Nimrod Information
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 81
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shack,
Very observant.
We had a new boss fresh from the ministry on promotion. He said if we had any burning issues to raise them and, given his great insight into the MOD he would fix.
"Can we have some more flying kit?" Flying back to back sorties with a couple of sims thrown in we run out of clean kit - gloves are often wet from one day to the next.
"Next question chaps?"
All bluster and bullsh1t.
Very observant.
We had a new boss fresh from the ministry on promotion. He said if we had any burning issues to raise them and, given his great insight into the MOD he would fix.
"Can we have some more flying kit?" Flying back to back sorties with a couple of sims thrown in we run out of clean kit - gloves are often wet from one day to the next.
"Next question chaps?"
All bluster and bullsh1t.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Shed
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Survival Eqpt
buoy15
I remember the Mk10 well, acted as my security blanket in 82 and then into the proper cold winters of that era! However not very practical when conducting turning and burning ASW at low level, esp in ordnance 
There was talk at the time of a lightweight IS but nothing ever came of it, surprise surprise.
As for the Q-Dons, there seems to be general feeling that it would be something you would grab on the way out as you stepped gaily off the wing into your ocean going rubber sea chariot - anyone who's watched a Nimrod crew attempting to don the Quick-Don under timed conditions in the tube will recognise the inherent comedy value and misnaming of the eqpt.
I don't recall the crew of 666 wearing anything other than standard flying suits when they got winched, and that was 6 mins from explosion to feet wet.
Therefore, in the absence of any other quick fixes to the aircraft to make it safer for its remaining service, is the time now right to consider the introduction of a suitable lightweight IS so that crews could at least have some hope of environmental survival in the event of a successful ditching?
Earlier chat spoke of parachutes - they've never been fitted to production a/c for the reasons I said previously, but am I right in thinking that MRA4 flight development crews either wear them or have them available? In which case is there a special method of egress avoiding all the hard and hot bits? Just wondered.
I wore the Mk10 Immersion Suit on every flight from it's introduction.
In 1984 I was ordered by the Sqn boss to stop wearing and return it to Flying Clothing.
I insisted that (according to Air Clues and the RAF Combat Survival Org) I was entitled to dress for the worst survival conditions I would encounter - ie, January, at night, over the north sea.
He said recent policy over-rode those requirements; the Nimrod was now classified a Category AA aircraft because of it's in-built redundantcy - 4 engines, multi hydraulics and high survivabilty rate - I argued but was told to wind my neck in
In 1984 I was ordered by the Sqn boss to stop wearing and return it to Flying Clothing.
I insisted that (according to Air Clues and the RAF Combat Survival Org) I was entitled to dress for the worst survival conditions I would encounter - ie, January, at night, over the north sea.
He said recent policy over-rode those requirements; the Nimrod was now classified a Category AA aircraft because of it's in-built redundantcy - 4 engines, multi hydraulics and high survivabilty rate - I argued but was told to wind my neck in
There was talk at the time of a lightweight IS but nothing ever came of it, surprise surprise. As for the Q-Dons, there seems to be general feeling that it would be something you would grab on the way out as you stepped gaily off the wing into your ocean going rubber sea chariot - anyone who's watched a Nimrod crew attempting to don the Quick-Don under timed conditions in the tube will recognise the inherent comedy value and misnaming of the eqpt.
I don't recall the crew of 666 wearing anything other than standard flying suits when they got winched, and that was 6 mins from explosion to feet wet.Therefore, in the absence of any other quick fixes to the aircraft to make it safer for its remaining service, is the time now right to consider the introduction of a suitable lightweight IS so that crews could at least have some hope of environmental survival in the event of a successful ditching?
Earlier chat spoke of parachutes - they've never been fitted to production a/c for the reasons I said previously, but am I right in thinking that MRA4 flight development crews either wear them or have them available? In which case is there a special method of egress avoiding all the hard and hot bits? Just wondered.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 81
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Smiter, I believe such a LW IS exists and dates back to the 80s. The bunny suit was replaced with a one-piece wooly pully and the whole worn under a flight suit.
This had the advantage of not having to load and unload the flight suit pockets for goon suit/non-goon suit sorties.
