Nimrod MRA.4
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
TH, no, you can still be done under the OSA even if you haven't signed.
I signed maybe 2 or 3 times. I was given a form to sign when I retired but I files it, can't remember where
and never a peep from HR.
I signed maybe 2 or 3 times. I was given a form to sign when I retired but I files it, can't remember where
and never a peep from HR.
Gentleman Aviator
Presactly my point PN.
If they're going to do you, they'll do you, so why (apart from putting the frighteners on people) do they insist on signing that Act only??
If they're going to do you, they'll do you, so why (apart from putting the frighteners on people) do they insist on signing that Act only??
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lossiemouth IV31 6RS
Age: 75
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A final effort, sent to the PM's Office and newspapers various. With thanks for some borrowed material.
Cancellation of Nimrod MRA4 – An Open Letter to the Prime Minister
Dear Mr Cameron,
I apologise for the open nature of this letter, but time is of the essence and the subject too important to allow for the luxury of private correspondence.
I refer to the cancellation of Nimrod MRA4 and the closure of Royal Air Force Kinloss to flying operations. The effect of this decision on local jobs, businesses and on the economy of Moray has been well aired, and rightly so. Of even greater concern to me and my family (despite the probable loss of my own job) is the effect this decision will have on the security and well being of the United Kingdom.
We are an island nation with the sea lanes still our main source of supply and trade. We are a nation active in world politics with ambitions for the future and a long history which has not endeared us to all members of a very mobile world population. In these days of international terrorism, drug running and our reliance on an underwater nuclear deterrent, it is utter folly to end our maritime patrol aircraft (MPA) capability.
We must have an airborne capability, even in these times of financial restraint. The need for long range reconnaissance, anti-submarine operations and a search and rescue capability has barely diminished, and the need for electronic and optical surveillance and intelligence gathering has increased to meet modern threats.
Why on earth then, have we cancelled Nimrod MRA4? Being late and over budget does not equate to being no good, and to summarily cancel without reference to current capability and future potential is unacceptable. MRA4 is a platform with 15 hours unrefueled flight duration, a 2,000 plus mile radius of action, 13 weapon hard points, radar range of 250 miles, is search and rescue capable, has advanced communications, superior electro optics for surface intelligence gathering and has very capable underwater detection systems. All integrated, working and demonstrated – AND ALREADY PAID FOR. At Royal Air Force Kinloss the training and support infrastructure is already in place and to disband such established facilities that support a very capable MPA is unforgiveable.
Unless this decision is reversed, people will die – as a result of unresolved search and rescue incidents, undetected drug and terrorist imports and missed intelligence. Our nuclear deterrent will be less secure and possibly rendered useless putting our whole nation at risk.
Mr Cameron, please hear these points from someone who has over 30 years military experience both within industry and the RAF. I have 5,000 flying hours as both Navigator and Pilot plus 5,000 hours of instructional experience in the Nimrod flight simulator. Approaching retirement, I have no axe to grind other than the well being of future generations, and of my country.
You say we cannot afford a maritime patrol aircraft capability. Prime Minister, the Nation cannot afford to be without.
Yours sincerely,
etc.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Taipei, Taiwan, ROC.
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An excellent and well thought out letter, I am going to post it on the Conservatives' Facebook page that will annoy the buggers.
Conservatives
Conservatives | Facebook
Conservatives
Conservatives | Facebook
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Here and there, occasionally at home.
Age: 56
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Leon J
I tried to provide some background to the question posed, it was not my intent or desire to be economical with the truth. Anyone who knows me will attest (I hope!) that I have always striven to be clear, honest and honourable. If my views of the project are different to someone else's, well so what? That's what views are, personal and individual. All I am doing is offering (where I can within the constraints of being a serving member of HM Forces) my perspective on some of the issues that appear on these erudite pages.
In answer to your specific questions, here are my views.
"What about the failures in the flap brackets?"
