Nimrod MRA.4
SFO
That is an excellent summary.
To me, this smacks of someone (perhaps MoD) suddenly being told to implement regulations and procedures they previously considered a waste of time and money (Witness A - Nimrod 2 Star in PE), which led to a loss of corporate knowledge and, importantly, the necessary experience and competence to apply engineering judgement and common sense.
The natural outcome is literal interpretation of regs and procedures that were written on the assumption the user (MoD) had staff who were fully trained and had demonstrated the above attributes on a daily basis for 10 years before being allowed near such a project. That is, the regs and procedures became increasingly useless, to an increasing majority, from about 1990, when MoD waived the need to have 10 years relevant experience and compounded matters by chopping funding to maintain airworthiness. This was one of the main points made to Haddon-Cave. And to Adam Ingram in 2005. And to DPA/DCE in 2000. And to CDP in 1998. And by DRA in 1996. And by the RAF themselves in 1992 ....... Utterly depressing.
That is an excellent summary.
To me, this smacks of someone (perhaps MoD) suddenly being told to implement regulations and procedures they previously considered a waste of time and money (Witness A - Nimrod 2 Star in PE), which led to a loss of corporate knowledge and, importantly, the necessary experience and competence to apply engineering judgement and common sense.
The natural outcome is literal interpretation of regs and procedures that were written on the assumption the user (MoD) had staff who were fully trained and had demonstrated the above attributes on a daily basis for 10 years before being allowed near such a project. That is, the regs and procedures became increasingly useless, to an increasing majority, from about 1990, when MoD waived the need to have 10 years relevant experience and compounded matters by chopping funding to maintain airworthiness. This was one of the main points made to Haddon-Cave. And to Adam Ingram in 2005. And to DPA/DCE in 2000. And to CDP in 1998. And by DRA in 1996. And by the RAF themselves in 1992 ....... Utterly depressing.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Just down the road from ISK
Posts: 328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Col_onHF
sadly inevitable really - anything that can't even get in-service 7 years after first flight . . . well . . . .
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The US of A, and sometimes Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SFO
Once again your outstanding understanding of the TRUTH is spot on. Nice one; keep up the good work.
It's so refreshing to have sense being talked on here.
And if anyone who knows "better" starts posting the usual guff, you are talking utter pi$h. You know who you are...
Once again your outstanding understanding of the TRUTH is spot on. Nice one; keep up the good work.
It's so refreshing to have sense being talked on here.
And if anyone who knows "better" starts posting the usual guff, you are talking utter pi$h. You know who you are...
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Just down the road from ISK
Posts: 328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never let facts get in the way of fishing for a bite!!
anyway, Typhoon was evolved from EFA, which was around 1n 1983 or 84, albeit not as a flying machine. So, Typhoons development took around 20 years. My point, really, was that MRA4 was still young at 15 years from ITT to in service.
anyway, Typhoon was evolved from EFA, which was around 1n 1983 or 84, albeit not as a flying machine. So, Typhoons development took around 20 years. My point, really, was that MRA4 was still young at 15 years from ITT to in service.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Annes
Age: 68
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SFO,
thankyou very much for that - although I asked if anyone connected would care to comment, I rather assumed that the serving aircrew would be under the lash and prevented from putting anything that contradicted the official line. I hope that your input doesn't cause you any problems, and would just like to record my appreciation of your stand here. As an outsider it's hard to know where truth lies usually, but I haven't any doubts at all about whether to believe your version or Liam Fox's.
Well done, and thanks again.
Dave
So, I'll pay for the rope, anyone up for a lynching party?
thankyou very much for that - although I asked if anyone connected would care to comment, I rather assumed that the serving aircrew would be under the lash and prevented from putting anything that contradicted the official line. I hope that your input doesn't cause you any problems, and would just like to record my appreciation of your stand here. As an outsider it's hard to know where truth lies usually, but I haven't any doubts at all about whether to believe your version or Liam Fox's.
Well done, and thanks again.
