Nimrod MRA.4
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Caterham
Age: 64
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With thanks to Target Lock: Nimrod : Squadron Service
On August 14th 1979 the Fastnet race encountered a Force 11 storm between Land's End and Fastnet in southern Ireland. 136 people were rescued in the largest (at the time) peacetime rescue operation ever mounted. Without the Nimrod's ability to locate vessels in distress and direct helicopters to provide assistance, the death toll could well have been higher than the 15 lives which were lost.
On February 12th 1982 eight Nimrods provided 40 hours of top cover when the Greek tanker Victory broke in two 1290km west of Lands End.
On July 6th 1988 the Piper Alpha gas rig in the North Sea about 120 miles north-east of Aberdeen caught fire and exploded, killing 167 men. Nimrod MR.2 XV228 was launched by the duty SAR crew, which was crew 8 from No 206 Squadron captained by Sqn Ldr Garfield Porter. The first pilot was Canadian exchange officer Maj Gary Barth and the Air Electronics Officer was Flt Lt George Woodhouse. The massive fireball created by the first explosion could be seen by the crew, even though the aircraft was 80 miles away from the rig. Crew 8 flew for a total of 8hrs 35 mins, until being relieved by another crew from 206 Squadron.
On August 11th 1988 a 201 Squadron Nimrod was scrambled to assist a Cessna which was seriously off-course between Greenland and Iceland. The Nimrod guided the Cessna until it ditched near Weather Station Lima.
Nimrods on SAR standby were scrambled 80 times in 1997, up 11 on the previous year. The farthest distance flown to an incident was over 1340 km
In February 1999 a Nimrod provided top cover during the rescue by helicopter of 11 people from MV Toisa Gryphon adrift 170 nautical miles west of the Scillies.
In September 1999 a Nimrod was scrambled from Kinloss to investigate multiple emergency beacons in the Bay of Biscay. The sources were several yachts in difficulty, with many demasted.
On March 13th 2000 a French fisherman fishing 178 miles west of Stornoway was airlifted by Coastguard helicopter to Stornoway after suffering an eye injury. As the scene was at the limit of the helicopter's range, a Nimrod captained by Flt Lt Iain MacMillan of 206 Squadron Crew 2 was first on the scene to liaise with the trawler's crew, establish a precise location for the helicopter and provide rescue cover for it.
Three Nimrods were involved in a rescue mission on March 6th 2001 after a German-registered trawler sank in the North Atlantic. Ten of the 16 crew were rescued but the other six lost their lives
On March 18th 2010 a Nimrod flew top cover during the medical evacuation of an injured seaman from the container ship "Montreal Express" 200 miles south-west of Cork. The Nimrod guided the rescue helicopters to the ship.
On August 14th 1979 the Fastnet race encountered a Force 11 storm between Land's End and Fastnet in southern Ireland. 136 people were rescued in the largest (at the time) peacetime rescue operation ever mounted. Without the Nimrod's ability to locate vessels in distress and direct helicopters to provide assistance, the death toll could well have been higher than the 15 lives which were lost.
On February 12th 1982 eight Nimrods provided 40 hours of top cover when the Greek tanker Victory broke in two 1290km west of Lands End.
On July 6th 1988 the Piper Alpha gas rig in the North Sea about 120 miles north-east of Aberdeen caught fire and exploded, killing 167 men. Nimrod MR.2 XV228 was launched by the duty SAR crew, which was crew 8 from No 206 Squadron captained by Sqn Ldr Garfield Porter. The first pilot was Canadian exchange officer Maj Gary Barth and the Air Electronics Officer was Flt Lt George Woodhouse. The massive fireball created by the first explosion could be seen by the crew, even though the aircraft was 80 miles away from the rig. Crew 8 flew for a total of 8hrs 35 mins, until being relieved by another crew from 206 Squadron.
On August 11th 1988 a 201 Squadron Nimrod was scrambled to assist a Cessna which was seriously off-course between Greenland and Iceland. The Nimrod guided the Cessna until it ditched near Weather Station Lima.
Nimrods on SAR standby were scrambled 80 times in 1997, up 11 on the previous year. The farthest distance flown to an incident was over 1340 km
In February 1999 a Nimrod provided top cover during the rescue by helicopter of 11 people from MV Toisa Gryphon adrift 170 nautical miles west of the Scillies.
In September 1999 a Nimrod was scrambled from Kinloss to investigate multiple emergency beacons in the Bay of Biscay. The sources were several yachts in difficulty, with many demasted.
On March 13th 2000 a French fisherman fishing 178 miles west of Stornoway was airlifted by Coastguard helicopter to Stornoway after suffering an eye injury. As the scene was at the limit of the helicopter's range, a Nimrod captained by Flt Lt Iain MacMillan of 206 Squadron Crew 2 was first on the scene to liaise with the trawler's crew, establish a precise location for the helicopter and provide rescue cover for it.
