No surprise that you have no first hand accounts, the crews involved all signed the official secrets act document and jokes aside they would be in a lot of trouble if they spoke out.
The spyflights site gives the flavour of similiar ops and also highlights the dangers.

It was 50 years ago, ancient history. The protagonists are now in the 80s and what damage would they inflict upon the security interests of the country by discussing those events? If researchers made approaches through squadron associations they might even get a few replies.

exmpa

I’m just repeating what I was told by someone who did enjoy having a bit of fun with it in the early 60s’

I suspect that what he really meant was that it was preferable to some of the other tasks on offer, e.g. being equipped with a shovel and expected to use it. But being pushed up and down a runway in a MRD was never a “fun” activity.

exmpa

The Machine Runway De-icing (MRD) was a product of its time. If you absolutely had to keep the runway open the MRD would do it, but you had to be prepared to accept the potential damage it might cause. V-Force QRA was the driver, closely followed by fighter stations. Most V-Force dispersals would also be scaled for the beasts. Overseas, RAFG would obviously qualify. Because the money had been spent on these machines, there was little left for other equipment. However in the late 60s Sicard sweepers and chemicals (initially Urea and later Consin) started to make their appearance and the routine use of MRDs steadily declined.

There was a forerunner consisting of a single engine mounted on a towed trailer that blew sideways. Now that really was dangerous.

exmpa

In Flight Medical Emergencies

I am slightly out of date on the equipment having retired a few years ago but things will have moved on rather than regressed, so here goes:

Most medium/long haul operators have some form of medical support available. A HF phone path or satcom call gives the crew access to specialist medical advice. What is important is that as well as advising on patient care they also have available a database of medical facilities at en-route airfields. It is pointless diverting to an airfield in somewhere-stan where a ground transfer to a medical facility will take a further 3 hours! The assessment tries to establish that the patient is stable an not deteriorating (or unlikely to do so). In which case continuing do destination is probably the best course, particularly if there are a number of suitable options en-route should they suddenly go downhill.

Many airlines now carry remote diagnostic equipment, stick on sensors on the patient and satcom transmission to the medical assistance facility. These clever boxes also allow the medics to speak direct to the cabin crew dealing with the patient. This makes for far more effective decision making and treatment.

“Is there a doctor on board?” The problem with this is that a psychiatrist is a long way away from general training and not too sure of his cardiology. The most common type, General Practitioners, aren’t too hot on emergency medicine either. As a result passenger medics tend to be very conservative and say “get him on the ground”, i.e. off my hands. Regardless of “where” on the ground is, and what facilities are available, the latter because they don’t know. BTW the airline indemnifies volunteer medics, so negligence claims should not be an issue.

The decision to divert with a sick passenger must be made carefully with the primary concern being the passenger’s well being. It is not always the case that their best interests will be served by diverting, in fact in a very high proportion of cases continuing to destination is the best option. The important thing is that the decision making process is highly structured and logical. Airlines go to great lengths to ensure that this is the case.

Understandably many passengers or their companions do not appreciate this under the stress of the emergency and believe that they will always be better off on the ground as soon as possible. This however is not always the case. in fact it rarely is.

exmpa

The rear crew had Air Ventilated Suit (AVS) supply at their crew positions. The CDT was not pressurised, what would be the point? It had no oxygen supply either. It was a basic crew escape trainer and the pilots didn’t always play, we did our “bit” in the simulator. In fact I can only recall going into it twice (although I must have gone through it on the OCU), once shortly after joining my first squadron and once when I had to go out to Goose Bay on the 7th seat.

exmpa

This is an interesting thread. Of course the Nimrods were not confined to operating from Ascension. Nimrod R1 XW664 also operated from San Felix Island and gathered intelligence on the Argentine forces. More details can be found here http://www.spyflight.co.uk/chile.htm

Watchman

You are making an interesting statement Watchman, that is not actually borne out by the second from last paragraph of the link you provide.

The critical sentence from which states:

It is still unclear whether any of these three sorties were actually undertaken by a Nimrod R1 of 51 Sqn, rather than a Nimrod MPA

exmpa

From previous knowledge, part of the problem was the unforseen costs and the unexpected edict from the CAA that all staff working on 558 must be paid the going rate for trade skilled employees and not volunteers. I guess this is still making a big pull on their meagre income, and if I were in Roberts’ shoes, i’d be lobbying the CAA to relax that restriction, if indeed it still applies.

The CAA will have absolutely no interest in how much anyone is paid. All that matters is that those maintaining and operating the aircraft have the necessary skills, qualifications and training, and are doing so within a properly constituted and resourced management structure.

I am sure that there are still loads of ex-Vulcan air and ground crew who would love to get involved with helping keep 558 airborne.

Maybe there are, but are they able to satisfy the necessary criteria? Just how many former Vulcan captains, with display experience on large aircraft, a valid licence and currency on a relevant type do you think there are around? That’s before you ask whether they have the time or inclination to become involved.

exmpa