Do we really need an MPA?

[Jayand]

Devils advocate here, do we really need a dedicated MPA and why?
Yes we are an Island nation, yes we are reliant on the sea for the vast majority of out trade I understand that.
The tasks that the MR2 undertook as their main role, ASW, ASUW, SAR and overland comms and surveilance were carried out brilliantly but which of them are missed now since she has gone?
The Overland role in Afghan has been taken over by other assets without too many grumbles, ASUW is vital in a Navy vs Navy conflict or war which we have not had since 1982, any chance of it happening again is being taken on risk by MOD.
ASW is an insurance poilcy against the extremely unlikely ever happening, what are the chances of us ever being under seige or attack from a Submarine fleet? even if that does happen then they mitigate their own risks with help form their own service, true it's not the same service the Nimrod could provide but it is a measured risk weighed against the smallest chance of it ever happening.
You wouldn't pay for extremely expensive flood insurance in the middle of the desert!
Sar is a tricky one, obviously this is the most likely to be used and the one that often has a happy outcome, many people owe their lives to a nimrod and are extremely grateful for it, however a smaller, cheaper, less technical aircraft could be utilised as a perfectly good SAR and Homeland defence ASUW asset, slap in a radar give it a good comms fit, a camera and a well trained small crew and off you go.
The days of having an aircraft that does the lot are seemingly over for the UK at least, if there is a way forward then perhaps this much cheaper option is it.
What do you reckon?

[RandomBlah]

Jayand, some points for you to ponder.

1. AsuW covers a wide range of activities- not just involvement in fleet Vs fleet scenarios.

2. Submarines are used for much more than "Battle of the Atlantic" scenarios. This includes SF insertion, recce (both above and below water). Just consider the effect of an enemy sub thought to be in a certain area- but not known for sure.

3. To not have an MPA as an island nation with a Submarine based nuclear deterrant is not measured risk- it is neglegance.

4. As an island nation we now have no way of discovering effectively and quickly what is happening 200 miles off our own shores.

[Abbey Road]

Ahhh, and there was me thinking it was a thread questioning whether we needed Mount Pleasant Airport in the Falkland Islands. I'll get me coat ...... :ok:

[Green Flash]

Now, I wonder what the Irish do (http://www.military.ie/aircorps/fleet/casa/index.htm)? (You can hang whizzy-bang things on 'em, too). Next MPA course to be run at Baldonnel?!:ooh:

[Green Flash]

Alternatively, maybe the USCG has some experience (http://www.uscg.mil/acquisition/mrs/features.asp)in these matters?

[glad rag]

Nice wee cab that for Coastguard work.

[Green Flash]

Glad

Indeed. But if you need some longer legs, why not try this (http://www.uscg.mil/acquisition/LRS/projectdescription.asp) (a cab not entirely unknown to the RAF)?

[glad rag]

Looks good for a new build.

To be honest I have no idea just how shagged out our Herc's are, however

" The upgraded HC-130H fleet will also receive structural enhancements to extend their service lives."

Is telling especially if operated in the maritime low level environment.

[Wander00]

Has it reverted to "Mount Pleasant Airport" then? We opened "RAF Mount Pleasant" on 1 May 1986.

[Finnpog]

For me, it is a certainty that we need an MPA.

If we had a budget to have a dedicated SAR frame, and then an ASW / ASuW frame all supported by a dedicated E3 Sentry for C3 then there might be different answers.

If we have to multirole the aircraft, both to make the initial purchase affordable and also to get the best return on the purchase by getting effective operationao use out of it - then the Nimrod, Orion, Poseidon, Kawasaki P1 stylee of aircraft have a point.

The overlanding comms roles might have been handed on, and I suppose demonstrates the versatility of the MR2 in the fact that it could pick up that role too.

Reading Dr Fox's little article, the message that I interpret is that the problem was the Nimrod programme, rather than a desire to get rid of the MPA capability. in fairness he is right when he says that Nu Labour got rid of the capability - the Tories have just killed off the specific replacement which may or may not have been able to be delivered to service with no a single extra penny of tax payers money going on it.

I'm not knocking the folks on the line. My father-in-law has spent the whole of his adult life in hangers working for what has become BAES.

There is a point where the criminal level of either incompentance, negligence or corruption which has brough about this shoddy state of affairs MUST be stopped

If you want to hang AGM-84s off the wings (not just for Jutland type naval conflicts, but also for terrorist / nutter interdiction), then why not try and fit Storm Shadow / Scalp as they are practically the same weight & size.