Three Nimrods were involved in a rescue mission on March 6th 2001 after a German-registered trawler sank in the North Atlantic. Ten of the 16 crew were rescued but the other six lost their lives
On March 18th 2010 a Nimrod flew top cover during the medical evacuation of an injured seaman from the container ship "Montreal Express" 200 miles south-west of Cork. The Nimrod guided the rescue helicopters to the ship.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SALISBURY
Age: 76
Posts: 706
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F3sRbest
As you obviously know nothing about the structure & management of Maritime aviation & even less of the history of successful SAR incidents involving the Nimrod, may I suggest that you go away & do some reading on the subject before you subject us to anymore of your erudite one liners?
A detailed study of the Piper Alpha accident would make a good starting point, always assumimg you can tear yourself away from the Beano.
A detailed study of the Piper Alpha accident would make a good starting point, always assumimg you can tear yourself away from the Beano.
when incidents occur far from land Nimrods would do a surface plot and vector the nearest shipping to the casualty...The MPA SAR role does NOT need to be performed by a Nimrod, but it does need to be performed by some fixed wing asset
Tourist - be careful ..... "Winco" will add your name to the "they must resign immediately" list
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dave
"As for £ per life saved, thank Christ you aren't running things, it'd be cheaper to just let everyone drown, after all."
Do you imagine for a moment that all the grown-ups of this world don't do exactly the same thing?
It's called a cost/benefit analysis. Pretty much the crux of civilisation in my opinion.
"As for £ per life saved, thank Christ you aren't running things, it'd be cheaper to just let everyone drown, after all."
Do you imagine for a moment that all the grown-ups of this world don't do exactly the same thing?
It's called a cost/benefit analysis. Pretty much the crux of civilisation in my opinion.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fincastle,
I don't profess to be any sort of expert on those subjects, but I know enough about military capability in the round and understand that in the current environment we can't all get what we want.
Yes, it's a real shame the Nimrod had to go... and I'm glad I'm not in that part of the business.... and I wish all the best for those involved, both in and out of uniform.
But.... get real guys! Please!
I don't profess to be any sort of expert on those subjects, but I know enough about military capability in the round and understand that in the current environment we can't all get what we want.
Yes, it's a real shame the Nimrod had to go... and I'm glad I'm not in that part of the business.... and I wish all the best for those involved, both in and out of uniform.
But.... get real guys! Please!
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Back in Geordie Land
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tourist,
Thank you for your immature and pathetic responce. Name calling is rarther sad, especially coming from a so-called SAR man! But still, you are entitled to say what you want. As wrathmonk suggests, you have already been added to my 'must resign immediately' list!
What you have completely failed to grasp here is that MRA4 has already been paid for, with your money and mine, and I for one do not want to see all that money wasted.
fincastle84 and davejb have explained it in simple terms, and I hope you can understand that (but I'm not sure though) No one is suggesting that you keep MRA4 solely for SAR, but if you really are a SAR pilot?? then don't be silly and belittle what Nimrod MR1 and MR2 achieved, and what MRA4 would also have achieved.
Oh, and by the way, I was only a humble Nimrod (pilot) captain. I've only got a few thousand hours on the mighty hunter (8500), and I only managed countless SAR incidents - most of them involving you guys who I seem to recall were extremly reluctant to go too far away from land without NIMROD top cover, especially if the wx was pants.
Today I have the luxury of flying one of Mr Boeings finest. So, what are you up to? still in your little yellow egg whisk or was it a grey and red one?
Thank you for your immature and pathetic responce. Name calling is rarther sad, especially coming from a so-called SAR man! But still, you are entitled to say what you want. As wrathmonk suggests, you have already been added to my 'must resign immediately' list!
What you have completely failed to grasp here is that MRA4 has already been paid for, with your money and mine, and I for one do not want to see all that money wasted.
fincastle84 and davejb have explained it in simple terms, and I hope you can understand that (but I'm not sure though) No one is suggesting that you keep MRA4 solely for SAR, but if you really are a SAR pilot?? then don't be silly and belittle what Nimrod MR1 and MR2 achieved, and what MRA4 would also have achieved.
Oh, and by the way, I was only a humble Nimrod (pilot) captain. I've only got a few thousand hours on the mighty hunter (8500), and I only managed countless SAR incidents - most of them involving you guys who I seem to recall were extremly reluctant to go too far away from land without NIMROD top cover, especially if the wx was pants.
Today I have the luxury of flying one of Mr Boeings finest. So, what are you up to? still in your little yellow egg whisk or was it a grey and red one?
My, my...people are getting agitated aren't they?
A couple of thoughts.
First of all, where are the self appointed MRA4 thread police? You know, the ones who shout "thread drift" whenever anyone mentions the MR2 (not necessarily XV230) on an MRA4 thread. Here we are discussing long range SAR provision, and nobody is saying "thread drift". Oh, but SAR was one of the MRA4s roles they will no doubt say, so is therefore a valid discussion point on an MRA4 thread. Well, I will concede that if they will concede that the MR2 was a precusor to the MRA4, indeed the fuselage was being re-used, so is an equally valid point of discussion on an MRA4 thread....
No doubt I will be flamed for the above comment!
