Kinloss........Whats Going on?
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Back in Geordie Land
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cooheed,
he may well be more qualified than I am, but his speciality is propulsion isn't it? So why is he now an expert on the rest of the aircraft? And what i said is that it is foolish to make comments like that in PUBLIC! There is enough concern within the public domain about this, and I am sure that the journolists are gathering it all together jusy waiting until the time is right to go to press. Making wild statements is wrong frankly.
dodgie sootie,
I can only assume that you have had a few drinks since your interveining post. You appear to have clearly turned into a somewhat rude, abusive and very silly-looking individual.
The Winco
he may well be more qualified than I am, but his speciality is propulsion isn't it? So why is he now an expert on the rest of the aircraft? And what i said is that it is foolish to make comments like that in PUBLIC! There is enough concern within the public domain about this, and I am sure that the journolists are gathering it all together jusy waiting until the time is right to go to press. Making wild statements is wrong frankly.
dodgie sootie,
I can only assume that you have had a few drinks since your interveining post. You appear to have clearly turned into a somewhat rude, abusive and very silly-looking individual.
The Winco
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bristol Temple Meads
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Da4orce
I suppose the point that I was trying to make is that since the Soviets have packed up all their "toys" and gone home, it is hard to imagine that Nimrod has a real ASW task. And that is were the problems start. It's "airframe" now being used for tasks for which it was never designed, in environments it was never disigned to operate in.
I recall the times when we flew real "ops" sorties against Soviet shipping and subs. When SAR meant something - one a/c on fixed standby (aircrew living in the mess), plus a back-up aicraft.
We had high OR rates, high moral and no NISC.
DV
I suppose the point that I was trying to make is that since the Soviets have packed up all their "toys" and gone home, it is hard to imagine that Nimrod has a real ASW task. And that is were the problems start. It's "airframe" now being used for tasks for which it was never designed, in environments it was never disigned to operate in.
I recall the times when we flew real "ops" sorties against Soviet shipping and subs. When SAR meant something - one a/c on fixed standby (aircrew living in the mess), plus a back-up aicraft.
We had high OR rates, high moral and no NISC.
DV
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Over the sea and far away
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What submarine?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: N/A
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They may only have diesel-electric submarines, but that would certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons.
Distant Voice, I refer you to the last post anyone made on the subject of contemporary ASW: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpos...38&postcount=7
I think the point that Mr, er, Point, was making is that just because you don't hear about what Nimrods do nowadays, doesn't mean that it isn't relevant since the Cold War ended and you left the fleet.
In addition, I should like to point out that we don't have "airframes", we have airframes; we don't do "ops" in the Gulf, we do ops; we don't have "moral", we have morale (well, Mr Trotter Sr and I do -- I can't speak for everyone up here); and I'm not even going to respond to suggestion that a Nimrod is incapable of finding a submarine without radar.
What else can I say to your comments? Those who need to know how many aircraft are declared servicable at Morning Prayers are, well, generally present at Morning Prayers, and those who need to know the "story" of 8th Nov already know.
This forum receives very few posts from current Nimrod aircrew, and I just hope that the ramblings of those who are not currently in the loop are taken with the pinch of salt they deserve.
Dave
So, £10.96 per hour for 40 hours....
That's £438.40 per week, or, for a (52-4) week year, £21043.20.
I'm sure there'll be qualified applicants falling over themselves to work for such a salary......on a 'temporary' contract
That's £438.40 per week, or, for a (52-4) week year, £21043.20.
I'm sure there'll be qualified applicants falling over themselves to work for such a salary......on a 'temporary' contract
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: ISK
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Daveyboy
....ramblings of those who are not currently in the loop....
I went to morning prayers once. It was cancelled....
what a waste of my time.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Under a stone
Age: 68
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All starts to become clear.....
If I draw together a few recent threads, all becomes clear. Shoot me if I am wrong......
Nimrod no longer has its submarine hunting job 'cos the Sovs have gone home.
AOC 1 Group wants aircraft for one way missions.
Fewer aircraft means less resources needed for servicing.
Air Traffickers down the back of aeroplanes are cheaper than NCA should you lose one.
The plan becomes to come together.....
Pull Pin.......Lob Gently and Duck.
Nimrod no longer has its submarine hunting job 'cos the Sovs have gone home.
AOC 1 Group wants aircraft for one way missions.
Fewer aircraft means less resources needed for servicing.
Air Traffickers down the back of aeroplanes are cheaper than NCA should you lose one.
The plan becomes to come together.....
Pull Pin.......Lob Gently and Duck.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: .
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fewer aircraft means less resources needed for servicing.
Good use of the English language with respect to the fewer vs less rules. It's nice to see that you studied hard in your youth.
Whilst we are discussing your post, I'll just pop the pin back in and hand it back to you!
In all seriousness, please tread carefully on this thread chaps. I know this subject is close to a lot of hearts and there are some very painful wounds that will stay sore for years to come. Frankly I'm beginning to find PPRuNe even more depressing than the lack of flying here at the moment.
Whilst we are discussing your post, I'll just pop the pin back in and hand it back to you!
In all seriousness, please tread carefully on this thread chaps. I know this subject is close to a lot of hearts and there are some very painful wounds that will stay sore for years to come. Frankly I'm beginning to find PPRuNe even more depressing than the lack of flying here at the moment.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bristol Temple Meads
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Dave, I had not realised that the forum was for current aircrew only. I thought the idea was for engineers and aircrew, past and present, to present their views and opinions so that a balanced debate could take place. I am sure that you are far more intellegent than your post indicates. The last thing we want is for you "current" guys to around the loop again, only to find it still doesn't work. It's called experience.
