MRA4 Shelved?

[Sideshow Bob]

Heard arumour yesterday that the Nimrod MRA4 has been cancelled. Anyone at Warton care to comment?

[stickmonkeytamer]

Ebay advert: For Sale- MRA4 simulator, one "careful" owner. Not used much. UK seller. Buyer must be able to collect from North of Scotland. 99p- no reserve.

[Data-Lynx]

Although reminiscent of a Blue Peter sketch, making a Nimrod MRA4 (http://www.mod.uk/dpa/projects/making_a_nimrod_mra4.htm) was updated only yesterday.

[rej]

Data-lynx

If it was updated yesterday, then that can only mean one thing .....

the project is cancelled

[The Gorilla]

Quote from the web site,

On 26 August 2004, PA1, the first of three Nimrod MRA4 development aircraft took off from BAE SYSTEMS Woodford site on the historic first flight of Nimrod MRA4, landing some 2 hours later at BAE SYSTEMS Warton following a successful maiden test flight.

Well I had to eat my hat over that, after predicting it would never fly!! But then I also predicted my beloved Toon to win the Premiership that year as well...

Another quote from the site,

Any commitment to full production will be dependent on acceptable design maturity and the agreement of an acceptable price.

I think this could possibly be the as yet unsigned death warrant for the project but I am not going to make any predictions!

:8

[Safety_Helmut]

Nothing new on that page though, it's all been there for a while.

Have alook on the "Nimrod MRA4 - At A Glance" page on the same site though. Now I am wondering how they have judged the aircrafts complexity in relation to others, surely it is not simply based on total lines of code, any thoughts anyone ?

Safety_Helmut

[Rakshasa]

This is:

- 3 times as complex as a B2 bomber

- 4 times as complex as a Eurofighter Typhoon

- 20 times as complex as a Tornado GR4.



Uh oh! :E

[Green Flash]

The 4's to 51 sqn, the 2's (and R's) to ISK via some serious re-spannering of the MLU variety and flogged to death until the 737/Airbus (A400 derivative????)/P3UK is ready. Any takers?:E

[Data-Lynx]

Following on from Gorilla, on 11 August 2005, BAe Systems published NIMROD MRA4 completes Italian Job (http://www.baesystems.com/newsroom/2005/aug/110805news2.htm). It noted that 'the third and final Nimrod MRA4 development aircraft, PA03, will join the fleet shortly, following its first flight from Woodford airfield, near Manchester.' Anyone know when it is due?

[The Gorilla]

Perhaps the article should say, if the morale thread is anything to go by:

hundreds of servicemen and women were forced to cheer and wave as the aircraft passed overhead.

:}

[Data-Lynx]

Last web entry seems to be on 14 Sep when Defence.com considered that NIMROD development gathers pace (http://www.defence.com/more.aspx?id=153) with the third MRA4 development aircraft (PA03) now flying as part of the test fleet. One thing in MRA4s favour is 14 hours ‘loiter time’ without the need for refuelling, considering the plans for the AAR/AT fleet to deal with new requirements.

[DEL Mode]

To plagiarise from another thread: -

Reading a thread like this it makes you wonder where alot of people get their info from.
When you know a few details about an incident like this, it becomes readily apparent that most people don't have a bl00dy clue what they're on about!
I know it's a rumour website but speculating or making stuff up about aircraft procurement is neither sensible or constructive.

[Data-Lynx]

DEL Mode. Methinks you are too hard. If I might speculate because that is what we do to ease frustration, your post could be tinged with another hard day at the office fighting off the civil serpents and dark blue/brown/green vultures who might be eager to see weakness in any other project than theirs. One of the most effective posts I have seen to counter wild, and possibly unhelpful, comments about early demise of a project ran to two letters: NO.

With the possible exception of Green Flash, almost all of the info in this thread is taken from websites dedicated to inform the public about essential, and usually expensive, projects. Where is the making stuff up about aircraft procurement?

[Strato Q]

All very interesting, but no one has answered the original post - anyone out there who can actually anything to the thread?

[DEL Mode]

Rest Assured - PA1, PA2 and PA3 are all clocking up the hours.

[Safety_Helmut]

I heard that a SPOF had been cunningly designed into the rudder. Anyone know any more ?