Turning to the point in question, long range SAR provision. The UK has an internationally agreed obligation to provide SAR coverage out to 30W. It is not rocket science to reach the conclusion that a long range aviation asset would be a required to effectively meet this obligation. As wiser, and cooler, heads have pointed out, an aircraft as sophisticated as the MRA4 (or indeed MR2 before it) is not necessary to fulfill this role - it just happened to be able to do it as one of the many roles it could fulfill.
At the moment I find it difficult to see how we are adequately fulfilling our international stated commitment, with little more than fig leaf coverage of a stated Hercules on SAR standby (no disrespect meant to our Hercules friends, but I believe the coverage is more stated than actual - but am willing to be corrected).
As to willy waving about how many hours you have, or how many people you have saved, I would respectfully suggest you grow up....
I would also caution people who haven't flown an aircraft type (of whichever sort) in over 10 years to be careful in believing that their previous knowledge is an accurate reflection of the way things are done today. While general principles often remain the same, this rule does not always apply, and specifics are subject to frequent changes.
As for the concept of £ per life saved, vs the "you can't put a price on a life" brigade - surely that is the sort of calculation/decision that NICE and the NHS are making all the time, to quote just one example. In the case of NICE they look at the price of new drugs vs extra longevity provided, and decide that if some drugs are considered too expensive for the benefit achieved that the NHS will not provide them. Unpalatable maybe, but the way of the world.....
A couple of thoughts.
First of all, where are the self appointed MRA4 thread police? You know, the ones who shout "thread drift" whenever anyone mentions the MR2 (not necessarily XV230) on an MRA4 thread. Here we are discussing long range SAR provision, and nobody is saying "thread drift". Oh, but SAR was one of the MRA4s roles they will no doubt say, so is therefore a valid discussion point on an MRA4 thread. Well, I will concede that if they will concede that the MR2 was a precusor to the MRA4, indeed the fuselage was being re-used, so is an equally valid point of discussion on an MRA4 thread....
No doubt I will be flamed for the above comment!
Turning to the point in question, long range SAR provision. The UK has an internationally agreed obligation to provide SAR coverage out to 30W. It is not rocket science to reach the conclusion that a long range aviation asset would be a required to effectively meet this obligation. As wiser, and cooler, heads have pointed out, an aircraft as sophisticated as the MRA4 (or indeed MR2 before it) is not necessary to fulfill this role - it just happened to be able to do it as one of the many roles it could fulfill.
At the moment I find it difficult to see how we are adequately fulfilling our international stated commitment, with little more than fig leaf coverage of a stated Hercules on SAR standby (no disrespect meant to our Hercules friends, but I believe the coverage is more stated than actual - but am willing to be corrected).
As to willy waving about how many hours you have, or how many people you have saved, I would respectfully suggest you grow up....
I would also caution people who haven't flown an aircraft type (of whichever sort) in over 10 years to be careful in believing that their previous knowledge is an accurate reflection of the way things are done today. While general principles often remain the same, this rule does not always apply, and specifics are subject to frequent changes.
As for the concept of £ per life saved, vs the "you can't put a price on a life" brigade - surely that is the sort of calculation/decision that NICE and the NHS are making all the time, to quote just one example. In the case of NICE they look at the price of new drugs vs extra longevity provided, and decide that if some drugs are considered too expensive for the benefit achieved that the NHS will not provide them. Unpalatable maybe, but the way of the world.....
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Right here, right now
Posts: 270
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't see anyone here demanding that the Nimrod is kept PURELY for SAR purposes, that is just one of the many roles that this true MULTI-ROLE aircraft was (MR1 & 2) and would have been (MRA4) capable of.
However, since some here seem to belittle the role that the aircraft has played in SAROps, the following are just some of the SAR missions, that I know of, that the Nimrod has played a very important, and sometimes vital, role in over the last 3 decades...
14 August 1979. Fastnet Yacht Race Disaster. 201 Squadron crew scrambled from Kinloss in response to initial Mayday call. 42 Squadron crews continued with the rescue and co-ordination effort. Of 316 starters - 128 yachts finished, 165 retired, 23 sank, 136 people rescued and 15 died.
27 March 1980. 201 Squadron crew scrambled to assist in incident in Ekofisk oilfield, North Sea. The accommodation platform Alexander Kielland had capsized. The crew coordinated the helicopter and ship activity for seven hours before being relieved. Nimrod operations continued for seven days in search of survivors. Regrettably 123 lives were lost.
August 1985. Nimrod's from Kinloss and St Mawgan involved in shepherding and, ultimately, rescue of Richard Branson and his crew of the Virgin Atlantic Challenger following a failed attempt at the Blue Riband Atlantic sea-crossing record.
15 August 1987. Aided by air to air refueling, 120 Squadron crew conducted a SAR search, 4,000 nautical miles from base, looking for a light aircraft that had disappeared off West Africa. In 10 days, operating out of Ascension Island, the crew flew 93 hours and searched over 200,000 square miles of ocean. Eventually they located the aircraft wreckage and sighted the bodies of the two missing pilots.
