'No blame' Over RAF Tornado Crash
Aha, now on your wave. I mean not a training fleet. Regardless, you need more than 110hrs a year to be safe so I infer you mean ground all aviation other than SH as only they are "frontline" and so only they should be funded?
Doesn't matter what your viewpoint is about what constitutes usefullness in current op scenarios, this low a flying rate is what gets kids killed.
Doesn't matter what your viewpoint is about what constitutes usefullness in current op scenarios, this low a flying rate is what gets kids killed.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was on the F3 fleet in the early naugties. I arrived on my first squadron full of enthusiasm, however 6 months later with 30 hours in my log book I was extremely frustrated and pi$$ed off. I've just been through my log book, my average over my tour was 8.5 hours a month.
I seem to remember a Jag mate was killed in the mid-late 90's when he hit the barrier on take off and currency and continuity was a major contributor factor. I guess nothing has been learned, sigh.
I seem to remember a Jag mate was killed in the mid-late 90's when he hit the barrier on take off and currency and continuity was a major contributor factor. I guess nothing has been learned, sigh.
I had a quick look at an old logbook. In my (albeit short) time on 56(F) in the early 1980s, my average monthly total, with no allowance for Christmas, annual leave etc was 20 hours..... Factor in leave and the average was about 23 hours per month.
And now people are only being given less than half that figure? What utter folly.
And now people are only being given less than half that figure? What utter folly.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: England
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10 hours per month? Utterly shocking.
Other than the obvious tragedy of the report, I was mortified to read that Blacksmith 2 was on course to do exactly the same as Kenny & Nige. I may be reading the report incorrectly however, the fireball from Blacksmith 1 clearly forced BT2 to commence a low level abort with the selection of reheat being what saved them with approx 1 sec of room for error.
I dread to think what may have happened if the guys in BT2 had not seen the fireball.
Other than the obvious tragedy of the report, I was mortified to read that Blacksmith 2 was on course to do exactly the same as Kenny & Nige. I may be reading the report incorrectly however, the fireball from Blacksmith 1 clearly forced BT2 to commence a low level abort with the selection of reheat being what saved them with approx 1 sec of room for error.
I dread to think what may have happened if the guys in BT2 had not seen the fireball.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: australia
Age: 76
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This was a CFIT in clear weather. Thrust, speed, rudder input and wing sweep seemingly rendered the corner just about impossible. The #2 only squeaked it, and he had lots of experience.
I really don't think a missing form, or dual check, had much to do with it.
So, with no-one seemingly really up to speed because of lack of real currency... why was this hairy manoeuvre attempted?
I admit that I am not familiar with this bit of Scotland, and if it really is a routine bend in a valley, will happily be corrected. But that would only bring us back to the first sentence.
GB is no friend of the Armed Forces, but it is a bit of a stretch to to lay this squarely on him.
"Know your limitations" applies regardless of how many hours per month we do.
I really don't think a missing form, or dual check, had much to do with it.
So, with no-one seemingly really up to speed because of lack of real currency... why was this hairy manoeuvre attempted?
I admit that I am not familiar with this bit of Scotland, and if it really is a routine bend in a valley, will happily be corrected. But that would only bring us back to the first sentence.
GB is no friend of the Armed Forces, but it is a bit of a stretch to to lay this squarely on him.
"Know your limitations" applies regardless of how many hours per month we do.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Darn Sarf
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I saw the results of low flying hours amongst the Junta frequently on my last tour - knowledge of your own limitations and capabilities (and that of the aircraft you're flying) comes from time in the jet. No substitute. At this point, the guys are working VERY hard to be able to fly the aircraft competently and safely and have little hours to practice the operation of the jet (I can only speak for the FJ World here).
Gordon Brown, as the leader of our country, is at fault. Someone important, somewhere, needs to stand up and be counted.
Gordon Brown, as the leader of our country, is at fault. Someone important, somewhere, needs to stand up and be counted.
Gordon Brown, as the leader of our country, is at fault. Someone important, somewhere, needs to stand up and be counted.
GB just sets the military budget - and has to juggle it against many other priorities.
RAF allocate their budget to their own priorities - and they obviously think that Typhoons and RAFAT are higher priorities than F3 training.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst it is always difficult to bring the chickens home to roost at number 10, we know that our military chiefs have been openly critical of this PM's restrictions on the military budget.
