Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Nickbat]

To have someone close "die in action" must be awful, but one's grief may be tempered by the fact that he or she died valiantly in battle against a foe.

However, to find out that the loss was down to bean counters at the MoD must make it a million times worse. I really feel saddened by the loss of those poor souls on the Nimrod.

Just read this:

"Mr Haddon-Cave condemned the change of organisational culture within the MoD between 1998 and 2006, when financial targets came to distract from safety.

He quoted a former senior RAF officer who told his inquiry: "There was no doubt that the culture of the time had switched.

"In the days of the RAF chief engineer in the 1990s, you had to be on top of airworthiness.

"By 2004 you had to be on top of your budget if you wanted to get ahead." 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8329117.stm


 

[webby23]

Yep, terrible story.

XV230 was actually the very first Nimrod delivered to the RAF, back in 1969....

Even then it was a compromised design, with many significant failings....

Cant believe the RAF are still using it 40 yrs on.....

 

[Lizzie_Zoom]

The very sad truth is that the Nimrod is using a Comet airframe that is about 50 years old, and a basic design for the rebuild that dates from the late sixties.  It is life expired.

I remember the great row over should Britain buy American AWAC aircraft, or develop our own using a rebuilt Comet.  And to think they are old enough to have replaced the Avro Shackleton!

Bloody Whithall penny pinchers have done it again!

[webby23]

Nimrods have always used a Comet airframe Lizzie, hence my comment previously about the design flaws, and as quoted, this particular airframe was handed over to the RAF in 1969..........

 

[albitz]

Watched this story on the news tonight,it made my blood boil.If politicians send service personell to war it is the very least they can do to ensure that they have the very best of equipment that can be supplied,not aeroplanes which havent even been properly maintained.

[webby23]

Politicians these days dont give a monkeys about the average soldier/airman.

What they care about now is losing their expenses, and how they are going to fill the resulting gap in their finances.....

How can the Government justify RAF cost cutting when the same Government gives the OK for a minister to claim for a new house on his duck pond......

It is totally utterly, completely......disgraceful

 

[rob in gib]

So sad that the British goverment still expect our brave forces personnel to not only go to WAR but to do there jobs with substandard equipment .

British soldier fighting in Afganistan "can i have a new pair of boots "
Goverment "no theres no money"

Afganistan family in Britain "what can we have"
Goverment "house , money , education oh and heres a pair of boots"



Where is health and safety ie H S  E

[Lizzie_Zoom]

Nimrods have always used a Comet airframe Lizzie, hence my comment previously about the design flaws, and as quoted, this particular airframe was handed over to the RAF in 1969..........

 

Exactly, but as you made no mention of the Comet and only about the existing flaws (with the Nimrod) I thought you may have missed that point

You will probably know then that the original Comet's had a fatal problem with metal fatigue, that they never overcame from a commercial point of view as the Boeing 707 took the lead and limelight

[Lizzie_Zoom]

I would reitterate that these planes should have been replaced years ago with modern, up to the minute, designs.

Then 14 military personnel would not have been killed by Whitehall penny pinchers!

[webby23]

Nimrods have always used a Comet airframe Lizzie, hence my comment previously about the design flaws, and as quoted, this particular airframe was handed over to the RAF in 1969..........

 

Exactly, but as you made no mention of the Comet and only about the existing flaws (with the Nimrod) I thought you may have missed that point

You will probably know then that the original Comet's had a fatal problem with metal fatigue, that they never overcame from a commercial point of view as the Boeing 707 took the lead and limelight

Errr....yes Lizzie !!!

For more information go back to my initial posting......

 

[Lizzie_Zoom]

Yep, terrible story.

XV230 was actually the very first Nimrod delivered to the RAF, back in 1969....

Even then it was a compromised design, with many significant failings....

Cant believe the RAF are still using it 40 yrs on.....

 

Ok Webby, not making a big deal out of this, but where do you mention "Comet" and that the Nimrod, that was flawed, is using a 50 year old air frame?

No need to answer, just leave it there and concentrate on the 14 killed by an obsolete flawed design

[webby23]

Yep, terrible story.

XV230 was actually the very first Nimrod delivered to the RAF, back in 1969....

Even then it was a compromised design, with many significant failings....

Cant believe the RAF are still using it 40 yrs on.....

 

Ok Webby, not making a big deal out of this, but where do you mention "Comet" and that the Nimrod, that was flawed, is using a 50 year old air frame?

No need to answer, just leave it there and concentrate on the 14 killed by an obsolete flawed design

"Even then it was a compromised design, with many significant failings......"

Agreed......!!!

 

[Nickbat]

We should have ordered AWACs (E-3 Sentry) as soon as they became available, but I feel that politics led to the decision to modify the Comet.

Politics and defence decisions don't mix. Remember the the TSR2? 

[webby23]

Yep, TSR2 was a gorgeous plane.....and a lesson learnt about politics and the military and the drawbacks of combining the two......

 

[Nickbat]

Yep, TSR2 was a gorgeous plane.....and a lesson learnt about politics and the military and the drawbacks of combining the two......

 

Yes indeed it was a superb plane, but the lesson was NOT learned. If it had been, these crew members may still have been alive today.