Dave
So, I'll pay for the rope, anyone up for a lynching party?
Join Date: May 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SFO.
Thank you for saying what everybody on the project knew, but the company was unable or unwilling to say for fear of getting into an argument with the Government.
Rumour has it that PA4 will go on the 14th
Thank you for saying what everybody on the project knew, but the company was unable or unwilling to say for fear of getting into an argument with the Government.
Rumour has it that PA4 will go on the 14th
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heartbreaking pics earlier of nearly complete airframes being readied for scrapping! Being one of the unwashed I must admit I'm more inclined to believe SFO's posts than anything that the torypress prints; however I still think a good few 100 millions extra would have been required to complete these aircraft (to a RTS standard).
Regards the capability itself then I guess this was a major part of the problem in that a 'gold plated' solution costs big bucks and that's something that we don't currently have...
Not sure that today's oil rig events really prove anything either way in this instance as the available assets appear to have proved sufficient and, in a way, validate the risk assessment that MoD/HMG undertook prior to formally cancelling MRA4. I guess you could say we were "lucky" that a Sentry was airborne on a Friday afternoon, or you could assume that it's role was non-essential and that the outcome would have been the same regardless?
Personally I think there's been too much attention focussed on the headline grabbing role of SAR and that the real capability loss is in offshore surveillance (friend or foe) and I'd hope that this chasm will be filled sooner rather than later.
Regards the capability itself then I guess this was a major part of the problem in that a 'gold plated' solution costs big bucks and that's something that we don't currently have...
Not sure that today's oil rig events really prove anything either way in this instance as the available assets appear to have proved sufficient and, in a way, validate the risk assessment that MoD/HMG undertook prior to formally cancelling MRA4. I guess you could say we were "lucky" that a Sentry was airborne on a Friday afternoon, or you could assume that it's role was non-essential and that the outcome would have been the same regardless?
Personally I think there's been too much attention focussed on the headline grabbing role of SAR and that the real capability loss is in offshore surveillance (friend or foe) and I'd hope that this chasm will be filled sooner rather than later.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Stockport
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SFO
Your summary was 1st class but still the Nimrod haters will dispute all the facts posted on these forums
******** 
Anyway we have past the point of no return now
all the spares and parts in production have now been scrapped and much as I have championed the mra4 I have to admit now the project is dead and there's no going back 
Your summary was 1st class but still the Nimrod haters will dispute all the facts posted on these forums
******** Anyway we have past the point of no return now
all the spares and parts in production have now been scrapped and much as I have championed the mra4 I have to admit now the project is dead and there's no going back
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Here and there, occasionally at home.
Age: 56
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DaveJb & Oz42
"SFO,
thankyou very much for that - although I asked if anyone connected would care to comment, I rather assumed that the serving aircrew would be under the lash and prevented from putting anything that contradicted the official line. I hope that your input doesn't cause you any problems, and would just like to record my appreciation of your stand here. As an outsider it's hard to know where truth lies usually, but I haven't any doubts at all about whether to believe your version or Liam Fox's.""
I am a firm believer in speaking the truth, as I would hope anyone is that carries the Queen's Commission. I have not and never will be a political animal, if I hear or see someone spouting sh1te, from an SAC to CAS, then I will say so, but I usually leave it up to the individual/organization concerned to choose the time/place. I would have quite happily pointed out the 'slight anomolies' to anyone in the DefSec's outer office but as we weren't asked I see no harm in responding with something that actually reflects reality rather than the 'lets's dis it and it will all go away' approach.
If the administration had stuck to the "we're broke and can't afford it line" I would have stayed in my box. I wouldn't have been happy but I would have stayed in my box. But now the feckelss, faceless, unelected governement spin merchants have had the audacity to effectively impune my integrity and professionalism, and that of a lot of damned fine people that I've worked with, by 'leaking' certain 'details'.
