Nimrod MRA.4
DFM
You know I can't quote from classified, but the standing MTs were changed prior to the staffing of SDSR. The ones in the Unclass SDSR report are the same without the amplifications.
BTW, I wouldn't touch the Daily Star even it was wrapping my chips!
iRaven
You know I can't quote from classified, but the standing MTs were changed prior to the staffing of SDSR. The ones in the Unclass SDSR report are the same without the amplifications.
BTW, I wouldn't touch the Daily Star even it was wrapping my chips!
iRaven
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tullahoma TN
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Modern Elmo, I don't get your point. Yes the Nimrods were all different sizes, but it was sorted out.
Once British Leyland Aerospace and your Air Force found out that individual Comets had bespoke* wingboxes, the only sane course of action was or is to abandon ship on the Comet/Nimrod aircraft.
What had those airframes been doing previously? Were they Nimrod I's or II's or former airliners which had been parked for years, or what?
There is no Airbus peer to the P-8 AFAIK just a few drawings which would be 10 years from service today.
There should have been a P-8 competitor, one with British military electronics and engine content on an Airbus platform.
* "Bespoke" sounds like English English, huh?
Once British Leyland Aerospace and your Air Force found out that individual Comets had bespoke* wingboxes, the only sane course of action was or is to abandon ship on the Comet/Nimrod aircraft.
What had those airframes been doing previously? Were they Nimrod I's or II's or former airliners which had been parked for years, or what?
There is no Airbus peer to the P-8 AFAIK just a few drawings which would be 10 years from service today.
There should have been a P-8 competitor, one with British military electronics and engine content on an Airbus platform.
* "Bespoke" sounds like English English, huh?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: A 1/2 World away from Ice Statio Kilo
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
excuse the delay
So the RAF Central Band is a capability that is needed in modern combat operations or just at VSO's cocktail parties and mess evenings?
But are you all naive to think VSOs or Big Dave made the D, nope it was some spotty yoofs with a polytechnic degree in media studies who suggested it would look bad for the next term if the pollies were faced with another "Nimrod" incident
. Well done TD,Tuc,Distant Voice et all.
P8 is a MMA I would rather Lockheed commence a new run or we look to the JMSDF MPx for the future. Maybe we should have an unmanned parliament, now that would be true democracy.
Charlie sends
P.s ICrow if you need the explanation of MMA please PM
But are you all naive to think VSOs or Big Dave made the D, nope it was some spotty yoofs with a polytechnic degree in media studies who suggested it would look bad for the next term if the pollies were faced with another "Nimrod" incident
. Well done TD,Tuc,Distant Voice et all. P8 is a MMA I would rather Lockheed commence a new run or we look to the JMSDF MPx for the future. Maybe we should have an unmanned parliament, now that would be true democracy.
Charlie sends
P.s ICrow if you need the explanation of MMA please PM
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Once British Leyland Aerospace and your Air Force found out that individual Comets had bespoke* wingboxes, the only sane course of action was or is to abandon ship on the Comet/Nimrod aircraft.
What had those airframes been doing previously? Were they Nimrod I's or II's or former airliners which had been parked for years, or what?
What had those airframes been doing previously? Were they Nimrod I's or II's or former airliners which had been parked for years, or what?
Much is made of the mainplanes being different sizes. This was entirely normal given the production processes of the day. Every aircraft I’ve ever worked on had the problem to a greater or lesser extent. What matters is how you control it (in the sense the differences between tail numbers and serial numbers must be known and recorded). How do you do that? By implementing the airworthiness regulations.
If you don’t, and it is a simple fact that it was policy from 1988-on not to implement them in order to save money (actually, to generate funding to offset deliberate waste elsewhere), then you lose control. Even if you think you have control, the same regs require you have the corporate knowledge, experience and willingness to listen to and act upon engineering advice, so that when planning the programme you make allowances for Risk Reduction (and ill-fitting mainplanes was a known risk, and notified to senior management many times).