8 July 1988. First of three 206 Squadron crews scrambled from Kinloss to the scene of the worst ever oil rig disaster in the North Sea - the explosion of Piper Alpha. Over 25 rescue vessels and 10 helicopters were involved in the rescue operation that saved 61 lives from a total of 228 on board. Nimrods were instrumental in the co-ordination of the helicopters and surface vessels throughout the incident.
7-9 March 1989. Continuous Nimrod patrols search for pilot of single-engine light aircraft that ditched mid-Atlantic as a result of engine failure during a crossing from the USA to UK.
22-24 July 1990. Nimrod of 206 Sqn carries out search for senior Civil Servants missing on a small open fishing boat in Indian Ocean. Sadly nothing found in search area. Empty boat found weeks later by merchant vessel.
5 August 1992. 206 Sqn crew scrambled to search for missing yacht in North Sea. Nimrod locates body of one of the crew and vectors Sea King (that had been searching smaller adjacent area) to carry out the recovery.
17 July 1993. Nimrod of 206 Sqn searches Irish Sea for missing yacht. Two Sea King helicopters conducted searches of 2 small areas to east of Isle of Man whilst Nimrod covered the rest of the Irish Sea. Launch and owner found safe and well next day in a port that was not the vessels planned destination. The Nimrod was diverted onto this search after completing top cover mission for Sea King CASEVAC mission to the west of Ireland.
3-4 February 1994. Six crews from 206 Squadron fly continuous SAR cover for 36 hours following the sinking of the MV Christinaki, 240 miles SW of Cornwall. Unfortunately there were no survivors in conditions described by the Nimrod crews as probably the worst they had ever seen: 80 knot surface winds and 50 feet wave heights.
23 July 2001. Nimrod of 201 Sqn scrambled to conduct search for man overboard from QE2 in Atlantic. SAR helicopters were unable to conduct a prolonged search of the area due to it being at the limit of their range.
As I said, these are just some of the SAR incidents that the Nimrod was involved in.
MFC
However, since some here seem to belittle the role that the aircraft has played in SAROps, the following are just some of the SAR missions, that I know of, that the Nimrod has played a very important, and sometimes vital, role in over the last 3 decades...
14 August 1979. Fastnet Yacht Race Disaster. 201 Squadron crew scrambled from Kinloss in response to initial Mayday call. 42 Squadron crews continued with the rescue and co-ordination effort. Of 316 starters - 128 yachts finished, 165 retired, 23 sank, 136 people rescued and 15 died.
27 March 1980. 201 Squadron crew scrambled to assist in incident in Ekofisk oilfield, North Sea. The accommodation platform Alexander Kielland had capsized. The crew coordinated the helicopter and ship activity for seven hours before being relieved. Nimrod operations continued for seven days in search of survivors. Regrettably 123 lives were lost.
August 1985. Nimrod's from Kinloss and St Mawgan involved in shepherding and, ultimately, rescue of Richard Branson and his crew of the Virgin Atlantic Challenger following a failed attempt at the Blue Riband Atlantic sea-crossing record.
15 August 1987. Aided by air to air refueling, 120 Squadron crew conducted a SAR search, 4,000 nautical miles from base, looking for a light aircraft that had disappeared off West Africa. In 10 days, operating out of Ascension Island, the crew flew 93 hours and searched over 200,000 square miles of ocean. Eventually they located the aircraft wreckage and sighted the bodies of the two missing pilots.
8 July 1988. First of three 206 Squadron crews scrambled from Kinloss to the scene of the worst ever oil rig disaster in the North Sea - the explosion of Piper Alpha. Over 25 rescue vessels and 10 helicopters were involved in the rescue operation that saved 61 lives from a total of 228 on board. Nimrods were instrumental in the co-ordination of the helicopters and surface vessels throughout the incident.
7-9 March 1989. Continuous Nimrod patrols search for pilot of single-engine light aircraft that ditched mid-Atlantic as a result of engine failure during a crossing from the USA to UK.
22-24 July 1990. Nimrod of 206 Sqn carries out search for senior Civil Servants missing on a small open fishing boat in Indian Ocean. Sadly nothing found in search area. Empty boat found weeks later by merchant vessel.
5 August 1992. 206 Sqn crew scrambled to search for missing yacht in North Sea. Nimrod locates body of one of the crew and vectors Sea King (that had been searching smaller adjacent area) to carry out the recovery.
17 July 1993. Nimrod of 206 Sqn searches Irish Sea for missing yacht. Two Sea King helicopters conducted searches of 2 small areas to east of Isle of Man whilst Nimrod covered the rest of the Irish Sea. Launch and owner found safe and well next day in a port that was not the vessels planned destination. The Nimrod was diverted onto this search after completing top cover mission for Sea King CASEVAC mission to the west of Ireland.
3-4 February 1994. Six crews from 206 Squadron fly continuous SAR cover for 36 hours following the sinking of the MV Christinaki, 240 miles SW of Cornwall. Unfortunately there were no survivors in conditions described by the Nimrod crews as probably the worst they had ever seen: 80 knot surface winds and 50 feet wave heights.
23 July 2001. Nimrod of 201 Sqn scrambled to conduct search for man overboard from QE2 in Atlantic. SAR helicopters were unable to conduct a prolonged search of the area due to it being at the limit of their range.
