Raf Rivet Joint
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Here and there, occasionally at home.
Age: 56
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flipster
I think you may have mis-understood the direction of my post. I was not questioning our cousins' airworthiness regime or maintenance policy per se. What I was trying to point out is that our SofS will need to be satisfied that whatever that regime and policy are is consistent with our own mandated requirements. That huge piece of work, to effectively translate US DoD policy, standards and regulation into MoD policy, standards and regulation (in order to ensure we are comparing apples with apples) will need to be done before the RTSA is likely to recommend sign-off to ACAS.
The problem is that the specialist organizations and people required to do this large piece of work are dwindling faster than the hopes of resurrecting Maritime Aviation in the UK.
The problem is that the specialist organizations and people required to do this large piece of work are dwindling faster than the hopes of resurrecting Maritime Aviation in the UK.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SFO,
Thanks for that - but neither was I querying our American cousins' system. Rather, I was lamenting the state into which we Brits have got our selves by constant penny-pinching and ignoring our own directives. If you are part of the MAA then I feel for you - you have a massive job to do with too few resources and I agree that far too much experience has been lost already - both over the past 20 years and, it sounds like, more recently.
Sadly, Haddon-Cave came as no surprise to a number of safety-conscious engineers who had been trying to bring this to the fore but who have been cast as pariahs by some senior offs who keep admiring the cut of the cloth in the emperor's new No1s!
Bon chance
flipster
Thanks for that - but neither was I querying our American cousins' system. Rather, I was lamenting the state into which we Brits have got our selves by constant penny-pinching and ignoring our own directives. If you are part of the MAA then I feel for you - you have a massive job to do with too few resources and I agree that far too much experience has been lost already - both over the past 20 years and, it sounds like, more recently.
Sadly, Haddon-Cave came as no surprise to a number of safety-conscious engineers who had been trying to bring this to the fore but who have been cast as pariahs by some senior offs who keep admiring the cut of the cloth in the emperor's new No1s!
Bon chance
flipster
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Here and there, occasionally at home.
Age: 56
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flipster
Many thanks for the reply. No, I am not part of the MAA, although I worked pretty closely with them as part of the MRA4 programme, so have a reasonable understanding of the pitfalls likely to reveal themselves.
On a slightly different tack, I found this on the Air Safety Network. Not passing judgement, just trying to make people use their little grey cells!
Aviation Safety Network > ASN Aviation Safety Database > Type index > ASN Aviation Safety Database results
On a slightly different tack, I found this on the Air Safety Network. Not passing judgement, just trying to make people use their little grey cells!
Aviation Safety Network > ASN Aviation Safety Database > Type index > ASN Aviation Safety Database results
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: at the end of the bar
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stats can say what you want them to say, but it would be hard to find any military aircraft in service for over 50 years, with over 800 built, that hadn't had accidents.
7 accidents and 10 fatalities in 20 years - and if you read the reports, the only two in the last 10 years were ground accidents, one of which was a collision and one a maintenance error.
7 accidents and 10 fatalities in 20 years - and if you read the reports, the only two in the last 10 years were ground accidents, one of which was a collision and one a maintenance error.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Here and there, occasionally at home.
Age: 56
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R8
I specifically stated that I was not passing judgement. Make of the data what you will, all I'm trying to do is get folks to look at the wider picture, not just driving the bus, or spinning the antennae or adjusting the CFAR thresholds, or whatever your individual aviation poison may be. Debate it, question it, ignore it, I don't care. I no longer have any favourite axe to grind, I'm all ground down, time to leave.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Up North (for now)
Age: 62
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know where you are coming from with the all ground down and time to leave comments SFO. There's always the gossip around the round table to keep us amused in the meantime. Yesterdays titbit was a pearler (if true!).
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have to admire the MOD, what could possibly go wrong -
After performing so poorly on so many 'complex' projects such as Typhoon, Chinook HC3, Nimrod MRA4 maybe we shouldn't be quite so ambitious. It would be more reassuring to read something like, "This project is simple, it will be monitored closely to ensure it meets our requirement, arrives on time and budget"
Oh well, let's hope it isn't fingers crossed procurement again
The most complex military sales case the UK has undertaken with the US Air Force for the last 70 years is well under way.
Oh well, let's hope it isn't fingers crossed procurement again
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JTO
Hi there dear boy!
The scrapping of Sentinel/ASTOR wasn't his fault was it....?!
However, I can think of a few more like him!
Hi there dear boy!
Bill Chrispin must have the worst CV on public record.
However, I can think of a few more like him!
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Scotland
Age: 45
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice to see some historical continuity - using the same serial numbers as the the 3 Nimrod R1s. I'm sure someone will raise an objection to the resurrection of 'The Beast' (the previous one having been plonked very gracefully into the Moray Firth).
I'd just like to say I think it wrong to name a serving Civil Servant (or Officer) in this context, if he has never sought to put his name in the public domain.
It is unfair to single out one man when his bosses (2 and 4 Star) placed on record a ruling that aircraft/equipment could be paid for and offered as safe to the Services, when it was known it was not. This was the fundamental criticism in the Haddon-Cave Review, that safety was knowingly compromised to save money.
As mentioned by flipster, more than one person gleefully implemented this illegal order, often for personal gain (advancement, not financial - but it is still fraud). In fact, in 2003 MoD claimed only one person in MoD thought it wrong to implement it!
