PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Military Aviation (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/)
-   -   Parliamentary Questions concerning Hercules Safety (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/215665-parliamentary-questions-concerning-hercules-safety.html)

nigegilb 6th Oct 2006 10:32

Sunday Telegraph might be worth a read this weekend.

GlosMikeP 6th Oct 2006 13:32

Got a heads up on it? Scuttlebut or good story?

nigegilb 6th Oct 2006 14:03

My lips are sealed.
Here is a thing though. What is the situation regarding the first Hercules to have foam fitted? I understood that the leaks were initially fixed quickly and that the ac was about to be deployed. However, I am now getting indications to the contrary. Anyone clear this up?

mary_hinge 6th Oct 2006 17:15


Originally Posted by nigegilb (Post 2892631)
My lips are sealed.
Here is a thing though. What is the situation regarding the first Hercules to have foam fitted? I understood that the leaks were initially fixed quickly and that the ac was about to be deployed. However, I am now getting indications to the contrary. Anyone clear this up?

Back in the shed leaking like the Proverbial!:{

nigegilb 6th Oct 2006 19:03

Thanks for clearing that up.

Chugalug2 6th Oct 2006 19:06


Originally Posted by mary_hinge (Post 2892940)
Back in the shed leaking like the Proverbial!:{

Why is this farce so sadly predictable? The words pi55up and brewery come to mind! Is there anyone in this benighted country, other than its armed forces that can act in what might be described as a professional manner? Schools that can't teach, hospitals that are deadly to enter (sorry Chappie!), computer systems that do not compute and of course defence contractors that can keep a good thing going for ever. Peoples lives are at very definite risk here, for God's sake! I suggest all further discussion between the interested parties be done in Theatre, preferably in the cargo holds of the unprotected Hercs that they are arguing about! Better still how about "thanks but no thanks, we know a man who can, in Australia or the USA, we'll go there." Get off your backsides everyone and get this thing done now, and properly!

mary_hinge 6th Oct 2006 19:25

[QUOTE=nigegilb;2893852]Thanks for clearing that up. The news is worse than I first thought. It has been suggested that Marshalls had been instructed to remove the tank sealant. I am definitely not qualified to comment on where the blame lies for this debacle, but I have been told that the work is supposedly guaranteed to be leak free for 1 year!

They have so many RAF C130s at Cambridge that all civil aircraft maintenance was terminated some months ago, the Hangars that took B747 / B767s/ B777 are full of C130s: Guys with ALMOST NO
Herc experiance are now running C130 Majors.

nigegilb 6th Oct 2006 19:30

Mary Hinge, I am struggling to retain my sense of humour here. Is it true that some of the major's are taking up to 12 months to complete?

mary_hinge 6th Oct 2006 19:43

Nigegilb. Check your PMs.

I Think that the record is 14 Months.:ugh:

herkman 7th Oct 2006 09:29

Sealing tanks is not rocket science. But it does require absolute cleanliness and people who are totally dedicated to doing a good job.

Every trace of the old sealant needs to be removed, with the surface repaired from any scraping/removal process, and the priming must be 100%. A years warrantee may be fine, but from my days I recall it lasting many years.

The RAAF has a program of continually monitoring the tank sealant, as we learned the hard way with our C130A models, that cutting the corners comes back to bite you.

Of course if you have people supervising who have little C130 experience, then the workers who also may lack experience will not get checked when things are going wrong.

It looks to me from outside, that the aircraft are working hard, maybe too hard, and so when the maintenance program goes by the board, it always comes back to haunt you. Then you end up with more aircraft in the shop, than are available for work.

Sounds to me that you may have a real problem hiding in the wings.

Regards

Col Tigwell

flipster 7th Oct 2006 09:40

Perhaps it is time to out-source this to people who can actually do the job in Oz/US - it will cost a bit but it seems as though Marshalls cannot hack it and they are failing our boys and girls.

Bottom line:
No Ks to fight nor train - Js overworked - both sets of crews brassed off and both sets of execs fighting to maintain morale and skill-levels, while going around the same buoys we did in 2001/2/3. Its all a bit sad really but it need not be so.

