Lies, Damn Lies and Labour lies that kill

I have noted on a few occasions the problems with the RAF Nimrod and the problems it has experienced culminating in the crash of Nmrod XV230 that cost the lives of 14 servicemen over Afghanistan. We have litany of issues that this crash has brought to our notice but the most applaing is that basically this type of Nimrod has not been airworthy since it was built and in particular changes to allow air refueling caused the Nimrod to be an explosion waiting to happen.

Now The Independent tells us that Bob Ainsworth lied about a report on the Nimrod. Bereaved relatives were not told of 26 faults which inspection found could threaten aircraft's safety

A report into the safety of Britain's ageing fleet of Nimrod spy planes, which a defence minister claimed did not reveal "any significant airworthiness issues", exposed almost 1,500 faults – 26 of which threatened the aircraft's safety.

Eight of the faults posed risks of fire and explosion, the cause of the catastrophic loss in September 2006 of a Nimrod in Afghanistan. Fourteen servicemen died after leaking fuel was ignited by a hot air pipe, causing the aircraft to explode...

... It found that the initial general condition survey – a visual inspection of the plane – revealed 1,495 "observations", 26 of which had "potential airworthiness implications".

These included chafed wiring, damage to an oil pipe and chafed fuel pipes, all of which could have led to a "fire and explosion". A further nine observations were categorised as "serious engineering issues requiring immediate action".

The MoD ordered the rapid rectification of all the problems on the ageing Nimrod fleet. However, 12 of the 18-strong fleet remain grounded while aircrews fix the problem that resulted in the explosion in Afghanistan.

So whilst these repairs were going on Bob Ainsworth the Defence Minister wrote to families of those servicemen killed, stating that the

"report by QinetiQ on the Nimrod has been received and it does not identify any significant airworthiness issues".

This was an utter and complete fabrication. The letter from Mr Ainsworth also made no mention of the fact that the MoD had ordered a thorough strip-down of the Nimrod to see whether there were any deeper, less visible problems.

This is just yet further news of the deep and dirty corruption that stains this government. Bob Ainsworth should resign immediatlely and Gordon will need to issue yet another apology for his stinking corrupt Government.

Defence minister glossed over Nimrod safety fears - Home News, UK - The Independent

Nimrod families take legal action

BBC News Scotland reports that some of the families of those killed in the crash of the RAF Nimrod XV230 are to sue the government. Demands for legal action have been led by Graham Knight, whose son Ben was among those killed when the aircraft crashed in Afghanistan two years ago.

I have blogged on this a number of times and I am not surprised by this turn of events. The government see it as an embarrassment and try to put their heads in the sand and ignore the problem hoping it will just disappear. The coroner has already ruled that the planes are "not airworthy" and should be grounded.

Apparently lawyers will argue the basis of the case would be in relation to Article 2 of the Human Rights Act the thrust will be that the airmen were sent into the theatre of war ill-equiped.

Mr Knight told BBC Scotland:

"Fourteen men died on that plane and apart from apologies nothing has really been done about it and although the planes have been deemed un-airworthy, they're still flying. Had it been a bus company and it had been an un-roadworthy bus, legal action would have been taken against the bus company. I feel that something needs to be done as nobody has been brought to task."

Let us only hope that by doing this it will keep in the minds of the current government that they cannot keep cutting back defence expenditure and still send our soldiers into action ill-equipped. The Nimrod is just the toip o f the iceberg.

BBC NEWS | Scotland | Nimrod families take legal action

Nimrod families want safety talks

The BBC reports that the families of 14 Servicemen killed in and RAF Nimrod crash in Afghanistan in 2006 want to have safety talks with the Armed Forces minister. They are upset about how the minister was able to make immediate comment about the airworthiness of the Nimrod without reading the coroners report. Robert Dicketts, father of L/Cpl Oliver Dicketts, 27 - who was killed in the explosion - has written to Mr Ainsworth on behalf of all the families of those killed as follows

First of all we were all very upset that you felt able to make an immediate comment about the airworthiness of the Nimrod fleet before you even had the chance to read the coroner's verdict.

Bearing in mind the seriousness of the matter we would have thought that you should have first read it, and then called in your experts to advise you before making any comments.

It is clear to us that your experts have completely different information to that which we heard in the coroner's court.

In view of this we would ask that we have a meeting to both review your experts' evidence and that which we heard.

He also added that the minister would be aware several experts had

Stated quite clearly the fleet was still not airworthy and continued that in cases where the experts thought the plane was still airworthy they had, in some cases, had their evidence "discredited".

Speaking after the inquest coroner Andrew Walker said the fleet had "never been airworthy" as he recorded narrative verdicts.

Des Browne reacted by saying changes made to the Nimrod meant it was now safe for crews.

