Kinloss........Whats Going on?
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Abbey Inn
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nigegilb, unfortunately the bomb bay on the MR2 has no fire suppressent system, so if the fire is real, you are in trouble, I remember an incident at St Mawgan in the 80's when a lit flare had hung up, nothing for it but to try to "blow it out" with airflow. Luckily the aircraft made a successful recovery but was then I believe cleared for one flight only to Woodford.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Shed
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At least one organisation is delighted with the situation at Kinloss - The Findhorn Foundation (our new age neighbours and proper tree huggers!) are rarely troubled by the sound of Speys these days. Jess the Dog, glad you enjoyed a serene break with them; personally I'd prefer an afternoon outside the Kimberley with a pint of heavy, a large plate of tikka and glorious views over a tranquil bay.
To the lads and lasses of 3(F) and everyone else on CQWI, thanks for keeping ATC employed and maintaining currency.
Its nice to see planes in the air at this wonderful station.
To the lads and lasses of 3(F) and everyone else on CQWI, thanks for keeping ATC employed and maintaining currency.
Its nice to see planes in the air at this wonderful station.
Am I missing something?
Wasn't giving responsibility for servicing and support to BAE supposed to solve any problems with availability.
BAE's own Online News Room says (in a release dated 18 Jul 2006)
BAE SYSTEMS AWARDED £65M EXTENSION TO NIMROD SUPPORT CONTRACT
Farnborough, United Kingdom. - The UK Ministry of Defence has awarded a £65m extension to the current Nimrod Integrated Support Contract (NISC) to BAE Systems. The contract amendment, known as NISC Phase 2, sees BAE Systems incentivised to ensure availability of the current Nimrod fleet to the front line and extends the term of the original contract from 2008 to the aircraft out of service date of March 2011.
NISC, contracted in October 2002 and currently worth £140m, transferred on-aircraft depth maintenance and spares management to BAE Systems. Nimrod support arrangements have seen aircraft availability increase by 40 per cent and costs reduce by 8 per cent. The success of the arrangement was recognised by a 2003 MoD Smart Procurement Award.
NISC Phase 2 sees BAE Systems expand its involvement in on-aircraft maintenance, take responsibility for fleet management and contract to deliver agreed levels of aircraft availability in line with the customer/supplier agreement between the Defence Logistics Organisation (DLO) and RAF Strike Command. BAE Systems is tasked to supply the optimum number of Nimrod aircraft each day.
Amanda Paterson, BAE Systems Director of Tanking, Transport and Reconnaissance Operations said: “Under NISC we’ve cut costs, increased availability and overseen a significant transfer of risk from the DLO to industry under its ‘provider’ to ‘decider’ transition. NISC 2 offers aircraft availability, rolls in further aspects of the RAF Kinloss activity and puts in place the forward/depth construct that meets the ‘end-to-end’ recommendation for the Nimrod platform.
“Under NISC, from a fleet of 21 aircraft, 12 were required each day. With NISC 2, from a reduced fleet of 16 Nimrod MR2 aircraft, ten aircraft will be made available each day, a huge proportional increase in efficiency.
“NISC 3 is planned for April 2007 and gets us to full availability of the aircraft and all its systems. This stepped approach has allowed us to streamline processes and prove our capability to deliver before we move to the next stage”.
Group Captain George Baber, leader of the DLO’s Nimrod Integrated Project Team said “The NISC approach is very much in line with the principles of delivering through-life capability management through partnering, as laid down in the Defence Industrial Strategy. The opportunities presented by NISC are win-win to all parties. The real challenge for BAE Systems and the DLO is to ensure that we generate better value and produce greater effectiveness. The MoD gains increased aircraft availability, the British taxpayer gets true value and if industry deliver they make a profit”.
Support of the current UK Nimrod fleet is paving the way for the introduction into service of the Nimrod MRA4 aircraft, providing a seamless transition between the two platforms. The NISC programme is trialling capability and de-risking the MRA4 entry to service.