Keep smiling!:) :)

ORAC 8th Oct 2006 05:49

Torygraph: No Government cash for families' lawyers at Hercules crash inquest

nigegilb 8th Oct 2006 07:52

So, a straight forward case. The MoD said they were not aware of any vulnerability before this aircraft was shot down. We then showed that pilots had requested foam many times over many years. When this aircraft was shot down, we were not at war, so why should combat immunity apply?
Combat immunity is a highly complex legal subject. When I visited AOC 2 Gp I was told that there was no case to answer. Sir, I beg to differ. The MoD will try and rail road this inquest through as fast as possible. Well, I don't think that is going to happen now. Double standards, just about sums the MoD up.

A spokesman for the Ministry of Defence said: "This is not a complicated case. The C-130 was struck by a missile and it crashed. Legal representation is not necessary and it is quite appropriate for those deemed interested persons by the coroner to ask questions of witnesses at an inquest without legal assistance."

Not quite accurate there Trevor, legal representation is not necessary for the families but highly desirable for the MoD. Hope you sleep well at night.

flipster 8th Oct 2006 08:58

It doesn't bode well for the MoD when their spokesman can't get his facts right!

As a tax payer, I am astounded by the MoDs double standards. Please, no highly-paid, two-faced, forked-tongued, weasley, legal parasites to protect MoD blunders and cover-ups

Not in my name!

Chugalug2 8th Oct 2006 11:50


Originally Posted by nigegilb (Post 2895935)
A spokesman for the Ministry of Defence said: "This is not a complicated case."
.

I quite agree. An RAF aircraft made more vulnerable to hostile action by MOD inaction, is hit and all on board are lost. British Armed Forces are pitched into the bitterest conflict with insufficient manpower and insufficient equipment, some even inappropriate, particularly in CAS and SH aircraft, due to MOD policy. At the same time their pay and administration is turned upside down, due to MOD policy.
The person in charge of the Herc ESF mod, who has gone sick, should be just the first. Anyone in the MOD or CoC, who looks at themselves in the mirror and thinks "I can't do this" should follow his example. Those who think they can, but obviously can't, should be fired. Its time to get rid of ALL the dead wood and promote the awkward squad. Those who don't fit in, who aren't one of us, who are always rocking the boat, whose annual assessment ends with the clever phrase that means so far, but no further.
The most resolute enemy that we face is not the Taliban but sheer incompetence.
To those whom it might concern; "You have sat too long for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us be done with you. In the name of God, GO!"

nigegilb 8th Oct 2006 22:44

Chug, I have been reassured that the deputy fronting Herc ESF is on top of the job and that we should be seeing more progress soon on the program. Previous manager has done a lot of good work improving the Herc, please get well soon. Probably best to step back for a little while and see if the progress manifests itself.

NG

Chugalug2 9th Oct 2006 08:41

Nige, you were quite right to upbraid me. I unreservedly withdraw my remark and apologise to the person concerned, his family, and anyone else that I gave offense to. Of course, like you, I wish him a complete and speedy recovery. It was a cheap and totally unjustified shot to instance one individual for the failings of many. I am sorry.

nigegilb 9th Oct 2006 08:51

Chug, there is a lot at stake here and passions are running high. The current leadership understand that we are working to the same aim but using different techniques. Occasionally we will step on toes. There is no denying that a lot of time was wasted earlier in the year and that the program should have been started much sooner. We have reminded the leadership all along that we will not stand by and see another crew blown out of the sky while the MoD reacts in its normal sloth like manner. I received reassurances over the weekend. I am happy to sit back for a little while and see what happens. After C4 News item much parliamentary action followed. We have done our bit for the moment.

Chug stay angry, the boys need as much support as they can get, the J takes about 2 weeks to get fitted with foam, lets see what happens.

flipster 9th Oct 2006 09:45

Wise words Nige and I totally agree that occasionally the MoD might need to be reminded that little brother is watching them.

I really do hope, however, that the IPT, 2 Gp and Marshalls have thoroughly investigated all options to fit ESF - including out-sourcing . Further delays are unacceptable but so is a botched or rushed job.

Politics, cost-cutting nor saving of face have no place in the solution to this problem; just alacrity, honesty and thoroughness.

The IPT should be given a 'blank check' signed by Blair and the Browns to ensure the sqns get the kit to do their job of supporting the troops on the ground.

GlosMikeP 9th Oct 2006 13:12


Originally Posted by flipster (Post 2897729)
The IPT should be given a 'blank check' signed by Blair and the Browns to ensure the sqns get the kit to do their job of supporting the troops on the ground.

Well if you believe it, the PM gave his undertaking the Services could have anything they wanted.


All times are GMT. The time now is 20:42.


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