[RileyDove]

Del Mode- I think from judging previous procurements the public is
more than welcome to speculate on how a project is going. If I am not mistaken it's the public purse paying for it.
The Nimrod revamp was greeted by some of the guys at Kinloss with more than a degree of doubt. After being slashed from twenty one to the present number I think it's even more
critical to know how the money is spent. The old formula used to be the more you build the cheaper the unit cost becomes - it doesn't seem to be happening in this case .
Can you enlighten me as to how much cash we have saved by having a third less of the MRA.4's - no need to speculate - the hard numbers will do!

[bui]

Well, if it all goes down the pan, Kinloss will have a 1 huge surplus building. On the up side, they can make up some of the lost money in rent. Forres has always needed an ASDA....may be RAF Kinloss can have the worlds best NAAFI! NICE.

Still, it'll all be a dead arguement when they move the fleet and close the base. :ouch::hmm:

[Data-Lynx]

Thanks DEL Mode. Just the ticket. Keep updating the websites and it might help the IO campaign if Nigel could fix a phot of one of the PAs over the sea (proper environment) and an additional milestone of a suitable number of combined flying hours. This is real achievement.

[Safeware]

S_H,I heard that a SPOF had been cunningly designed into the rudder
Perhaps for the uniniated this will sound worse than it could be.
A single point of failure is not necessarily intolerable, provided that the integrity of the piece of equipment is high enough. As an example, all our FJ fleet have single points of failure because they have only one pilot. (I'll let someone else make the quips about that :) ). Because there is only one pilot, he has only one set of AEA, one sitck, one set of throttles etc etc.

The issue here (if correct) is more likely to be:

a) What is the required integrity of the single point of failure?
b) How much is is going to cost to fix it?

sw

[Safety_Helmut]

You are correct Safeware. However, MRA4 is not a fast jet. I would draw your attention to CS25 Para 1309, and the following excerpt:
The aeroplane systems and associated components, considered separately and in relation to other systems, must be designed so that - Any catastrophic failure condition (i) is extremely improbable (ii) does not result from a single failure
Now the MRA4 is not a commercial large aeroplane, but I suspect it could be argued that CS25 would represent best practice.

Safety_Helmut

[Safeware]

S_H,

'Best Practice' - me thinks you have high hopes!

sw

[Safety_Helmut]

Not high hopes SW, just pointing out some useful guidance.

[Charlie Luncher]

So what is the scuttle on the mean machine? MMA is forecast to start to replace the P3 fleet in 2015 did I say 2025?

I heard the delays were due to having to defrost the BAES flight test crew, due to them being frozen when not required to prolong life:E . They were old lads when I was a young' un and I ain't so young no more. I'll wager even Mr F, the bub of the crew has to have his tomatoes started now:ok: .

Or maybe it has more to do with the Trannie bar in the North Lancs resort, that gorilla put them on to, taking up their time:eek: .

Charlie sends

[Safeware]

S_H,The aeroplane systems and associated components, considered separately and in relation to other systems, must be designed so that - Any catastrophic failure condition (i) is extremely improbable (ii) does not result from a single failureMr Airbus obviously wasn't going along with this idea then:
www.iasa.com.au/folders/Safety_Issues/RiskManagement/A300previous.html

Whereas FJ have the single pilot issue, heavy aircraft have only one rudder.

sw

[Safety_Helmut]

Well Safeware, considering the time you've taken to find this, it's a shame your research has fallen short. AA587 didn't just lose its rudder, it lost the entire tail fin (vertical stabiliser). Now, I don't believe for one moment that the clause of the standard I quoted was conceived to cover a major structural failure. Have a read of the full report and I think you will find that the accident was considered to be more than just a case of "pilot error"> Have a read of the FAA's report, and also this analysis: www.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de/publications/Reports/CrashOfAA587.pdf (http://www.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de/publications/Reports/CrashOfAA587.pdf )

Safety_Helmut

[Safeware]

S_H,

We are being picky today.

Since your last post, I've actually been working somewhat heavily on current issues rather than researching old ones. :p:

I never said that it was 'just a case of pilot error' and the reference to 'heavy aircraft have only one rudder' was back to the original point about an SPOF in the MRA4 rudder.

Do you consider then that the pilot reaction, weather, training, culture etc etc come into the CS25 definition at para 1309 as 'other systems' then?

sw

[Safety_Helmut]

No, read it, and you'll see why that's a daft question.