Notes to Editors
The Nimrod fleet currently comprises 16 MR2 aircraft stationed at RAF Kinloss in the North East of Scotland and three R Mk 1 aircraft stationed at RAF Waddington in Lincolnshire.
The maintenance tasks at RAF Kinloss are carried out by a strategic subcontractor FR Aviation Services. The two companies operate jointly at RAF Kinloss under the title of Nimrod Support Group (NSG). Underpinning NISC is a new “e-Capability” solution that uses MoD and industry IT systems to provide integrated asset management.
In early 2005, as an interim step to NISC Phase 2, an associated NISC contract was awarded called the Logistics Transformation Contract. This broadened the scope of NISC activities and includes fleet maintenance management, new ranges of parts and maintenance activities. The award of NISC Phase 2 contract amendment subsumes the LTC and consolidates the original NISC.
Ten aircraft should be available each day - and clearly are not. Even assuming that all of the aircraft meant to be available for operations in-theatre (four?) BAE is failing to deliver the availability for which it is being paid.
So are BAE/FR Aviation Services being penalised for this shortfall?
Would things have been better with three squadrons, 21 jets and full shifts of servicemen, rather than civilians?
Wasn't giving responsibility for servicing and support to BAE supposed to solve any problems with availability.
BAE's own Online News Room says (in a release dated 18 Jul 2006)
BAE SYSTEMS AWARDED £65M EXTENSION TO NIMROD SUPPORT CONTRACT
Farnborough, United Kingdom. - The UK Ministry of Defence has awarded a £65m extension to the current Nimrod Integrated Support Contract (NISC) to BAE Systems. The contract amendment, known as NISC Phase 2, sees BAE Systems incentivised to ensure availability of the current Nimrod fleet to the front line and extends the term of the original contract from 2008 to the aircraft out of service date of March 2011.
NISC, contracted in October 2002 and currently worth £140m, transferred on-aircraft depth maintenance and spares management to BAE Systems. Nimrod support arrangements have seen aircraft availability increase by 40 per cent and costs reduce by 8 per cent. The success of the arrangement was recognised by a 2003 MoD Smart Procurement Award.
NISC Phase 2 sees BAE Systems expand its involvement in on-aircraft maintenance, take responsibility for fleet management and contract to deliver agreed levels of aircraft availability in line with the customer/supplier agreement between the Defence Logistics Organisation (DLO) and RAF Strike Command. BAE Systems is tasked to supply the optimum number of Nimrod aircraft each day.
Amanda Paterson, BAE Systems Director of Tanking, Transport and Reconnaissance Operations said: “Under NISC we’ve cut costs, increased availability and overseen a significant transfer of risk from the DLO to industry under its ‘provider’ to ‘decider’ transition. NISC 2 offers aircraft availability, rolls in further aspects of the RAF Kinloss activity and puts in place the forward/depth construct that meets the ‘end-to-end’ recommendation for the Nimrod platform.
“Under NISC, from a fleet of 21 aircraft, 12 were required each day. With NISC 2, from a reduced fleet of 16 Nimrod MR2 aircraft, ten aircraft will be made available each day, a huge proportional increase in efficiency.
“NISC 3 is planned for April 2007 and gets us to full availability of the aircraft and all its systems. This stepped approach has allowed us to streamline processes and prove our capability to deliver before we move to the next stage”.
Group Captain George Baber, leader of the DLO’s Nimrod Integrated Project Team said “The NISC approach is very much in line with the principles of delivering through-life capability management through partnering, as laid down in the Defence Industrial Strategy. The opportunities presented by NISC are win-win to all parties. The real challenge for BAE Systems and the DLO is to ensure that we generate better value and produce greater effectiveness. The MoD gains increased aircraft availability, the British taxpayer gets true value and if industry deliver they make a profit”.
Support of the current UK Nimrod fleet is paving the way for the introduction into service of the Nimrod MRA4 aircraft, providing a seamless transition between the two platforms. The NISC programme is trialling capability and de-risking the MRA4 entry to service.
