Nimrod Information
IIRC The R1 existed some 12 years ago, when an unknown squadron with no aircraft left RAF Wyton and took up residence at RAF Waddington as 51 Squadron with three Nimrod R1's in 1995.
“Perhaps you could tell us where the money is going and what is more important than flight safety and human life please?”
Winco, you are far too sensible my friend. You’ll never become a Director in DE&S. (And nor will I, for the same reason). The list of things deemed far more important than flight safety and human life is too voluminous to list here, but here’s a few;
IPT breakthrough jollies to plush hotels to be lectured by 18 year olds on how to “bond”.
Daily reports “up” to IPT “Management Boards” who consist almost entirely of junior staff who have never made a decision in their life, and whose only interest is the agenda item “Xmas bash”.
RAB (Random Asset Budgeting) reports to the same non-entities
Fag breaks outside in purpose built shelters designed to stop the rain putting them out.
More seriously; being seen to have a robust process is far more important than having the resource, knowledge, ability and will to actually implement it. And when the said senior staffs don’t know the difference, can’t explain what I’m talking about and have never done it, then we’re really in trouble.
Winco, you are far too sensible my friend. You’ll never become a Director in DE&S. (And nor will I, for the same reason). The list of things deemed far more important than flight safety and human life is too voluminous to list here, but here’s a few;
IPT breakthrough jollies to plush hotels to be lectured by 18 year olds on how to “bond”.
Daily reports “up” to IPT “Management Boards” who consist almost entirely of junior staff who have never made a decision in their life, and whose only interest is the agenda item “Xmas bash”.
RAB (Random Asset Budgeting) reports to the same non-entities
Fag breaks outside in purpose built shelters designed to stop the rain putting them out.
More seriously; being seen to have a robust process is far more important than having the resource, knowledge, ability and will to actually implement it. And when the said senior staffs don’t know the difference, can’t explain what I’m talking about and have never done it, then we’re really in trouble.
tucumseh, I know this is off topic despite being about Nimrods, but I laughed when i read yours and ZH875's comments about R1s. When I was at Kinloss in 72 a large contigent of groundcrew turned up for Nimrod courses, when asked which station they are posted to (there was a couple in those days) they said RAF Wyton. So two or three of us applied, being Nimrod Q'd etc, a couple of days after our requests went through we had to report to PSF along with the SIB to answer how we knew about an aircraft that does not exist that is not going to RAF Wyton, they also interviewd the new guys on the course to find someone to string up for giving away military secrets.
When I was on 203 Sqd in Luqa an R1 landed (about 75/76) and I was asked to empty/replenish the Toilet, so duly arrived with the trolley on the back of a landrover and positioned it by the front LH side, only to find out that there was no panel. When I went up the steps, there in front of me was a operators station and no toilet, by the time it sunk in that this was not a Nimrod I knew I was being arrested and carted off for questioning. Funny old thing when I was let go and told where the Toilet was on the R1, the crew said I could carry on, I politely declined and left them to do it.
Followed by that in 1978 I was moved from the Hydraulic Bay at Wyton to 51 sqd because of that same Nimrod Q. When a report came out in a newspaper with a picture of an R1 the MOD had a D notice slapped on them and the article withdrawn.
So it is quite strange as you say how things change with regards to these sort of areas.
When I was on 203 Sqd in Luqa an R1 landed (about 75/76) and I was asked to empty/replenish the Toilet, so duly arrived with the trolley on the back of a landrover and positioned it by the front LH side, only to find out that there was no panel. When I went up the steps, there in front of me was a operators station and no toilet, by the time it sunk in that this was not a Nimrod I knew I was being arrested and carted off for questioning. Funny old thing when I was let go and told where the Toilet was on the R1, the crew said I could carry on, I politely declined and left them to do it.
Followed by that in 1978 I was moved from the Hydraulic Bay at Wyton to 51 sqd because of that same Nimrod Q. When a report came out in a newspaper with a picture of an R1 the MOD had a D notice slapped on them and the article withdrawn.
So it is quite strange as you say how things change with regards to these sort of areas.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Back in Geordie Land
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tucumseh
There has been a lot written on this forum about those of us who are no longer 'current' whether we be Aircrew or Groundcrew, and so I thought I would put the question back to one of the expert 'current' Nimrod people who made such a bold statement!