In fact, if we are only going to go to war with air supremacy or with effective SEAD, then go for the Brimstone & PWIV fit and then use it as a CAS package.

[Ivan Rogov]

WRT smaller platforms, the first thing you need to do is decide what you want to do.
If that is peacetime patrol of your EEZ, medium range SAR (e.g.: get to 500miles in a reasonable time and do a search for 4 hours plus), etc. then many of the medium range twin prop aircraft are the most efficient solution. But that is nearing the limit of their capability.
If you want to do hostilities you need to bolt on extra bits IFF, data links, secure radios, DAS, armour vital areas, ensure adequate redundancy of airframe and equipment, etc.
Now if you want to do ASW that needs much more equipment (Acoustics, buoys, launchers, MAD and operators) and add more fuel for work at longer range. Soon you end up with something the size of a P-3, Nimrod, P-8, and Atlantique. C-130 is that size but no one uses it for that task, the USCG C-130s are really a long range EEZ, SAR platform and if it was suitable for the task the US would have used it. Props also provide an issue for ASW.

[Green Flash]

Finn

Ref your If you want to hang AGM-84s off the wings (not just for Jutland type naval conflicts, but also for terrorist / nutter interdiction), then why not try and fit Storm Shadow / Scalp as they are practically the same weight & size.

In fact, if we are only going to go to war with air supremacy or with effective SEAD, then go for the Brimstone & PWIV fit and then use it as a CAS package.

Wiki-p comes up with

AC-130 a standoff capability using either the AGM-114 Hellfire missile, the Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (based on the Hydra 70 rocket), or the Viper Strike glide bomb.[13]

[Sgt.Slabber]

Oil workers say Nimrod scrappage will endanger their lives - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/8288557/Oil-workers-say-Nimrod-scrappage-will-endanger-their-lives.html)

[The Old Fat One]

It's not MPA, it's LRMP (as in long range maritime patrol). As in Focke Wolf Condor, Catalina PBY, Sunderland, Shackleton, Argus.......etc etc.

This is not a pedantic point, it is essential. It is the reach, speed, endurance, flexibility, payload and sensor/communications fit that gives the LRMP its totally unique and irreplaceable capability.

Outwith the fertile imagination of the wannabee military geek, this is not a job for airships, unmanned vehicles or any other such non-existent, yet-to-be-invented fantasy. Outwith the agenda of bean-counters, opportunists and contending military vested interests, this is not a job for helicopters, ships or transport aircraft.

Of course we need one and of course we need a public enquiry to find out exactly how we have ended up without one.

I don't know if we will get a public enquiry (I doubt it) but I do know that the aircraft has already gone, and the LRMP capability infrastructure that has been developed since the 1930's will be gone over the course of the next 1-2 years. By the time the politicians that have nailed their colours to the mast over the demise of the LRMP have gone from power, our LRMP capibility will have long since become nothing more than a footnote in history and it will never come back.

Perhaps it is now time to move on?

[Finnpog]

Green Flash... Hi. I hadn't read that before. Thankee

TOFO... You are spot on about LRMP.

[getsometimein]

From the original post:
You wouldn't pay for extremely expensive flood insurance in the middle of the desert!
This is exactly what we do with the Nuclear Deterrent.

Defense of a nation isn't about fighting off the invaders. Its about stopping the "enemies" from even thinking about invading.

Your "thesis" doesn't cover half of the jobs Nimrod did. Until you take those roles into account you are always going to get a skewed answer. There are plenty of government and military agencies now asking what can do the job that Nimrod did for them, and the answer is that there is nothing that has the same capability.

[keesje]

.
Meanwhile the Germans move on. 5 for $ half a billion, including development ~$1 billion. Maybe they'l order another 5. Australia, Canada and Japan are interested too. They have a range of 25.000km / 36 hours.

http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_RQ-4_EuroHawk_Prototype_Wheel-out_lg.jpg

Based on what I know what information was gathered and processed in 1990 P3C's I think the same job can be done by a crew of 6-7 with artificial intelligence, network capabilities and dozens of colleagues "online". And thats pretty conservative.

I think Europe needs to have a long rang patrol capability, also for the UK. I'm not going to discuss why UK decided on the Nimrod rebuild strategy and some here still seem to approve.