A (singular) inner flap hinge bracket failed on one of the development aircraft. Following investigation, the design of the bracket was modified and the construction material changed. New brackets fitted to production aircraft.
"What about the under-tension fuel pipes?"
The standard of work was below that required and expected. The issue was identified, corrective work was carried out and working practices updated.
"What about the big bolts that weren't torqued or locked properly?"
Can't comment, don't have any info.
"Why have they spent over 7 months redrafting the safety case?"
Many of the Statements Of Design (SODs) have been updated to include the latest (i.e production standard) changes. The SODs form one of the pilllars of the Safety Case and hence the Safety Case had to be updated. There was also additional work required following input from QQ and other agencies. This Production Aircraft Safety Case (as opposed to the Development Aircraft Safety Case) was the one that would have been presented to the RTSA (and hence SofS), so logic dictates that you take time to ensure you've got it as right as it can be.
"What about the paperwork discrepancies?"
What about them? You telling me you've never been offered a Fm700 that was wrong, a piece of paper that said one thing, when the opposite was true?
They are called errors, made by humans who make mistakes. That's why we have processes to try to identify the errors and rectify the mistakes. The fact that these discrepencies were identified in some way goes to demonstrate that our process was working.
I am not saying that mistakes were not made, of course they were, they were made on all sides and over a long period of time. But what do you do?
Do you just chuck the towel in, or do you engage with the relevant parties and work to resolve the issue?
Obviously we did the latter, 'cos that is what we were paid to do and we tried to do it as professionally and competently as possible. If we failed, then it was a team failure because MRA4 was a team effort, involving many different stakeholders from a broad range of agencies.
And the £3.6 Billion was not wasted until the PM stood up and made his statement. Then it became a waste because it was paid for and we chose not to take it and not to fund its use in-service for the next 25 years minimum.
Again, these views are mine and mine alone.
SFO
In answer to your specific questions, here are my views.
"What about the failures in the flap brackets?"
A (singular) inner flap hinge bracket failed on one of the development aircraft. Following investigation, the design of the bracket was modified and the construction material changed. New brackets fitted to production aircraft.
"What about the under-tension fuel pipes?"
The standard of work was below that required and expected. The issue was identified, corrective work was carried out and working practices updated.
"What about the big bolts that weren't torqued or locked properly?"
Can't comment, don't have any info.
"Why have they spent over 7 months redrafting the safety case?"
Many of the Statements Of Design (SODs) have been updated to include the latest (i.e production standard) changes. The SODs form one of the pilllars of the Safety Case and hence the Safety Case had to be updated. There was also additional work required following input from QQ and other agencies. This Production Aircraft Safety Case (as opposed to the Development Aircraft Safety Case) was the one that would have been presented to the RTSA (and hence SofS), so logic dictates that you take time to ensure you've got it as right as it can be.
"What about the paperwork discrepancies?"
What about them? You telling me you've never been offered a Fm700 that was wrong, a piece of paper that said one thing, when the opposite was true?
They are called errors, made by humans who make mistakes. That's why we have processes to try to identify the errors and rectify the mistakes. The fact that these discrepencies were identified in some way goes to demonstrate that our process was working.
I am not saying that mistakes were not made, of course they were, they were made on all sides and over a long period of time. But what do you do?
Do you just chuck the towel in, or do you engage with the relevant parties and work to resolve the issue?
Obviously we did the latter, 'cos that is what we were paid to do and we tried to do it as professionally and competently as possible. If we failed, then it was a team failure because MRA4 was a team effort, involving many different stakeholders from a broad range of agencies.
And the £3.6 Billion was not wasted until the PM stood up and made his statement. Then it became a waste because it was paid for and we chose not to take it and not to fund its use in-service for the next 25 years minimum.
Again, these views are mine and mine alone.
SFO
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
SFO
I thank you for your latest posts, and would hope you would be able to take the time to write some letters to our politicians too.
You know how far the project has come and what it can still deliver; if given the chance!