[Safeware]

Didn't think that it was a daft question - I don't agree, but there are those out there that do, and try to use it in safety arguments.

Just wondered where you stood.

sw

[RAF_Techie101]

In response to the previous request, please see below...

(Assuming it works and the picture actually comes up on the screen...)

D:\Pictures\Aircraft Pics\MRA4

Which it didn\'t.. Carp... Anyone want to be sent some pictures of the MRA4 and post them up for me.....?

[moggiee]

Isn't AA587 essentially a series of problem?

Two aeroplanes too close together (wake turbulence)
The Airbus turning too early and hitting vortices
Pilot over controlling the rudder
Poor training by AA
Over sensitive rudder on the Airbus

No real "single point" there in my view, but a combination of factors that could occur on most aeroplanes in one way or another.

[Safety_Helmut]

Moggiee
No real "single point" there in my view, but a combination of factors that could occur on most aeroplanes in one way or another.
Agreed.

Safeware
Do you consider then that the pilot reaction, weather, training, culture etc etc come into the CS25 definition at para 1309 as 'other systems' then?
Didn't think that it was a daft question - I don't agree, but there are those out there that do, and try to use it in safety arguments.
It was an odd question in that CS25 is "Certification Specification for Large Aeroplanes", it does not describe the requirements of a SMS.

Safety_Helmut

[Gainesy]

Techie 101,

I'll put them up for you, check your PMs for my e-mail address.

[Gainesy]

Techie,
Sorry, my kit does not recognise that format for some reason and will not open them for viewing; anybody else want to help?

[ORAC]

Latin Flyer´s Airport Bar (http://groups.msn.com/LatinFlyersAirportBar) upload here.

[RAF_Techie101]

Aha - ok let's try again then...

If it works, thanks very much guys, much appreciated, if it doesn't - I'm holding you all personally responsible...
MRA4 Pics (http://groups.msn.com/LatinFlyersAirportBar/martinsplanepics.msnw?Page=Last)

[Gainesy]

That thing has more fins than Lossie.:uhoh:

Nice pics Techie.

[engineer(retard)]

Sounds like S_H and sw are suffering from a humour SPOF :)

regards

retard

[singleseatadnav]

In the last 20 years what has the Nimrod done for us? Since wasting millions with the AEW Nimrod we seem to be walking a familiar path yet again.

However, This might mean that we can finally surgically remove an underachieving and talentless apendage of pilots. Not only are they wasting our flying pay but they are eating their way through enough food to feed half of Sudan!!

I have a piece of advice to all of you Kinloss aircrew........... Do you want fries with that?

:cool:

[BATS]

Singleseatadnav

At risk of biting..... what has the AD community done operationally in the last 15 yrs then ???????

[The Swinging Monkey]

BATS, good question, but why not ask....

what has any nav done operationally in the last 50 yrs then ???????

Very little I would suggest!
Kind regards to all, (even Navs!)
TSM

[navibrator]

How about continuous QRA in the Uk and FI for a start!!

Who says CRM works?

[2port]

TSM

I bit.

...ever flown into Kabul, at night, in a snow storm....?

2P

[Pontius Navigator]

What have navs done in the last 50 years?

The question does not even dignify an answer.

The answer would occupy a book




or two.

[DEL Mode]

Lets start a thread called which one of the two people in the cockpit has the biggest ego! or can we find out what is going on with MRA4?

[Jackonicko]

Questions:

Is there any more to this than the MRA4 (as a notionally NEW aircraft) not meeting a SPOF requirement that the MR2 (as a mature aircraft, designed under less rigorous standards and regulations) does not have to?

Is this entirely a theoretical risk, or are there real reasons to fear for the integrity of the Nimrod rudder?

Are the MRA4s still grounded?

[bangin0ut]

Jacko, I can tell you they are most definately NOT grounded!

2 are currently going through a pause to allow essential work to be carried out on them, but PA2 is still available for test flying.

[Safeware]

2 are currently going through a pause to allow essential work to be carried out on them, but PA2 is still available for test flying.

now there's a suitably evasive answer - they're not grounded, just not flying.

sw

[bangin0ut]

Not being evasive at all, just telling it like it is!

