported around the route. Even if BA were operating a brand new fleet of A330s, they would suffer delays if they didn't have proper route support! But I understand that is all part of the FSTA deal.
I don't think we should talk about tactics here.
I just hope that whatever transport aircraft we end up with for FSTA, it is properly supported around the route. Even if BA were operating a brand new fleet of A330s, they would suffer delays if they didn't have proper route support! But I understand that is all part of the FSTA deal.
I am surprised that the basics of aircraft performance are not taught at Sandhurst.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Oxfordshire
Age: 54
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think we call upon the army to support our aircraft (perimiter defense aside), but they do call in re-supply and CAS from us, and not knowing our capabilities and limitations can, and has, lead to some major cock ups.
Even the fact that the Army pay the RAF for the transport is not widely known. 216 gets grief for always going back to Brize, leaving soldiers to climb on coaches and drive a further 3 hours or so home. If the Army paid for it, the aircraft would deliver them to their closest airport!
A better understanding may prevent disappointment!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Under a Log
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BBC: RAF transport fleet 'out of date' Aircraft in the RAF's fleet urgently need replacing, MPs and armed forces sources have told the BBC......
"After a competition and several years of complex PFI negotiations AirTanker Ltd, a consortium comprising EADS, Rolls Royce, Cobham, and Thales were judged to offer the best prospective PFI solution. VT Group joined the consortium shortly after. Following subsequent resolution of key commercial terms, Secretary of State announced on 28 February 2005 that AirTanker Ltd had been selected as Preferred Bidder for FSTA. A final decision on the PFI deal for the FSTA programme can be made only when negotiations are complete, the detailed contract is agreed, and the risks to the
programme are fully understood. While the MOD, in consultation with the rest of Government, hopes to complete its assessment soon, further progress has to be made with AirTanker towards agreeing a fully developed contract covering all the commercial terms and service provision aspects. This has led to a further extension, and increase in investment to the Assessment Phase in order to further de-risk the Main Gate Business Case."
It would seem, perhaps others know better, that we are no further forward, and now approaching 10 years from when FSTA (PFI) was announced and still no metal has been cut.
Last edited by mary_hinge; 24th Nov 2006 at 13:16.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In layman's terms I think that means the MoD screwed up the FSTA contract requirement and thought they were getting more than they asked for. This screw up has led to a potential significant costing increase. In the words of an interested partner it was not a mature deal. I am told the PFI contract for flying training is much more "mature", if that is the right word.
BBC: RAF transport fleet 'out of date' Aircraft in the RAF's fleet urgently need replacing, MPs and armed forces sources have told the BBC
So the overworked fleet is to be denuded of airframes just when it is most required, more money thrown at it - and then wait for the airframe to start telling us it's too old, when we could at least have been spending a (relatively) small amount more to have a modern AT fleet that would not forever cause problems for engineers and bring continuing complaints from the users.
Although I don't suppose we can do anything about the movers!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Under a Log
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This in the same week that I read one of the many shiny 'in house' magazines that seem to arrive on the Squadron at regular intervals from diverse logistic places (so I can't remember which one) that the Tristars are about to go to Marshall's for yet another cockpit and DAS upgrade 'to enable them to operate well into the next decade (and beyond?).
So the overworked fleet is to be denuded of airframes just when it is most required, more money thrown at it - and then wait for the airframe to start telling us it's too old, when we could at least have been spending a (relatively) small amount more to have a modern AT fleet that would not forever cause problems for engineers and bring continuing complaints from the users.
Although I don't suppose we can do anything about the movers!
So the overworked fleet is to be denuded of airframes just when it is most required, more money thrown at it - and then wait for the airframe to start telling us it's too old, when we could at least have been spending a (relatively) small amount more to have a modern AT fleet that would not forever cause problems for engineers and bring continuing complaints from the users.
Although I don't suppose we can do anything about the movers!
£22mil I've heard.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: England
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
216 Sqn are doing a magnificent job maintaining the Afghan airbridge. It is taking a huge amount of effort and skill. It is always unfortunate when unseviceabilities, circumstances beyond their control or just honest mistakes delay a movement - but there is no slack in the system and hence the poor passenger inevitably suffers. Please do not linger under the mis-apprehension that other ways of doing this airbridge have not been examined. 216 Sqn have plenty of operators with Tac AT/SH or FJ experience so, believe me, all these things that are "obvious" to you have been considered. The end result is just about the best way that it can be done given the nature of the aircraft and the other limitations (no of crews etc). A more generous budget for spares and manpower would help though; LEAN is also a hinderance.
Without going into the whys and wherefors of operating into Kabul, I can tell you that BA/Virgin etc could not achieve what the 216 crews are doing almost daily; their unions and insurance companies simply would not let them. It must be demoralizing to have every glitch hung-out in public, but 216 are still delivering on the great majority of occasions.
216 Sqn - keep up the good work and stay safe.
Without going into the whys and wherefors of operating into Kabul, I can tell you that BA/Virgin etc could not achieve what the 216 crews are doing almost daily; their unions and insurance companies simply would not let them. It must be demoralizing to have every glitch hung-out in public, but 216 are still delivering on the great majority of occasions.
216 Sqn - keep up the good work and stay safe.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Under milk wood
Age: 64
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A soldier doesn't need to know about aircraft performance, just know the time the aircraft is due to leave and what time he/she needs to be there to get on it. The RAF are the ones who are tasked with providing that support. When you catch a train, do you now how the rail system works (good question now, does it work?).