The suit was not as tough as the Mk 10 and I don't believe the thermal properties of the knitted suit were as good as the pile. It would also have been interesting try to have a c
p in one, but then again it was nigh impossible having one, or anything else when wearing a Mk 10.
I remember one trip to Kef, I was 'just' wearing long johns and vest, cause bunny suit was too itchy. The bunny suit, a flying suit, and the Mk 10. And a life jacket.
Serving tea was difficult as I had to clamour over all the sprawlling ground crew, use one hand to lift a leg over the spars whilst balancing the tray of tea in the other.
This had the advantage of not having to load and unload the flight suit pockets for goon suit/non-goon suit sorties.
The suit was not as tough as the Mk 10 and I don't believe the thermal properties of the knitted suit were as good as the pile. It would also have been interesting try to have a c
p in one, but then again it was nigh impossible having one, or anything else when wearing a Mk 10.I remember one trip to Kef, I was 'just' wearing long johns and vest, cause bunny suit was too itchy. The bunny suit, a flying suit, and the Mk 10. And a life jacket.
Serving tea was difficult as I had to clamour over all the sprawlling ground crew, use one hand to lift a leg over the spars whilst balancing the tray of tea in the other.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Shed
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The bunny suit was replaced with a one-piece wooly pully and the whole worn under a flight suit.
Still, I have a wry smile when I see the young blades with their LJ's nervously hoping we don't have to go swimming.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 81
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TheSmiter, if you are talking of the fairly heavy green suit with a sort of hard rough outer surface that is probably the bunny suit I am talking of.
The newer one was a one-piece knitted garment of ribbed wool thesame as the aircrew pullover. It was more flexible, thinner, and gave far less thermal protection. On the apron at ISK, with only a Mk 14 or 16 coverall you would get practically no benefit.
To go with this you had to wear the immersion suit too. It was thinner than a Mk 10 and had no pockets. You had to wear a flying suit over it.
Is that clearer or have I missed your point?
The newer one was a one-piece knitted garment of ribbed wool thesame as the aircrew pullover. It was more flexible, thinner, and gave far less thermal protection. On the apron at ISK, with only a Mk 14 or 16 coverall you would get practically no benefit.
To go with this you had to wear the immersion suit too. It was thinner than a Mk 10 and had no pockets. You had to wear a flying suit over it.
Is that clearer or have I missed your point?
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Shed
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cheers Wader, that clears it up - I've got the original one! And the squippers ain't getting it back, just yet. Apparently the new guys can't get the later one for love nor money.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Next door
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Smiter
Although there will be several other PPruners who may have actually flown in PA1 (MRA4), I had the pleasure of actually seeing the method of egress devised for it.
It consists of a upwardly sliding, heavily sprung door which together with a barrier forced out into the airflow, is activated by a handle. This applies to the forward and rear starboard doors, and the barrier is supposed to give the opportunity to get some downward direction before being wisked past the rather large engine intakes or horizontal tail planes.
I think I would prefer to dive out and downwards, if I had ever been in the unenviable position of having to get out using a parachute, as the possibility of decapitating myself seemed all to real from where I was looking.
Someone will probably be along shortly, who has flown in PA1 to either confirm or deny my impressions.
Although there will be several other PPruners who may have actually flown in PA1 (MRA4), I had the pleasure of actually seeing the method of egress devised for it.
It consists of a upwardly sliding, heavily sprung door which together with a barrier forced out into the airflow, is activated by a handle. This applies to the forward and rear starboard doors, and the barrier is supposed to give the opportunity to get some downward direction before being wisked past the rather large engine intakes or horizontal tail planes.
I think I would prefer to dive out and downwards, if I had ever been in the unenviable position of having to get out using a parachute, as the possibility of decapitating myself seemed all to real from where I was looking.
Someone will probably be along shortly, who has flown in PA1 to either confirm or deny my impressions.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 81
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TheSmiter, I have still got my original bunny suit, highly prized. I was once offered $50 for it, a lot of money 40 years ago, but it was too bloody cold in Goose.
It is a two-piece. The top a soft white polo neck and the bottom long johns with a shaped and padded bum. Does my bum look big in this? Yes.
Its only snag is the weight was the eleasticated waist is not strong enough to hold it up.
It is so warm I have only ever worn it in Canada or when in bed suffering from pneumonia.