In the same MoD(PE) Directorate General, at precisely the same time, another major conversion programme had exactly the same problems, albeit on a smaller scale, only this time caused by differences in production runs. Question – Why is that aircraft in service and not languishing in a hangar? Because the regulations were implemented, despite orders not to from the 2 Star in charge of both programmes (and also Chinook HC Mk3).
As has been said above, given the sheer scale and scope of this known risk, your basic problem was the procurement strategy. I’m sure there were valid reasons for modifying MR2 (despite the rule of thumb, never mod a mod). I can’t really think of any, but someone will know. But, the decision was made and the way ahead was clear; and ignored. To call the programme Nimrod 2000 was a howler. As I said before, there was at least one (that I know of) technical and contractual pre-requisite whose ISD was late 2001, so Nimrod simply couldn’t be delivered before then. Apart from MRA4 “delays”, the main effect is on the legacy MR2 project and its funding. There is what is called the “5 Year Rule”. As the ISD was announced as 2000, MR2 funding would reduce gradually in the preceding years, as they could not demonstrate 5 years useful life of, for example, modifications. Other areas such as tech pubs would run down (even further than dictated by the 1991 policy). Instead of buying economic quantities of spares, only small, short term, expensive buys would be made. (Recognise all this from the QinetiQ report?). And every time a “delay” was announced, MR2 would have to make a compensatory bid to restart the 5 year clock. The dangers are obvious; compounded by an unwillingness in PE to notify such “delays”, leaving MR2 high and dry. (One 3 year slip was continually denied). How many times did they restart the 5 year clock? How many across both programmes know WTF I’m talking about? That’s Corporate Knowledge, Experience and all the other fundamental airworthiness principles I talk of. Also known as Common Sense.
If you don’t, and it is a simple fact that it was policy from 1988-on not to implement them in order to save money (actually, to generate funding to offset deliberate waste elsewhere), then you lose control. Even if you think you have control, the same regs require you have the corporate knowledge, experience and willingness to listen to and act upon engineering advice, so that when planning the programme you make allowances for Risk Reduction (and ill-fitting mainplanes was a known risk, and notified to senior management many times).
In the same MoD(PE) Directorate General, at precisely the same time, another major conversion programme had exactly the same problems, albeit on a smaller scale, only this time caused by differences in production runs. Question – Why is that aircraft in service and not languishing in a hangar? Because the regulations were implemented, despite orders not to from the 2 Star in charge of both programmes (and also Chinook HC Mk3).
As has been said above, given the sheer scale and scope of this known risk, your basic problem was the procurement strategy. I’m sure there were valid reasons for modifying MR2 (despite the rule of thumb, never mod a mod). I can’t really think of any, but someone will know. But, the decision was made and the way ahead was clear; and ignored. To call the programme Nimrod 2000 was a howler. As I said before, there was at least one (that I know of) technical and contractual pre-requisite whose ISD was late 2001, so Nimrod simply couldn’t be delivered before then. Apart from MRA4 “delays”, the main effect is on the legacy MR2 project and its funding. There is what is called the “5 Year Rule”. As the ISD was announced as 2000, MR2 funding would reduce gradually in the preceding years, as they could not demonstrate 5 years useful life of, for example, modifications. Other areas such as tech pubs would run down (even further than dictated by the 1991 policy). Instead of buying economic quantities of spares, only small, short term, expensive buys would be made. (Recognise all this from the QinetiQ report?). And every time a “delay” was announced, MR2 would have to make a compensatory bid to restart the 5 year clock. The dangers are obvious; compounded by an unwillingness in PE to notify such “delays”, leaving MR2 high and dry. (One 3 year slip was continually denied). How many times did they restart the 5 year clock? How many across both programmes know WTF I’m talking about? That’s Corporate Knowledge, Experience and all the other fundamental airworthiness principles I talk of. Also known as Common Sense.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Back in Geordie Land
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fortissimo and iRaven
gentlemen,
You realy must learn to read what has been written here, and stop making yourselves look silly.
iRaven, your comments clearly show you as a journo and therefore I am reluctant to have any further responce to you other than to say this; if you look at all recent wars, the 'clearing of the skies' was undeniably achieved by the USAF and USN with a little help from one or two others (even the French!). The F3's did not contribute to the 'air war' during GW1 or GW2 and as for Bosnia/Kosovo, they weren't there either in the begining. As far as I recall, they weren't there for this latest 'shindig' at the start in Afghanstan. Your idea is correct, but unless the fighters are going to go in on day one, when there is some opposition, they are worthless because the Americans will have dealt with the air threat long before we can even muster enough fighters to go out! Now take a look at the MPA involvement from day1, look at the SH involvement, the AEW and Truckie involvement. Are you getting the message yet???
