Nimrod MRA4 Being Broken Up
Ah the old I heard it form a bloke who was talking to some other bloke line.
Fellas, its gone, get over it, move on.
No amount of whinging and whining on PPRuNe is going to bring it back.
Fellas, its gone, get over it, move on.
No amount of whinging and whining on PPRuNe is going to bring it back.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Waiting to return to the Loire.
Age: 54
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sabre rattling and bluster.
Knowing that it is completely too late, that they are totally safe to raise this without embarrassing one of the other grown-ups.
Writing an open letter AFTER the scrapping started?
At least they have booked the front seats on the strategic I-told-you-so bus.
Writing an open letter AFTER the scrapping started?
At least they have booked the front seats on the strategic I-told-you-so bus.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roland Pulfrew. Was this your intended link?
Scrapping the RAF's £4bn Nimrod fleet 'risks UK security' - Telegraph
It hasn't taken the brown head shed long to toe the political line, has it. Is it of immediate use in the 'Stan? no; gash it.
I must remember to buy some shares in Boeing.
Scrapping the RAF's £4bn Nimrod fleet 'risks UK security' - Telegraph
It hasn't taken the brown head shed long to toe the political line, has it. Is it of immediate use in the 'Stan? no; gash it.
I must remember to buy some shares in Boeing.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Green and pleasant land
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
''Machine tools have been destroyed"
"Telegraph has also learnt that very senior military chiefs have written privately to defence industry figures to begin looking at replacing the Nimrods in three years’ time. A likely replacement would probably be an inferior American aircraft."
TSR-2 all over again ??
On the other hand, if BAE Systems had actually done their job on time, rather than relentlessly milking the 'revised spec' cash cow that is the ineffective MoD, then it would already be in service
"Telegraph has also learnt that very senior military chiefs have written privately to defence industry figures to begin looking at replacing the Nimrods in three years’ time. A likely replacement would probably be an inferior American aircraft."
TSR-2 all over again ??
On the other hand, if BAE Systems had actually done their job on time, rather than relentlessly milking the 'revised spec' cash cow that is the ineffective MoD, then it would already be in service
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Devastated , Fast jet world as predicted with Army support made the PM change his mind. Loyalty and Morale , there is very little now but as long as we have that then the forces will carry on.
like 20,000 people lets hope redundency is good
like 20,000 people lets hope redundency is good
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Surrey Hills
Posts: 1,478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Government Stupids could have saved many more billions and thereby not trashing the Nimrod by simply stopping the subsidies to the worse than useless wind power generators which don't generate power when it is needed, use power to try to maintain serviceability and are never more than about 24% efficient and require fossil fuelled back up on permanent standby!
How clever is that?
How clever is that?
Last edited by aviate1138; 27th Jan 2011 at 05:27. Reason: typo
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Not of this world
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A bonkers decision by a present gov backed up by a former who had little in the way of supporting vertical boneage!
Yes it’s a shame the MR2 has gone, but it was past its best and way past retirement. As are/were many of those retired over the past few years. As for the MRA4 – it was supposed to have replaced the MR2 in 2000 originally remember, so lets not forget its was both ridiculously over budget, so far behind schedule and plagued by problems still, but yes at this stage to simply scrap is ….. is…. Is……as mad as a bottle of chips - but its done.
All in all utter ball hooks from BAE for milking the never ending cash cow (again), for the different Gov’s for not actually reigning the fools in, backed up by a senior staff who only see fit to ‘make a noise’ when it safe for them to do so - spineless gits – result even more money now being spent on another cut n shut to get over a previous cut n shut goof up.
I am ashamed of the UK Gov, the Senior Staff and BAE, as should they be
At the end of the day we all know these are groups of self-serving types who will do whatever hey can if it is in their own best interests and be dammed with the consequences or impact as the latest spat on East Enders will soon be far more important to the media and those will little effective intelligence.
Yes it’s a shame the MR2 has gone, but it was past its best and way past retirement. As are/were many of those retired over the past few years. As for the MRA4 – it was supposed to have replaced the MR2 in 2000 originally remember, so lets not forget its was both ridiculously over budget, so far behind schedule and plagued by problems still, but yes at this stage to simply scrap is ….. is…. Is……as mad as a bottle of chips -
but its done.All in all utter ball hooks from BAE for milking the never ending cash cow (again), for the different Gov’s for not actually reigning the fools in, backed up by a senior staff who only see fit to ‘make a noise’ when it safe for them to do so - spineless gits – result even more money now being spent on another cut n shut to get over a previous cut n shut goof up.
I am ashamed of the UK Gov, the Senior Staff and BAE, as should they be
At the end of the day we all know these are groups of self-serving types who will do whatever hey can if it is in their own best interests and be dammed with the consequences or impact as the latest spat on East Enders will soon be far more important to the media and those will little effective intelligence.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: South
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, the United Kingdom, consisting of the British Isles and Ireland (which is so phonetically close to 'island' as makes no difference), now has no chance at all of a half decent maritime capability.