As I said, these are just some of the SAR incidents that the Nimrod was involved in.
MFC
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MFC
I agree, that there are many other roles for Nimrod, but SAR is hardly at the top.
Even a glance down your list shows that your favourites list is less than once a year. Hardly bang for buck.
Having glanced a bit further, surely you can do better than that lot? I mean, I've been taking the piss a bit, but you must have a better brag sheet than that?!
"22-24 July 1990. Nimrod of 206 Sqn carries out search for senior Civil Servants missing on a small open fishing boat in Indian Ocean. Sadly nothing found in search area. Empty boat found weeks later by merchant vessel."
I can shorten that to "flew a lot and accomplished nothing"
"3-4 February 1994. Six crews from 206 Squadron fly continuous SAR cover for 36 hours following the sinking of the MV Christinaki, 240 miles SW of Cornwall. Unfortunately there were no survivors in conditions described by the Nimrod crews as probably the worst they had ever seen: 80 knot surface winds and 50 feet wave heights."
I can shorten that to "flew a lot and accomplished nothing"
"15 August 1987. Aided by air to air refueling, 120 Squadron crew conducted a SAR search, 4,000 nautical miles from base, looking for a light aircraft that had disappeared off West Africa. In 10 days, operating out of Ascension Island, the crew flew 93 hours and searched over 200,000 square miles of ocean. Eventually they located the aircraft wreckage and sighted the bodies of the two missing pilots"
I can shorten that to "flew an incredible amount at vast expense and accomplished nothing much"
"23 July 2001. Nimrod of 201 Sqn scrambled to conduct search for man overboard from QE2 in Atlantic. SAR helicopters were unable to conduct a prolonged search of the area due to it being at the limit of their range.
I can shorten that to "flew a lot and accomplished nothing"
Please tell me some good dits, please!
I agree, that there are many other roles for Nimrod, but SAR is hardly at the top.
Even a glance down your list shows that your favourites list is less than once a year. Hardly bang for buck.
Having glanced a bit further, surely you can do better than that lot? I mean, I've been taking the piss a bit, but you must have a better brag sheet than that?!
"22-24 July 1990. Nimrod of 206 Sqn carries out search for senior Civil Servants missing on a small open fishing boat in Indian Ocean. Sadly nothing found in search area. Empty boat found weeks later by merchant vessel."
I can shorten that to "flew a lot and accomplished nothing"
"3-4 February 1994. Six crews from 206 Squadron fly continuous SAR cover for 36 hours following the sinking of the MV Christinaki, 240 miles SW of Cornwall. Unfortunately there were no survivors in conditions described by the Nimrod crews as probably the worst they had ever seen: 80 knot surface winds and 50 feet wave heights."
I can shorten that to "flew a lot and accomplished nothing"
"15 August 1987. Aided by air to air refueling, 120 Squadron crew conducted a SAR search, 4,000 nautical miles from base, looking for a light aircraft that had disappeared off West Africa. In 10 days, operating out of Ascension Island, the crew flew 93 hours and searched over 200,000 square miles of ocean. Eventually they located the aircraft wreckage and sighted the bodies of the two missing pilots"
I can shorten that to "flew an incredible amount at vast expense and accomplished nothing much"
"23 July 2001. Nimrod of 201 Sqn scrambled to conduct search for man overboard from QE2 in Atlantic. SAR helicopters were unable to conduct a prolonged search of the area due to it being at the limit of their range.
I can shorten that to "flew a lot and accomplished nothing"
Please tell me some good dits, please!
There is a lot of willy waving and finger pointing going on, but has anyone established yet why the programme was cancelled?
Is it because;
a. Fears over safety / unwillingness to sign a Release
b. A policy decision that UK no longer need the Nimrod's undoubted capabilities
c. Treasury strop over cost escalation / incompetence
d. VSOs couldn't be bothered / concentrated on FJs
e. AN Other
May I suggest you can't fight your corner or make informed comment until this is clarified.
Given the Chinook HC Mk3 ("gold-standard cock-up" according to Public Acounts Committee) only wasted a few hundred million, can we look forward to a far reaching inquiry into N2000/RMPA/MRA4? Perhaps that would be the forum to re-affirm the requirement.
Is it because;
a. Fears over safety / unwillingness to sign a Release
b. A policy decision that UK no longer need the Nimrod's undoubted capabilities
c. Treasury strop over cost escalation / incompetence
d. VSOs couldn't be bothered / concentrated on FJs
e. AN Other
May I suggest you can't fight your corner or make informed comment until this is clarified.
Given the Chinook HC Mk3 ("gold-standard cock-up" according to Public Acounts Committee) only wasted a few hundred million, can we look forward to a far reaching inquiry into N2000/RMPA/MRA4? Perhaps that would be the forum to re-affirm the requirement.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Indeed the location of the ships afloat is indeed tracked automatically. The problem is then one of alerting them to go to the search location. Sometimes this would be possible without an aircraft but at other times the aircraft (FW or RW) is essentia to increase the horizon.