Over to you Magners
There has been a lot written on this forum about those of us who are no longer 'current' whether we be Aircrew or Groundcrew, and so I thought I would put the question back to one of the expert 'current' Nimrod people who made such a bold statement!
Over to you Magners
Nigegilb,
Quote:
"this aircraft is quite literally, a mid-air collision waiting to happen."
Yes, it would be if we selected the A/P on and fell asleeep. Your statement is an affront to the Nimrod crews.
Quote:
"Because of a lack of TCAS, Nimrod crews are making do with ad hoc procedures, NVG look outs, use of aircraft radar etc."
Use of an aircraft radar, which is one of the best, and manned by a specialist is not "ad hoc".
Get back in your box.
Quote:
"this aircraft is quite literally, a mid-air collision waiting to happen."
Yes, it would be if we selected the A/P on and fell asleeep. Your statement is an affront to the Nimrod crews.
Quote:
"Because of a lack of TCAS, Nimrod crews are making do with ad hoc procedures, NVG look outs, use of aircraft radar etc."
Use of an aircraft radar, which is one of the best, and manned by a specialist is not "ad hoc".
Get back in your box.
Nige,
Your quote seems to suggest confliction with civvy traffic and not coalition aircraft.
Is the civvy traffic flying in the airways flying lights out? Surely you don't need NVGs to see and avoid them?
How many civvy pilots use NVGs and would be able to see IR strobes?
Firstly, could someone confirm that the lack of TCAS and the rejection of the UOR was based on cost and not some other factor?
Secondly, the problem comes that not all agree that lack of TCAS and IR strobes is a major flight safety issue and that human life is 'unduly' at risk. Lack of these items do not make an aircraft inherently unsafe.
Where does your quote come from? Unreported Airproxes? Not being happy without TCAS but quite happy to go with no radar? Something does not add up with this argument to me.
Your quote seems to suggest confliction with civvy traffic and not coalition aircraft.
Is the civvy traffic flying in the airways flying lights out? Surely you don't need NVGs to see and avoid them?
How many civvy pilots use NVGs and would be able to see IR strobes?
'I think the money is going to other things more important'
Perhaps you could tell us where the money is going and what is more important than flight safety and human life please?
Perhaps you could tell us where the money is going and what is more important than flight safety and human life please?
Secondly, the problem comes that not all agree that lack of TCAS and IR strobes is a major flight safety issue and that human life is 'unduly' at risk. Lack of these items do not make an aircraft inherently unsafe.
Where does your quote come from? Unreported Airproxes? Not being happy without TCAS but quite happy to go with no radar? Something does not add up with this argument to me.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAR Bloke, as I understand it, the aircraft radar is deemed non mission essential. Hence, the occasions that Nimrods are up there mixing it without the radar to spot potential collisions. I describe these procedures as ad hoc because the aircraft radar was never designed to replace TCAS, which is why the radar is not demed essential. A radar used in this way, is blind to several types of potential collision.
Going back to my incident for a moment, I too was deconflicted from coalition aircraft. However you cannot account for incompetence. The US Herc that we almost hit head on was flying at the incorrect flight level for procedural separation promulgated in spins/ATOs. The fighter controllers normally providing a radar service were being used on other higher priority missions. The "controller" I was in communication with might as well have been the cleaner, such was his lack of radar experience.
I made the point about NVGs because we had a fully compatible flight deck, the Nimrod does not. Using NVG spotters in beam windows blinded from 11 to 1 o'clock is hardly a failsafe anti-confliction procedure.
Honestly, I thought we had left all this behind in 2001/02. I am sorry, not everyone sees it the same way. But, I am not surprised, some of the responses on this thread are shocking.
I will further investigate the UOR situation and post any info on this thread.
I have to agree that Nimrod MR2 would appear to be being nursed out of service at minimum cost and with way too much associated risk.
Going back to my incident for a moment, I too was deconflicted from coalition aircraft. However you cannot account for incompetence. The US Herc that we almost hit head on was flying at the incorrect flight level for procedural separation promulgated in spins/ATOs. The fighter controllers normally providing a radar service were being used on other higher priority missions. The "controller" I was in communication with might as well have been the cleaner, such was his lack of radar experience.