Why not copy same to the Times etc. Now is the time to be heard before it is all too late!
Good Luck - A proud Englishman and Briton.
I thank you for your latest posts, and would hope you would be able to take the time to write some letters to our politicians too.
You know how far the project has come and what it can still deliver; if given the chance!
Why not copy same to the Times etc. Now is the time to be heard before it is all too late!
Good Luck - A proud Englishman and Briton.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK, Paris, Peckham, New York
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good letter, send it to the broadsheets immediately before the wayne rooney saga distracts the country and media.
It is completely mental decison. Utterly mental. To be honest the whole idea of mating new wings on old airframes was daft, but to come so far and paid for it...retarded.
Surely if they wanted to save money, could they not send the hunter to another base? then save the costs on running kinloss airbase for only 9 a/c, which does seem daft. In my mind the conversation went
Dave - "kinloss, Scotland isnt it, whats based there"
Air Bosses "Err nothing at the moment"
Dave - " well whats it there, for close it"
Bosses "we have a new a/c about to be delivered soon, 9 nimrods"
Dave - "that old bucket that had the awful accident, never, cancel it."
If it is already paid for, and I believe someone said BAe still have the workers tinkering with the a/c earlier on in the forum, are they now finishing it to sell on?? could you imagine, I would not surprise me, that would be a shareholders wet dream, 4 billion quid off the country and then another few $$ selling them on...is that possible??
Thoughts go out to all that worked on her, and based up there. Travesty and in a few years this will be seen as worse than the TSR.
It is completely mental decison. Utterly mental. To be honest the whole idea of mating new wings on old airframes was daft, but to come so far and paid for it...retarded.
Surely if they wanted to save money, could they not send the hunter to another base? then save the costs on running kinloss airbase for only 9 a/c, which does seem daft. In my mind the conversation went
Dave - "kinloss, Scotland isnt it, whats based there"
Air Bosses "Err nothing at the moment"
Dave - " well whats it there, for close it"
Bosses "we have a new a/c about to be delivered soon, 9 nimrods"
Dave - "that old bucket that had the awful accident, never, cancel it."
If it is already paid for, and I believe someone said BAe still have the workers tinkering with the a/c earlier on in the forum, are they now finishing it to sell on?? could you imagine, I would not surprise me, that would be a shareholders wet dream, 4 billion quid off the country and then another few $$ selling them on...is that possible??
Thoughts go out to all that worked on her, and based up there. Travesty and in a few years this will be seen as worse than the TSR.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Caterham
Age: 64
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is this all about, really
Everything I have read in these posts since hearing of the scrapping of MRA4 makes me believe more and more that there is a fundamental problem with the aircraft itself and the decision to end LRMP is about that, rather than cost savings. I cannot see how it can be considered to be prudent to abandon LRMP around UK waters. What is strange is that no one within the media or politics has stood up to ask why this important part of our defence is being lost, apart from the Defence Secretary himself in his leaked letter to the PM.
"Deletion of the Nimrod MR4 will limit our ability to deploy maritime forces rapidly into high-threat areas, increase the risk to the Deterrent, compromise maritime CT (counter terrorism), remove long range search and rescue, and delete one element of our Falklands reinforcement plan."
It is inconceivable that any UK Government would abandon LRMP, especially a conservative one.
The problems with the development of Nimrod 2000 have been ever increasing for BAE, MOD and UKG for more that 10 years. A fundamental problem with the aircraft now would be a huge embarrassment to all concerned.
What is worse though, is that in 10 or 15 years time this capability may have to be rebuilt from scratch. The one thing that frightens me the most about this is the security I felt as a young wet man in the 80's flying around oil rigs, at 200 feet in rough seas, or worse, but won't mention because of OSA, were the years and years of professional experience amongst my crew. Some of these guys were flying Maritime Patrol during the Cuba Crisis. Our Squadron QFI lied about his age to join up in WWII.