All in all this is most unsatisfactory. We have a government insisting something is OK and a Coroner saying it isn't. Who are we to believe, we know now that the initial design of the Nimrod was unsafe so even with the modifications it still has the design problems. The Nimrod is still essential to the RAF's role in Afghanistan let us also hope it is also up to the job of keeping its crews safe.

More posts about the Nimrod here.

BBC NEWS UK Nimrod families want safety talks

Ten Kinloss pilots left RAF over Nimrod safety fears

According to the Independent

At least 10 pilots and crew have quit their posts at RAF Kinloss in the past decade because of safety concerns over the ageing Nimrod fleet

This is a based upon reports from David Morgan a newspaper Editor in Forres and apparently an Aviation Expert.

Not a statistic the MOD or RAF has advertised.

Despite this the same avation writer contends, in the Scotsman, that the Nimrod is not "un air-worthy" but rather that the aircraft should just have been grounded.

Now I'm not sure exactly what the difference between being un-airworthy and requiring to be grounded is. Both should mean the aircraft does not see service again until all the faults have been rectified. The un-airworthy verdict applies to the fact that the Nimrod had for all it's flying years a fault that was waiting to be exposed, the grounding means that that fault has now been exposed alongside others that mean the aircraft should not now be in service.

David Morgan when asked what should be done with the aircraft said

There's no doubt that the aircraft are in desperate need of retirement becausethe systems are so complex and difficult to maintain that there is really no
option but to release them.

The Press and Journal also reports here that not all the faults identified in the Nimrod have been fixed. It has the following

Moray MP Mr Robertson asked Mr Browne how many of the 30 recommendations in a Nimrod fuel system safety review of October 2007 had been complied with.

He replied: “Twenty-one have been accepted and are being implemented, three are being considered for implementation and a further six are on hold as they relate to air-to-air refuelling.”

Mr Robertson said yesterday: “Who are we to believe when the coroner says Nimrod are not airworthy and the defence secretary says they are, but admits that vital safety changes, recommended by his own safety review, have not been made?”

He added: “Des Browne needs to give a very good reason to why the Nimrod fleet should not be grounded until all these requirements have been fulfilled.

“If he cannot satisfy me that the safety recommendations have been fulfilled, I do not see how the Nimrod fleet can continue to operate.”

More blogs by me on this subject here.

Ten Kinloss pilots 'left RAF over Nimrod safety fears' - Home News, UK - The Independent

Can we ban the RAF Nimrod from British Airspace?

The Press and Journal has the following to say after the verdict of the Coroner into the the crash of the RAF Nimrod XV230 yesterday.

The Government’s record of looking after its own forces in Afghanistan and Iraq has been called into question repeatedly, but the deaths of 14 Nimrod crew was its darkest moment.

Ministers last night refused to bow to pressure from bereaved families and the coroner who called for the entire Nimrod fleet of aircraft to be grounded.

The Government claimed that modifications to operational procedures now made the aircraft safe to fly. This might well carry a hollow ring to it given the Ministry of Defence’s previous record of looking after Nimrods, which was condemned by both the inquest and an RAF board of inquiry. Had new corporate manslaughter laws been retrospective in nature the Government could easily be facing extremely damaging and expensive legal action.

Critics will suspect that the Government is taking a huge gamble that its new procedures will work.

If there is any further loss of life by Nimrod crews for similar reasons, there will be a clamour for manslaughter charges to be brought.

I can only agree and perhaps go further and ask if we can ban this plane from British Airspace?

If the Coroner's verdict is that it should be grounded surely the Civil authorities can ban it from our airspace and particularly from landing and taking off from such airports as Aberdeen.

I realise that the Nimrod is of great use in Afghanistan but surely other countries could fill this position temporarily whilst the Nimrod if properly checke and updated to ensure it is safe to take to the skies again.

Is Government taking a gamble? - Press & Journal

Families react to Nimrod verdict - Bob Ainsworth a Disgrace

I'll let the families of those killed on-board Nimrod XV230 do the talking.

Follow the link to see what they think of the Coroners verdict and also the disgrace of a statement by Armed Forces Minister Bob Ainsworth.

BBC NEWS | UK | Families react to Nimrod verdict

Coroner for XV230 says Nimrod fleet was 'not airworthy'

According to the Coroner

The RAF's entire Nimrod fleet has "never been airworthy",

For more information on Nimrod XV230 see here

BBC NEWS | UK | Nimrod fleet was 'not airworthy'

Appalling admission about doomed plane - Nimrod XV230

According to the "Press and Journal"

IT WOULD be wrong to attempt to prejudge the outcome of an inquest into the deaths of 14 RAF Kinloss crew in a Nimrod crash in Afghanistan, but the evidence which is unfolding will take a lot of explaining.

Statements by experts are becoming more incredible by the day. Yesterday, aircraft manufacturer BAE Systems’ chief engineer admitted, under intense questioning, that the doomed plane, the 37-year-old Nimrod XV230, was not airworthy when it went on active operations against the Taliban.