Fortissimo, If you read my comments, you will see that right up to my posting 1051, I have never doubted what CAS was alledged to have told everyone at KSS about his fight to keep Nimrod. It isn't until post 1051, a week after the KSS meeting that, due the complete lack of public concern/outrage whatsoever from ANY airship, including CAS and ACAS, I have thus arrived at the conclusion that CAS did not fight the decision as hard as he claims.
Now, of course I can't substantiate that; I was no more at the meeting with the PM than you were. But I still maintain that he and several of his colleagues should go for the following single reason.
CAS (allegedly) argued like crazy to keep Nimrod. He claims that he had a face-to-face meeting with the PM on the saturday (I think it was) If I believed that, then I have to believe that the head of the RAF, who was directly involved in negotiations with the PM, was unable to convince him that this island nation needs MPA (Nimrod) coverage.
So, CAS is faced with an intollerable dilema: He, as head of the RAF is no longer able to convince the nations leader about the need for certain types/roles of Air power. What will he do in future conflicts? How can he possibly stand up to him again and be expected to be heard?
What would you do? I would resign for a whole host of obvious reasons, but primarily because it is the honourable thing to do for him.
davejb
Your last post brought back some happy memories.
Winco
gentlemen,
You realy must learn to read what has been written here, and stop making yourselves look silly.
iRaven, your comments clearly show you as a journo and therefore I am reluctant to have any further responce to you other than to say this; if you look at all recent wars, the 'clearing of the skies' was undeniably achieved by the USAF and USN with a little help from one or two others (even the French!). The F3's did not contribute to the 'air war' during GW1 or GW2 and as for Bosnia/Kosovo, they weren't there either in the begining. As far as I recall, they weren't there for this latest 'shindig' at the start in Afghanstan. Your idea is correct, but unless the fighters are going to go in on day one, when there is some opposition, they are worthless because the Americans will have dealt with the air threat long before we can even muster enough fighters to go out! Now take a look at the MPA involvement from day1, look at the SH involvement, the AEW and Truckie involvement. Are you getting the message yet???
Fortissimo, If you read my comments, you will see that right up to my posting 1051, I have never doubted what CAS was alledged to have told everyone at KSS about his fight to keep Nimrod. It isn't until post 1051, a week after the KSS meeting that, due the complete lack of public concern/outrage whatsoever from ANY airship, including CAS and ACAS, I have thus arrived at the conclusion that CAS did not fight the decision as hard as he claims.
Now, of course I can't substantiate that; I was no more at the meeting with the PM than you were. But I still maintain that he and several of his colleagues should go for the following single reason.
CAS (allegedly) argued like crazy to keep Nimrod. He claims that he had a face-to-face meeting with the PM on the saturday (I think it was) If I believed that, then I have to believe that the head of the RAF, who was directly involved in negotiations with the PM, was unable to convince him that this island nation needs MPA (Nimrod) coverage.
So, CAS is faced with an intollerable dilema: He, as head of the RAF is no longer able to convince the nations leader about the need for certain types/roles of Air power. What will he do in future conflicts? How can he possibly stand up to him again and be expected to be heard?
What would you do? I would resign for a whole host of obvious reasons, but primarily because it is the honourable thing to do for him.
davejb
Your last post brought back some happy memories.
Winco
CL:
On the specious basis that I claim to be an "et al" in your list, and proud to be so at that, I won't patiently wait as tuc does for you to explain yourself, but simply launch into a denunciation!
