Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Can Wigston survive the onslaught?

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Can Wigston survive the onslaught?

Old 2nd Feb 2023, 16:22
  #341 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: where-ever nav's chooses....
Posts: 834
Received 46 Likes on 26 Posts
Originally Posted by Timelord
For those that choose to comment without watching CAS’s testimony, he said this:

The current UK F35 helmet is not suitable for people below a certain weight.
There is a helmet suitable for lighter people but it does not meet UK standards of head protection. The US use this helmet for lighter people.
Should a light person be streamed F35 the UK would consider buying the lighter ( I think he said £250,000) helmet and “assess the risk “ to that individual, but that problem had not yet arisen.

I’m rather proud of the way I did that without a single male/ female/he/she!
perhaps the bigger point is UK safety exceptionalism. Why are we diverging from other operators of the aircraft?
alfred_the_great is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2023, 16:29
  #342 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 535
Received 178 Likes on 94 Posts
Originally Posted by WillNorris81
Any info regarding the weight considered “too light” ?
According to Nice but Tobias, the weight limit is 5 stone 8lbs (15:15 in the Parliament TV prog).

If that is true - and given that it's Tobias quoting the number, it could be anything - that would probably limit Kylie Minogue from being an F35 Lightning pilot. Not sure most of the other women I know would be under that weight, 78lbs / 36kg or thereabouts.
Not_a_boffin is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2023, 16:35
  #343 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Crawley
Posts: 32
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Thought I heard earlier in the session it was 52 kg. 5 st 8 lb is little more than flying kit or Kylie…
GreenXCode is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2023, 16:39
  #344 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,121
Received 2,959 Likes on 1,263 Posts
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin
According to Nice but Tobias, the weight limit is 5 stone 8lbs (15:15 in the Parliament TV prog).

If that is true - and given that it's Tobias quoting the number, it could be anything - that would probably limit Kylie Minogue from being an F35 Lightning pilot. Not sure most of the other women I know would be under that weight, 78lbs / 36kg or thereabouts.
They would have had to backfill Baders legs with sand to get him up to weight, I would imagine he would have problems then walking.

So prey tell, I can understand the limit of the bang seat or possibly the aircraft trim at an extreme, but why does the weight of the pilot affect their ability to wear a helmet?, one would assume neck muscles etc would be the main concern or upper body strength or Pilot height would play a more important role.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2023, 17:03
  #345 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,615
Received 1,740 Likes on 791 Posts
I believe it’s to do with the acceleration of the seat at the lower end of the weight scale.
ORAC is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2023, 17:09
  #346 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 535
Received 178 Likes on 94 Posts
Originally Posted by GreenXCode
Thought I heard earlier in the session it was 52 kg. 5 st 8 lb is little more than flying kit or Kylie…
I know which I'd prefer to get into......
Not_a_boffin is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 2nd Feb 2023, 17:22
  #347 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: West Sussex
Age: 82
Posts: 4,765
Received 236 Likes on 72 Posts
Originally Posted by alfred_the_great
perhaps the bigger point is UK safety exceptionalism.
Indeed, ATG. The elephant in the room that the Committee declined to comment upon, except in passing. It would be better if the 'Chief's' aspiration was to return UK military airfleets to airworthiness rather than to fret upon the diversity of the occupants. What use is that, if their own aircraft kill them without any enemy input? The dire performance before the Defence Committee was an alert to all who care about our defence as to the inadequacy of the RAF leadership. Failing abysmally to fight for the RAF's ability to prevail against future foes, it prefers to set itself a woke agenda instead. That it fails in that regard too is of little consequence to my mind. It's duty is to ensure the future of UK Air Power. The combination of Capability Gaps, permanently grounding entire fleets due to airworthiness failures, failing to train aircrew in an acceptable time frame, ridding us of tactical workhorses such as the Hercules in favour of fewer, bigger, and more expensive aircraft that tactical attrition will make fewer still, makes one wonder if the RAF's purpose, of going to war, has been seriously taken on board.

The RAF was designed as a bureaucracy. Yesterday's hearing showed, if nothing else, that in that aspiration at least it has succeeded. As others have said, a very depressing experience throughout.
Chugalug2 is offline  
The following 11 users liked this post by Chugalug2:
Old 2nd Feb 2023, 18:38
  #348 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Where I rest my head!
Posts: 52
Received 9 Likes on 3 Posts
Angry

CAS didn't seem to have a grip of anything being discussed. When asked how many Typhoons we had he said 137. He was then pressed on how many are available and of course no answer.

He received questions on why the RAF decided to only order 3 Wedgetails instead of 5. The answer was cost saving which turns out to be £200m. I believe £1.9 billion for 3 and £2.1 billion for 5. Crazy. He was then asked when the fleet would be operational, it took 5 attempts before a vague answer came out.

I won't go on - but absolutely depressing, especially the red face, blinking of eyes and stuttering when he didn't like the questions. Ellwood and Francois knew it too.

WildRover is offline  
The following 6 users liked this post by WildRover:
Old 2nd Feb 2023, 18:45
  #349 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Baston
Posts: 3,297
Received 750 Likes on 259 Posts
Please Defence Secretary get rid, and find someone a nice seat in the Lords.
Perhaps sitting with the Bishops ?
langleybaston is offline  
The following 2 users liked this post by langleybaston:
Old 2nd Feb 2023, 19:02
  #350 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2022
Location: Carterton
Posts: 27
Received 10 Likes on 7 Posts
Wow, this is one of the only boards I've read where everyone, everyone, is on the same side. If the turkey that is CAS has achieved one thing in his sorry career, it's that he united a whole board.
Atlasisrubbish is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2023, 19:20
  #351 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 338
Received 13 Likes on 4 Posts
Dear me. Having just seen that, I am appalled. The Air Chief Marshall was nervous, uncertain in his answers and clearly out of his depth in that position. As others have said, his whole demeanour suggested discomfort and uncertainty. Mid level management someone said - hardly even that. In my last company there'd have been a loud bark of 'stop waffling and answer the b**** questions' from the top boss after a few minutes of that.

