All but dropping the weapon
Yes I did see that link Hempy but unless I missed something did not find an answer to my question regarding availability of the panorama programme. However, at my age missing something is a daily occurrence. 
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Tourist, I don't think it is a case of bigging it up. For many in the RAF, particularly ground crew, all the know is aircraft take off, aircraft pound circuit, aircraft land.
Where there is media coverage such as an RN drugs bust, or a QRA, or Army action then it gives a glimpse of what the Forces do.
Where there is little media exposure then threads like this serve to enlighten rather than Willy waving.
I gave a talk on Bomber operations and in the audience was my ex-boss a fighter man. He said he had had no idea where we had planned to fly.
You may be interested to know that Lord Hennessey runs a parallel history project that endeavours to match archive material with contemporary accounts.
Where there is media coverage such as an RN drugs bust, or a QRA, or Army action then it gives a glimpse of what the Forces do.
Where there is little media exposure then threads like this serve to enlighten rather than Willy waving.
I gave a talk on Bomber operations and in the audience was my ex-boss a fighter man. He said he had had no idea where we had planned to fly.
You may be interested to know that Lord Hennessey runs a parallel history project that endeavours to match archive material with contemporary accounts.
The RN is also running a historical account of Cold War SM operations, at UNCLASS and various other levels. Contact the RN Historical Branch if you wish to add to this.
Janda,
I don't think you missed anything. I too have looked for Tom Mangold's "The Deep Cold War" and failed to find it readily available. It is listed in the British Film Institute (BFI) catalogue so we may probably assume that a copy of it lies in the National Film Archive located in the former SSA at Gaydon
It was shown on Day 1 of the Nimrod OCU for a number of years and I guess that we had a U-Matic format copy of the programme. This was the pre-digital era and I can only assume that a digital copy never became available. I cannot recall when we stopped showing it.
There is now a great deal of information about SOSUS in the public domain. As you know this was not the case when the programme was first aired. However there is no doubt that the Soviets had a good picture of the system and its capabilities gained from the Walker-Whitwoth spy ring and from observation of our activities. That they certainly knew the location of some of the chains was evident from the number of times SAR was scrambled to investigate a cable break and found a Moma "Survey" vessel departing the datum at best speed!
In the early 1980s I recall seeing an article in an unclassified Soviet Armed Forces magazine that gave a pretty accurate description of the procedures we employed to prosecute SOSUS derived contacts. IIRC Aviation Week published an article a short time late that was almost certainly based upon the Soviet source; the graphics were remarkably similar!
The gradual withdrawal of Soviet Northern Fleet SSBNs to patrol areas closer to their bases coincided with the reduction of radiated noise levels by Soviet vessels. But fixed SOSUS arrays were now being augmented by passive towed array ships and later by active units.
The fixed array system was integrated into IUSS which has itself been significantly curtailed in recent years. Whether or not the Russian system remains operational is a matter for conjecture.
It should be clear that NATO and Soviet tactics and purposes were quite different. SOSUS was aimed at detecting and tracking Soviet SSBNs deploying (and on station) in the North Atlantic whilst the Soviet equivalent was aimed at protecting their SSBN assets and bases from intruders.
One does question the reasoning behind some of the security decisions in those days. It was clearly evident that the Soviets had a fairly good knowledge of SOSUS and most maritime crews who put a little thought into it quickly deduced that the Soviets were conducting acoustic surveillance of their own. However crews were very rarely briefed on this, even when tasked against Soviet vessels involved in this activity. I am sure that many will recall "Svanetya" or "Ribachiy" and the heavenly twins "Vavilov" and "Lebdev". One does wonder if a little more openness might have increased the effectiveness of our operations.
YS
Yes I did see that link Hempy but unless I missed something did not find an answer to my question regarding availability of the panorama programme. However, at my age missing something is a daily occurrence.