The early run down of the Tornado F3 was a direct result of the increased and unprovisioned expenditure on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The responsibility for getting our military into this expenditure can be laid firmly and justifiably at that doorstep - admittedly on his predecessor's shoulders but as Chancellor he was responsible for the miserly approach to funding those wars.
That our senior RAF officers made the particular decisions to manage within that reduced budget as they did is a matter for their conscience but the ultimate blame must lie with GB and teflon Tony.
The early run down of the Tornado F3 was a direct result of the increased and unprovisioned expenditure on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The responsibility for getting our military into this expenditure can be laid firmly and justifiably at that doorstep - admittedly on his predecessor's shoulders but as Chancellor he was responsible for the miserly approach to funding those wars.
That our senior RAF officers made the particular decisions to manage within that reduced budget as they did is a matter for their conscience but the ultimate blame must lie with GB and teflon Tony.
My how we sneered and laughed when we learned that the Russians were only logging ten to twelve hours per month in their MiG-29s in East Germany.........
BEagle
I had a quick look at an old logbook. In my (albeit short) time on 56(F) in the early 1980s, my average monthly total, with no allowance for Christmas, annual leave etc was 20 hours..... Factor in leave and the average was about 23 hours per month.
on the F4 in 5 years...and I thought that was "thin".10 hours a month is criminal, IMHO..
Best Rgds.
Whilst it is always difficult to bring the chickens home to roost at number 10, we know that our military chiefs have been openly critical of this PM's restrictions on the military budget.
The RAF seem particularly bad at prioritising their budget. How many hours per month do the Red Arrows fly? If the RAF think the Red Arrows are a higher priority than the F3s were, then so be it - but don't blame GB!
Moreover, why did they try to string out the F3 fleet's existence? The Typhoon was operational late last year, so was there really still an operational role for the F3? If there was, did they really need to attempt to keep all the pilots current? Why didn't they halve the number of pilots immediately but give them a double ration of hours? History has shown that disbanding a squadron or ending the career of an aircraft often leads to accidents - surely somebody was managing that risk?
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not convinced we can lay the reduction on flying hours at the door of No 10. Does GB really decide which force gets to fly more hours..?
It worries me that other forces, be the FW or RW have different views on currency rates. My Force insist on a minimum of 15 hours per month....my oppos force insist of 10:30 hours every 3 months....never could quite work that one out.
It doesn't seem to be a matter of cost. It costs just as much per hour to fly a Merlin as it does a Tornado. Does the AT force also have currency cuts?
It worries me that other forces, be the FW or RW have different views on currency rates. My Force insist on a minimum of 15 hours per month....my oppos force insist of 10:30 hours every 3 months....never could quite work that one out.
It doesn't seem to be a matter of cost. It costs just as much per hour to fly a Merlin as it does a Tornado. Does the AT force also have currency cuts?
Last edited by vecvechookattack; 30th Mar 2010 at 13:44. Reason: spelling
Trim Stab,
I have noticed that you seem to be very 'Brown Army' centric and woefully ill-informed when it comes to the RAF, yet at the same time, you're clearly a switched on aviator. What are you, an infanteer with a CPL?
"Why did they try to string out the F3 fleet's existence?"
UK AD, QRA, and the Falklands require five frontline AD squadrons to sustain. There are only two Typhoon squadrons. "You do the math" as our Colonial cousins might say.
"The Typhoon was operational late last year, so was there really still an operational role for the F3?"
Typhoon has been operational in the AD role since 29 June 2007. And in the A-G role since July 2008. The build up of the force has been slow, however, and the third Typhoon squadron (let alone the fourth and fifth) won't be operational until next year. There will continue to be a role for the F3 until there are sufficient Typhoons to replace it.
"If there was, did they really need to attempt to keep all the pilots current?"
Actually, F3 Squadrons have disbanded before the replacement Typhoon units are ready. The original plan was for a phased, dove-tailed withdrawal, carefully co-ordinated with the introduction of Typhoon. As any sane person would expect.
This plan has gone by the board, and as a result, there are now just three AD units - two Typhoon squadrons and a single, under-strength F3 unit. Is the latter needed? Yes, it is. And then some. Two Typhoon units are insufficient to maintain Southern QRA, the Falklands commitment, and to maintain currency in the A-G role, let alone taking over Northern QRA as well.