I made the point about NVGs because we had a fully compatible flight deck, the Nimrod does not. Using NVG spotters in beam windows blinded from 11 to 1 o'clock is hardly a failsafe anti-confliction procedure.
Honestly, I thought we had left all this behind in 2001/02. I am sorry, not everyone sees it the same way. But, I am not surprised, some of the responses on this thread are shocking.
I will further investigate the UOR situation and post any info on this thread.
I have to agree that Nimrod MR2 would appear to be being nursed out of service at minimum cost and with way too much associated risk.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South West
Age: 60
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ref the lack of TCAS. I have recently been operating in the Afghan/Iraq regions in the AAR role. I have to say that TCAS is a hugely positive aid to the safe operation of our aircraft in these areas that lack full ATC services.
Aircraft operating without TCAS, especially at night or poor weather, are poorly placed when trying to avoid collisions using solely the mark one eyeball.
Aircraft operating without TCAS, especially at night or poor weather, are poorly placed when trying to avoid collisions using solely the mark one eyeball.
Fed up, thank you for your contribution and your maiden post. I hope you understand that I am not belittling it in any way when I say that I could not have imagined any professional aviator having any other view. Clearly I am wrong, for contrary views have already been expressed! At the very least that is surely a strong argument for an Airworthiness Authority that would enforce the fitting of TCAS, if for no other reason than to save people from themselves as well as saving the innocent victims of such macho foolhardiness. If the views expressed questioning Nige's campaign to get TCAS fitted to MR2 are in any way typical of attitudes on that fleet, then there is a very grave problem indeed. Kit only needs money and the will to get it fitted, changing a gung ho philosophy of "the Mk1 eyeball is all you need" takes much much more effort. I am alarmed at the revelation that basic reporting within the RAF Flight Safety system, whether via F760A or F765B, has been severely curtailed for perhaps in excess of 10 years for 'cost saving' reasons. I see a direct correlation between that and the Airworthiness deficiencies reported in this thread. I now wonder if it has not also incubated a generation of aviators who see those like myself who believe in the critical importance of a healthy and viable Flight Safety system in the RAF as mere milksops.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scotland
Age: 49
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like the SoS will be making a statement to the House!
http://media.netpr.pl/notatka_89577.html
The media are invited to attend an EMBARGOED off-camera on the record
'lock-in' briefing on the findings of the Nimrod XV230 BOI on Tuesday 4
December.
DATE: Tuesday 4 December 2007
TIME: 12.15 - 15.30 (approx).
VENUE: Media Suite, MOD Main Building, Whitehall, London SW1A 2HB.
The timings are as follows:
12.15 - 14.00: Media arrive and receive a redacted BOI and background material.
14.00 - 14.30: Presentation by the BOI president on the Board's findings.
14.30 - 15.15: Q&A session.
15.15 - 15.30: Comfort break.
15.30: SofS to make a statement to the House of Commons on the BOI's
findings. The statement will be relayed live to the MoD media suite.
Media who wish to attend the embargoed briefing MUST accredit in advance.
'lock-in' briefing on the findings of the Nimrod XV230 BOI on Tuesday 4
December.
DATE: Tuesday 4 December 2007
TIME: 12.15 - 15.30 (approx).
VENUE: Media Suite, MOD Main Building, Whitehall, London SW1A 2HB.
The timings are as follows:
12.15 - 14.00: Media arrive and receive a redacted BOI and background material.
14.00 - 14.30: Presentation by the BOI president on the Board's findings.
14.30 - 15.15: Q&A session.
15.15 - 15.30: Comfort break.
15.30: SofS to make a statement to the House of Commons on the BOI's
findings. The statement will be relayed live to the MoD media suite.
Media who wish to attend the embargoed briefing MUST accredit in advance.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lincs
Posts: 695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can anyone ever recall when this has happened before? Where the MOD have invited the press and the media to discuss the findings of a BoI prior to it's release?
I find it bewildering that such a thing is going to happen, unless of course there are some really serious points that they want to 'come clean about' to the press and then announce what they are going to do to fix it all.
Magners, I am seriously worried by some of your comments mate - are you really in the RAF aor are you just pretending? The one about 'the money is going to other things more important' would be quite funny if it wasn't so true.
Roll on Monday afternoon.