If ever there was a case of someone shooting the messengers, then your ignorant rant is just that. After all the posts on all the threads; Sea King, Tornado, Hercules, Nimrod and of course the most long running and most shocking of all, Chinook, you just don't get it do you? Everyone of those fatal accidents was airworthiness related because those charged with enforcing the Regulations chose instead to subvert them. The cost to date on my Casio is 62 dead, but most probably many more, let alone all the wasted billions as well as the disrupted careers of many, yourself included I would guess.
If you've been shafted you're doubly so if you don't know who by! So sit down and take a deep whiff of that caffeine laden beverage in front of you. Hint, many of those responsible are laden with honours, on a nice fat pension and now tend their roses. I don't qualify on any of those counts and nor do the others you let rip at, so who does that leave?
....it would look bad for the next term if the pollies were faced with another "Nimrod" incident. Well done TD,Tuc,Distant Voice et all.
If ever there was a case of someone shooting the messengers, then your ignorant rant is just that. After all the posts on all the threads; Sea King, Tornado, Hercules, Nimrod and of course the most long running and most shocking of all, Chinook, you just don't get it do you? Everyone of those fatal accidents was airworthiness related because those charged with enforcing the Regulations chose instead to subvert them. The cost to date on my Casio is 62 dead, but most probably many more, let alone all the wasted billions as well as the disrupted careers of many, yourself included I would guess.
If you've been shafted you're doubly so if you don't know who by! So sit down and take a deep whiff of that caffeine laden beverage in front of you. Hint, many of those responsible are laden with honours, on a nice fat pension and now tend their roses. I don't qualify on any of those counts and nor do the others you let rip at, so who does that leave?
Winco
You're talking out the top of your melon fella. The F3s were in Bosnia as soon as the UN declared a no-fly zone (I know because I was there) - the only shoot down of Serbian FJs was the day they ventured in and that was our down-day; the Boss fielded the phone call from the CAOC on the Golf Course and it was the same vul time as we had been doing the previous 6 days or so (unlucky!). We were sitting CAPs against all of the Iraqi Air Force on the Saudi border about 48hrs after they went into Kuwait - thankfully they never came because most of the RSAF had dissapeared! We were flying CAPs over Iraq from the end of Desert Fox up to 40 miles (ish) from Baghdad - the closest I got was with a Mig 23 about to reach the top of my launch success zone(LSZ) and then he knobbed off North back out of the no-fly. We made countless intercepts of Hips during Bosnia but were never given clearance to engage as their combative status was in question (so outside ROE). We weren't in Kosovo because we were Mig 23 and Mig 25 hunting over Iraq - out of interest the F14 , F15 and F16 were equally fruitless but kept the bomber and ISTAR packages safe (now do you understand why we need FJs??!).
Oh, and if we're in the spelling sl@g off stakes then that isn't how you spell response (note no 'c') and that isn't how to spell 'wingco' (note the additional 'g') - unless you are a brand from Woolworths?
Rant off
LJ
You're talking out the top of your melon fella. The F3s were in Bosnia as soon as the UN declared a no-fly zone (I know because I was there) - the only shoot down of Serbian FJs was the day they ventured in and that was our down-day; the Boss fielded the phone call from the CAOC on the Golf Course and it was the same vul time as we had been doing the previous 6 days or so (unlucky!). We were sitting CAPs against all of the Iraqi Air Force on the Saudi border about 48hrs after they went into Kuwait - thankfully they never came because most of the RSAF had dissapeared! We were flying CAPs over Iraq from the end of Desert Fox up to 40 miles (ish) from Baghdad - the closest I got was with a Mig 23 about to reach the top of my launch success zone(LSZ) and then he knobbed off North back out of the no-fly. We made countless intercepts of Hips during Bosnia but were never given clearance to engage as their combative status was in question (so outside ROE). We weren't in Kosovo because we were Mig 23 and Mig 25 hunting over Iraq - out of interest the F14 , F15 and F16 were equally fruitless but kept the bomber and ISTAR packages safe (now do you understand why we need FJs??!).