It is a two-piece. The top a soft white polo neck and the bottom long johns with a shaped and padded bum. Does my bum look big in this? Yes.
Its only snag is the weight was the eleasticated waist is not strong enough to hold it up.
It is so warm I have only ever worn it in Canada or when in bed suffering from pneumonia.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: North of England
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
am I right in thinking that MRA4 flight development crews either wear them or have them available? In which case is there a special method of egress avoiding all the hard and hot bits? Just wondered.
I touch wood every time I think about it !
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Shed
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nimrod survival Eqpt
Dimmer, Spinner & Wader thanks all for your inputs 
Spins, I thought I'd heard of the system you describe, but like Dimmer, am losing brain cells rapidly.
Wader, the bunny suit is indeed one of God's finer creations with all sorts of utility, like the early morning January sprint across Dava Moor- wonder how much I'd get on ebay?
Dimmer, long time no see, regards to Mrs Switch; is she keeping you under control? Take care buddy and keeping touching the wood.
PS Silly question really: don't suppose they've even considered incorporating the 'escape system' into production aircraft?
As I said, silly question!
Spins, I thought I'd heard of the system you describe, but like Dimmer, am losing brain cells rapidly.
Wader, the bunny suit is indeed one of God's finer creations with all sorts of utility, like the early morning January sprint across Dava Moor- wonder how much I'd get on ebay?
Dimmer, long time no see, regards to Mrs Switch; is she keeping you under control? Take care buddy and keeping touching the wood.
PS Silly question really: don't suppose they've even considered incorporating the 'escape system' into production aircraft?
As I said, silly question!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nigegilb wrote
Nige, I may be wrong, but I think the chap who told you that was speculating.
I don't see hot air (super heated?) as an ignition source.
I would have to dig my physics books out of the attic to be any more confident. But hot air doesn't give an ignition source even if the fuel is well over its flashpoint.
A hot air leak may well damage insulation on a loom and cause a short circuit...but there I go.
I'll wait for the BOI but expect little more info than we have already. All this talk of fuel leaks, and no-one talking of ignition sources.
On the original thread I commented that it would be a very brave Engineering Officer that allowed Nimrods to go flying again, and I was thinking of a subject known as 'Wiring Husbandry'
Google for it.
SPHLC
I have been told that super-heated air is considered to be the most likely cause of ignition
I don't see hot air (super heated?) as an ignition source.
I would have to dig my physics books out of the attic to be any more confident. But hot air doesn't give an ignition source even if the fuel is well over its flashpoint.
A hot air leak may well damage insulation on a loom and cause a short circuit...but there I go.
I'll wait for the BOI but expect little more info than we have already. All this talk of fuel leaks, and no-one talking of ignition sources.
On the original thread I commented that it would be a very brave Engineering Officer that allowed Nimrods to go flying again, and I was thinking of a subject known as 'Wiring Husbandry'
Google for it.
SPHLC
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: ecosse
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The point in my last post was that one man, OC Eng, went bleating to the Staish about servicing schedules and shortage of staff regarding Mk10 suits and the Staish supported him, dis-regarding my survival needs, and without consultation of his stn aircrew.
Later, we inherited another 'wonderful' OC Eng who, in a short 2 year tour, convinced 18 Gp we had to have a North and South line. Yep, £2m squids later we had a new North line and a "portable hangar", confusion, ground crew division, plus a pissed off MT, Catering. Refuelling, Armouring and aircrew fraternity who were saying "what the f*cks going on"
He left on promotion and we went back to 1 Line
As a Captain , I witnessed an OC Eng or his deputies, who went in to Eng Coo-ord and put all the U/S tabs in their pocket prior to morning prayers and put them back on the board afterwards
It gets better - Remember AR5? - £750,000 shed for storage - never used - another story
Even More Better - "The progression of lies"
A tale of Nimrod Serviceability since 1972 - I have the details
Love Many, Trust a Few, Always paddle your own canoe
Later, we inherited another 'wonderful' OC Eng who, in a short 2 year tour, convinced 18 Gp we had to have a North and South line. Yep, £2m squids later we had a new North line and a "portable hangar", confusion, ground crew division, plus a pissed off MT, Catering. Refuelling, Armouring and aircrew fraternity who were saying "what the f*cks going on"
He left on promotion and we went back to 1 Line
As a Captain , I witnessed an OC Eng or his deputies, who went in to Eng Coo-ord and put all the U/S tabs in their pocket prior to morning prayers and put them back on the board afterwards
It gets better - Remember AR5? - £750,000 shed for storage - never used - another story
Even More Better - "The progression of lies"
A tale of Nimrod Serviceability since 1972 - I have the details
Love Many, Trust a Few, Always paddle your own canoe
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sir Peter, I have said before that I doubt if we will ever know for sure, all the more reason for getting fuel tank protection on the Nimrod. Hot Air? Have to say I scratched my head when I was told as well.