Its actually a planned pause in the test schedule. These pauses (BAE terminology) have been planned for months. BAE use them to catch up on the changes/fixes that are found during the flight tests. To do them between test flights would result in a fragmented and slower flight test phase.

The rudder issue has been discussed at length with regard to SPOF, its just coincidence that the current pause has coincided with this becoming the latest hot topic surrounding the future of the MRA4.

[Jackonicko]

BanginOut,

You sound as though you ought to know the answers to all three Qs, not just the third......

[Charlie Luncher]

Bats
Can't believe you bit man chill:ugh: .

You do know he has failed somewhere along the line and sits at home playing his flight sim games making up "cool" c/s's for himself complete with rubber suit - oh yeah and mask.:8

As for GPS you gotta love it any monkey can use it even apes!:E

Charlie sends

[bangin0ut]

Jacko

In response, it has not been cancelled - yet, and hopefully it wont be. The capability that the MRA4 will bring is a huge leap forward comparred to everything we currently have in service.

The rudder issue has been mooted around Warton, so I guess there are some problems. I cant elaborate as I really dont know enough about what the problem is.

In response to Riley Dave, the overall cost has not changed AFAIK. A production conract is due to be announced over the coming months. This was originally planned for late this year, but I've heard that this could have slipped to the 1st quarter next year. This will them give the unit price, and a better idea of the final cost will be known.

Cant remember if there were any other Q's, but if you post them here I will try to help if possible.

[pigfist]

Jacko,

Go on ask how big and gucci the galley is in the bag of an MRA4! Bet it is all mod cons and stacks of space for the OBSCENE AMOUNT OF FOOD THAT THE KIPPER FLEET CONSUME! Now you probably think I'm joking - nope. They even have mahoosive rations thrown in for a sim trip in the tube. How they are not all as fat as barrels is beyond me......aah, they are.
Now trim the MRA4 allocation, get rid of 2nd and 3rd tranch of Eurobomber, sorry fighter, whatever role it thinks its doing htis week. Get rid of the Rock Apes (no Rapier - what do you do now?) and half the admin branch and we might, just might scrape up enough cash to stop Gordon from nicking our new spanky carriers.

[althenick]

In the last 20 years what has the Nimrod done for us?

... Well having seen all the piccies of various Subs & ships on the Comcen Buildings wall in Kinloss i'd say it acted as a bl00dy good deterent to unwanted vistors camping off of the UK with their SSBN's and wotnot, However I digress...

Surley the question should be

What will the Nimrod do for us in the forseeable future

Cold war is over, do we really need something like this to defend our seas, As I understand we dont require an MPA that has to be able to patrol vast wads of the atlantic.

Taken from the Airforce Technology Website...

The main roles of Nimrod MRA4 are maritime reconnaissance, anti-submarine warfare, anti-surface unit warfare and search and rescue.

Could The requirements in future not be fulfilled by smaller/cheaper/Off-the shelf designs?

[bangin0ut]

althenick, running the risk of sounding like some sort of company yes man,

Can't dispute your opening statement, but what follows just goes to show that most people dont know what the MR2 is doing today! There is more to the MR2 than SAR and taking pretty photos of warships and submarines.

If you knew what the MR2 was doing and understood a little about the potential of the MRA4, you would not have asked the Q.

The MRA4, with the capability it promises, will greatly enhance what the MR2 is currently doing, as well as expanding its roles.

As an island we would always need something to 'patrol the vast wads of the atlantic' as you never know where your next threat is coming from.

As for smaller/cheaper/COTS - there is no such thing. COTS while cheap upfront is generally more expensive in the long run as you buy a standard piece of kit, then get the manufacturer to mod it to your exact requirement and viola a piece of kit that would have cost less to develop from scratch.

COTS being cheaper really is a myth!

[Jackonicko]

The very heavy initial emphasis on ASW reflects the fact that the customer is DEC Underwater Warfare (or whatever he's called this week). No-one doubts that the aircraft won't be a multi-role attack and ISTAR platform (Aunty Betty's Buff) once (or if) the frontline get their hands on it.

I'm not surprised that people misunderstand the Nimrod's role today. The RAF have been stupidly backward in telling people what the aircraft has been doing in recent ops, and have hardly been forthcoming in publicising the very real overland jobs the aircraft and its crews have been doing.

