PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Military Aviation (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/)
-   -   Newsnight report on WE.177/P.A.L's (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/300588-newsnight-report-we-177-p-ls.html)

desk wizard 15th November 2007 21:43

Newsnight report on WE.177/P.A.L's
 
Anyone got any comments, apart from the fact they haven't been in the inventory for 9 years?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programme...ht/7097101.stm

Beeayeate 15th November 2007 22:51

The liberalists in the Beeb probably think they've been too soft on the armed forces lately and have dredged up an approx 43 year old non-story to make them look like they are still intrepid investigative journalists. :yuk:

Interestingly, (and again), no mention of the nuke Canberras of RAF Germany. I wonder if, apart from those of us who were on them, anybody actually knew about them?

.

Green Meat 16th November 2007 00:01

You just wait until the beeb gets a hold of the story about a USAF launch officer missing a rated countdown drill on Thor, so (allegedly) the RAF LCO simply used a screwdriver in lieu of the American key... Oops, that'll be on Newsnight on the next slack news day!

Occasional Aviator 16th November 2007 08:28

I saw this last night and was beside myself. The techincal advice seemed to have come exclusively from Hollywood films, and the only 'expert' was the chair of CND. Surely the MoD could have put someone on to point out that:

a. There were numerous checks (and codes!) in the process of launching a nuclear-armed aircraft - and the guards weren't just there to keep spetsnatz out, they had orders to shoot the crew if they got to a certain point without the right authentication.

b. It's pretty irrelevant to discuss WE177 anyway, as we don't use them any more.

c. The US incident was nowhere near as serious as it was made out on the programme - if you believed that, it was like they left a B-52 in an unguarded layby while they went home for the weekend.

d. You can't run a credible deterrent if it can be neutralised with one bomb on Westminster.

beardy 16th November 2007 09:46

Did somebody forget something?

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2029/...61d66e.jpg?v=0

LowObservable 16th November 2007 12:12

Nice thread. Black Omegas all round!

Jetex Jim 16th November 2007 18:43

prruners might enjoy posting their comments to the Newsnight blog
page, if the Beeb can keep their technology working...


http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight...commentsanchor

Brewster Buffalo 16th November 2007 19:37


The Royal Navy argued that officers of the Royal Navy as the Senior Service could be trusted:
"It would be invidious to suggest... that Senior Service officers may, in difficult circumstances, act in defiance of their clear orders".
however the Navy apparently held a dfferent opinion on the RAF....:}

Pontius Navigator 16th November 2007 19:50

The report, as per the link, is strictly accurate - as far as it goes.

It does not mention that PAL was not an airborne system either. The code was loaded by the crew, sitting in the cockpit, when it was issued. I don't recall the Nimrod having PAL.

The WE177 crew would be unable to launch without a release because the gates would remain shut!

Interesting it did not mention the Jaguar pilots who had sole authority, once the gates were open.

greycoat 16th November 2007 22:44

Pontius, are those actual gates i.e. impediment to forward movement, that you refer to? I heard from 814 tasked Police that in the case of 'rogue' Jag pilot they were to shoot out front tyre to prevent ac taking off. In other ac the 2 man principle was supposed to suffice.

Oh and Beardy, those keys were come by legitimately.

k3k3 16th November 2007 23:49

On the Jag QRA one half of the HAS door stayed closed until the codes were verified. (Fading memory from Brüggen 1977-78).

Pontius Navigator 17th November 2007 07:23

Greycoat, part and part. K3k3 - pre-HAS.

QRA aircraft in the Q pens had gates on wheels. The V-force did not. In the FOA arming would obviously take place when tensions were higher and shooting wheels would have been an option.

A single word amendment to the 814, in 1978 or thereabouts, changed that and we had gates and fencing at ISK for the Nimrod too.

Obviously HAS improved security all round.

green granite 17th November 2007 07:42

Typical Beeb is the use of the term "bicycle lock key" instead of saying that they are highly secure lock systems with over a million key combinations and are virtually unpickable. :ugh:

Besides it must have been a perfectly satisfactory system because no-one dropped one live anywhere to start a war, did they. :rolleyes:

ORAC 17th November 2007 08:49


Typical Beeb is the use of the term "bicycle lock key" instead of saying that they are highly secure lock systems with over a million key combinations and are virtually unpickable.
Kryptonite & the Bic..

Pontius Navigator 17th November 2007 08:49


Originally Posted by green granite (Post 3709203)
Typical Beeb is the use of the term "bicycle lock key" instead of saying that they are highly secure lock systems with over a million key combinations and are virtually unpickable. :ugh:

Besides it must have been a perfectly satisfactory system because no-one dropped one live anywhere to start a war, did they. :rolleyes:

Conspiracy theory - we took it on trust that they would have worked :bored:

green granite 17th November 2007 10:47

What do you expect from cheepo, made in China type stuff.