LRMP aircraft may come back - I am sure they will, but the loss of the accumulated years of experience amongst the crews that fly them will take much longer,
The MOD's own tribute to an old friend and colleague, Gary Andrews,
One of the most experienced aviators on the maritime fleet, he was always quick and willing to impart his knowledge and understanding to the benefit of his crew-mates and the Squadron as a whole.
"Deletion of the Nimrod MR4 will limit our ability to deploy maritime forces rapidly into high-threat areas, increase the risk to the Deterrent, compromise maritime CT (counter terrorism), remove long range search and rescue, and delete one element of our Falklands reinforcement plan."
It is inconceivable that any UK Government would abandon LRMP, especially a conservative one.
The problems with the development of Nimrod 2000 have been ever increasing for BAE, MOD and UKG for more that 10 years. A fundamental problem with the aircraft now would be a huge embarrassment to all concerned.
What is worse though, is that in 10 or 15 years time this capability may have to be rebuilt from scratch. The one thing that frightens me the most about this is the security I felt as a young wet man in the 80's flying around oil rigs, at 200 feet in rough seas, or worse, but won't mention because of OSA, were the years and years of professional experience amongst my crew. Some of these guys were flying Maritime Patrol during the Cuba Crisis. Our Squadron QFI lied about his age to join up in WWII.
LRMP aircraft may come back - I am sure they will, but the loss of the accumulated years of experience amongst the crews that fly them will take much longer,
The MOD's own tribute to an old friend and colleague, Gary Andrews,
One of the most experienced aviators on the maritime fleet, he was always quick and willing to impart his knowledge and understanding to the benefit of his crew-mates and the Squadron as a whole.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My protests that I have been under the official secrets act since I enlisted in the RAF in 1976 fell on unwilling to listen ears, once under the official secrets act it is for life but not according to BAe Systems it isn't!
Oh and as for regular flights to Kazakhstan in a BAe 125 (not tricky to work out the current name is it?), there were no such thing unless a few times counts as regular. And they don't have the 125s anymore.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: .Lincs.
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a lighter note:
I hope wheels are in motion to organise the disbandment party from hell. I believe the closure of st mawgan set a good example when the guest speaker was knocked out mid-flown by a piece of tableware. There was also a do at waddo that became legendary (so much that everyone there had their p-file marked "waw" - was at waddington). At no one has a career to worry about it should be one of the RAFs defining moments (obviously not in a good sense).
No need to worry about the state of the base in the morning as the army will reduce it to rubble within days anyway. Also no need to buy any pianos, that thing outside 120 will burn for hours if you use the Sutherland float for kindling.
Better make it a joint do, otherwise 120 will have a Wednesday beer call and stovies from the mess.
I hope wheels are in motion to organise the disbandment party from hell. I believe the closure of st mawgan set a good example when the guest speaker was knocked out mid-flown by a piece of tableware. There was also a do at waddo that became legendary (so much that everyone there had their p-file marked "waw" - was at waddington). At no one has a career to worry about it should be one of the RAFs defining moments (obviously not in a good sense).
No need to worry about the state of the base in the morning as the army will reduce it to rubble within days anyway. Also no need to buy any pianos, that thing outside 120 will burn for hours if you use the Sutherland float for kindling.
Better make it a joint do, otherwise 120 will have a Wednesday beer call and stovies from the mess.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Taipei, Taiwan, ROC.
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be quite incredible, if there was a fundamental problem with the Nimrod, since it is not trying to do something fancy like super-cruise or STOL, it is just trying to do ordinary stuff. The project got in to a lot of problems because the manufacturers had to integrate modern systems in to a 1950s aircraft design but there is no inherent difficulty in doing that, it just takes a lot more work than doing the same thing in a modern airliner. My view is that plane is a superb aircraft and it is being scrapped because those in government are either idiots or are being deliberately malicious in seeking to damage UK security or some mixture of the two.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Winco,
I'm not at all sure the British public would be 100% behind a reversal of the MRA4 decision. Knowledge is relatively scarce, and I think to a great many the Nimrod is synonymous with a crash, and detecting submarines, which are not seen as a potent threat by Joe Public.
