Nimrod MRA.4

[The Old Fat One]

... Escalation takes years. Despite the regs saying each stage must be dealt with expeditiously, the only time I got a formal rejection or ruling against me was just as that person was leaving post. It took years. Finally, you get to PUS. (He didn’t reply at all but I’m willing to bet it was kept from him)...

As a matter of interest did you ever raise a complaint with your MP? We all have that right, military included, and I saw it used several times to good effect. I also saw a military issue raised as a question for Parliment (all the Nimrod folk will know the issue) and although it did not have great success at the time, it did put the issue on the record for all to see.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

I will not let a bitter, uninformed, cynical man, defame me or my colleagues, on this or any other forum

Dry your eyes, princess! If a man grieving for the unnecessary loss of his son makes a few derogatory comments, so what? This whole website is full of defamatory posts by people who are bitter, uninformed and cynical, and (unlike TD) don't even have any link, however tenuous, to the matter in hand. Whether or not his comments are relevant or helpful, having a pop at him seems pretty mean.

[Chugalug2]

I find it interesting that tuc is being asked if it ever occurred to him to leak to the press or to contact his MP. What he did do was to defy an illegal order from a 2* Air Officer to suborn the UK Military Airworthiness Regulations for his area of responsibility, and instead ensured that they were covered by "creative accounting" (most definitely not his words but mine, in an attempt to illustrate the lonely and isolated position that he was in). As he says, he went through all the official redress procedures, only to be told at every level that the illegal order was legal and to be obeyed! All around him others were bent on doing just that. During the period in which this anarchy prevailed (at least 20 years, possibly up to 30) hundreds of RAF Staff Officers must have been in post and been aware of, if not directly involved in implementing, these so called cost cutting initiatives that have cost us so dear in blood and treasure. Air Officers in double figures would also have been in on the act. What did all those people do? Contact the Press? Alert their MP's? I suspect they simply kept their heads down, did as they were told and saw their tour/service out. No doubt I would have done the same. It is a measure of tuc's moral stamina that he did not.

Time for the RAF to take stock of itself, right now. If it is to begin to recover its own moral stamina it should begin by putting right a Gross Injustice done to two of its own JO's by two of its own Air Officers. It should then face up to the chargeable offences committed by its own very senior officers. Not to do so will mean that it will always be mired by the shame that they have inflicted upon it. Meanwhile it should aid rather than resist the urgent need to reform military airworthiness provision which will require the establishment of a separate and independent MAA and MAAIB, IMHO.

To those of you who accuse me of thread drift (and much else I dare say), that all this has nothing to do with the MRA4, I can only reply; "Oh yes it does, really it does!".

Finally apologies tucumseh if I embarrass you with this, but it needed to be said and you would never have done so. Forgive me please, I did it for the sake of my Service.

[tucumseh]

TOFO

As a matter of interest did you ever raise a complaint with your MP? We all have that right, military included, and I saw it used several times to good effect. I also saw a military issue raised as a question for Parliment (all the Nimrod folk will know the issue) and although it did not have great success at the time, it did put the issue on the record for all to see.

Excellent question because the formal advice I was given was this was the way to go, for various reasons, including;

1. Having exhausted due process (the final act being a letter to PUS), it is better to avoid the press and deal through one’s MP. As you say, it is one’s inalienable right.
2. Ministers are duty bound to reply to letters/questions from fellow MPs, but can and do routinely ignore the public.

The answer is yes and he, my MP, has been very supportive and diligent; although somewhat sceptical at first. But he also recognised that MoD were stalling him, refusing to answer direct questions and routinely lying when they did. The 2005 correspondence I mentioned giving warning to Min(AF) that the airworthiness regs were not being implemented, and the advice he was being given in Ministerial Briefs was demonstrably wrong, was passed to him by my MP. I have the letters in which my MP chased up Ministers because the issues I raised were so serious they demanded immediate attention. As I said, he only replied 9 months after XV230 crashed, and still denied there was a problem. That simple exchange of letters will stand for all time as proof Haddon-Cave did not come as a revelation, but was a reiteration of known facts. Coincidentally, ACM Loader later used precisely the same words (failure to implement) in the BoI report, but it is a powerful coincidence. Behind that 2005 letter is a 15 year unbroken audit trail of similar internal correspondence when the same issues were notified to senior MoD staffs (and, as I always point out, my own 2 Star also had responsibility for Nimrod and Chinook). In 2001, at a formal meeting, I placed that paper trail bundle in front of another 2 Star. He recoiled, refused to touch it and later advised Ministers there was no such evidence and declined to distribute minutes of the meeting, which his own PA had taken. Thank goodness for tape recorders, eh?

