Nimrod entry into service
 

Is it an oversight or is there no interest in the fact that the 40th anniversary of the Nimrod entering service on the 2nd of October 1969 has passed without comments?

Maybe it's because it happened at St. Mawgan and not in Scotland!

pmills575

The real reason is the Gawdon Brown doesn't want to remind everyone, not least the next of kin of those lost on board XV230, that the Nimrod is way past its "sell by" date.:(

It would also draw attention to the delay into service of the MR4A. It is also sobering to recall that we once had 46 Nimrods to be replaced now by less than 10.:ugh:

MB

Theres whisky for sale at ISK to celebrate 40 years of Nimrods, and also another bottle for 70 years of Kinloss itself!

Madbob,
saw a couple in the circuit at Kinloss today. So, wrong. Not past their "sell by" as your puerile "banter" suggests.

BS, I think he was using poetic licence to point out the age of the aircraft.

We still remember the rapid development and obsolescence of aircraft during WW2 and the relatively short life of post-war aircraft such as Valiant, Victor 1 and Vulcan 1 with an equally rapid turn-over of fighter types.

In contrast, since the 1960s, we have seen what would have been staggering longevity of even fighter types - Tornados 1982-, Dominie 1966, C130 ditto, VC10 ditto. We still have to get our minds around airframe lives of 30-40 years.

Interesting when you consider the lives of modern warships. The Ark is coming to the end of its life at a mere 25 years.

Moving quickly towards it though BS, wouldn't you agree?

But all have had major servicings during their lifetimes, and had knackered components replaced. No different really to the AT fleet. Just because it's of a certain age doesn't mean it should be dammed. Lots of various elderly aircraft still giving good service worldwide.

I could've sworn I saw a 'Mighty Hunter' with a 40th Anniversary paint job just t'other day.
:ok:

To answer the question: No interest. Sorry.

BS

When I did my METS course at Finningley in 1981 two of my contemporaries were posted to 236 OCU at St. Mawgan. To find that one could graduate from Cranwell from 45(R) Sqn today (nearly 30 years later) and be posted to the essentially the same aircraft tells a pretty damming story of failed procurement programmes. This would apply to postings to Nimrods, VC10s, Tristars and C130K as all remain a posting option to a METS graduate.

The MR4A, the FSTA, A400M and C130J programmes were/are all late and your guess is a good as mine as to when the A400 and FSTA will actually arrive.

At least the other METS posting options such as Shackleton, Andover, Canberra, Vulcan and Victor have been put out to grass. I assure you I was not being puerile - the fact is I was being very serious - perhaps you can correct me if you think the above is factually incorrect.

MB

Madbob, you make a weak case.

You fail to recognise that aircraft are maintained to increasingly long safe-life standards. I am not entering the Nimrod crash debate but of the types you mentioned,

Shackleton 1949-1990 - 41 years
Canberra 1949-2006 - 57 years but some still flying
Victor 1952-1993 - 41 years - accept that this involved two designs
Vulcan 1953-1984 - 31 years - ditto
VC10 1962 - 47 years
Andover 1965-1994 - 29 years - some still flying. Their short service was a result of defence policy changes and economics and nothing to do with capability or airframe life.
Dominie 1965- 44 years
Puma 1968- 41 years

You will see that lives of 40 plus years are the historical norm and not an exception. The MRA4 is extensively rebuilt. Using the above in-service dates for a Mk 1 it will certainly be well passed 60 when it retires but with more recent design and construction techniques that should not be an issue.

Just been ISK way for the past 2 weeks and the 40th annivesary paint job was doing its circuit bashing duties some of the days. Nice paint job!
Good to see you again.My favourite part of the UK.

The Nimrod Fleet has never been in better shape IMHO , post the hot air duct replacements and recent maintenance reacting to husbandry issues etc etc ive never seen them in such good nick its been a lot of work and it would be a shame to see them retire in 18 months.

Anniversary paint job?
 

Perhaps they should have used this infamous paint job to commemorate 40 years of the Mighty Muncher:


:eek:

In the Spring of 1969, I was on detachment at RAF Kinloss as a very junior Flt Cdt. I was sleeping off my 14+ hours trip in a Mk3ph3 Shacklebomber when my room was shaken by an almighty roar - it was the pre-production Mk1 Nimrod showing off its capabilities. And very impressive it was too!

Trip home at the end of the detachment was unusual - driven to RNAS Lossiemouth by some lunatic Wg Cdr in the RAF's last Standard Vanguard estate car, then down to Yeovilton in a Sea Vampire flown by a friend of my father. About 22 hours less than the train journey had taken!

It will be sad to see the Nimrod go but its had its day and no longer has a role (other then flying displays). Great aircraft in the 1970's but no longer viable

What on earth are you talking about? Do you even know?

vecvechookattack: Nice trolling, sailor -- and you even got a bite!

I hope your Service is prepared to be annihilated by Nimrod MR2s yet again over the next 7 days of Joint Warrior :-)

No longer has a role ? Actually its a platform which still has a lot to offer in several different roles

Including short range ACM, if I remember the AIM9L's correctly.:ok::E

So he was right: it no longer has a role, now it has many.
(Yes, I know it had multiple roles anyway)