A set of islands.... surrounded by water.... don't got a plane wot can luk foar fings in water (poor spelling intentional).
Also, I'd like to draw some attention to the BBC news frontpage this morning. Two stories of interest:
1. "Cost of UK fraud £38bn a year"
BBC News - Fraud costs UK economy '£38bn a year'
2. "Scrapping Nimrod fleet 'perverse'
Leading military figures warn that scrapping the £4bn fleet of new RAF Nimrods will create a "massive gap" in British security"
BBC News - Scrapping RAF Nimrods 'perverse' say military chiefs
The Nimrod, a fundamental asset, is being scrapped after £4bn has been spent, in order to save £2bn over the next 10 years.
Whilst UK fraud costs £38bn. Per year. There is absolutely no way it can be argued as logical. It will save half of what it has already cost, leaving a huge gap in security (And let's remember the SAR capability, so it will probably cost lives). And then in comparison, it will save 0.52% of what fraud will cost over the same time frame.
(Edit: added links)
A set of islands.... surrounded by water.... don't got a plane wot can luk foar fings in water (poor spelling intentional).
Also, I'd like to draw some attention to the BBC news frontpage this morning. Two stories of interest:
1. "Cost of UK fraud £38bn a year"
BBC News - Fraud costs UK economy '£38bn a year'
2. "Scrapping Nimrod fleet 'perverse'
Leading military figures warn that scrapping the £4bn fleet of new RAF Nimrods will create a "massive gap" in British security"
BBC News - Scrapping RAF Nimrods 'perverse' say military chiefs
The Nimrod, a fundamental asset, is being scrapped after £4bn has been spent, in order to save £2bn over the next 10 years.
Whilst UK fraud costs £38bn. Per year. There is absolutely no way it can be argued as logical. It will save half of what it has already cost, leaving a huge gap in security (And let's remember the SAR capability, so it will probably cost lives). And then in comparison, it will save 0.52% of what fraud will cost over the same time frame.
(Edit: added links)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spanner Monkey
Here, here. Good speech.
You guys and girls that are being shafted...there is a valuable life lesson in all of this, if you are clear thinking enough to see it. I know you to be quality through and through and there will be plenty of opportunities for those with the drive and imagination to find them.
It's over...move on.
(But hopefully not before a couple of no-holds-barred-you-can't-sack-us-twice-mother-of-all-parties)
Here, here. Good speech.
You guys and girls that are being shafted...there is a valuable life lesson in all of this, if you are clear thinking enough to see it. I know you to be quality through and through and there will be plenty of opportunities for those with the drive and imagination to find them.
It's over...move on.
(But hopefully not before a couple of no-holds-barred-you-can't-sack-us-twice-mother-of-all-parties)
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Here
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It’s only a matter of time before the mil gets shafted again…. & believe me it will, for it just doesn’t get it…
The military, with military mindsets, want it & want it now (but can’t quite get its head round the ‘what, when & how’ bit).
Civilian companies (BWoS, Boing, EADS, Airbus et al..) do what they are legally required to do & that is think with a different mindset, a commercial mindset – Profit. They are not charities.
If the ‘customer’ knew what he wanted & stuck to it, he’d get what he ordered & probably on time & to price (& yes there ARE examples of this being so) or penalties would be paid.
Yet here we have a ‘customer’ who has been in the procurement game for getting on for 100 years (in the case of the RAF), yet it still can’t get its act together. It gets ‘shafted’ almost every time… Hellloooo.
With some of the more recent procurement fiasco’s bordering on the ‘Gross Incompetence’/’Criminal Negligence’ is it no wonder that the ‘Arfur Daly’s’ of the commercial world see the military coming…? You can’t blame xxx (insert company name) for getting a gold plated contract which makes money for it’s shareholders (& let’s not forget that BOTH sides have legal departments who scour these contracts and advise senior management before they are signed).
If the contract has to be re-negotiated/changed at the behest of the ‘customer’ is the supplier expected to pick up the bill? If you were having a house built to your agreed specification & halfway through the (contracted) build you decided to swap out ‘x’ for ‘y’ & change the wiring spec, who would you expect to pay for the additional work?
My advice would be to buy shares in companies like BWoS & share in the vast profits resulting from ‘Customer’ incompetence. At least you’ll get some of yer hard earned tax back…. LOT’s of profits = Very happy shareholders. Simples.
The Mil are not alone in their wandering in the lost world of procurement… The NHS, Foreign Office & any number of gov depts. seem to be equally inept.
‘fools’? spannermonkey... I think not. You may not like it but they are certainly not fools.
The military, with military mindsets, want it & want it now (but can’t quite get its head round the ‘what, when & how’ bit).
Civilian companies (BWoS, Boing, EADS, Airbus et al..) do what they are legally required to do & that is think with a different mindset, a commercial mindset – Profit. They are not charities.