DV
DV
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 81
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DA4Force [quote]
How would a Nimrod crew go about searching for a submarine with no Radar and no Acoustics ??? [quote]
Thereare several other sensors available to the Mighty Hunter but I would have to kill you before I reveal them.
OTOH is you read Alf Price's book, Aircraft v Submarine he will give you a clue about the first aircraft detection AND attack on a submarine without the aid of radar or acoustics and it was submerged at the time.
How would a Nimrod crew go about searching for a submarine with no Radar and no Acoustics ??? [quote]
Thereare several other sensors available to the Mighty Hunter but I would have to kill you before I reveal them.
OTOH is you read Alf Price's book, Aircraft v Submarine he will give you a clue about the first aircraft detection AND attack on a submarine without the aid of radar or acoustics and it was submerged at the time.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: cornwall
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Release Authorised : Nearer the truth....
Disharmony at Kinloss? Aircrew not flying enough! Not enough aircraft to go around! Engineers working their socks off to meet unrealistic targets!
Suddenly all becomes clear. Too many aircrew vying for too few resources. If all the Kipper fleet aircraft is being ground down for is to keep currencies valid..then they have too many currencies to maintain!
Nimrod aircrew manning levels are still pre Options for change let alone Front line First. Oh but what about the squadron disbandments I hear you say.. well what exactly did that achieve on the aircrew manning levels? Can anyone say exactly how many where made redundant?. ....Not many...and not to the same extent as the rest of the RAF. It was nothing more than a transparent personell move to the other Squadrons.
It doesn't take a brain surgeon to work it out. A = number crew OOA, B = number for pre/ post OOA recovery (given they only take what the rest of the RAF are given). C = Number aircrew actually on the program. Balance that against D =the number of aircraft available and E = an allowance for some maintenance to be carried out. To my mind it is apparent that we have a 'lot of aircrew' and 'no resources'.
To the individuals this will cause some great angst, to them I say that this in no way refelcts on their airmanship and commitment, they are a part of self-sustaining sycophantic system which is at fault. No business in the private sector could exist in this state, so why in the present business like ethos of the RAF are we still not addressing this issue?
Disharmony at Kinloss? Aircrew not flying enough! Not enough aircraft to go around! Engineers working their socks off to meet unrealistic targets!
Suddenly all becomes clear. Too many aircrew vying for too few resources. If all the Kipper fleet aircraft is being ground down for is to keep currencies valid..then they have too many currencies to maintain!
Nimrod aircrew manning levels are still pre Options for change let alone Front line First. Oh but what about the squadron disbandments I hear you say.. well what exactly did that achieve on the aircrew manning levels? Can anyone say exactly how many where made redundant?. ....Not many...and not to the same extent as the rest of the RAF. It was nothing more than a transparent personell move to the other Squadrons.
It doesn't take a brain surgeon to work it out. A = number crew OOA, B = number for pre/ post OOA recovery (given they only take what the rest of the RAF are given). C = Number aircrew actually on the program. Balance that against D =the number of aircraft available and E = an allowance for some maintenance to be carried out. To my mind it is apparent that we have a 'lot of aircrew' and 'no resources'.
To the individuals this will cause some great angst, to them I say that this in no way refelcts on their airmanship and commitment, they are a part of self-sustaining sycophantic system which is at fault. No business in the private sector could exist in this state, so why in the present business like ethos of the RAF are we still not addressing this issue?
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zhivago,
I' would be very interested in where you got your so called facts about aircrew numbers, so if you dont mind please justify you comments about crews just being shuffled to other Sqn's. Although I do think you may find this difficult.
When I first arrived at ISK, there was 29 crews (3 + 1 Sqns for those in the know) plus some others of the checking variety and training teams (not OCU) which could supplement.
Some items on this thread are peoples points of view, which is fine, but when it comes to factual errors then people who think they are in the know ought to think before pressing the submit button.
As for the groundcrew, they are a great bunch trying to do the best they can. Sadly many airframes are getting old and require more hours work on the ground for that one hour airborne. This isn't just a Nimrod problem, I would put it at the door of our Government who have delivered years of underinvestment because the MOD is not a vote winner. The NHS and Education are bottomless pits with funding, more so than the MOD, but will always be vote winners.
I' would be very interested in where you got your so called facts about aircrew numbers, so if you dont mind please justify you comments about crews just being shuffled to other Sqn's. Although I do think you may find this difficult.
When I first arrived at ISK, there was 29 crews (3 + 1 Sqns for those in the know) plus some others of the checking variety and training teams (not OCU) which could supplement.
Some items on this thread are peoples points of view, which is fine, but when it comes to factual errors then people who think they are in the know ought to think before pressing the submit button.
As for the groundcrew, they are a great bunch trying to do the best they can. Sadly many airframes are getting old and require more hours work on the ground for that one hour airborne. This isn't just a Nimrod problem, I would put it at the door of our Government who have delivered years of underinvestment because the MOD is not a vote winner. The NHS and Education are bottomless pits with funding, more so than the MOD, but will always be vote winners.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Over the sea and far away
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nimrod aircrew manning levels are still pre Options for change let alone Front line First. Oh but what about the squadron disbandments I hear you say.. well what exactly did that achieve on the aircrew manning levels?
Zhivago - rather than spouting ignorant rubbish, why not leave St. Mawgan for a few days and have a look at the real Air Force, rather than the Monday to Friday office hour world that you appear to live in.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: desert mostly
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zhivago, you seem to be spouting ill informed drivel of the highest order. A surplus of bodies (air or groundcrew) is certainly not one of ISK's problems. If you're going to comment on what is an extremely emotive subject at present, at least do us the courtesy of being accurate.