I’d be interested to know what articles you are referring to. Please PM.



Chug – Duly embarrassed, but thanks.

[Charlie Luncher]

MRA4

So despite the Axe grinders

How is the MRA4 coming along, you up for some Fincastle Fun, I can book the tees and we have plenty of beer. You could dress it up as warm weather trials.

Dicky don't drive angry but I know were you are coming from, I guess the other "experts" just don't get it, but you are not allowed to say that because they have the smarts, no one else
Best to all me auld muckers at ISK keep the faith
Charlie sends

[tucumseh]

So despite the Axe grinders

A strange statement but one I've heard many times from those responsible for the systemic failings reported by Haddon-Cave and the subsequent deaths of your colleagues.

Perhaps I'm wrong? Should I just do what I'm told, look the other way and/or obey orders to make a false written declaration about airworthiness. Such an order is, after all, perfectly legal and justified according to every single one of my superiors I've debated it with; and every Minister who has ruled on it.

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

Rest assured, Tucumseh, that I, and probably many others read every word of every post you make on this website.

But what happens next? Is anything actually happening, apart from ongoing court action for compensation?

Have the two IPT geezers had their say yet? Or do they carry the can?

[The Old Fat One]

Tuc,

I was referring to an issue which has nothing to do with the aircraft; it was a personnel problem.

For interest only, in the late eighties AEOps (as they were then) were subject to pay downbanding after a review. On subsequent investigation, the review team had manifestly failed to meet their own terms of reference and the review was profoundly flawed. If that was not bad enough, the result was announced in a letter (by a one star I think) which tied the pay banding to a change to terms of service announcement, when the two items were entirely disconnected. To complete the farce the aforementioned two page letter look liked it had been written by a ten year old, with sentence after sentence contradicting each other.

Not surprisingly the AEOp cadre took issue and commenced redress proceedings as per QRs. At each step they were met with pretty much the same response "too late the one star has signed it off". Somewhere in the records of parliment, the pay band review was recorded as being irrevocably flawed, but it was never over turned. (Until sometime in 2002 when a new review upbanded the AEOp cadre).

[fincastle84]

Tuc

Are you finding that the new government is anymore sympathetic to your cause or are they also burying their heads in the sand?

[Distant Voice]

Faults at all levels

We can talk about faults with the top brass, faults with ministers, faults with the system and procedures, but if all that were perfect we are still left with the people who release and accept the aircraft for flight. I have been on several detachments and I know that because of task pressures there is a tendancy to operated at a more "relaxed" level than one would do back at home base. Defects are carried, no go items become go items. Let's look at XV230 on the day of the crash;

• No 3 tank port would not go above 7800 lbs
• Could not get more than 15,000 ilbs into tank No 1
• Suspect blow-offs from No 1 tank
• Defective fuel gauge for No 5 tank
• SCP trips off during AAR.

None of the above found their way into the F700, where they could be seen by all. We will never know if Flt Sgt Davies was aware of any of them. So a simple system, covering flight safety, was ignored by people at the work-face. The point that I am trying to make is that no matter how sophiticated and water-tight you make the system it will only work if it is followed by everyone from top to BOTTOM.

DV

[Distant Voice]

PN.

Flt Sgt Davies was not a member of Crew 3, he had been flown in for the one trip. That is why it is important to have defects officially recordered and investigated. The informal network may have cost 14 lives in this case.

DV

[davejb]

Gents,
not wishing to criticise anyone here, but wouldn't all this be better in the extensive thread on XV230 rather than in the MR4 thread? Yes MR2 does rather lead on to MR4, I'm not disputing that - but it would be nice if we still had a thread for MR4 related info too.

[Mad_Mark]

Hear, hear, Dave

The usual crowd are back to hijack a thread related to the Nimrod. Please guys, keep it on the XV230 thread and leave this one alone!