It was shown on Day 1 of the Nimrod OCU for a number of years and I guess that we had a U-Matic format copy of the programme. This was the pre-digital era and I can only assume that a digital copy never became available. I cannot recall when we stopped showing it.
There is now a great deal of information about SOSUS in the public domain. As you know this was not the case when the programme was first aired. However there is no doubt that the Soviets had a good picture of the system and its capabilities gained from the Walker-Whitwoth spy ring and from observation of our activities. That they certainly knew the location of some of the chains was evident from the number of times SAR was scrambled to investigate a cable break and found a Moma "Survey" vessel departing the datum at best speed!
In the early 1980s I recall seeing an article in an unclassified Soviet Armed Forces magazine that gave a pretty accurate description of the procedures we employed to prosecute SOSUS derived contacts. IIRC Aviation Week published an article a short time late that was almost certainly based upon the Soviet source; the graphics were remarkably similar!
The gradual withdrawal of Soviet Northern Fleet SSBNs to patrol areas closer to their bases coincided with the reduction of radiated noise levels by Soviet vessels. But fixed SOSUS arrays were now being augmented by passive towed array ships and later by active units.
The fixed array system was integrated into IUSS which has itself been significantly curtailed in recent years. Whether or not the Russian system remains operational is a matter for conjecture.
It should be clear that NATO and Soviet tactics and purposes were quite different. SOSUS was aimed at detecting and tracking Soviet SSBNs deploying (and on station) in the North Atlantic whilst the Soviet equivalent was aimed at protecting their SSBN assets and bases from intruders.
One does question the reasoning behind some of the security decisions in those days. It was clearly evident that the Soviets had a fairly good knowledge of SOSUS and most maritime crews who put a little thought into it quickly deduced that the Soviets were conducting acoustic surveillance of their own. However crews were very rarely briefed on this, even when tasked against Soviet vessels involved in this activity. I am sure that many will recall "Svanetya" or "Ribachiy" and the heavenly twins "Vavilov" and "Lebdev". One does wonder if a little more openness might have increased the effectiveness of our operations.
YS
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Virginia
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tourist,
Just face it, no rotary will never have any credibility when compared to a "zoomy". I spent more productive time working with the MR2 than I ever did with the rotary down draft.
A very, very, long time ago they all should've been booted off to the Army/RN where they belong.
Just face it, no rotary will never have any credibility when compared to a "zoomy". I spent more productive time working with the MR2 than I ever did with the rotary down draft.
A very, very, long time ago they all should've been booted off to the Army/RN where they belong.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nimbev
I thought I was reasonably clear.
When it comes to street cred, Nimrod is not good due to the dullness of the job and the public image of a large crew of flightsuit extreme load testers.
Nobody trying to impress a girl comes out with "I'm a Nimrod pilot".
OP
Nice try, but ask the recruiters what the young kids off the street want to fly nowadays.....
Incidentally, they won't say "Erm, I would like to spend some productive MR2 time mister recruiter please. I hear the girls really dig MPA"
I thought I was reasonably clear.
When it comes to street cred, Nimrod is not good due to the dullness of the job and the public image of a large crew of flightsuit extreme load testers.
Nobody trying to impress a girl comes out with "I'm a Nimrod pilot".
OP
Nice try, but ask the recruiters what the young kids off the street want to fly nowadays.....
Incidentally, they won't say "Erm, I would like to spend some productive MR2 time mister recruiter please. I hear the girls really dig MPA"
nobody trying to impress a girl comes out with "I'm a Nimrod Pilot
Reminds me of all those old jokes: How do you tell when you've met a fast jet pilot? He'll tell you! What's the difference between a fast jet and a fast jet pilot? One stops whining when the engines shut down!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roland
As you well know, all that happens at the airshow is that other pilots of aircraft without the onboard space come to the E3/Nimrod wing party and steal the girls.
You are essentially reduced to the status of facilitator or "madam"
As you well know, all that happens at the airshow is that other pilots of aircraft without the onboard space come to the E3/Nimrod wing party and steal the girls.