"I didn't believe it but the boffins have proved it possible. All
hot air in the area now isolated. It could have been vented fuel due to our
tank filling sequence but again that has been negated now."
Like I say, lots of work has been going on. There was a question about a possible over-pressure during the AAR sequence. It is possible that if the tanks are full and the tanker remains in contact it could have led to the tanks and the vent system being exposed to pressures the system was not designed for. A change to AAR procedures has reduced such a possibility.
The thing I haven't been able to sort out is the warranty period of Nimrod fuel seals. I have been told that the company has changed the wording on the warranty and servicing contract. No idea if this is true, so I make the last statement with the usual caveats.
"I didn't believe it but the boffins have proved it possible. All
hot air in the area now isolated. It could have been vented fuel due to our
tank filling sequence but again that has been negated now."
Like I say, lots of work has been going on. There was a question about a possible over-pressure during the AAR sequence. It is possible that if the tanks are full and the tanker remains in contact it could have led to the tanks and the vent system being exposed to pressures the system was not designed for. A change to AAR procedures has reduced such a possibility.
The thing I haven't been able to sort out is the warranty period of Nimrod fuel seals. I have been told that the company has changed the wording on the warranty and servicing contract. No idea if this is true, so I make the last statement with the usual caveats.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bridgwater Somerset
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was travelling up to Inverness on Tuesday and have only returned today, so this is my first posting since the show was aired.
Firstly I see by the postings that in the main it was thought to have been thought provoking and well balanced. I agree it was.
Some said it didn't go far enough , this is because the BOI has not yet reported and this programme was not trying to guess what its findings will be as some posting on here appear to have thought they would seek to do.
There were many other things that could have been included in the programme but the BBC wee keen to ensure it was factual.
I know of certain facts but I am not able to supply proof because of the Official Secrets Act preventing people from saying what they know. Fortunatly as you would have seen there are a Few Good Men who stepped forward with information and documentary evidence . I commend their bravery in coming forward.
I am working closely with others to build up a clear picture of what may have lead up to the crash and would be hapy to recieve any information .
Some have already given me information which may prove to be crucial in the future and I wish to thank them for this.
To blogger
No the Nimrod crews do not carry chutes, I offered to buy Ben one and his answer was very short. "If something goes wrong I will go down with the a/c".
They did not send out a Mayday they sent out a Pan, they thought they were going to make it and it suddenly exploded...
Had fire suppresent foam been fitted in the wings they might still be here as it was the wing that exploded first followed within a couple of seconds by the rest of the a/c.
Firstly I see by the postings that in the main it was thought to have been thought provoking and well balanced. I agree it was.
Some said it didn't go far enough , this is because the BOI has not yet reported and this programme was not trying to guess what its findings will be as some posting on here appear to have thought they would seek to do.
There were many other things that could have been included in the programme but the BBC wee keen to ensure it was factual.
I know of certain facts but I am not able to supply proof because of the Official Secrets Act preventing people from saying what they know. Fortunatly as you would have seen there are a Few Good Men who stepped forward with information and documentary evidence . I commend their bravery in coming forward.
I am working closely with others to build up a clear picture of what may have lead up to the crash and would be hapy to recieve any information .
Some have already given me information which may prove to be crucial in the future and I wish to thank them for this.
To blogger
No the Nimrod crews do not carry chutes, I offered to buy Ben one and his answer was very short. "If something goes wrong I will go down with the a/c".
They did not send out a Mayday they sent out a Pan, they thought they were going to make it and it suddenly exploded...
Had fire suppresent foam been fitted in the wings they might still be here as it was the wing that exploded first followed within a couple of seconds by the rest of the a/c.
