Discussion
ralphrj said:
Seeker UK said:
ralphrj said:
Seeker UK said:
In normal circumstances, you would be correct. However, the decision to scrap Nimrod, like Harrier was political, not based on requirements and were taken DESPITE Civil Service / single service chiefs advice.
The RAF volunteered the cancellation of Nimrod in their submission to Phase 2 of the SDSR.http://www.janes.com/products/janes/defence-securi...
Commodore Beverstock Senior Responsible Owner for Astute and Nimrod said:
Even though we cancelled the programme, although we had 95% paid out what was approved on the programme, there were still issues to be resolved with delivering that aircraft into service. Those costs and risks were not quantified.
Bernard Gray Chief of Defence Materiel said:
I personally believe—though it is a classified issue—that the level of risk being accepted in that was an acceptable one, and it was also correctly judged. Therefore this was not a close 4-3 result; this was a 5-0 result, and I am confident the Department made the right decision. The only question would be: would you make a decision earlier? It is not in question that this was the right choice.
Dixie68 said:
The fuel bins are in place because the extreme heat of the desert would cause the fuel in the wings to expand and the blow-off valves would operate if it had been slightly over-fuelled.
Closer to the refuel. Note the high-tech hoses and bins to catch spillage/overflow:
My guess is that your trade wasn't Engines.Closer to the refuel. Note the high-tech hoses and bins to catch spillage/overflow:
As someone with rather a too intimate knowledge of Nimrod fuel tanks and systems than was ever good for my health, I think it highly unlikely that a fuel tank blow-off valve could be operated by ambient heating. A blow-off valve is just a flap which is held closed against a rubber seal by a fairly strong spring. It opens when there is a sudden increase in pressure inside the tank. The only time I've witnessed this is during refuelling. It can be because the high-level float switches fail to operate when the tank is full. More often than not it is the liney's fault for putting the fuel in too quickly and not getting the bowser driver to reduce the re-fuelling pressure as the tank nears full.
A blow off valve can leak fuel if there is not a good seal between the flap and its seat, but this is an easily fixed fault. Fuel dripping from the tanks due to ambient heating and expansion, comes through the vent system, which is separate from the blow-off valves. The vent lines from the tanks are always open to atmosphere. It is how air escapes the tanks during refuelling and how air enters the tanks as fuel is consumed. If a blow-off valve operates, the pressure increase has been so great and sudden that the vent system has been unable to cope.
The photograph above shows the hose connected to the port 4 tank vent outlet. It had to be moved from the wing-tip to the underside of the wing as part of the Loral modifications.
Incidentally, the crew chief sat on the damaged Loral pod in one of your other photographs. 'TH' by any chance?
Edited by JoeBolt on Thursday 22 March 14:49
ralphrj said:
Commodore Beverstock Senior Responsible Owner for Astute and Nimrod said:
Even though we cancelled the programme, although we had 95% paid out what was approved on the programme, there were still issues to be resolved with delivering that aircraft into service. Those costs and risks were not quantified.
Bernard Gray Chief of Defence Materiel said:
I personally believe—though it is a classified issue—that the level of risk being accepted in that was an acceptable one, and it was also correctly judged. Therefore this was not a close 4-3 result; this was a 5-0 result, and I am confident the Department made the right decision. The only question would be: would you make a decision earlier? It is not in question that this was the right choice.
Edited by Seeker UK on Thursday 22 March 21:55
Edited by Seeker UK on Thursday 22 March 21:56
Seeker UK said:
IME senior officers will not publicly criticise ministerial decisions, they will all be good decisions. Until they retire. ;-)
Absolutely spot on. They toe the party line when serving to get their knighthoods, retire, and THEN say what a bag of balls the government are. By the time they get to that rank they're more politician than military serviceman anyway.Dixie68 said:
speedtwelve said:
Good pics. Never had a trip in one, but did help load sonobuoys onto an MR2 at Ice Station Kilo while on Space Cadet camp in 1983. Almost couldn't get on board due to the dustbin bags full of in-flight rations for the crew...
Hence my now less than athletic form 
Flew with an ex-mil QFI who'd spent most of his career on the kipper fleet. We had to take some fuel off to get down to max take-off weight 
JoeBolt said:
My guess is that your trade wasn't Engines.
As someone with rather a too intimate knowledge of Nimrod fuel tanks and systems than was ever good for my health, I think it highly unlikely that a fuel tank blow-off valve could be operated by ambient heating. A blow-off valve is just a flap which is held closed against a rubber seal by a fairly strong spring. It opens when there is a sudden increase in pressure inside the tank. The only time I've witnessed this is during refuelling. It can be because the high-level float switches fail to operate when the tank is full. More often than not it is the liney's fault for putting the fuel in too quickly and not getting the bowser driver to reduce the re-fuelling pressure as the tank nears full.