TD, not much longer to wait now Sir.
I find it bewildering that such a thing is going to happen, unless of course there are some really serious points that they want to 'come clean about' to the press and then announce what they are going to do to fix it all.
Magners, I am seriously worried by some of your comments mate - are you really in the RAF aor are you just pretending? The one about 'the money is going to other things more important' would be quite funny if it wasn't so true.
Roll on Monday afternoon.
TD, not much longer to wait now Sir.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TSM this is totally unprecedented. The journos have to hand over their mobile phones and are invited to a lock in. After which questions and SoS rises. I can only think the MoD are deeply worried.
Huge pat on the back to TD who has had to grieve and fight the MoD for the truth at the same time. The press attending, will listen with an open mind, but with the advantage that an awful lot of info is out there, with which they can guage some understanding before a very technical brief.
I am sorry that the BoI are not presenting before family and friends at Kinloss first. But I am not going to comment further on this decision.
Huge pat on the back to TD who has had to grieve and fight the MoD for the truth at the same time. The press attending, will listen with an open mind, but with the advantage that an awful lot of info is out there, with which they can guage some understanding before a very technical brief.
I am sorry that the BoI are not presenting before family and friends at Kinloss first. But I am not going to comment further on this decision.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can add some information about the expected announcement on Tuesday which I hope will be helpful. Apologies if this is a duplicate post - didn't seem to work the first time I tried.
The purpose of the "lock in" is to ensure that the press have all the detailed information they need but cannot report it before it is placed in the public domain via the proper channel - namely, Parliament. This is not unpredecented, and has been used when releasing the results of BOIs before.
I understand that the families will be briefed on the conclusions of the BOI in private on the morning before the Parliamentary statement, and before the press. This is also not unprecedented.
We plan to publish further information - including the BOI report itself - on the MOD website as soon as possible after the Parliamentary statement (expected 1530 Tuesday). I will post a link to that information here as soon as it is available... If someone doesn't beat me to it.
Robin Riley
Assistant Director (Bureau)
Directorate of Defence Public Relations
Ministry of Defence
www.mod.uk
This was posted by the Ministry of Defence. You can find a copy at www.blogs.mod.uk
The purpose of the "lock in" is to ensure that the press have all the detailed information they need but cannot report it before it is placed in the public domain via the proper channel - namely, Parliament. This is not unpredecented, and has been used when releasing the results of BOIs before.
I understand that the families will be briefed on the conclusions of the BOI in private on the morning before the Parliamentary statement, and before the press. This is also not unprecedented.
We plan to publish further information - including the BOI report itself - on the MOD website as soon as possible after the Parliamentary statement (expected 1530 Tuesday). I will post a link to that information here as soon as it is available... If someone doesn't beat me to it.
Robin Riley
Assistant Director (Bureau)
Directorate of Defence Public Relations
Ministry of Defence
www.mod.uk
This was posted by the Ministry of Defence. You can find a copy at www.blogs.mod.uk
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Norfolk England
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TCAS
Nigel
You may find this MOD web page of interest in the light of various comments on TCAS!
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/De...ionSuccess.htm
JB
You may find this MOD web page of interest in the light of various comments on TCAS!
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/De...ionSuccess.htm
JB
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have heard that radar service is not too bad in the South, but patchy in the North. Comms also patchy, confirmed by the utter silence that met the MAYDAY call the other week. In this kind of environment it is absolutely essential to have TCAS more so than in the London TMA. Multi engine, mil aircraft operating lights out procedures with no way of coordinating avoiding action using mode "S" and TCAS/ACAS is a situation that is asking for trouble. A couple of crew members eyes glued to the skies through their gogs, trying to keep the Mighty Hunter safe over the skies of Afg?
On 31 Mar next year the state exemption runs out. Nimrods wil be flying out over International airspace West of Ireland, West of Iberia and down through the Med and on to Akr all for a bit of common sense.
But remember the mantra, "safety of our personnel is paramount." I expect the hacks will hear that line spoken a few times next week.
On 31 Mar next year the state exemption runs out. Nimrods wil be flying out over International airspace West of Ireland, West of Iberia and down through the Med and on to Akr all for a bit of common sense.
But remember the mantra, "safety of our personnel is paramount." I expect the hacks will hear that line spoken a few times next week.
