|
||
|
28th October 2009, 23:22 | #11 |
I really should get out more.......
Rover 75 Tourer CDT CLUB SE Copper Red Mica Dec 01 ....now deceased....replaced by2003 Royal Blue T Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: North Warnborough, Hampshire
Posts: 2,398
Thanks: 9
Thanked 69 Times in 20 Posts
|
My thoughts too John......"Also Maintenance should be brought under same Laws and controls we operate under."...
A poor soul on the news(I imagine she had lost somebody on that flight) said she hoped resignations were in order..............PRISON should be the order, it would be for us.No doubt things will be stirred up in the media "lessons to be learned etc"..............till the next time.
__________________
01 75 CDT Club SE Tourer..."The Rover 75 is a British-built car to be proud of." B.M.Ws loss........OUR GAIN!!!!!!!! http://knowledgerush.com/wiki_image/...arp.300pix.jpghttp://farm1.static.flickr.com/167/3...b847e1c5_m.jpg |
29th October 2009, 07:06 | #12 |
This is my second home
Volvo C70 Convertible and JZR 3 wheeler Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Tring, Herts
Posts: 3,960
Thanks: 124
Thanked 173 Times in 124 Posts
|
I was considering applying to be an AEOp - hopefully to be on Nimrods rather than the Shackletons - when in then RAF in the late 60's.
Now, consider a parallel with our 75s and ZTs - they need more cosseting and maintenance now that they're getting older and higher mileage than they did when new and still in production. It's obvious this will be the case. So how old are some Nimrod airframes? And shouldn't the maintenance etc be more now than then? I've not read the report, only know what's been on the news, but what another indictment of our country in general today. Malcolm
__________________
Only my opinion, obviously, so please don’t shoot me if it doesn’t match yours! |
29th October 2009, 10:34 | #13 |
Banned
Rover 75 Tourer Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Northwich
Posts: 1,099
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
It does seem to me that relentless cuts in the defence budget together with an increasing demand on operational hours in Iraq and Afganistan are the root cause of this issue.
The 'privatisation' of the maintenance of the RAF aircraft put safety into the realm of cost effectiveness. When the aircraft were maintained solely by the RAF safety was a matter of discipline. 25 years ago I served in the RAF and remember how Junior Technicians could and did face charges of negligence for when a error was made in their work. The rationale behind this was that a mistake by a 'Techy' could lead to loss of life. |
29th October 2009, 10:47 | #14 |
I really should get out more.......
Rover 75 Saloon 2.5V6+Auto - Pack Luxe & Sterling Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Paris-France & Cairo-Egypt
Posts: 2,122
Thanks: 6
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
Agree with that
__________________
Majed [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] Member no. 36 - Samarkand, I miss you so much "Miss April 2010"! |
29th October 2009, 13:13 | #15 |
This is my second home
Rover 75 V8 Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,448
Thanks: 0
Thanked 206 Times in 32 Posts
|
Don't disagree with anything said. Two points from me to consider:
1. the very first error and thus original cause of this tragedy was unsafe (dangerous/flawed/un-professional) systems origination/design in the original Nimrod - hence in the 1960's, so 40+ years ago. This fact speaks loudly that the problems are far from new. So it can't be case of it was all much better in my day because clearly it wasn't......... 2. you can't put a price on safety but.......; military aviation is and always has been a massively expensive industry. I can't hear many people calling for the tax rises that would be required to fund restoration of proper safety systems and procedures, and to restore safety requirements over all else. I don't expect we'll hear such calls at all but without them nothing can change.
__________________
Mike [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] |
29th October 2009, 16:03 | #16 | |
Passed Away
Typhoon ZT 190+ Saloon Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Leeds
Posts: 6,833
Thanks: 0
Thanked 18 Times in 10 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
29th October 2009, 16:09 | #17 | |
Banned
Rover 75 Tourer Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Northwich
Posts: 1,099
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
Quote:
The connection to the 7/7 bombers was from terrorists in Pakistan, not Afganistan. Last edited by Rover418275; 29th October 2009 at 17:39.. Reason: additional text |
|
29th October 2009, 18:02 | #18 | |
Banned
75 CDT Connoisseur SE Auto Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Wolverhampton
Posts: 8,450
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
Quote:
The Rover 75, for example, has water drainage problems in the plenum, but it is known about and we take such things into account in our maintenance. The incidents which ought to have highlighted this problem have only occurred in recent years, when the rot had already set in. |
|
29th October 2009, 18:44 | #19 |
This is my second home
Rover 75 V8 Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,448
Thanks: 0
Thanked 206 Times in 32 Posts
|
That is a view, but not that of the report's eminent author, and I will side with him on this one.
__________________
Mike [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] |
29th October 2009, 19:26 | #20 |
Banned
75 CDT Connoisseur SE Auto Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Wolverhampton
Posts: 8,450
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
As is your right of course. Although I can't accept your interpretation of Haddon-Cave's in such simplistic terms Mike.
I too agree with the report. I have to read it in a dispassionate manner because I am involved in examining the ramifications for basic engineering training but would suggest that the ethos on Nimrod Line Squadron in the early 70s is something which, thirty years on, cannot be gauged. However, I was there, and believe me when I say that I wouldn't trust my life in an aircraft I had suspicions about. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|