A blow off valve can leak fuel if there is not a good seal between the flap and its seat, but this is an easily fixed fault. Fuel dripping from the tanks due to ambient heating and expansion, comes through the vent system, which is separate from the blow-off valves. The vent lines from the tanks are always open to atmosphere. It is how air escapes the tanks during refuelling and how air enters the tanks as fuel is consumed. If a blow-off valve operates, the pressure increase has been so great and sudden that the vent system has been unable to cope.
The photograph above shows the hose connected to the port 4 tank vent outlet. It had to be moved from the wing-tip to the underside of the wing as part of the Loral modifications.
Incidentally, the crew chief sat on the damaged Loral pod in one of your other photographs. 'TH' by any chance?
You are correct, I'm an ex-fairy so I just went by what the heavies told me - the scamps must've fibbed!As someone with rather a too intimate knowledge of Nimrod fuel tanks and systems than was ever good for my health, I think it highly unlikely that a fuel tank blow-off valve could be operated by ambient heating. A blow-off valve is just a flap which is held closed against a rubber seal by a fairly strong spring. It opens when there is a sudden increase in pressure inside the tank. The only time I've witnessed this is during refuelling. It can be because the high-level float switches fail to operate when the tank is full. More often than not it is the liney's fault for putting the fuel in too quickly and not getting the bowser driver to reduce the re-fuelling pressure as the tank nears full.
A blow off valve can leak fuel if there is not a good seal between the flap and its seat, but this is an easily fixed fault. Fuel dripping from the tanks due to ambient heating and expansion, comes through the vent system, which is separate from the blow-off valves. The vent lines from the tanks are always open to atmosphere. It is how air escapes the tanks during refuelling and how air enters the tanks as fuel is consumed. If a blow-off valve operates, the pressure increase has been so great and sudden that the vent system has been unable to cope.
The photograph above shows the hose connected to the port 4 tank vent outlet. It had to be moved from the wing-tip to the underside of the wing as part of the Loral modifications.
Incidentally, the crew chief sat on the damaged Loral pod in one of your other photographs. 'TH' by any chance?
Edited by JoeBolt on Thursday 22 March 14:49
As for the crew chief, no not TH (a Leccy called Terry by any chance?), this one is Dave (a Scot & also a Leccy but who retired in the 90s) - a superb crew chief who some people didn't get on with because of his tendency to speak his mind, something I liked.
Yes, I thought the Crew Chief in the photo resembled Terry H. (also one of the good guys). I had two postings at Kinloss. One to NLS and one to NMSU. No prizes for guessing which tour I thoroughly enjoyed and which one I hated!
My NLS posting was as a JT fresh out of Halton. I remember being stood underneath a blow-off valve outlet when it went off. I was soaked down all one side of my body, including my right buttock! Being still very new to the squadron and a bit embarrassed about it, I kept quiet and soldiered on until the end of the shift, all the time suffering greater discomfort as the fuel started burning my skin. It was probably another 10 days or so before the nasty red rash cleared up and I could sit down in comfort.
My NLS posting was as a JT fresh out of Halton. I remember being stood underneath a blow-off valve outlet when it went off. I was soaked down all one side of my body, including my right buttock! Being still very new to the squadron and a bit embarrassed about it, I kept quiet and soldiered on until the end of the shift, all the time suffering greater discomfort as the fuel started burning my skin. It was probably another 10 days or so before the nasty red rash cleared up and I could sit down in comfort.
JoeBolt said:
Yes, I thought the Crew Chief in the photo resembled Terry H. (also one of the good guys). I had two postings at Kinloss. One to NLS and one to NMSU. No prizes for guessing which tour I thoroughly enjoyed and which one I hated!
My NLS posting was as a JT fresh out of Halton. I remember being stood underneath a blow-off valve outlet when it went off. I was soaked down all one side of my body, including my right buttock! Being still very new to the squadron and a bit embarrassed about it, I kept quiet and soldiered on until the end of the shift, all the time suffering greater discomfort as the fuel started burning my skin. It was probably another 10 days or so before the nasty red rash cleared up and I could sit down in comfort.
NLS for me too, (then NLSS when it split). I once got soaked from the waist down with Avtur when trying to move a full fuel bin but I didn't keep quiet about it for long once it started soaking into my undercrackers, (my fault for just wearing shorts and a tee shirt under my coveralls). Intense pain on the veg of my meat and two. Mind you, when I got to the Med Centre I still managed a wink and a "thank you" to the WRAF nurse who said, "Oh that's swollen quite a bit" when she took off my shreddies - unfortunately she was talking about one of my balls as the skin peeled off it.My NLS posting was as a JT fresh out of Halton. I remember being stood underneath a blow-off valve outlet when it went off. I was soaked down all one side of my body, including my right buttock! Being still very new to the squadron and a bit embarrassed about it, I kept quiet and soldiered on until the end of the shift, all the time suffering greater discomfort as the fuel started burning my skin. It was probably another 10 days or so before the nasty red rash cleared up and I could sit down in comfort.
Working dress worn under my coveralls from that day forward
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff