told the tale of RAF aircrews flying old dangerous Nimrod aircraft. The crash in Afganistan last year is deemed as a direct result of these old difficult to maintain aircraft. Do you think the government should replace these aircraft with modern ones. Divert a couple of billion to save the lives of british aircrew instead of paying off some african third world despot? i know im gonna get some flak, but charity beguins at home
2007-06-04 10:26:23 · 10 answers · asked by wildwood081 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I agree with you 100%, it's a total disgrace, to have the best fighting force in the world with such faulty second hand equipment, it is sickening and I don't know what it's going to take to get the government to get their fingers out their @$$e$ and fix the problem "PRONTO", and you are right to say stuff of the friggin third world countries, charity begins at home, or at least it should.
2007-06-04 10:39:04 · answer #1 · answered by ~Celtic~Saltire~ 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You have to take with a pinch of salt TV programs like panorama who's remit is too cause controversy with the way the subject investigation is slanted.
Some of the points made by the show!
Fuel leaks - poor crew moral- crews leaving, - not made to fly in that kind of weather conditions!.- broken air ducting being a fire hazard!
The nimrod is a great aircraft and has performed well for very nearly 40 years. like anything else age will take its toll on airframes and things do break! The panorama programme made it sound like all the in service fleet are death traps and not fit to fly!.
This isn't the case, the fuel leak problem is common to lots of aircraft not just nimrods, its an hazard that happens because airframes are stressed which causes leakage, . The real problem is because several of the remaining fleet are grounded , the ones that are in service are working round the clock and are working very hard
gaining lots of in flight hours which they normally wouldn't get!.
"The more in flight time! - The more the airframe gets stressed and need longer inspections".
The new nimrod is delayed! yeah delayed like many other government projects , costs go up and things get delayed even more .
The MOD have said that the new nimrod will not be ready for service until 2010 at the earliest, until then the in service aircraft will have to be kept going. This is achievable with the right inspection and maintenance procedures.
2007-06-05 13:13:54 · answer #2 · answered by robert x 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes charity does begin at home. So instead of buying new nimrods or the likes how about using the money to rehouse the homeless on our streets. The Taliban or the Iraqi insurgents do not use aircraft and they are not complaining like our lot
2007-06-05 12:53:24 · answer #3 · answered by K. Marx iii 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes they should. Unfortunately public opinion is not on the side of the military at the moment due to the war in Iraq. It's not the aircrews fault but that of the politicians.
You wouldn't go on holiday in a jet if you thought it wasn't properly maintained but we as citizens of the UK ask our service men and women to put their life on the line for us and they do this day in and day out. If you have a job to do then you should be given the correct equipment and training to carry it out to the best of your ability regardless of whether it's in the military or not.
2007-06-04 10:43:24 · answer #4 · answered by Jimbobarino 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
as an ex soldier it ll never happen, our politicians hate the forces why do you think they still issue the sa80. i spoke to a man from heckler and koch about seven years ago , they offered to replace the whole lot of them for a new weapon that was easier to use, clean and strip and operate they were also willing to sell on the old rifles to other countries and charge them very little for the new ones, however in there infinite wisdom they declined.
so theres no chance of any new airforce for years to come lets just give it to outside agencies instead and payoff the worlds debt then sort ourselves out, its a crying shame the way the country has gone.
2007-06-05 00:03:44 · answer #5 · answered by francis f 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you assert the BBC are actually not independent, for sure they are not in the situation of world warming, this is no longer some conspiracy invented by using a liberal elite, this is a scientific actuality agreed on by using ninety 9.ninety 9% of all climatologists and different scientists, those that don't agree are those that have a political schedule. the place is your scientific info that this is a lie? you do not have one and you're in denial approximately certainty. yet you will no longer settle for this, an ostrich hiding its head includes techniques.
2016-11-04 22:53:52 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Richard C, Britain already has AWACS and we bought them from the yanks. AWACS is an airborne early warning system not a submarine hunter/spyplane.
2007-06-05 01:31:48 · answer #7 · answered by daleyg_01 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They need new and up to date equipment. Not only would it help the RAF but would potentially lead to increased employment for our Aerospace industries.
2007-06-04 23:21:15 · answer #8 · answered by ehc11 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its a disgrace!! I agree with you, if we are to send our air crew to fight (not always something I agree with though) for us then they should be sent in the best planes possible. They are someones children in that plane, therefore they should be cared for. But this government do not care!!!
2007-06-04 10:49:11 · answer #9 · answered by helen b 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hell yes get better planes!! sometimes we have to think of our own country as well as all the other ones that the UK support
2007-06-04 11:54:02 · answer #10 · answered by british gurly 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