Tourist,
You make a valid point but overlook more essential one. These missions serve to draw a line for the families at home. They remove the doubt tht if something had been done then their loved ones may have survived. Forelorn help and in financial terms a waste of money but in human terms absolutely essential.
The same could be said of other casevac operations. The cost is one thing the value is something else. Going nearer home, why do SAR Helos search mountains for the uneducated and ill-equipped an do it for free?
Tourist,
I can shorten that to "flew a lot and accomplished nothing"
The same could be said of other casevac operations. The cost is one thing the value is something else. Going nearer home, why do SAR Helos search mountains for the uneducated and ill-equipped an do it for free?
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Right here, right now
Posts: 270
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tourist...
I haven't just re-read this whole thread so could you please help me by pointing out where anyone in support of the UK maintaining a LRMPA capability (MRA4 or otherwise) has placed SAR "at the top".
As for "bang for buck" which you seem so keen on (have you since been moved from flying SAR helos to flying bean-counter desks?), isn't that true of most fleets? What is the "bang for bucks" from the F3 fleet over the past campaigns? How many of the GR4 missions in Iraq between 'the wars' achieved a big "bang for buck" level? How many of the Harrier and GR4 missions over Afghanistan actually involve "bang for buck" in your eyes? How much "bang for buck" are we getting from Typhoon?
If you knew anything of the missions that the Nimrod has done over the years (not just talking SAR here, that was only one role of many for the aircraft) your bean-counting mind may be a little happier about the "bang for buck" for the aircraft overall. Please explain to me what "bang for buck" we, the taxpayer, are getting from not brining into service a £3.6bn aircraft that is already paid for?
May I reiterate one more time, we are not fighting the case for a LRMPA on SAR alone, or even with SAR "at the top", we are simply highlighting just one of the LRMPA capabilities - one that we, as a nation, have signed up to provide to the international community out to 30W - a commitment that we can no longer fulfil properly.
Tourist, please stop trying to twist the words of those that you disagree with.
MFC
I agree, that there are many other roles for Nimrod, but SAR is hardly at the top.
As for "bang for buck" which you seem so keen on (have you since been moved from flying SAR helos to flying bean-counter desks?), isn't that true of most fleets? What is the "bang for bucks" from the F3 fleet over the past campaigns? How many of the GR4 missions in Iraq between 'the wars' achieved a big "bang for buck" level? How many of the Harrier and GR4 missions over Afghanistan actually involve "bang for buck" in your eyes? How much "bang for buck" are we getting from Typhoon?
If you knew anything of the missions that the Nimrod has done over the years (not just talking SAR here, that was only one role of many for the aircraft) your bean-counting mind may be a little happier about the "bang for buck" for the aircraft overall. Please explain to me what "bang for buck" we, the taxpayer, are getting from not brining into service a £3.6bn aircraft that is already paid for?
May I reiterate one more time, we are not fighting the case for a LRMPA on SAR alone, or even with SAR "at the top", we are simply highlighting just one of the LRMPA capabilities - one that we, as a nation, have signed up to provide to the international community out to 30W - a commitment that we can no longer fulfil properly.
Tourist, please stop trying to twist the words of those that you disagree with.
MFC
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MRA4 was binned as nobody from the top of the food chain was there to defend it when it came to crunching the figures about. 
Far more important to show the RAF as fast jet fleet as thats the way it always has been and always will be.
Far more important to show the RAF as fast jet fleet as thats the way it always has been and always will be.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Shhhh!!
Age: 56
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets try
Dec 18th 1988 - overland SAR incident to search and locate Norwegian Helicopter crash, because nothing else could get airborne, kept comms kept him alive, rescued later. Great International cooperation
Jan 13th 1989 - MV Yarrawonga right at the limit of the SAR obligation area - Nimrod found ship kept standing patrol until US helos refuelled en route to perform the longest SAR incident of it's type, all hands saved - US helos commented later they would never had got there without MR2
April 16th 1989 - Yacht Dorathia Bay of biscay - all hands had to abandon ship and Nimrod searched, located and guided MV to area to recover survivors.
not just 1 a year but a small sample of 1 person on 1 crew over 5 months, this goes on a lot more than you remember/realise/care to admit.
the money has gone, the crews are available, why not do something really drastic like cut the Air ranks and senior officers by 2/3rds and maintain a frontline asset that has a use at home as well as abroad?
Jan 13th 1989 - MV Yarrawonga right at the limit of the SAR obligation area - Nimrod found ship kept standing patrol until US helos refuelled en route to perform the longest SAR incident of it's type, all hands saved - US helos commented later they would never had got there without MR2
April 16th 1989 - Yacht Dorathia Bay of biscay - all hands had to abandon ship and Nimrod searched, located and guided MV to area to recover survivors.
not just 1 a year but a small sample of 1 person on 1 crew over 5 months, this goes on a lot more than you remember/realise/care to admit.
the money has gone, the crews are available, why not do something really drastic like cut the Air ranks and senior officers by 2/3rds and maintain a frontline asset that has a use at home as well as abroad?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Annes
Age: 68
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wrathmonk,
the problem is to get the rescuing ship to where the survivors are, particularly if the survivors are no longer on a vessel with nav kit. A ship can't see all that far from that low down, essentially the position of the sinking ship (or whatever) is 'where to start looking' rather than 'where it actually is', so unless the survivors are pretty well on the datum when your rescue ship arrives there's every chance they'll not be seen.