I think for Europe / Western Europe / EC or what ever you name it, the interest is such capabilities are much the same. By now I think Scandinavia, Benelux, UK, Germany, France, Spain and some more countries share the same values and thoughts.

If **** happens most likely the populations (sharing the same (interactive) media, opinions, values etc.) will agree on a united action pretty quickly.

So probably a common naval air force with spread out airbases in geographical smart locations sharing a fleet of medium and heavy MPAs, ULR UAV's and satelite systems has become feasible.

4000km ranges from various European air bases:

http://www.gcmap.com/map?P=&R=4000km%40lis,+4000km%40FSS,+4000km%40NSY%0d%0a&MS=wls&MP=ortho&MC=GVA&MX=540x540&PM=*&PC=%23000000&PW=2&RS=shaded&RC=%23ffff00

The location of the different platforms should be optimized for the various environments and tasks. Transport and tanker capabilities could be added or even combined.

[GreenWings]

@keesje:

The Eurohawk is fine if all you want to do is Maritime/Overland surveillance. Long Range Maritime patrol is about more than that. Eurohawk cant drop liferafts to the poor stranded sailor whose fishing boat is sinking; it cant search for, detect and prosecute and attack on submarines, and I'm sure it cant to a lot more that we would want a dedicated MPA/LRMP manned platform to do for UK PLC.

[Wrathmonk]

Slight thread drift perhaps but have we still got UK individuals on MPA / LRMP (;)) exchange tours around the world or have they all been recalled as we no longer offer a reciprocal seat on a Nimrod sqn? And if we do still have exhangees are they likely to be replaced on tourex? Or indeed, are we seeking more exchange posts to keep some form of, albeit, limited "knowledge" about as I believe the RN are (were?) doing with USN F18 drafts.

[Biggus]

Wrathmonk,


Pure guesswork on my part, but I would suggest the clue is in the word "exchange"....

We no longer have anything to exchange. I would expect that we have not immediately recalled anyone (if we actually have anyone) on overseas MPA exchange, as it would be unfair to the host nation, not to say downright rude, to cause them a loss of trained personel at no notice. They will not simply not be replaced at tourex.

In the grand scheme of things we are probably talking about no more than half a dozen posts I would assume...

[keesje]

@GreenWings

Big UAV cannot do everything a Nimrod can. Nimrod cannot do everything a Eurohawk can. (e.g. hanging out 24 hrs, 5 hours out at 60.000 ft)

As I wrote, you probably need combined types. The time s societies were so uninformed and scared they were willing to put aside tens of billions to pay for home developed solutions for everything is gone.

Trying to put everything thinkable in 1 250.000lbs, Ex00.000.000, 10 crew, fifties airframe for 1 nation proved so out of touch it's hard to believe IMO. The lobby to get the plan approved must have been overwhelming.

E.g. Tanker/ Transports could do surveillance and SAR roles if necessary. An ASW platform too could be much smaller these days.

http://flyawaysimulation.com/media/images1/images/a400m-6.jpg

I think it will go that way. We see developments in the carrier, transport, AWACS areas already.

[Diablo Rouge]

We are an island nation and have an area of responsibility regarding SAR that is far larger then that typical of any country: ie we in effect do the Eire patch for them and far out into the Atlantic. If the USAF pulled their Pavehawk out of the UK we could not meet out responsibility.

It will take a repetition of history to highlight the error that Govt has made in deleting this duty of care. For example, would our partners address UK needs in the likely event of another UK v Iceland Cod War. Mentioned because this is arguably a civil Govt matter not a military one and I doubt that UK Govt could mandate a military partner to involve itself in UK domestic affairs.

The Russian submarine commanders are probably mapping the UK coastal waters as we speak and I am led to believe from others in the know that their sub-aqua technology is years ahead of the wests.

The North Sea oilfield is, and always has been vulnerable to attack from terrorists and require an asset with a long duration on station that is able to operate in both aggresive and passive (rescue) mode. I am yet to see a C130J with depth charges and torpedoes.

We still have commitments amongst former colonies and the usual timeline is independence +50 years. Many of these countries are themselves islands.

Historically, many potential hotspots have been erased before being too serious based upon intelligence supported by evidence. The worlds sea lanes are often the source of such evidence. The pirates of Somalia could see copy-cat ops conducted by other third world nations directly affecting UK interests overseas.