I agree with the general sentiment, but just think the background to the comment should be explained.
It is unfair to single out one man when his bosses (2 and 4 Star) placed on record a ruling that aircraft/equipment could be paid for and offered as safe to the Services, when it was known it was not. This was the fundamental criticism in the Haddon-Cave Review, that safety was knowingly compromised to save money.
As mentioned by flipster, more than one person gleefully implemented this illegal order, often for personal gain (advancement, not financial - but it is still fraud). In fact, in 2003 MoD claimed only one person in MoD thought it wrong to implement it!
I agree with the general sentiment, but just think the background to the comment should be explained.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: In England
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Totally agree Tuc......No one should use this forum to directly abuse or berate named individuals, whatever the issue. Our procurement system is complex, and responsibility for certain decisions is carried across the MoD and industrial spectrum both at what is now the DE&S and senior desks within the MoD, the Commands and Corporate HQs.
What demanding programmnes like Sentinel, MRA4 and RJ demonstrate is the need for clear lines of responsibility and expertise throughout the procurement process where aviation safety is properly embedded in these processes from the outset. All too often the focus is on time and technical success alone.
Over recent decades, the safety part has been compromised as a variety of individuals have sought to deliver capability from floundering (often underfunded from the outset) programmes based on far too optimistic plans and contractural promises. The politicians have played their part in these deceits too, as well as adding to the problem as they moved the goal posts for personal political gain. Competent and honourable individuals have been put down and sidelined as they have tried to align the processes with the regulations - H-C has shown this. This is nothing for anyone to be proud of.
Having dismantled the checks and balances set up many decades ago that had created a world class culture and process focussed on airworthiness and aviation safety, we see all around us the consequences of this.
Let us hope the recent formation of the MAA will lead to a return to a much more approriate approach across the board to this vital issue...and a programme such as RJ gives everyone an opportunity to get it right.....but it may prove expensive and time consuming!
What demanding programmnes like Sentinel, MRA4 and RJ demonstrate is the need for clear lines of responsibility and expertise throughout the procurement process where aviation safety is properly embedded in these processes from the outset. All too often the focus is on time and technical success alone.
Over recent decades, the safety part has been compromised as a variety of individuals have sought to deliver capability from floundering (often underfunded from the outset) programmes based on far too optimistic plans and contractural promises. The politicians have played their part in these deceits too, as well as adding to the problem as they moved the goal posts for personal political gain. Competent and honourable individuals have been put down and sidelined as they have tried to align the processes with the regulations - H-C has shown this. This is nothing for anyone to be proud of.
Having dismantled the checks and balances set up many decades ago that had created a world class culture and process focussed on airworthiness and aviation safety, we see all around us the consequences of this.
Let us hope the recent formation of the MAA will lead to a return to a much more approriate approach across the board to this vital issue...and a programme such as RJ gives everyone an opportunity to get it right.....but it may prove expensive and time consuming!
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
51 are EVERYWHERE...if they're not, then there's something wrong!
Ever listened to the greeting message if you ring a certain doughnut near Cheltenham? It states that '...your call may be recorded...' I should bloomin' hope it is!
Ever listened to the greeting message if you ring a certain doughnut near Cheltenham? It states that '...your call may be recorded...' I should bloomin' hope it is!
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Scotland
Age: 45
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
End Of R1 - Big Gap - Start of RJ
Does anyone know how big the gap is between end of R1 and start of RJ? What's happening (other than this Offutt thing I've seen in the papers) to the 51 aircrew? Does the Sqn still exist between aircraft? If we can do without the capability in between aircraft, do we need it at all?
MyRIVETisJOINT,
There will be a function held at RAF Waddington on 31 Mar 11, to celebrate the last flight of the Nimrod R1 (and the end of Nimrod).
From
http://www.pprune.org/military-aircr...-function.html
An MoD spokesman said that between "2011 and 2014, the U.K. will enter into a partnering arrangement with the U.S. that will safeguard U.K. personnel core competencies."
From
USAF Planes To Help U.K. Fill SIGINT Gap - Defense News
Up to four UK crews will deploy from summer 2011 with their US colleagues on combined operations worldwide, including Afghanistan.
From
RAF - News by Date
In regards to Signals Intelligence the Special Relationship has never gone away. The UK/USA Agreement was declassifed in June 2010 by both the UK and US.
Newly released GCHQ files: UKUSA Agreement
UKUSA Agreement- NSA/CSS
TJ
There will be a function held at RAF Waddington on 31 Mar 11, to celebrate the last flight of the Nimrod R1 (and the end of Nimrod).
From
http://www.pprune.org/military-aircr...-function.html
An MoD spokesman said that between "2011 and 2014, the U.K. will enter into a partnering arrangement with the U.S. that will safeguard U.K. personnel core competencies."
From
USAF Planes To Help U.K. Fill SIGINT Gap - Defense News
Up to four UK crews will deploy from summer 2011 with their US colleagues on combined operations worldwide, including Afghanistan.
From
RAF - News by Date
In regards to Signals Intelligence the Special Relationship has never gone away. The UK/USA Agreement was declassifed in June 2010 by both the UK and US.
Newly released GCHQ files: UKUSA Agreement
UKUSA Agreement- NSA/CSS
TJ