Last edited by Tappers Dad; 8th Jun 2007 at 07:02.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bridgwater Somerset
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have just been reading the transcript of the Panorama prog.
JOFRE: Twenty-five fuel leaks in five months. Is that a lot?
TORPY: It's a lot. I would always like to see the figure reduced to the absolutely lowest minimum.
So what he done over the last 10 years to reduce the leaks NOTHING they are leaking at the same rate.!!!
What is his absolutely lowest minimum 24-23 leaks ??
TORPY: If you look over the last ten years, the level of fuel leaks that we've had has remained pretty constant over those ten years.
So thats good is it that the a/c are leaking just as much now as 10 years ago !!!!!!
JOFRE: But let's look at the five months up to March, there were 25 fuel leaks, some of them really quite serious. Are you concerned about that?
TORPY: I am very concerned about it, and that's why we have made sure that we analysed every single incidence. There are no underlying themes.
Try fuel leaks as an underlying theme Mr Torpy !!!!!
Sir GLENN TORPY, RAF Air Chief Marshal: In terms of air craft availability, today we have six aircraft up at Kinloss available for a crew to fly, which is the best we've had for the last nine months, and I think that is actually indicative of the effort that we've put in to the whole of the fleet up at Kinloss.
JOFRE: But with two thirds of the fleet grounded on average last year, I mean... are you happy with that?
TORPY: No, I'm not happy with it.
Why has it taken an effort to get 6 Nimrods servicable .Why are that not servicable anyway !!!!!
JOFRE: Twenty-five fuel leaks in five months. Is that a lot?
TORPY: It's a lot. I would always like to see the figure reduced to the absolutely lowest minimum.
So what he done over the last 10 years to reduce the leaks NOTHING they are leaking at the same rate.!!!
What is his absolutely lowest minimum 24-23 leaks ??
TORPY: If you look over the last ten years, the level of fuel leaks that we've had has remained pretty constant over those ten years.
So thats good is it that the a/c are leaking just as much now as 10 years ago !!!!!!
JOFRE: But let's look at the five months up to March, there were 25 fuel leaks, some of them really quite serious. Are you concerned about that?
TORPY: I am very concerned about it, and that's why we have made sure that we analysed every single incidence. There are no underlying themes.
Try fuel leaks as an underlying theme Mr Torpy !!!!!
Sir GLENN TORPY, RAF Air Chief Marshal: In terms of air craft availability, today we have six aircraft up at Kinloss available for a crew to fly, which is the best we've had for the last nine months, and I think that is actually indicative of the effort that we've put in to the whole of the fleet up at Kinloss.
JOFRE: But with two thirds of the fleet grounded on average last year, I mean... are you happy with that?
TORPY: No, I'm not happy with it.
Why has it taken an effort to get 6 Nimrods servicable .Why are that not servicable anyway !!!!!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Torpy should be hung out to dry. During his tenure we have lost 3 multi-engine aircraft. All, probably lost to fuel tank explosions, all requiring a simple solution. We have lost a couple of helos down to crews not having the experience/training required to do the "A level" flying and we hear today that his latest wheeze is to cut training still further to pay for ops. There was a time when only the most experienced flew SF sorties, not any more. Now we are going back to the days of the 2nd World War.
It is not quite the "20 minuters" yet but who knows where this will end; most probably with more unnecessary loss of life.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle1658059.ece
http://www.thisisoxfordshire.co.uk/d...t_training.php
Cutting back on training, at a time of war, when SF sorties are being flown by inexperienced crews is madness. How CAS can sign his name to such a plan is beyond me.
It is not quite the "20 minuters" yet but who knows where this will end; most probably with more unnecessary loss of life.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle1658059.ece
http://www.thisisoxfordshire.co.uk/d...t_training.php
Cutting back on training, at a time of war, when SF sorties are being flown by inexperienced crews is madness. How CAS can sign his name to such a plan is beyond me.
Last edited by nigegilb; 8th Jun 2007 at 15:19.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lincs
Posts: 695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TD
I think its a sign of the problem with the fleet and the service as a whole that there has been very little in the way of argumant or disagreement from those who have questioned the showing of the programme.