The intelligent question isn't why the F3 has been kept on so long, it's why have we got rid of so many of them so early?
When they replaced the SLR with the SA80, they didn't scrap every SLR the day that the first SA80 was received. When the Chieftain replaced the Centurion, Centurions served on until there were sufficient of the new tank to replace them. It really isn't rocket science.
I have noticed that you seem to be very 'Brown Army' centric and woefully ill-informed when it comes to the RAF, yet at the same time, you're clearly a switched on aviator. What are you, an infanteer with a CPL?
"Why did they try to string out the F3 fleet's existence?"
UK AD, QRA, and the Falklands require five frontline AD squadrons to sustain. There are only two Typhoon squadrons. "You do the math" as our Colonial cousins might say.
"The Typhoon was operational late last year, so was there really still an operational role for the F3?"
Typhoon has been operational in the AD role since 29 June 2007. And in the A-G role since July 2008. The build up of the force has been slow, however, and the third Typhoon squadron (let alone the fourth and fifth) won't be operational until next year. There will continue to be a role for the F3 until there are sufficient Typhoons to replace it.
"If there was, did they really need to attempt to keep all the pilots current?"
Actually, F3 Squadrons have disbanded before the replacement Typhoon units are ready. The original plan was for a phased, dove-tailed withdrawal, carefully co-ordinated with the introduction of Typhoon. As any sane person would expect.
This plan has gone by the board, and as a result, there are now just three AD units - two Typhoon squadrons and a single, under-strength F3 unit. Is the latter needed? Yes, it is. And then some. Two Typhoon units are insufficient to maintain Southern QRA, the Falklands commitment, and to maintain currency in the A-G role, let alone taking over Northern QRA as well.
The intelligent question isn't why the F3 has been kept on so long, it's why have we got rid of so many of them so early?
When they replaced the SLR with the SA80, they didn't scrap every SLR the day that the first SA80 was received. When the Chieftain replaced the Centurion, Centurions served on until there were sufficient of the new tank to replace them. It really isn't rocket science.
Last edited by Jackonicko; 31st Mar 2010 at 08:55.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: In the Ether
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does the AT force also have currency cuts?
The question of training and currency is very different for much of the AT world at the moment.
- Training cuts? Yes, because frames aren't available in the UK to do said training as they're either in theatre or servicing the airbridge.
- Currency cuts? Not necessarily as we're keeping current due to the high Op Tempo (on some fleets). What is suffering is currency for anything other than HERRICK tasking - are we truly globally capable or able to perform contingency ops at the moment? Some would (and have) said 'no'.
Back on thread though, and to tie in with post-Nimrad chat - maybe a fleet's true airworthiness is about more than the nuts and bolts that make up the airframe???
RIP Fellas.
Flying hours
Jacko, you know my views on flying hours quality versus quantity.
The best and most capable pilots I came across during my short spell as a driver were Swedish Air Force Viggen pilots. They were helped by the fact that their aircraft was light years ahead of anything the RAF was ever likely to get and by their operational procedures. Notwithstanding those advantages, their pilots were simply in a class of their own, despite being limited to 96 hours per year.
That's right, 8 hours per month, but virtually all of it flown in tactical training areas right on their doorsteps. But don't take my word for it; ask anyone who was lucky enough to get a back-seat ride in that fantastic airplane in Sweden. The way the Swedish Air Force operated was a model of how to get the very best from very limited resources.
I doubt that Tonka crews getting 50 hours per month droning around Iraq would have complained if they traded that for 8 hours of quality tactical training with no transit time.
The best and most capable pilots I came across during my short spell as a driver were Swedish Air Force Viggen pilots. They were helped by the fact that their aircraft was light years ahead of anything the RAF was ever likely to get and by their operational procedures. Notwithstanding those advantages, their pilots were simply in a class of their own, despite being limited to 96 hours per year.
That's right, 8 hours per month, but virtually all of it flown in tactical training areas right on their doorsteps. But don't take my word for it; ask anyone who was lucky enough to get a back-seat ride in that fantastic airplane in Sweden. The way the Swedish Air Force operated was a model of how to get the very best from very limited resources.
I doubt that Tonka crews getting 50 hours per month droning around Iraq would have complained if they traded that for 8 hours of quality tactical training with no transit time.