Notes to Editors
The Nimrod fleet currently comprises 16 MR2 aircraft stationed at RAF Kinloss in the North East of Scotland and three R Mk 1 aircraft stationed at RAF Waddington in Lincolnshire.
The maintenance tasks at RAF Kinloss are carried out by a strategic subcontractor FR Aviation Services. The two companies operate jointly at RAF Kinloss under the title of Nimrod Support Group (NSG). Underpinning NISC is a new “e-Capability” solution that uses MoD and industry IT systems to provide integrated asset management.
In early 2005, as an interim step to NISC Phase 2, an associated NISC contract was awarded called the Logistics Transformation Contract. This broadened the scope of NISC activities and includes fleet maintenance management, new ranges of parts and maintenance activities. The award of NISC Phase 2 contract amendment subsumes the LTC and consolidates the original NISC.
Ten aircraft should be available each day - and clearly are not. Even assuming that all of the aircraft meant to be available for operations in-theatre (four?) BAE is failing to deliver the availability for which it is being paid.
So are BAE/FR Aviation Services being penalised for this shortfall?
Would things have been better with three squadrons, 21 jets and full shifts of servicemen, rather than civilians?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
The fact is that there are dozens of P3 airframes in fantastic condition, sitting in the desert, and we should get them now. They have next to zero hours
"Global Security: ....The P-3C and EP-3E aircraft inventory is experiencing significant airframe corrosion and will additionally begin to reach the end of its fatigue life beginning in 2002. The US Navy is conducting a series of programs to sustain the P-3/EP-3E aircraft inventory until a follow-on platform can be fielded... through the Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA) program. The MMA program has been directed to provide Initial Operational Capability (IOC) no later than 2015......
In 2003 the US Navy decided to cut by one third its fleet of aging P-3C submarine hunting aircraft after engineering evaluations determined airframes had less life in them than expected. Following structural tests of the P-3C fleet conducted earlier in the year, Adm. Vern Clark, chief of naval operations, directed the Navy in August 2003 to quickly reduce its fleet of 228 land-based surveillance aircraft to 150.....
US Navy: .....The ongoing P-3C airframe sustainment program inspects and repairs center and outer wings while reducing Fleet inventory to the mandated 130 aircraft by 2010. The P-3C fleet has experienced significant fatigue degradation over its operational life as quantified through the Service Life Assessment Program (SLAP). The Navy has instituted special structural inspections programs and replacement kits to refurbish aircraft structures to sustain airframe life......
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the dark side
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh my god give it a rest all of you...
Badmouthing ISK is becoming a national pastime by the look of this forum, although I note that nobody who actually works here is taking part.
We who are there are still working very hard to maintain our operational commitments and morale, on my Squadron at least, is not a problem. Indeed yesterday, during the loose article, aborted takeoff, and fire-warning events that we endured, everyone was joking e.g "bet this is on pprune already!"
The only major worry during the whole flight was the queue of Typhoons trying to outbid our PAN with their fuel shortages.
Everyone knows there are aircraft and manning shortages here but the fact is it is nowhere near as bad at ISK as you all make out. The doom-mongers amongst you will not only be worrying the workers at kinloss, but also our wives and loved ones who are not averse to trawling these forums as well.
Rant over
Badmouthing ISK is becoming a national pastime by the look of this forum, although I note that nobody who actually works here is taking part.
We who are there are still working very hard to maintain our operational commitments and morale, on my Squadron at least, is not a problem. Indeed yesterday, during the loose article, aborted takeoff, and fire-warning events that we endured, everyone was joking e.g "bet this is on pprune already!"
The only major worry during the whole flight was the queue of Typhoons trying to outbid our PAN with their fuel shortages.
Everyone knows there are aircraft and manning shortages here but the fact is it is nowhere near as bad at ISK as you all make out. The doom-mongers amongst you will not only be worrying the workers at kinloss, but also our wives and loved ones who are not averse to trawling these forums as well.