I was on the crew that took over from the initial SAR for Alexander Keilland, I know how busy we were that day, controlling a bunch of helos and a bunch of ships, ensuring that suitable sectors were allocated to each, that the helos were able to search without having to worry about where all the other helos were, keeping the comms relays going (ship and helo at one end, coastguard, rescue centre at the other) - sometimes just sorting out housekeeping for helos (refuel etc) so they could concentrate on the search. We could do that because we had good nav kit, the tacnav's rather large display screen was good for that sort of thing, an effective radar, and lots of people who were all trained to use radios and think tactically.... I find it hard to believe that the Cessnas will be able to do the same job on a major incident. I think we are banking on only having small to medium incidents.
Imagine the day when a fully laden airliner goes down at, say, 25 west, and actually survives the ditching and manages to offload the pax onto what they call the liferafts.
It doesn't have to be Nimrod, but we do need something that can reach 30W with a decent loiter time once it gets there, a decent radar, good radio fit, and a fair number of crew to shoulder what can be a fairly huge workload. That the MRA4 would have ticked those boxes, and has been paid for, is I think a fair argument but clearly one that Mr Cameron is not swayed by.
Tuc - yes, it would be very good to know why the MRA4 was cancelled, my money is mainly on (a) with a bit of (c). I can't see Cameron really not listening to advice on the matter, but for the life of me I can't shake the feeling that he associates 'Nimrod' with 'self igniting 60 year old airliner'.
Dave
the problem is to get the rescuing ship to where the survivors are, particularly if the survivors are no longer on a vessel with nav kit. A ship can't see all that far from that low down, essentially the position of the sinking ship (or whatever) is 'where to start looking' rather than 'where it actually is', so unless the survivors are pretty well on the datum when your rescue ship arrives there's every chance they'll not be seen.
I was on the crew that took over from the initial SAR for Alexander Keilland, I know how busy we were that day, controlling a bunch of helos and a bunch of ships, ensuring that suitable sectors were allocated to each, that the helos were able to search without having to worry about where all the other helos were, keeping the comms relays going (ship and helo at one end, coastguard, rescue centre at the other) - sometimes just sorting out housekeeping for helos (refuel etc) so they could concentrate on the search. We could do that because we had good nav kit, the tacnav's rather large display screen was good for that sort of thing, an effective radar, and lots of people who were all trained to use radios and think tactically.... I find it hard to believe that the Cessnas will be able to do the same job on a major incident. I think we are banking on only having small to medium incidents.
Imagine the day when a fully laden airliner goes down at, say, 25 west, and actually survives the ditching and manages to offload the pax onto what they call the liferafts.
It doesn't have to be Nimrod, but we do need something that can reach 30W with a decent loiter time once it gets there, a decent radar, good radio fit, and a fair number of crew to shoulder what can be a fairly huge workload. That the MRA4 would have ticked those boxes, and has been paid for, is I think a fair argument but clearly one that Mr Cameron is not swayed by.
Tuc - yes, it would be very good to know why the MRA4 was cancelled, my money is mainly on (a) with a bit of (c). I can't see Cameron really not listening to advice on the matter, but for the life of me I can't shake the feeling that he associates 'Nimrod' with 'self igniting 60 year old airliner'.
Dave
I'm not very interested nor impressed by the rather unseemly sniping at those who have just been deprived of not only their future fleet but also their operational role by those who haven't, to which I would simply add the word "yet"!
Like tucumseh I would rather know why this has happened. In all the outrage, in all the bluster does anyone know for sure? Is it not time for someone to congratulate the PM on his "courageous" decision? That usually stopped Hacker dead in his tracks, it might just stop CMD.
If BWoS is still building these aircraft, do we know why? If they are doing so would it not be common-sense to also implement the requirements to make them airworthy as alluded to by TOFO? Are they doing so? Might the MRA4 then be awarded its RTS? Or is all that as nought because No.10 has unilaterally decided that LRMOps are no longer required for UK defence? If that is the case is not the CAS's position untenable, or does he tacitly agree despite what he has said? In short I find more questions than answers as time passes. Other than tuc do others also want these questions answered or do they prefer to continue sniping at each other?
Like tucumseh I would rather know why this has happened. In all the outrage, in all the bluster does anyone know for sure? Is it not time for someone to congratulate the PM on his "courageous" decision? That usually stopped Hacker dead in his tracks, it might just stop CMD.
If BWoS is still building these aircraft, do we know why? If they are doing so would it not be common-sense to also implement the requirements to make them airworthy as alluded to by TOFO? Are they doing so? Might the MRA4 then be awarded its RTS? Or is all that as nought because No.10 has unilaterally decided that LRMOps are no longer required for UK defence? If that is the case is not the CAS's position untenable, or does he tacitly agree despite what he has said? In short I find more questions than answers as time passes. Other than tuc do others also want these questions answered or do they prefer to continue sniping at each other?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MFC
I agree, that there are many other roles for Nimrod, but SAR is hardly at the top.