You are essentially reduced to the status of facilitator or "madam"
In your dreams Tourist. We just used to feed FJ pilots lots of innocuous tasting cocktails, light the blue touch paper and retire to watch taking the girls with us.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's right Roland.
I blame Hollywood. All the sexy movies based around transport aircraft pulling 1.5g instilling unrealistic expectations of passion with multi-engine aircrew.
All the girls dream of 30 seconds under an overweight Nimrod WSOP.....
"....oh please tell me again about the secret missions you can't really talk about...*sigh*...."
I blame Hollywood. All the sexy movies based around transport aircraft pulling 1.5g instilling unrealistic expectations of passion with multi-engine aircrew.
All the girls dream of 30 seconds under an overweight Nimrod WSOP.....
"....oh please tell me again about the secret missions you can't really talk about...*sigh*...."
Please stop feeding the troll known as Tourist. Your are merely encouraging him/her and causing him to fill up this otherwise interesting thread with his obvious fishing attempts 
. Thanks.
. Thanks.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OP
Go ask your recruiters....
It's not really important. We all agree where Nimrod comes on the role disposal dreamsheet.
p.s. I personally would try the Typhoon, but then I've done rotary so a change would be nice...
Go ask your recruiters....
It's not really important. We all agree where Nimrod comes on the role disposal dreamsheet.
p.s. I personally would try the Typhoon, but then I've done rotary so a change would be nice...
Notwithstanding that, to the average Spam airshow spectator, anything painted hemp must be a Nimrod, when we attended the Houston airshow with our big brown Vickers FunBus not long after the Toronto Nimrod crash, it was clear that the previous year's Nimrod and its crew had achieved huge admiration amongst the locals. They were terribly sad at the loss and it was abundantly clear that the grief was genuine.
As for RW or FJ, I recall the tale of someone who'd been through the NATO JPTS course. When the postings were announced, he found that he'd been posted to fly the Wessex. "What in hell's a Wessex?", his US course mates asked, whilst pondering their forthcoming F-15 postings. When he told them, they couldn't believe it, "A helicopter? Jeez - who did you upset? That's a job for a goddam Army NCO!".....
As for RW or FJ, I recall the tale of someone who'd been through the NATO JPTS course. When the postings were announced, he found that he'd been posted to fly the Wessex. "What in hell's a Wessex?", his US course mates asked, whilst pondering their forthcoming F-15 postings. When he told them, they couldn't believe it, "A helicopter? Jeez - who did you upset? That's a job for a goddam Army NCO!".....
Gentleman Aviator
"A helicopter? Jeez - who did you upset? That's a job for a goddam Army NCO!"....
Oh - and me!
Poor Tourist
I feel really sorry for tourist having to rely on his aircraft type rather than good looks and personality to pull the girls. Mrs Tourist (if there is one) has my sympathy.
Everyone knows that the one the girls really go for is/was the Nimrod AEO. To a man they are handsome, possess a sparkling wit, were intelligent and like the aircraft, they have a long satisfying endurance (and are much bigger where it matters) - all the qualities the ladies seek. AEO's like the aircraft they used to fly (and often captained), had a long endurance, whereas with the fast jet boys it was all over quickly (unless they had a refuel (Viagra?)).
So, there you are Tourist, the secrets laid bare for you to learn from. And you thought the secrets were associated with the mission!
Everyone knows that the one the girls really go for is/was the Nimrod AEO. To a man they are handsome, possess a sparkling wit, were intelligent and like the aircraft, they have a long satisfying endurance (and are much bigger where it matters) - all the qualities the ladies seek. AEO's like the aircraft they used to fly (and often captained), had a long endurance, whereas with the fast jet boys it was all over quickly (unless they had a refuel (Viagra?)).
So, there you are Tourist, the secrets laid bare for you to learn from. And you thought the secrets were associated with the mission!