Rant over
I'm glad to hear that your morale is sky high, Mr T.
But there are allegations of two types of problem - one about morale, which you have addressed and corrected, and one about aircraft availability and serviceability, where serious allegations have been made, but which remain uncontested.
They are supposed to generate ten aircraft per day. When was the last time that actually happened?
How many aircraft were on the line each day last week?
How many Nimrod sorties were planned last week, and how many were mounted last week, for example?
Is it true that only one Nimrod "managed to get airbourne (after a rejected t/o)" last week, and that it "only flew for a few minutes, rtb with engine problem?"
How many days have we been without Nimrod SAR cover this year?
Someone said that they hadn't "seen the SAR Nimrod reported as serviceable for over a week". Were they mistaken?
Is it not true that QFIs, pilots and engineers have been PVRing in larger than normal numbers? How about the allegation that some aircrew have refused to fly particular airframes?
But there are allegations of two types of problem - one about morale, which you have addressed and corrected, and one about aircraft availability and serviceability, where serious allegations have been made, but which remain uncontested.
They are supposed to generate ten aircraft per day. When was the last time that actually happened?
How many aircraft were on the line each day last week?
How many Nimrod sorties were planned last week, and how many were mounted last week, for example?
Is it true that only one Nimrod "managed to get airbourne (after a rejected t/o)" last week, and that it "only flew for a few minutes, rtb with engine problem?"
How many days have we been without Nimrod SAR cover this year?
Someone said that they hadn't "seen the SAR Nimrod reported as serviceable for over a week". Were they mistaken?
Is it not true that QFIs, pilots and engineers have been PVRing in larger than normal numbers? How about the allegation that some aircrew have refused to fly particular airframes?
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Crucible
Age: 55
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Trotter sr.
Looking back at the posts on this thread I believe you are mistaken on these points.
No-one is badmouthing ISK. In fact, as the Swinging Monkey said as part of his eloquent post
The locations of some of the posters on the thread would indicate that some of them do indeed originate at ISK.
Suggest you remove your rose tinted glasses and face up to the facts
Flying hours are harder and harder to come by.
People are leaving.
Lineys are working their bits off.
Most of our loved ones already know about this so I hardly think reading about it in this or any other forum will come as a surprise.
Badmouthing ISK is becoming a national pastime by the look of this forum, although I note that nobody who actually works here is taking part.
No-one is badmouthing ISK. In fact, as the Swinging Monkey said as part of his eloquent post
.........folks at Kinloss feel that they are in any way responsible for what has happened and what is happening right now. They are not. It is very clear who is to blame for what is going on:
Suggest you remove your rose tinted glasses and face up to the facts
Flying hours are harder and harder to come by.
People are leaving.
Lineys are working their bits off.
Most of our loved ones already know about this so I hardly think reading about it in this or any other forum will come as a surprise.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the dark side
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Len, I am not wearing rose-tinted glasses - I've been working my t*ts off in the Middle East for the last 6 years... I know its hard.
Jacko, how many military fleets have a daily availability of 66%?
that is what we would have to hit to get 10 a day. Currently majors, rectification, and mod programs account for 7/15 of the frames we have-so there aint never gonna be 10!
Jacko, how many military fleets have a daily availability of 66%?
that is what we would have to hit to get 10 a day. Currently majors, rectification, and mod programs account for 7/15 of the frames we have-so there aint never gonna be 10!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: over here
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Trotter.
My mistake, that would be 2 airbourne last week then.
Now was that the engine surge or the burst tyres, the binding brakes...
Morale high on your Sqn?
Anybody getting enough hours to maintain thier Cat?
Those at Kinloss who post here know that morale is not high.
My mistake, that would be 2 airbourne last week then.
Now was that the engine surge or the burst tyres, the binding brakes...
Morale high on your Sqn?
Anybody getting enough hours to maintain thier Cat?