......and that is before you start talking about some of the tasks that Nimrod completed that we do not talk about in public.

Therefore in summary: MPA requirement? YES without a doubt and in decades to come, the demise of MRA4 will be discussed in the same veign that TSR2 enjoys to this day. I am aware that a jet powered MPA has advantages over props in the anti-sub role but I also believe that BAe let themselves and the country down in the Nimrod fiasco and are reaping the benefit of what they sowed. The title "Nimrod 2000" will haunt them for many a year. The unforgiveable element of what we shall go through in the coming months is the removal of human expertise in the MPA area of Ops. After all, the Nimrod was never more then a host fuselage with jet engines and many other off the shelf airframes could quite probably do the job better.

[Small Spinner]

Perhaps someone will help me here, but all this stuff (c**p) about 50s aircraft, and there unsuitability winds me up, as the Nimrod was built like a brick out house, and actually much better suited to low level operations over the sea, as it proved.
I know of a number of instances where the old girl reportedly was given as much credit for recovering from precarious situations, as the pilot was. KISS principle of aerodynamics may apply here. I certainly felt safe in her, even in some of the manoeuvres we got up to.

Some of these adaptations from commercial aircraft, would not last in these type of hostile environments?
Many of today's high bypass engines are not designed to be take the hammer that the Nimrod Spey's were subjected to. And as another poster has mentioned, high lift swept wings, are not the sort for this job?

In a spirit of moving on, the Japanese Kawasaki MPA, looks like the type of aircraft, and people we need to deal with, if we are ever to resurrect our LRMPA capability.

[davejb]

TOFO made some excellent points,
Keesje. with respect, what IS your experience of MPA? 'On' them 20 years ago - do you mean as MPA aircrew, actually doing this stuff?

UAV's do not currently have the capabilities so many people keep spouting about, it takes no brains whatsoever to blithely suggest UAVs can do ASUW, ASW blah blah, it's quite another thing to point to an actual UAV that CAN do it. Balloons - God give me strength, we're talking about airships... the Shackleton, which theoretically managed something like 300 mph, could leave one standing - I cannot conceive of ever trying to carry out meaningful ASW or ASuW in something dramatically slower than a Shack...you'd be trying to lay a pattern ahead of a sub while your engines redlined and you progressed slowly backwards.

Yes, you could carry out inshore coastguard duties using smaller aircraft. You could not carry out rig protection or major SAR control duties from one - you could of course decide to fly Sentries on that sort of thing. The day an airliner ditches in mid Atlantic we'll certainly feel the loss of an LRMPA capability.

Protection of SSBN - if a nuclear capability is deemed essential for national defence, which so far it has been, then it is downright foolish to remove a significant part of the mechanism by which our SSBNs deploy unhindered and untracked. I would imagine that these days the boomers rather expect to be trailled on exit. It isn't a deterrent if your prospective opponent is confident they can take out your BNs whenever required... and we don't have enough of them to be able to lose any.

Accepting that NImrod is dead, we still need pretty much what we're busy scrapping - to be blunt, had Nimrod 4 gone into service, with 9 aircraft, I think we'd also have needed a smaller inshore patrol aircraft to carry out the mundane stuff around the coastline. Now we need both platforms.

Dave

[Diablo Rouge]

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/graham-warwick/P-X%20lands.jpg

Looks the part, but we have no history of defence trading links with Japan. Assuming it carries an aggresive payload and is more Lexus than Datsun, it may yet get to wear roundels with a dab of blue and white added. The problem is that Govt and UK Mil have become too Afghancentric and if Iraq is not forgotten yet (and for many it is) then we are too focused in affairs far away that the UK public does not care an iota about.
Wonder if the Japanese will send one to Farnborough (Trade) Airshow.

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

Apparently not.

God help us; this government won't. And it's not going to get easier after PR11.

Duncs:ok:

PS I'd like to see how many sonobuoys the Euro Global Hawk carries.

[baffy boy]

Yes, more than we need the number of Tornados and Typhoons we have, and when that becomes evident it will be too late. Unfortunately when it does become evident those who made the decision will not be held to account for what will surely be seen as tantamount to a criminally stupid act.

Forgive them, for they know not what they do.

Those that support the need for MPA (or LRMPA) on this thread know what they are saying in my opinion and have made some excellent points. Those proposing alternatives might be making suggestions that make sense to them, but only because they do not fully understand the problem.