MadMark!!!

[In thrust i trust]

Alpha

Does anyone know if Alpha got off the ground today?

[Chugalug2]

davejb:

Yes MR2 does rather lead on to MR4, I'm not disputing that - but it would be nice if we still had a thread for MR4 related info too.

The most relevant MRA4 related info that I am aware of is that it still does not have an RTS. One miserable signature is all that stands in the way of this aircraft getting into the eager hands of RAF air and ground crew to continue the distinguished careers of the Mighty Hunters. One miserable signature that is withheld because the compromising of the MR2 is now visited upon the MRA4. Why was the MR2 compromised? Because of a deliberate and enforced policy to do so emanating from within the RAF High Command. What Herman Goering and Co singularly failed to do 70 years ago, this gang of criminals has succeeded in with spectacular effect. Lives have been lost, aircraft destroyed and our Maritime capability brought to its knees. Meanwhile those responsible tend their roses in happy contentment.
As you say davejb, MR2 does tend to lead on to MR4!

[tucumseh]

The usual crowd

That would be the crowd that has been fighting for years to make your lives safer. Bet your family would like to shake our hands. Water off a ducks back mate. I’ll still try to do my job correctly. People are finding this easier now because those who spent years telling us NOT to bother with safety are now hiding in the shadows. How many Stars have you had a go at to improve your lot? I’m not criticising you if you haven’t. I know how it works and if you’re not at least a Gp Capt it is probably more than your job is worth to do this. So please be glad others do it for you.

DV

system it will only work if it is followed by everyone from top to BOTTOM.

Spot on. We each have a part and no-one here has a single answer. At the root of this (both XV230 and MRA4!) is the Risk Management necessity to “Avoid the avoidable, and manage the unavoidable”. If you stop avoiding the avoidable (or the obvious), then you are piling too much pressure and risk on the end user. Avoidable events occur and they haven’t the wherewithal to manage them. That is what happened on both XV230 and MRA4. And C130 XV179. And Chinook ZD576..... This is precisely what Haddon-Cave reported on, although using his own words. The basics were deliberately ignored to save money and for personal gain. Read my last 2 posts on the Mull thread. That is where the problems originate. Huge amounts of money knowingly wasted, leaving very little for “maintaining airworthiness”. So the latter was pushed to one side for short term convenience (replacing valuable spares that had been scrapped). It wasn’t the only problem, but it is the one involving most money.

Fincastle

Are you finding that the new government is any more sympathetic to your cause or are they also burying their heads in the sand?

Well, first of all it is not “my” cause because there are many others doing the same thing, and better than I. I think perhaps I am slightly different because I look at these events from a different viewpoint, including long before the final act. I found that under the previous Government (Labour) LibDem MPs were quite happy to make a nuisance of themselves by writing to Ministers, because they thought they’d nothing to lose and much to gain. Now they are unexpectedly part of a coalition, I must be honest and say each of them has been true to his word (so far!) and they continue the fight from a new found position of power. For example, Ainsworth, Ingram, Browne et al routinely ignored correspondence that wasn’t sent via my MP – and the replies they did send to my MP were usually a pack of half truths and lies. The new LibDem Defence Minister has clearly had his staff trawl through all unanswered letters and I (at least) have received replies. Good replies as well. On the other hand, as many of the problems we discuss first occurred under a Tory government, I notice a slight nervousness as these facts emerge. For example, Haddon-Cave baselined his report at 1998 (Labour) but you never hear the Tories crowing about this because they know it should have been early 90s. But, on balance, there has been a positive change. Lord Philip’s Review will tell us more.


SPHLC
If you don’t mind, I cannot answer that. The matter is sub judice.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

our Maritime capability brought to its knees

More like "destroyed completely"...

[tucumseh]

To Distant Voice

I got your PM but your inbox is full. Sent an e-mail.

Regards

[Distant Voice]

Tuc,

Got it. Many thanks.

DV

[fincastle84]

Tuc,

Thanks for your considered & detailed reply.
This whole situation is so tragic, particularly for the families related to the crew of 230 but also fo those of us who gave our lot to Maritime & whose job was so ably assisted by such a capable airplane, now so sadly blighted.
Good luck in your continued endeavours.