Even a glance down your list shows that your favourites list is less than once a year. Hardly bang for buck.
Having glanced a bit further, surely you can do better than that lot? I mean, I've been taking the piss a bit, but you must have a better brag sheet than that?!
"22-24 July 1990. Nimrod of 206 Sqn carries out search for senior Civil Servants missing on a small open fishing boat in Indian Ocean. Sadly nothing found in search area. Empty boat found weeks later by merchant vessel."
I can shorten that to "flew a lot and accomplished nothing"
"3-4 February 1994. Six crews from 206 Squadron fly continuous SAR cover for 36 hours following the sinking of the MV Christinaki, 240 miles SW of Cornwall. Unfortunately there were no survivors in conditions described by the Nimrod crews as probably the worst they had ever seen: 80 knot surface winds and 50 feet wave heights."
I can shorten that to "flew a lot and accomplished nothing"
"15 August 1987. Aided by air to air refueling, 120 Squadron crew conducted a SAR search, 4,000 nautical miles from base, looking for a light aircraft that had disappeared off West Africa. In 10 days, operating out of Ascension Island, the crew flew 93 hours and searched over 200,000 square miles of ocean. Eventually they located the aircraft wreckage and sighted the bodies of the two missing pilots"
I can shorten that to "flew an incredible amount at vast expense and accomplished nothing much"
"23 July 2001. Nimrod of 201 Sqn scrambled to conduct search for man overboard from QE2 in Atlantic. SAR helicopters were unable to conduct a prolonged search of the area due to it being at the limit of their range.
I can shorten that to "flew a lot and accomplished nothing"
I agree, that there are many other roles for Nimrod, but SAR is hardly at the top.
Even a glance down your list shows that your favourites list is less than once a year. Hardly bang for buck.
Having glanced a bit further, surely you can do better than that lot? I mean, I've been taking the piss a bit, but you must have a better brag sheet than that?!
"22-24 July 1990. Nimrod of 206 Sqn carries out search for senior Civil Servants missing on a small open fishing boat in Indian Ocean. Sadly nothing found in search area. Empty boat found weeks later by merchant vessel."
I can shorten that to "flew a lot and accomplished nothing"
"3-4 February 1994. Six crews from 206 Squadron fly continuous SAR cover for 36 hours following the sinking of the MV Christinaki, 240 miles SW of Cornwall. Unfortunately there were no survivors in conditions described by the Nimrod crews as probably the worst they had ever seen: 80 knot surface winds and 50 feet wave heights."
I can shorten that to "flew a lot and accomplished nothing"
"15 August 1987. Aided by air to air refueling, 120 Squadron crew conducted a SAR search, 4,000 nautical miles from base, looking for a light aircraft that had disappeared off West Africa. In 10 days, operating out of Ascension Island, the crew flew 93 hours and searched over 200,000 square miles of ocean. Eventually they located the aircraft wreckage and sighted the bodies of the two missing pilots"
I can shorten that to "flew an incredible amount at vast expense and accomplished nothing much"
"23 July 2001. Nimrod of 201 Sqn scrambled to conduct search for man overboard from QE2 in Atlantic. SAR helicopters were unable to conduct a prolonged search of the area due to it being at the limit of their range.
I can shorten that to "flew a lot and accomplished nothing"
Why MRA4 cancelled?
My guess would be a combination of (in order):
a) desire to save money (over 10 years savings are >£Bn I assume)
b) savings
c) reducing budgets
d) fiscal pressure in Govt
e) a capability case maybe feeling a bit at odds in todays world, with deterrent protection being the key need, but overall still a bit hard for Joe Public (i.e. Politicians) to really grasp as "essential" - certainly feeling a bit exposed in light of drivers a)-d).
these key drivers backed up by a heady cocktail of
f) on-going RTS snags (?), failure to fly at Farnborough
g) sad history of delays with BAES and cost overruns
h) poison saga of MR2 and bad public image of "tainted Nimrod"
giving little sympathy to the project, despite its likely future success.
h) alone not probably not enough to can MRA4, but for those stoking the "ground them all forever" fire, it can't have helped much.
My guess would be a combination of (in order):
a) desire to save money (over 10 years savings are >£Bn I assume)
b) savings
c) reducing budgets
d) fiscal pressure in Govt
e) a capability case maybe feeling a bit at odds in todays world, with deterrent protection being the key need, but overall still a bit hard for Joe Public (i.e. Politicians) to really grasp as "essential" - certainly feeling a bit exposed in light of drivers a)-d).
these key drivers backed up by a heady cocktail of
f) on-going RTS snags (?), failure to fly at Farnborough
g) sad history of delays with BAES and cost overruns
h) poison saga of MR2 and bad public image of "tainted Nimrod"
giving little sympathy to the project, despite its likely future success.
h) alone not probably not enough to can MRA4, but for those stoking the "ground them all forever" fire, it can't have helped much.
Last edited by JFZ90; 27th Oct 2010 at 22:14.