Try doing that to a properly engineered barrel lock such as the ones fitted to fruit M/Cs in pubs, you will find it doesn't work with those :)

LowObservable 17th November 2007 12:20

Green Granite,
Is that one of those DAMHIKT (Don't ask me how I know this) comments?

Pontius Navigator 17th November 2007 13:56

Roland, as we never practised with the owners I am not entirely sure what would have happened. AFAIR the Mk 1 would have had the weapons enabled at some point but this was not a crew procedure. In otherwords it was fit and forget.

The Mk 2 was fitted with a SWEC3 (?) and that might have incorporated the SEP to which you refered. It was 'safer' (?) but took longer to operate which was not a good feature during the attack.

Phoney Tony 17th November 2007 15:11

Chaps,

If you know, you were read on.

If you were read on, were you read off.

Either way you are still bound by the OSA.

Beware beware!

Yellow Sun 17th November 2007 15:58

Tony,

I would suggest that nothing has been posted on this thread that is not already in the public domain. A reasonable starting point could be found here:

Principles of Nuclear Weapon Safety

I even know someone who keeps a weapon control panel on his study desk!!:8
No, it's not me!

YS

Yellow Sun 17th November 2007 17:25


Quote:
No, it's not me!

Well that fact that you know him makes you a geek by association.
Look, he's a navigator. Someone's got to talk to him.;)

YS

Pontius Navigator 17th November 2007 17:28


Originally Posted by Yellow Sun (Post 3710297)
Look, he's a navigator. Someone's got to talk to him.;)
YS

No they don't. All he needs is someone to listen to him.

Bit like driving a car. You are the 'pilot' and bitching betty in the GPS is the nav. No point in talking to her, she won't be listening. Like an aircraft you could eject her though.

Phoney Tony 18th November 2007 05:47

Yellow Sun,

Just because something is is the public domain does not exempt you from the OSA.

PT

Maple 01 18th November 2007 08:18

Who are you, the USYO? :=

Phoney Tony 18th November 2007 09:01

I am not a USyO.
But rules are rules.
http://www.ip-finder.info/
Click here and scoll down.

They are watching you!

vecvechookattack 18th November 2007 14:47

Apparently my PC is somewhere near Skipton in Yorkshire.....wonder what this is sat next to me here in Cornwall then ??

airborne_artist 18th November 2007 14:57

Sounds like my PC is off on the moors N of Skipton with yours, VV. Odd, since one very like it is here with me just 3 m SW of Benson.

ricardian 18th November 2007 15:18


Originally Posted by Phoney Tony (Post 3711428)
I am not a USyO.
But rules are rules.
http://www.ip-finder.info/
Click here and scoll down.

They are watching you!

According to that website I am located in "Blackburn West Lothian United Kingdom" and the map has an arrow pointing to Edinburgh.
--
Bruce Fletcher
Stronsay, Orkney

Fitter2 18th November 2007 15:36

And I am apparently in the centre of Kansas, although I haven't been within 1000miles of there for some years.

beardy 18th November 2007 15:47

These all sound like USAF target co-ordinates. Just glad I'm not where they think I am.

Maple 01 18th November 2007 16:29

Hmmm, just north of Leeds, well up to RAFP standards.....

ZH875 18th November 2007 17:21

I also drew the unlucky straw, and am sitting next to VVHA just outside Skipton.


Could be worse, it could have put me in Lancashire.:p

Pontius Navigator 18th November 2007 18:39

Given that the accuracy is within 25 miles it is interesting to note that many of us, like ZH875, are all within 15 miles of an RAF station.

Jackonicko 18th November 2007 18:50

So which pub shall we meet in this evening. Like everyone else, my house has been magicked up to Skipton.

Yellow Sun 18th November 2007 18:53

Yes, how odd. it puts me somewhere near Menwi?>%^^&*%£:mad: H::%%&*^$£:mad:

YS;)

1771 DELETE 18th November 2007 19:59

That web site got me sussed out in seconds and it was fairly accurate, to the nearest large town.
Most of the discussion is history now, just glad i dont have to go through those yearly checks anymore.

cornish-stormrider 19th November 2007 10:47

Aberdeen, yeah ok. Check my name plate.......

Gainesy 19th November 2007 12:32

Hmm, Wichita. Mrs G is going to be pissed off, as I'm to collect her from Gatwick this evening.

The Helpful Stacker 19th November 2007 13:10

Apparently I'm located just north of Skipton too.:confused:

Wader2 19th November 2007 13:20

Even scarier, my address is in Bradford. If you knew where I really was :}


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:26.


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.