There was very little, if anything, in the way of sensationalism as some predicted, and several on here are even saying that the programme didn't go far enough, and I would agree with that. I would have prefered to have seen a little bit more 'force' used by the BBC.
As for the CAS, well he has clearly been left in an extremely difficult position, and his standing in the public and probably within the rank and file of the service looks extremely dodgy. You cannot come out with some of the things that he did, and sit back and do nothing about it. He should make a public statement now about what he intends to do regarding over-tasking, under-manning, under-funding blah!!
I also think that the lack of official comment from either the MOD or the government suggests they appreciate (at last!) that there are very serious problems, not only within the Nimrod fleet, but elsewhere in the RAF, and the other services also.
Clearly this cannot continue. It has to, and will end sooner or later. I only hope that no other families have to go through the same living hell as you and the others have. Keep up the fight TD, I do believe you might just be winning dear chap!
Best wishes to all
TSM
I think its a sign of the problem with the fleet and the service as a whole that there has been very little in the way of argumant or disagreement from those who have questioned the showing of the programme.
There was very little, if anything, in the way of sensationalism as some predicted, and several on here are even saying that the programme didn't go far enough, and I would agree with that. I would have prefered to have seen a little bit more 'force' used by the BBC.
As for the CAS, well he has clearly been left in an extremely difficult position, and his standing in the public and probably within the rank and file of the service looks extremely dodgy. You cannot come out with some of the things that he did, and sit back and do nothing about it. He should make a public statement now about what he intends to do regarding over-tasking, under-manning, under-funding blah!!
I also think that the lack of official comment from either the MOD or the government suggests they appreciate (at last!) that there are very serious problems, not only within the Nimrod fleet, but elsewhere in the RAF, and the other services also.
Clearly this cannot continue. It has to, and will end sooner or later. I only hope that no other families have to go through the same living hell as you and the others have. Keep up the fight TD, I do believe you might just be winning dear chap!
Best wishes to all
TSM
nigegilb: Cutting back on training, at a time of war, when SF sorties are being flown by inexperienced crews is madness. How CAS can sign his name to such a plan is beyond me.
It's all down to a complete lack of sufficient finance!!
It is time that Defence was given some priority over the black holes that are the NHS, Education and Social Security.Procurement project overruns, whether they are the fault of DPA, MOD or industry, have to be paid for. That means there is less and less money to run current kit, buy spares, buy fuel, etc etc. If this was the NHS we would overspend and then look to the government to bail us out. Or we would close wards. Or do less operations. But what have we got left to cut? The blood has all been squeezed from the stone. A LONG time ago. The only thing left is to cut back on "peacetime" flying and exercises. It is time that VCDS and 2nd PUS were told to p
s off next time they ask for "savings". There are none left to be had!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bristol Temple Meads
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TD. Are we sure that there were 6 serviceable Nimrods at Kinloss, and not the usual 2-3.
Also on the qusetion of fuel leaks. The official figures from MoD support the CAS claim that things have been steady over the past 10 years (approx 4 leaks per 50 flying hours). With 8000 hours being clocked up last year by the fleet that should work out at around around 640 fuel leaks during the year, or 320 in a 6 month period. So how was the 25 figure arrived at? I know it is a figure put out by the Sec of State for Defense, perhaps he means of the 320 there were 25 serious fuel leaks involving Air Incident reports.
I believe that the claim that fuel leaks have been steady over the past 10 years will feature in the BOI report, and will be MoD's justification for believing everything was ok (no nasty trends). I said at the time the data was given out in answer to a PQ, the information was at hand within 5 working days.
DV
Also on the qusetion of fuel leaks. The official figures from MoD support the CAS claim that things have been steady over the past 10 years (approx 4 leaks per 50 flying hours). With 8000 hours being clocked up last year by the fleet that should work out at around around 640 fuel leaks during the year, or 320 in a 6 month period. So how was the 25 figure arrived at? I know it is a figure put out by the Sec of State for Defense, perhaps he means of the 320 there were 25 serious fuel leaks involving Air Incident reports.
I believe that the claim that fuel leaks have been steady over the past 10 years will feature in the BOI report, and will be MoD's justification for believing everything was ok (no nasty trends). I said at the time the data was given out in answer to a PQ, the information was at hand within 5 working days.
DV