Those at Kinloss who post here know that morale is not high.
Last edited by andgo; 31st Mar 2007 at 16:59.
Mr Trotter sr
And the answer to the rest of Jackonicko's questions then...
"How many aircraft were on the line (serviceable) each day last week?
How many Nimrod sorties were planned last week, and how many were mounted last week, for example?
How many days have we been without Nimrod SAR cover this year?
Someone said that they hadn't "seen the SAR Nimrod reported as serviceable for over a week". Were they mistaken?
Is it not true that QFIs, pilots and engineers have been PVRing in larger than normal numbers? How about the allegation that some aircrew have refused to fly particular airframes?"
Or are you taking the standard politicians approach, and only answering the questions you have suitable answers to?
And the answer to the rest of Jackonicko's questions then...
"How many aircraft were on the line (serviceable) each day last week?
How many Nimrod sorties were planned last week, and how many were mounted last week, for example?
How many days have we been without Nimrod SAR cover this year?
Someone said that they hadn't "seen the SAR Nimrod reported as serviceable for over a week". Were they mistaken?
Is it not true that QFIs, pilots and engineers have been PVRing in larger than normal numbers? How about the allegation that some aircrew have refused to fly particular airframes?"
Or are you taking the standard politicians approach, and only answering the questions you have suitable answers to?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the dark side
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ANDGO
I never said morale was high - I just commented that it seemed ok amongst the crew I flew with yesterday
Biggus
I only answered the questions that I knew the answers to, and that I chose to answer in a public forum - OK it was the politicians way...
I never said morale was high - I just commented that it seemed ok amongst the crew I flew with yesterday
Biggus
I only answered the questions that I knew the answers to, and that I chose to answer in a public forum - OK it was the politicians way...
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe I could have a go then...
"Ground crew are leaving in droves and a number of aircrew,
pilot engs and back end, are jumping ship. All the QFI's will be working for
NetJets in 12 months, even the ones who took FRI's, they are paying them
back!! Confidence in aircraft and hierarchy is at an all time low."
"Ground crew are leaving in droves and a number of aircrew,
pilot engs and back end, are jumping ship. All the QFI's will be working for
NetJets in 12 months, even the ones who took FRI's, they are paying them
back!! Confidence in aircraft and hierarchy is at an all time low."
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lincs
Posts: 695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Trotter,
You're not the Station Commander are you?
'Cos a lot of what your saying is at complete odds with what my very good friends are telling me! I'm not making any of this crap up, its ALL coming out of Kinloss itself.
Now, if morale is high on your squadron, then great, but give us a clue...which one is it? Cos it 'aint any of the three squadrons where my mates are. And they all say almost exactly the same thing, so I'm curious about your comments.
Maybe the rest of ISK have got it wrong eh?
And by the way, could I just assure you that at no time have I ever bad-mouthed ISK. On the contrary. I have made it perfectly clear where the faults lie and who is to blame - and it 'aint you guys at Kinloss.
I notice your lack of commenst to Jackos questions??? I wonder why that is.
TSM
You're not the Station Commander are you?
'Cos a lot of what your saying is at complete odds with what my very good friends are telling me! I'm not making any of this crap up, its ALL coming out of Kinloss itself.
Now, if morale is high on your squadron, then great, but give us a clue...which one is it? Cos it 'aint any of the three squadrons where my mates are. And they all say almost exactly the same thing, so I'm curious about your comments.
Maybe the rest of ISK have got it wrong eh?
And by the way, could I just assure you that at no time have I ever bad-mouthed ISK. On the contrary. I have made it perfectly clear where the faults lie and who is to blame - and it 'aint you guys at Kinloss.
I notice your lack of commenst to Jackos questions??? I wonder why that is.
TSM
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the dark side
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The answer to most of Jacko's questions regarding the availability and serviceability of a military asset is "mind your own business".