It is little wonder that this appalling admission brought gasps of horror at the inquest from bereaved relatives of the crew.

There have long been doubts about whether or not this illustrious, but ageing, fleet of aircraft was fit to perform at the required standard.

A previous RAF board of inquiry into the tragedy delivered a damning condemnation of maintenance and safety procedures. The inquest might easily follow suit, with the coroner having a number of possible recommendations at his disposal.

If we sidestep the legal niceties for the moment, the average member of the public will be left wondering how on earth the system running one of the most revered military organisations in the world was allowed to send this crew on what amounted to a suicide mission. One wonders whether or not they knew when they took off that they were in more danger from their own equipment than the enemy.

Whatever the coroner’s recommendations might be, the public must be reassured that current and future aircrew are never placed in the same position.

All I can say is my father would have been deeply distressed to hear what is happening to his beloved RAF.

Appalling admission about doomed plane - Press & Journal

Nimrods are Still Safe to fly

Des Browne says Nimrods are safe to fly Beau Bo D'or disagrees and so do I.

Pigs fly over the Ministry of Defence - New animation for Channel 4 News.

Report and link to video report here.




Board of Inquiry- Nimrod MR2 XV230

Today in Parliament Des Browne acknowledged what anybody following the story of the crash of XV230 and the loss of 14 British lives could have told you.

According to the Times

Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, in an extraordinarily contrite statement to the Commons, said: “On behalf of the MoD and the Royal Air Force, I would like to apologise to the House of Commons, and most of all to those who lost their lives, and to their families. I am sorry.”

Gordon Brown sat next to him as he revealed the shortcomings that were at the heart of the worst fatal incident to be suffered by the Armed Forces in either Afghanistan or Iraq. The families of the victims are now due to receive substantial compensation.

Coming after attacks on the Government by five former defence chiefs who complained that the MoD’s budget was inadequate, the Nimrod affair was seized on as another illustration of the Forces having to depend on ageing and unreliable equipment.

The following condemnation from the same article reveals some of the problems.

The most damning condemnation of what had gone wrong in the general maintenance of the Nimrod fleet came from Air Chief Marshal Sir Clive Loader, Commander-in-Chief Air Command. Sir Clive said: “I conclude that the loss of XV230 and, far more importantly, of the 14 Service personnel who were aboard, resulted from shortcomings in the application of the processes for assuring airworthiness and safe operation of the Nimrod.”

The attached link takes you to the full report of the Board of Inquiry into the loss of Nimrod MR2 XV230 and the loss of 14 British Lives.

A quick scan of the report brings out that the likely cause of the crash was a fuel leak after air-to-air refueling and the subsequent ignition of this fuel by a pipe at above 400 degrees centigrade. What is staggering is that despite a seven fold increase in the number of fuel leaks and general knowledge of this problem no action had been taken to properly sort out the problem.

The graph shown here shows the number of leaks per 1000 flying hours and show that the rate increased from about 0.5/1000 hrs in 1984 up to 3.5 in 2006. This was apparently missed as being a problem and was not fully investigated.

A brief report is available here with the 33 recommendations it makes.

Michael Smith writing in his Blog in the Times has the following

The scandal of the deaths of 14 servicemen on board Nimrod XV230 continues. I am bound to say that I believed long ago that there couldn't be any more bad information coming out. But the release under the Freedom of Information Act of a report by QinetiQ, the defence company, on the extent of the leaks on board the Nimrod fleet and in particular the six aircraft flying over Afghanistan and Iraq simply beggars belief. The leaks represented a "critical" structural problem. Civilian contractors at RAF Kinloss were not only not required to pass on the substantial information they had on the leaks and how to deal with them to the Integrated Project Team which oversees how the Nimrod fleets is run, they were not required to tell the RAF technicians working on the aircraft at Kinloss that the Air Publications they were working to were out-of-date and of "little, if any, value". The problems with the leaks dated back ten years but were exacerbated by the "intense" schedule flown by the six Nimrods equipped with special video surveillance equipment fed back directly to commanders on the ground. Since these leaks were largely being caused by pressure from the aircraft's air-to-air refuelling system, never part of its original equipment and fitted as an emergency measure during the Falklands Conflict, they could not be replicated on the ground. "QinetiQ were unable to establish a clear impression of how these non-detected leaks are addressed," the report said. Or put another way, they couldn't be found so they couldn't be fixed. But so essential was the real-time video surveillance equipment to troops on the ground that the RAF had to keep the aircraft in the air quite literally, and tragically, at all costs.

The Times reports here on the release today of the report.

All I can do is express my sympathies to the relatives of the dead and hope that lessons are learned, in particular by this Government and the MOD, that penny-pinching results in the death of our Armed Forces. Let us hope that Des Browne did not lie when questioned in the house about the 15bn defence cuts that have been rumoured.

Ministry of Defence | About Defence | BOI Nimrod MR2 XV230