I hope we get away with it, but can't see how we can.

[peter272]

Forgive them, for they know not what they do.

But as our rulers, shouldn't they know? The more I watch this new breed of politician (all image and no substance) the more I despair.

Most of us go through some rigorous selection and training route to get to wield any sort of authority. This bunch of wasters seem to be immune from that requirement

[Ivan Rogov]

Keesje, please don't take offence but as has already been said were you actually a member of a P-3 crew?
If you were then I would be shocked by your opinions and would have to assume that you have spent far too much time having a shmoke and a pancake in the cafes of Amsterdam.
Was the picture of PC flight simulator A400 with a USCG paint scheme suggesting it's suitability for any of the MPA roles?
It doesn't matter how long a Eurohawk remains ontask at 60k it still can't do most of the MPA tasks. Just look at BAMS, the US have effectively re-written the requirement to cover the concepts limitations.
IMO your comments so far demonstrate that you lack any knowledge of the MPA, or the environment it operates in and are out of your depth. Maybe you should consider whether you wish to continue embarrassing yourself in public on this forum.

Back to MPA, you also have to consider your potential adversary. Your platform should be capable of defeating theirs (otherwise you will come second), e.g. he gets a stone, you get a stick, he gets a bigger stick, eventually he gets a SSN/SSBN force, you get a LRMPA Sqn, he makes the SSN/SSBN quiet, you upgrade your LRMPA sensors, etc. To be effective at this level requires investment in 'high end' military equipment, you could buy 200 CASA 235 but you would never find a deployed SSN/SSBN.

[davejb]

Damn!
I thought I was being quite subtle...

[Ivan Rogov]

Unfortunately I'm not as articulate and poses poor literacy skills :E

[Biggus]

Ivan,

I once found an SSN in a C-130K with a 1960s E290 radar.... ;)

[Ivan Rogov]

Biggus, I once found a SSBN while drunk walking back to Faslane from Helensburgh :ok:

It is a little harder when they play hide and seek for real.

[Biggus]

....I'm sure it is, the ;) was the hint....

[Ivan Rogov]

I got it first time, the :ok: was the hint :ok:;):}

Just didn't want you giving our Dutch friend any ideas :p

[davejb]

I once found a sheep whilst driving back from Arrochar to Faslane....
but with nowhere else to go but the loch or the centre of the A814, there really wasn't much of a choice once you'd fallen off the hillside I suppose....

I think my driveway is wider than the A814, come to think of it....

[Charlie Luncher]

keesje
If you think back to RADAR theory there is a slight problem with your Hawky bird:8 and what we want it to do. But then your RADAR was probably some version of AN/APS 115 so anything would be an upgrade:ugh::{:eek:.
Euro forces showed their worth in FRY, especially the French:mad:
Charlie sends

[keesje]

A few blinded politicians, destroying a key defense capability without understanding what they are doing.

Probably not. Many people looked at it from many different angles.

Nimrod: from a symbol of pride to one of decline | The Spectator (http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/6652343/nimrod-from-a-symbol-of-pride-to-one-of-decline.thtml)

I was never a real crew member. Still I had a pretty good picture of what was going on. We shouldn't only look back to see the future. Maybe having been intensively involved & committed for a long time can cause blind spots. At least in the dutch case for years successfully fighting off real changes in a changing world played a role.

The dramatic reality is a democratic chosen government and majority in parliament decided to pull the plug all together. No doubt a damaging report / review will follow on how this all has developed.

Anger and disbelieve aren't going to solve anything. I watched the MR4 project in disbelieve and although I feel for the people involved and nobody likes a fleet being scrapped in this stage, it doesn't come as a total surprise. If it does, maybe there were blind spots.

[davejb]

I was never a real crew member. Still I had a pretty good picture of what was going on.

<sigh>..........

[Not_a_boffin]

The first time we try to do anything against someone with a submarine force it could get a bit interesting. That nice Mr Dinnerjacket has some and that fella Kim out east, plus Mr Mubarak bought some from the nice chinese man (even if they are knackered). Indonesia has some decent boats as well and funnily enough all of these are adjacent to maritime trade routes of some description. Longer memories will remember one of the contributors to the 70's oil crisis was closure of Suez.

Looks like it'll be down to someone else next time (potentially no bad thing), question is, who?