Them Fire They Me Were Piss Wouldn't On If I
thankyou very much for that - although I asked if anyone connected would care to comment, I rather assumed that the serving aircrew would be under the lash and prevented from putting anything that contradicted the official line. I hope that your input doesn't cause you any problems, and would just like to record my appreciation of your stand here. As an outsider it's hard to know where truth lies usually, but I haven't any doubts at all about whether to believe your version or Liam Fox's.""
I am a firm believer in speaking the truth, as I would hope anyone is that carries the Queen's Commission. I have not and never will be a political animal, if I hear or see someone spouting sh1te, from an SAC to CAS, then I will say so, but I usually leave it up to the individual/organization concerned to choose the time/place. I would have quite happily pointed out the 'slight anomolies' to anyone in the DefSec's outer office but as we weren't asked I see no harm in responding with something that actually reflects reality rather than the 'lets's dis it and it will all go away' approach.
If the administration had stuck to the "we're broke and can't afford it line" I would have stayed in my box. I wouldn't have been happy but I would have stayed in my box. But now the feckelss, faceless, unelected governement spin merchants have had the audacity to effectively impune my integrity and professionalism, and that of a lot of damned fine people that I've worked with, by 'leaking' certain 'details'.
Them Fire They Me Were Piss Wouldn't On If I
LRMP
Just when the dust was settling!
Found this on when browsing the old net. Funny UK Gov don't think the same. Maybe we aren't an Island
Worth a look.
P-8 Poseidon MMA: Long-Range Maritime Patrol, and More
Found this on when browsing the old net. Funny UK Gov don't think the same. Maybe we aren't an Island
Worth a look.
P-8 Poseidon MMA: Long-Range Maritime Patrol, and More
More bang for your buck
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: land of the clanger
Age: 82
Posts: 3,512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In an article in the Sunday times about the Ark Royal, there is mention that the Admirals are furious about the cancellation of the Nimrod and are looking to buy and fly their own maritime reconnaissance aircraft because they consider the submarine threat to be very serious.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Stockport
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In an article in the Sunday times about the Ark Royal, there is mention that the Admirals are furious about the cancellation of the Nimrod and are looking to buy and fly their own maritime reconnaissance aircraft because they consider the submarine threat to be very serious.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Waiting to return to the Loire.
Age: 54
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you accept that the Nim money has been paid, and we still had not recieved the 9 aircraft which we started with upgraded to the MRA4 spec - it could be played as being politically advantageous to have an RN order for 'more than 9' new LRMPA at what is portrayed as a decent price.
The gov will just say "that is how you buy wisely".
Long range makes a lot of sense, buton one of the other threads there was a concept of retreading S3 Vikings. Nowhere near as long legged as the Nim, but it would cover the coastal issues and be carrier capable.
It also would only have a crew requirement of 4 and could integrate with the Sentry and SK in the 'battlespace'.
Reading the word of the Truth which the internet clearly is, it does seem that the plane was retired due to econmics and capabilities of the Super Hornet paired with the Orion, rather than because of inherent problems with the machine.
I'm happy to be shot down
The gov will just say "that is how you buy wisely".
Long range makes a lot of sense, buton one of the other threads there was a concept of retreading S3 Vikings. Nowhere near as long legged as the Nim, but it would cover the coastal issues and be carrier capable.
It also would only have a crew requirement of 4 and could integrate with the Sentry and SK in the 'battlespace'.
Reading the word of the Truth which the internet clearly is, it does seem that the plane was retired due to econmics and capabilities of the Super Hornet paired with the Orion, rather than because of inherent problems with the machine.
I'm happy to be shot down
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Stockport
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 2nd MRA4 delivered to the RAF PA-05 (ZJ515) was cut up today
This just leave the 2 test frames PA-01 & PA-02 left & these will be gone by weeks end.
PA-04 (ZJ514) at Warton was cut up last Weds (16th Feb).
This just leave the 2 test frames PA-01 & PA-02 left & these will be gone by weeks end.
PA-04 (ZJ514) at Warton was cut up last Weds (16th Feb).