[CWW]

singleseatadnav:
In the last 20 years what has the Nimrod done for us?
What, apart from sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, public health and peace? Nothing, mate.

Apologies to Python, but please remember "Single Seat AD Nav" (?) that ignorant plonkers are unlikely to ever learn what aircraft actually do.

[althenick]

BanginOut,

Thanks for the enlightenment. Your right - I dont know much about MRA4 and I certainly wouldn't dispute the enhanced capabilty of the airframe, but i'm still not convinced we need such a lavish package given that the cold war is over. I would agree that if HMG were to expand its portfolio to a multi-role attack Aircraft then yes lets have it (all of them!) Otherwise in not convinced as an interested bystander or taxpayer.

[Charlie Luncher]

Jacko

I don’t believe the RAF has been stupid at all, those that need to know do - those that don't well don't.:hmm:

To many times have Hacks/PR Spin Drs/Minor Politicians/un-informed Senior O's/BAES or Boeing detractors/military experts(delete as appropriate) have compromised the safety of operators with their opinions or media sound bites so they look important for their book launch or 15 mins of fame and a few rounds on Sky TV.
Free informed speech is important but remember who won it for you and who lets you keep it.
As for UBM and the dark arts, I don’t know of any nations declaring to wipe out the Jewish state that have submarines.:suspect: After all it is one facet of a true multirole combat aircraft.
A deep fat fryer for the battered Mars bars and a freezer for the DCS would be ideal though:ok:
Charlie sends

[Jackonicko]

If we were living in a totalitarian state, or even if we were back in the Cold War, when people trusted the Government to procure the best kit, then the lack of publicity given to Nimrod's recent success in (how can we put this) its expanded portfolio of roles and capabilities would be acceptable.

When, however, quite senior politicians, officers outside the Nimrod community and large elements of the friendly press haven't been indoctrinated, who is going to put the case when competing programmes threaten the type's funding?

And if my tax pounds are paying for something, then I want to know what they are being spent on, and I certainly want those who might warn me if they're being misspent to know. And in this particular case, it would be rather nice to know how wisely and effectively small amounts of our money have transformed a useful platform into a vital and successful one. You wouldn't catch the dark blues being so coy about one of their toys doing such good work, and they certainly wouldn't lean on friendly journos to keep shtum about what they did know.....

And I'm blo.ody sure that those who need to know on the other side know chapter and verse about the Nimrod's recent deeds of derring do, and have all that they need on the items of kit used.

[Pontious]

'What's the Nimrod ever done for us...'

Well there's probably a few trawlermen, yachtsmen, evacuating Oil Rig workers and others that will be eternally grateful for the part the 'Mighty Hunter' has played in their rescue.

'Are the Warton MR4's grounded'

Nope. One passed over my house downwind for 08 at Warton this morning.

Enuff said.

:ok:

[pmills575]

I find it so re-assuring that the experts here have put my mind to rest. I was worried that there were still submarines! Silly I know. Still , even if there are still some, I guess they are only friendly ones, surely. That means I must have missed the news reports that all of the subs were scrapped at the end of the cold war. Good result for the negotiators. Who was that?

I guess that must also include large fleets of nasty surface warships.

Why exactly do we need a Navy ?

[Jimlad]

Seeing as we're onto a "what have the X ever done for us" thread, can I please ask what Movers have ever done for us and why we haven't privatised the branch and replaced them with trained monkeys yet?

[Rakshasa]

Cause the Monkey Trainers are too busy training the Rock Apes? :E

[richlear]

Janes Navy International had a big splash about the P8 (MMA) this month...some interesting stuff. Just the ability to service the aircraft worldwide using commercial facilities must make a huge difference to the LCC.

[moggiee]

There is more to defence than the cold war.

Plenty of Soviet subs are now living in Asia and as such are in the hands of potentially hostile governments.

Now, I don't hold with this "axis of evil" stuff but the fact is that there are people out there building a serious capability and it would be unwise for us to have one of Buff Hoons "capability holidays" with regard to ASW.

After all, although we may not have the threat on our doorstep, but recent conflicts have been sited upon other peoples doorsteps!

[The Proctologist]

A 12 man UAV then!

[Gainesy]

What's the Nimrod ever done?

SAROPS on. Bay of Biscay.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/4417128.stm