TSM/Nige
I think you'll find that briefing the press under an embargo is actually normal practice. And, for the record, all of the families are being briefed in advance.
CLA
I think you'll find that briefing the press under an embargo is actually normal practice. And, for the record, all of the families are being briefed in advance.
CLA
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: EU Land
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
XV235 MAYDAY Call
Nigegilb,
Ref your 1791, regarding the 'utter silence' in response to XV235's MAYDAY call; from where the incident occurred, they were LOS to 2 TAC Air C2 units (at Kandahar and Camp Bastion) and to the KAF ATC, all of whom constantly monitor UHF/VHF GUARD.
Rudekid suggested that 'with all the box switching that occurs, I wouldn't rule out a switch pigs either...'. While I'm not at all familiar with an MR2's cockpit/radio layout, it does seem unusual that all three ground units would fail to respond if a MAYDAY was transmitted on GUARD. Additionally, other aircraft operating in the area could/should/would also have heard and been able to acknowledge/respond.
This is not an attempt to undermine your push for TCAS, but a possible clarification for one of the elements of the XV235 puzzle.
SkippedOnce
Ref your 1791, regarding the 'utter silence' in response to XV235's MAYDAY call; from where the incident occurred, they were LOS to 2 TAC Air C2 units (at Kandahar and Camp Bastion) and to the KAF ATC, all of whom constantly monitor UHF/VHF GUARD.
Rudekid suggested that 'with all the box switching that occurs, I wouldn't rule out a switch pigs either...'. While I'm not at all familiar with an MR2's cockpit/radio layout, it does seem unusual that all three ground units would fail to respond if a MAYDAY was transmitted on GUARD. Additionally, other aircraft operating in the area could/should/would also have heard and been able to acknowledge/respond.
This is not an attempt to undermine your push for TCAS, but a possible clarification for one of the elements of the XV235 puzzle.
SkippedOnce
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bridgwater Somerset
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
defenceheadquarters
I believe the MOD posting on this Rumour network, has two connotations .
1 The MOD realize the importance of PPRuNe and have responded to criticism of the MOD by serving personnel.
2 The MOD are in damage limitation mode
Had the families not made a fuss over the last few days there were no plans for the BOI president or the Chief of Air Staff to meet the families in Kinloss as we were promised. However this has now been reviewed following pressure from the families and families will now have the opportunity to to talk to the BOI president and the Chief of Air Staff on Wednesday 5th December at Kinloss.
I believe the MOD posting on this Rumour network, has two connotations .
1 The MOD realize the importance of PPRuNe and have responded to criticism of the MOD by serving personnel.
2 The MOD are in damage limitation mode
Had the families not made a fuss over the last few days there were no plans for the BOI president or the Chief of Air Staff to meet the families in Kinloss as we were promised. However this has now been reviewed following pressure from the families and families will now have the opportunity to to talk to the BOI president and the Chief of Air Staff on Wednesday 5th December at Kinloss.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great news Graham. As you are well aware, the families involved in the XV179 tragedy were given a full presentation by the BoI team at Lyneham, I also believe the AAIB specialist was present, along with a Govt Minister. They were briefed first, as a matter of priority. Sqn personnel were also keen to learn the findings. I assume Kinloss personnel will receive a full briefing by the President on the 5th as well. This is also, very important.
I fail to understand why the press are being given the red carpet treatment in London the day before. I would be grateful if the person who posted from Defence HQ would explain when this kind of briefing has been held in London in the recent past, in similar circumstances.
If the families asked for the briefing to be held in London, then, different matter.
Edited to add, TD, would you mind telling us when you learned of this briefing on the 5th? I understand from my own contacts in the media that they were briefed by the MoD on or around the 20 Nov about the presentation in London on the 4th.
I fail to understand why the press are being given the red carpet treatment in London the day before. I would be grateful if the person who posted from Defence HQ would explain when this kind of briefing has been held in London in the recent past, in similar circumstances.
If the families asked for the briefing to be held in London, then, different matter.
Edited to add, TD, would you mind telling us when you learned of this briefing on the 5th? I understand from my own contacts in the media that they were briefed by the MoD on or around the 20 Nov about the presentation in London on the 4th.
Last edited by nigegilb; 1st Dec 2007 at 08:23.