Mike Penning (Hemel Hempstead) (Con): I thank the Secretary of State for today's statement. I pay tribute to our armed forces who are serving in Iraq and around the rest of the world for the fantastic professional work that they do on our behalf. Our love, best wishes, thoughts and prayers go to the families of the 10 servicemen whom we have sadly lost.
I had honour of flying into Baghdad and Basra with the RAF shortly after the crash. The professionalism shown by the RAF was unbelievable and the Americans stood back in amazement at how the RAF had taken such a disaster on the chin and got on with their work, although the personnel were clearly very upset.
I understand that we cannot discuss lots of details today for operational reasons and because of the sensitivities. Does the rest of the Hercules fleet, and particularly the C-130H and J aircraft, have fuel tank inerting systems, which would make our servicemen around the world safer? The Secretary of State may be considering fitting the C-130K with such a system.
John Reid: The hon. Gentleman's remarks to the families will be much appreciated, as will his recognition of the dangers of flying, which he has experienced personally. Some of us have had the privilege of flying with the RAF in what is for them a day-to-day, risk-filled theatre, such as Basra or Baghdad. Those of us who have put on body armour, put out the lights and flown at night at an angle of descent that is calculated to terrify most people outside the RAF while swerving understand the risks inherent in such operations. We often forget that such flights are daily occurrences. That particular crew had already flown perhaps four times between Balad and Baghdad before the tragic incident occurred, and they had flown day-in, day-out since their deployment two or three weeks before the incident. Most of the crew were very experienced: between them, they had 19 operational deployments, so they were people who got on with the job as a matter of course and took those risks.
The hon. Gentleman asked why a fire suppressant system was not fitted to the C-130 and what the position is on the other aircraft. As he knows, the K variant was first developed and built in the 1960s, when that technology was not available. Systems to upgrade the aircraft are now available and we are examining as a matter of urgency whether the technology can be successfully fitted to our aircraft. I must repeat my earlier point that, before the incident, the C-130 Hercules was not thought to be particularly vulnerable to that form of attack. We now know that it in certain circumstances it can be very vulnerable.
We shall examine this as a matter of urgency. I merely point out that it is not always an easy thing to do. A data recorder, for instance, can be fitted relatively easily into a modern digitised cockpit, but the C-130K was built in the 1960s. Although we can put in a lot of defensive aids, it is not that easy to put in a data recorder where there are multi-faceted, sometimes clockwork, indicators and no central terminal from which to draw the information. There may be difficulties, but we are considering it as a matter of urgency. |