If the ‘customer’ knew what he wanted & stuck to it, he’d get what he ordered & probably on time & to price (& yes there ARE examples of this being so) or penalties would be paid.
Yet here we have a ‘customer’ who has been in the procurement game for getting on for 100 years (in the case of the RAF), yet it still can’t get its act together. It gets ‘shafted’ almost every time… Hellloooo.
With some of the more recent procurement fiasco’s bordering on the ‘Gross Incompetence’/’Criminal Negligence’ is it no wonder that the ‘Arfur Daly’s’ of the commercial world see the military coming…? You can’t blame xxx (insert company name) for getting a gold plated contract which makes money for it’s shareholders (& let’s not forget that BOTH sides have legal departments who scour these contracts and advise senior management before they are signed).
If the contract has to be re-negotiated/changed at the behest of the ‘customer’ is the supplier expected to pick up the bill? If you were having a house built to your agreed specification & halfway through the (contracted) build you decided to swap out ‘x’ for ‘y’ & change the wiring spec, who would you expect to pay for the additional work?
My advice would be to buy shares in companies like BWoS & share in the vast profits resulting from ‘Customer’ incompetence. At least you’ll get some of yer hard earned tax back…. LOT’s of profits = Very happy shareholders. Simples.
The Mil are not alone in their wandering in the lost world of procurement… The NHS, Foreign Office & any number of gov depts. seem to be equally inept.
‘fools’? spannermonkey... I think not. You may not like it but they are certainly not fools.
Tsr Part 2
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so we've spent £4bn on the Nimrod MR4 its still wasn't operational so how much was it going to cost?
Could we have ended up spending another £4bn to make it operational and would this have been acceptable?
The MR4 program has been a rerun of AEW3 by the looks of things. But then when you have 1 supplier they have you over a barrel.
Hopefully lessons have been learnt though I remember statements of a similar nature being made about AEW3
Could we have ended up spending another £4bn to make it operational and would this have been acceptable?
The MR4 program has been a rerun of AEW3 by the looks of things. But then when you have 1 supplier they have you over a barrel.
Hopefully lessons have been learnt though I remember statements of a similar nature being made about AEW3
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Deaf Ears
I find it quite disturbing how little those making the decisions seem to listen. One only has to glance at this forum (mostly) composed of professional military aircrew to see what the people who actually do the job think. One only has to flick the telly on to see the devestation of those who threw years of their civilian careers at a cancelled project.
Human stories aside, however, the ratio of money considerations vs. genuine defence and security considerations in the SDSR is mind blowingly off kilter. This is a brilliantly tragic example of 'shoot first, ask questions later'...we can (allegedly) save two billion over two years by scrapping it. OK. Do it.
On the human side I hope all the military personnel involved, or hoping to be involved when the MRA4 came into service, can crack on and have successes elsewhere; same to the civilians involved.
Bad times.
Human stories aside, however, the ratio of money considerations vs. genuine defence and security considerations in the SDSR is mind blowingly off kilter. This is a brilliantly tragic example of 'shoot first, ask questions later'...we can (allegedly) save two billion over two years by scrapping it. OK. Do it.
On the human side I hope all the military personnel involved, or hoping to be involved when the MRA4 came into service, can crack on and have successes elsewhere; same to the civilians involved.
Bad times.
lazy fairweather PPRuNer
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Forres,Scotland
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now then, let's have a look at what you could have won.
A Nimrod's just flown over my house......look, there it goes again.
Has anyone ever wondered how many modern aircraft would actually have entered service had they been put under the same scrutiny as this one?
A Nimrod's just flown over my house......look, there it goes again.
Has anyone ever wondered how many modern aircraft would actually have entered service had they been put under the same scrutiny as this one?
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kinloss
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes it’s a shame the MR2 has gone, but it was past its best and way past retirement.
Did you know that BAES had a Nimrod MR2 airframe on a fatigue rig so that they could flex and stress it whenever they wanted to and thereby calculate the fatigue life of the fleet that were thousands of hrs behind it? The average MR2 had only 17,000 fg hrs of careful handling at the end of its life; many thousands of hrs short of a full life. It also had brand new fuel seals and hot pipes (inoperative in flight) throughout. Only the Spey engines had a logistical issue, but when I last looked at the "replace by date" on each engine in the F700 on a typical MR2 in March last year, none were due to be changed any time soon.
The MR2 was at its best at the the end, and it certainly was not past retirement age. The loss of XV230 and its crew was made even more wasteful and tragic by not taking the product of the huge effort to make it safe, folllowing that accident, forward into this decade.
The MR2 was forced out of service by the plan to replace it. The idiots didn't wait for the replacement to come in before disposing of it.
With very little money and manpower, the MOD could "buy back" a few the MR2s, inspect/service them as required and then maintain an adequate LRMPA capability for a few years pending the procurement of an off the shelf capability.
It just needs someone with the balls to do it.
Ed