Where was the emphasis on 'we need more, we need it now, or as soon as' ? Most of that seemed to be excuses for current inadequacies. We are where we are; accept that and move on. To be shown up by a bunch of politicians - for shame !

Having had the pleasure of meeting another VSO recently, I was impressed by the (pleasant) crispness and decsiveness he showed. No waffle. So we still have them, just not right at the top. Something wrong with the selection process. I don't think I'd like to serve in a unit led by that gentleman; too much dither showing. It was said many years ago by one warrior that he'd rather follow someone decisively wrong - at least you know where you are going and hence how to change course!

ACM Wigston - would your guys happily follow you I wonder?

Last edited by biscuit74; 4th Feb 2023 at 16:46.
biscuit74 is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2023, 19:43
  #352 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: with the wife
Posts: 371
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Only out of idle curiosity....and at a safe distance.
4mastacker is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 2nd Feb 2023, 20:05
  #353 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 71
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
There are good people coming up: Rich K and Harv are both impressive people, then there are Al Marshall and Phil Robinson - also tremendously impressive. Let’s get through the next couple of months…..
Roger the cabin boy is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 2nd Feb 2023, 20:08
  #354 (permalink)  

Nigerian In Law
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The stool at the end of the bar
Posts: 1,154
Received 43 Likes on 30 Posts
As a former Pongo pilot may I say that was the most dismal, unprepared, dithering and embarrassing performance I've ever seen from anyone of Staff rank, let alone a service chief. He clearly hadn't read his briefing notes.

NEO
Nigerian Expat Outlaw is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2023, 20:24
  #355 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: North Yorkshire....God's Country
Age: 59
Posts: 471
Received 42 Likes on 19 Posts
I couldn't help but notice the no nonesense old lad in the flasher mac sat over Wigston's right shoulder.......he looked like he wanted to slap his legs and send him to bed........particularly when he was being quizzed about the selection debacle. He didn't even put up a fight for more resources when he had the opportunity to do just that. Not an inspirational leader I'm afraid.

Last edited by mopardave; 2nd Feb 2023 at 20:28. Reason: addition
mopardave is offline  
The following 2 users liked this post by mopardave:
Old 3rd Feb 2023, 05:07
  #356 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: back out to Grasse
Posts: 557
Received 28 Likes on 12 Posts
Dear me. Having just seen that, I am appalled. The Air Chief Marshall was nervous, uncertain in his answers and clearly out of his depth in that position. As others have said, his whole demeanour suggested discomfort and uncertainty.
Would appear to be an indication that he is more used to mandating objectives from his team rather than being grilled by MP's who know when he is out of step and lying.

​​​​​​​IG
Imagegear is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2023, 05:40
  #357 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 3,226
Received 172 Likes on 65 Posts
I must confess a degree of sympathy for CAS, and for any serving officer who has to appear before that committee of (for the most part) fools. Especially John Spellar, who as a Minister routinely lied to the same committee on the Mull of Kintyre case, prolonging the families’ agony for some years. (e.g. ‘FADEC software is not safety critical’).

And while evasive and unsure of his facts, I don’t think CAS lied outright or dropped his men in it, which was the routine response of a certain predecessor on the same Chinook case. Wigston took the hit, which is his job, when it is clear that most of the RAF’s problems have been building for decades. Had he chosen to, he could have pointed to the fact that at least 3 of the committee members, and many of their predecessors, had been advised of these problems some years ago and done SFA. Not least the Chairman, when a junior Defence Minister from 2017-19.

It was a sh*t show, but there’s far more to it than one man’s poor performance.
tucumseh is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 3rd Feb 2023, 06:24
  #358 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wherever it is this month
Posts: 1,794
Received 82 Likes on 38 Posts
Originally Posted by mopardave
I couldn't help but notice the no nonesense old lad in the flasher mac sat over Wigston's right shoulder.......he looked like he wanted to slap his legs and send him to .
The "disastra memes" account on Instagram claims that said gentleman was a Vulcan pilot and Linton instructor. He didn't look impressed!
Easy Street is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2023, 08:12
  #359 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 833
Received 103 Likes on 52 Posts
Originally Posted by tucumseh
I must confess a degree of sympathy for CAS, and for any serving officer who has to appear before that committee of (for the most part) fools. Especially John Spellar, who as a Minister routinely lied to the same committee on the Mull of Kintyre case, prolonging the families’ agony for some years. (e.g. ‘FADEC software is not safety critical’).


It was a sh*t show, but there’s far more to it than one man’s poor performance.
I agree. It was like the end of “Animal Farm” where you eventually can’t tell the difference between the humans and the animals. Same with the politicians and VSOs. Very depressing.
Timelord is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2023, 09:35
  #360 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Somerset
Posts: 194
Received 43 Likes on 16 Posts
Originally Posted by Timelord
I agree. It was like the end of “Animal Farm” where you eventually can’t tell the difference between the humans and the animals. Same with the politicians and VSOs. Very depressing.

ALL peacetime VSO in all civilian controlled militaries are politicians. They cannot be anything else: They are appointed by, and ultimately report to politicians: The wielders of ultimate power, deliverers of money and givers of orders. Political acceptability to left, right and centre is an essential quality for progress up the greasy pole.

N
Bengo is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.