[Biggus]

Not a Boffin,


Marine Boy Online Wiki - ShareTV (http://sharetv.org/shows/marine_boy)

[Mad_Mark]

Keesje:
I was never a real crew member. Still I had a pretty good picture of what was going on.
I think it is obvious that those of us that were 'real crew member[s]' could tell that you were not (hence the questions to that effect) is that you clearly do not have 'a pretty good picture of what was going on', at least not in the UK MPA fleet with a wider range of tasks filled and a much larger AOR than the Netherlands patrolled :rolleyes:

I do get so fed up of the comments about other 'assets' being able to fulfil the roles that Nimrod MR1/2 did or 4 would have done. In my time I did many national 'jobs' that no other UK asset could have done and that no UAV could presently (or in the foreseeable future) do! As has been said many times, much of the Nimrod tasking is simply not talked about in open source (or in Number 10 by the look of SDSR!)

MadMark!!! :mad:

[Not_a_boffin]

Biggus

Wot, no

YouTube - Stingray TV intro (1964) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E06cNv55jTs)

??
Or even Viz's Scooter Dolphin Boy for that matter!

[Biggus]

Not_a_boffin,

We're spoilt for choice...

YouTube - Thunderbird 4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=---1WSwwN6A)

[RumPunch]

The Picture of the A400M in Coastguard colours did make me chuckle. The US military flying an Airbus.

The MR2 was stealthy in its job and Im sure (dont quote me) had an element of surprise over the P3 as the vibrations of the P3 could be picked up by enemy submarines thus the Nimrod with speed and the best aircrew gave it an advantage.

Ok I know thats Sub warfare and the Nimrod carried out more essential tasks than any other asset in the UK inventory so yes the UK will miss what the Nimrod took to the party, Can anything fill that gap ...No and even if we had the P8 in service it is not designed for carrying out the other tasks that the Nimrod carried out.

The Government have made this decision they will be the ones that will be accountable when the first russian submarine sails down the Thames with the red flag waving, or might be an Iranian one how we shall all laugh.

[LookingNorth]

...when the first russian submarine sails down the Thames with the red flag waving, or might be an Iranian one how we shall all laugh.

Just signalling the Thames Barrier boys to raise the barrier won't cost much.

[In thrust i trust]

Do we really need an MPA?..............Yes

Get a grip Cameron.

[RumPunch]

Brilliant Looking North , that would make me chuckle :ok:

[ShortFatOne]

They won't need to so long as it isn't an especially high tide. The barrier is open most of the time and generally only closes to protect London from the effects of high spring tides.

[keesje]

The Picture of the A400M in Coastguard colours did make me chuckle. The US military flying an Airbus.

http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID=35742
Chuckle on. US Coastguard fly Eurocopter Dauphins for ages, and the Army is introducing large numbers of Eurocopter helis (part of EADS just like Airbus).

I think programs like the armed Predator C Sea Avenger and the growing role of naval satellite surveillance might be some of the reason investing billions in a upgraded MPA platform for the next 30 yrs did get enough priority.

Dismissing everyone asking questions on the total MPA task package obviously did not work for the MR4.

Maybe the RAF ASW/MPA contingent was a bit too convinced of itself and how things would develop. Maybe they were a bit lazy on listening and looking around. We don't know yet, time and the commission will tell.

[Jayand]

I still think a cost effective future compromise could be obtained with a smaller aircraft that just covers SAR and basic ASUW.
The rest of the tasks are like I earlier stated just insurance against the extremely unlikely that we can't afford.
The Dutch seem to be managing.
There has been much scaremongering about how this decision will come back to bite us in the future, if you believe so then lets here some specifics because all the time we had the nimrod it didn't drop anything in anger, even the Vulcan managed that at the end of it's life!
And I am fully aware of the other tasks it carried out and was never scared of what might of been had they not been around.
It's no longer a great secret of their involvement against drugs and to be honest the money it cost might have been better spent on the Police.

[camelspyyder]

A lot of pro-Dutch sentiment on here, but since when did they have a nuclear deterrent to protect?

Also, whose aircraft did they rent when unable to cover their own long range SAR commitment in the Carribean?

Kinloss' Nimrod MR2 of course.

CS:)

[Evalu8ter]

Simple solution (for a RW mate anyway...).

Scrap the E3 and replace with French E3/E2 on a time share basis (ashore and afloat).

Buy a small force of Hoovers (great value out of AMARC) to cover the approaches to Faslane and deploy a flight on the CVF for ASW - again, share with the French. Turbo-trackers if you're being stingy....