Oh, and if we're in the spelling sl@g off stakes then that isn't how you spell response (note no 'c') and that isn't how to spell 'wingco' (note the additional 'g') - unless you are a brand from Woolworths?
Rant off
LJ
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Outside the Matz
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have some"visiting" MPA crews at the moment. There is no banter or comaraderie but genuine anger at having to Continuously bail us out. WW2 jibes and being regarded as worse than the French is frankly sickening and I can not defend my fleet, station or country. Never have I felt so ashamed.
How the Mighty has Fallen.
How the Mighty has Fallen.
Last edited by Bannock; 24th Oct 2010 at 11:45. Reason: gash spelling
....it would look bad for the next term if the pollies were faced with another "Nimrod" incident. Well done TD,Tuc,Distant Voice et all.
Winco: If ever there was a case of someone shooting the messengers, then your ignorant rant is just that.
My point is that you cannot now pretend to be a mere "messenger", if you have been involved in the verciferous attacks on Nimrod safety and have abused some of the evidence present (e.g. at best misinformed, or worst willful, misqouting of a QQ safety report, to the extent that SNP politicians were using it for political gain) to drive home your attack. This has affected decision making and has contributed to the decision to cancel MRA4.
Many rant and rave on here about making VSOs et al responsible - but seem to shy away from any accountability for your own actions. You may protest that you had no idea/intention that this would be the outcome of your actions, but that doesn't mean you didn't have an effect.
You have played a part in the cancellation of MRA4.
You can't blame Tuc for the MRA4 debacle!
Thank you LJ for retorting on the spelling; but I can fight my own battles!
Betty, you're right on the spelling. I only ever touched one at FY, that was about as close as I got to sonobuoys as I went somewhere different.
OK, for those that think I'm a journalist. I went to ITC at FY over 20 years ago, I remember one of the Flt Cdrs whose initials were Charlie Romeo (a Flt Eng). I saw Charlie Romeo about 4 years ago when I flew in to his airfield and he was OC Ops. I got a commision after 2-3 yrs as NCA and went on to do something completely different. I chose the Pprune name because I am an EWI. During, my time at FY I remember nights out on the razz in Doncaster (White Bear, Camelots, 7th Heaven, Salutation, Bacchus Wine Bar, etc...).
Satisfied? I'm not giving away any more info as I will blow my identity.
iRaven
Thank you LJ for retorting on the spelling; but I can fight my own battles!
Betty, you're right on the spelling. I only ever touched one at FY, that was about as close as I got to sonobuoys as I went somewhere different.
OK, for those that think I'm a journalist. I went to ITC at FY over 20 years ago, I remember one of the Flt Cdrs whose initials were Charlie Romeo (a Flt Eng). I saw Charlie Romeo about 4 years ago when I flew in to his airfield and he was OC Ops. I got a commision after 2-3 yrs as NCA and went on to do something completely different. I chose the Pprune name because I am an EWI. During, my time at FY I remember nights out on the razz in Doncaster (White Bear, Camelots, 7th Heaven, Salutation, Bacchus Wine Bar, etc...).
Satisfied? I'm not giving away any more info as I will blow my identity.
iRaven
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bristol Temple Meads
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JFZ90
You refer to the "misquoting of a QQ safety report". Would it be the one that states "Furthermore, due to the lack of any safety target, no statement can, or has been made made as to whether the hot air system risks identified in this report have been reduced to As Low As Reasonably Pracitcable (ALARP) in line with the requirements of JSP 553", or do you have another one in mind.
DV
You refer to the "misquoting of a QQ safety report". Would it be the one that states "Furthermore, due to the lack of any safety target, no statement can, or has been made made as to whether the hot air system risks identified in this report have been reduced to As Low As Reasonably Pracitcable (ALARP) in line with the requirements of JSP 553", or do you have another one in mind.
DV
What is self evident is the lack of Naval Pprune input throwing up their hands in horror about there being no more MRA4.
Anyone from the Senior Service care to comment? Or are you content that you can protect YOUR 'bombers'?
The B Word
Anyone from the Senior Service care to comment? Or are you content that you can protect YOUR 'bombers'?
The B Word