And as for reports of low morale filtering out of Kinloss, they're not exactly a new phenomenon. The whole place has festered with unrest for the whole of the 25 years I've been there, mostly stoked up by whining gits who want to live down south, or these days those who try to avoid going to the sandpit!!
And as for reports of low morale filtering out of Kinloss, they're not exactly a new phenomenon. The whole place has festered with unrest for the whole of the 25 years I've been there, mostly stoked up by whining gits who want to live down south, or these days those who try to avoid going to the sandpit!!
I'm not having a go at Mr Trotter, I'll happily believe that his morale is sky high (and that delights me). I'd love to know which of the two squadrons he is referring to, since we'd then know fairly quickly if what he says about morale on his unit is accurate, or merely that he's lucky enough to be in a lovely enthusiastic bubble - perhaps in a good crew with a captain who knows about leadership.
Nor am I badgering him, specifically, to answer what are obvious questions arising.
Depending on what the answers are, we can perhaps report the situation accurately (not hysterically, and not in tabloid fashion, generating yet another face-saving band aid solution), and bring some grown up attention to the problem.
If anyone can PM me any detailed answers to my questions, or accurate information (tail numbers of the aircraft no-one wants to fly, for instance) then please feel free to do so.
I appreciate Mr Trotter's opinion that what I'm asking is a matter of 'mind your own business' - but it's just a bit too easy to use military secrecy as an excuse to cover problems that are politically embarrassing rather than genuinely militarily sensitive, and which the taxpayer and voter actually does have a right to know, and which the serviceman will benefit from having known more widely.
I suspect that the situation is exacerbated by the need to keep two elements of the fleet at 'higher than contracted rates of availability' and that this is soaking up a larger proportion of service manpower - leaving too few to work with industry's people at Kinloss.
I can quite imagine that when the NISC contract was negotiated, no-one anticipated the need to keep so many aircraft operating quite so intensively on deployed operations.
Nor am I badgering him, specifically, to answer what are obvious questions arising.
Depending on what the answers are, we can perhaps report the situation accurately (not hysterically, and not in tabloid fashion, generating yet another face-saving band aid solution), and bring some grown up attention to the problem.
If anyone can PM me any detailed answers to my questions, or accurate information (tail numbers of the aircraft no-one wants to fly, for instance) then please feel free to do so.
I appreciate Mr Trotter's opinion that what I'm asking is a matter of 'mind your own business' - but it's just a bit too easy to use military secrecy as an excuse to cover problems that are politically embarrassing rather than genuinely militarily sensitive, and which the taxpayer and voter actually does have a right to know, and which the serviceman will benefit from having known more widely.
I suspect that the situation is exacerbated by the need to keep two elements of the fleet at 'higher than contracted rates of availability' and that this is soaking up a larger proportion of service manpower - leaving too few to work with industry's people at Kinloss.
I can quite imagine that when the NISC contract was negotiated, no-one anticipated the need to keep so many aircraft operating quite so intensively on deployed operations.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: In a vacuum
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh my god give it a rest all of you...
I have been on the receiving end of peoples actions of moral indignation, and believe me, when things are bad, these attitudes don't help, especially amongst those who insist they can find and solve all the answers. Good luck to them, if they succeed, but I agree, we need to lift not destroy and that is often how I felt after my partner died for his country, especially when people started shouting about things they had never bothered about before his death.
Why does it take a death to make people militant? This is just a rhetorical question - why aren't so called essential issues highlighted before catastrophes, or perhaps they are. Cetainly before my partners death, the issues currently occupying the various 'campaign leaders' were not 'up front'. I know that better than anyone.
I am sure that things at Kinloss are both up and down, but it is essential that every effort is made to keep morale high - walking away is not the answer. As my partner said - 'If I walk away, it dilutes the experienced workforce, increasing the risks for others to take, I can't do it'.
So come on guys, lift, lift as much as you can.
Incidentally, the unit my partner served on had and has a very high morale. How do you think they get through each day!!!!
So thank you, Mr. Trotter for trying to make a point.