The strategy seems to have endorsed programmes that were adaptable and exportable. As adaptable and versatile as MRA4 may have been, there wasn't much of an export market on the horizon.
I'd like to see if we end up with any UAV capability in the same ball park.
Drust
I'm not at all sure the British public would be 100% behind a reversal of the MRA4 decision. Knowledge is relatively scarce, and I think to a great many the Nimrod is synonymous with a crash, and detecting submarines, which are not seen as a potent threat by Joe Public.
The strategy seems to have endorsed programmes that were adaptable and exportable. As adaptable and versatile as MRA4 may have been, there wasn't much of an export market on the horizon.
I'd like to see if we end up with any UAV capability in the same ball park.
Drust
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Taipei, Taiwan, ROC.
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder what would be the financial cost of a circa ten kiloton yield range nuke going off in London. The Nimrod is a very flexible aircraft and very suited to the asymmetric post 9/11 threat posed by state and non-state actors, it could do stuff like collecting intelligence through over-flight of a hostile but low air threat land area, to it's conventional maritime surveillance capability, to supporting a Tornado hunt of TELs by standing outside of the enemy's air defenses and suppressing his fixed radar surveillance with air launched cruise missiles. It is idiocy of the highest order to scrap a long range, sensor rich, battle management capable, multi weapons capable, multi-role aircraft of the type that the Nimrod is, when it is nearly exactly suited to the present conflict and the cost of failing to maintain an adequate defense in this conflict could be catastrophically high, such as for example a nuclear strike on London delivered either via a ballistic missile warhead air-burst or a covert ground positioned weapon.
Nuclear War on BRITAIN - BBC Broadcast Attack Warning !
YouTube - Nuclear War on BRITAIN - BBC Broadcast Attack Warning !
Nuclear War on BRITAIN - BBC Broadcast Attack Warning !
YouTube - Nuclear War on BRITAIN - BBC Broadcast Attack Warning !
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: retirementland
Age: 79
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can expect captains of the oil and gas industry to lobby for the MCT and SAR benefits of the Nimrod, especially with the cuts in the navy fleet. Losing the E-3s to pay for them would be a good trade.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At least the USN is still flying from Kinloss, thought they would have been sent home by now since this country doesn't care about maritime.
When in opposition Mr Fox bleated about the MR2 coming out of service early, but once in power they soon change their minds. They are just typical politicians, say anything to get into power and then stab you in the back.
I was always the optimist, but there sure isn't any Great in Britain any more, just two faced politicians. So just as bad as Labour in so many ways, and still can't answer questions directly.
Disgusted with the lot of them, and that includes CDS.
When in opposition Mr Fox bleated about the MR2 coming out of service early, but once in power they soon change their minds. They are just typical politicians, say anything to get into power and then stab you in the back.
I was always the optimist, but there sure isn't any Great in Britain any more, just two faced politicians. So just as bad as Labour in so many ways, and still can't answer questions directly.
Disgusted with the lot of them, and that includes CDS.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand, on very good authority that BAE are continuing to build the MRA4, the guys on the hangar floor are still working. Aiming that 9 aircraft will be built by 2012. How can we as a nation sit by, and let this essential capability die, when there will be nine aircraft that we have already paid for sitting idle in a hangar somewhere ? Madness. The government needs to justify this.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 4 Civvy Street. Nowhere-near-a-base. The Shires.
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
d1w1
The knockout at 42 was during a Xmas party...a salt cellar in a bread bun hit a MACr smack in the face
42's real disbandment party was when the whole Sqn flew our remaining MR2's to Gibraltar for a weekend...very messy
CS
42's real disbandment party was when the whole Sqn flew our remaining MR2's to Gibraltar for a weekend...very messy
CS