Lease a small fleet of deicated USCG-esque patrol/SAR ac. A derivative of a CASA or C27J should do the job nicely and useful for MACP in an emergency. Oh, and stop faffing with SAR-H.

The days of having one-trick ponies are over (well, apart from Typhoon it seems....), a sensible mix of s/h and leased airframes should cover all of the bases and provide good value for defence.

[Jayand]

Long range SAR in the Carribean? oh is that what they were doing?
and they were working for the Americans not the Dutch!
I have covered the Nuclear deterrant argument, if we ever need to use it were ****** anyway and lets be hones 9 airframes wasn't really a credible force!

[keesje]

A lot of pro-Dutch sentiment on here

Not at all. I and many others were pretty sick when then wiped away 13 good updated P3C, 80 yrs of global naval fixed wing experience and sold them cheap to the Germans and Portugese. It took some time to see the bigger picture.

Privat capacity was hired, F60s were converted, partners were paid to fill the gabs.

I think the UK will now have the opportunity to make a clean start, using smart new technology and cooperation to meet new requirements.

Maybe we can cooperate, within EC Cameron and Rutten seem to become best friends rather quickly at the moment.

[camelspyyder]

If you'd spent 2 months staying in a crappy Dutch barracks in the Carribbean, I think you'd remember who you were working for and what the tasking was...:hmm:

CS

[EdSett100]

A lot of mention has been made about the loss of longe range SAR. Well, there is one thing that needs to be made clear. Longe range SAR is not necessarily the responsibility of the MOD. We have the Maritime and Coastguard Agency who should bear the responsibility, given the resources, of course. The MOD needs only to look after its own men and machines. This, we have done with great success since the Battle of Britain and, of course, our military SAR assets have been made available to the MCA, whenever possible since then to meet our international commitment. Now that we are without Nimrod, the loss of long range SAR is no longer a MOD problem to resolve, except when we deploy our single engine fast jets overseas (oh, no we won't have any soon!). Perhaps it is for this reason that a central figure (the PM) was seen to take the decision to cancel Nimrod MRA4.

My second point is quite simply this: I sincerely doubt the RAF will ever again be tasked with a dedicated maritime air capability. Any replacement LRMPA will fall to the RN. Why would the RAF Board want to add to their problems by procurring and suporting a capability that has erstwhile been closer to RN ops than either land or air ops. I refer only to LRMPA. Of course, the MOD could try to buy a multi-role, adaptable, agile machine that operates over land and over sea and allocate it to the RAF. But we just tried that, didn't we?

[EdSett100]

Also, whose aircraft did they rent when unable to cover their own long range SAR commitment in the Carribean?




You don't believe we went there for that, do you?

[Mad_Mark]

Long range SAR in the Carribean? oh is that what they were doing?
For the 2 month period between the P3's going and the F60's arriving - YES!

and they were working for the Americans not the Dutch!
Any other flying done whilst there (not a lot, just enough to maintain crew currency) was multi-national, some with no US involvement at all :ooh:

Also, whose aircraft did they rent when unable to cover their own long range SAR commitment in the Carribean?
You don't believe we went there for that, do you?
For those 2 months - YES!


MadMark!!! :mad:

p.s. Come on people, it's single R and double B ;)


[Edited to add a reply to post by EdSett100]

[Not_a_boffin]

Twenty or so Hoovers would be an interesting option (particularly if KS3 & ES 3 included), but where would the funds come from to bring them back?

70+ B frames at AMARC and must be some relatively low-timers among them.

[Jayand]

Camel I have spent longer in much worse places and still dont remember who, why or what we were there for!!
The dutch owned the barracks but I am pretty sure you were not there for just SAR:cool:.
The Geography of their base was the reason you were there.

[MFC_Fly]

The Geography of their base was the reason you were there.The lack of Dutch SAR cover was the reason that we were there :ugh:

As Madmark said, we did fly occasionally whilst there. Our crew was scrambled once during our stay, but that was for a Dutch non-SAR tasking! The other flights included 2 training sorties (less than 4 hours each), a 7 hour UK 'fly the flag around the UK dependencies' sortie and only 4 "gee man, since you're in theatre can you guys help us out" multi-national sorties - but nothing to the scale and intensity of our usual Caribbean (happy Madmark???) deployments. My flying during our 'wonderful' stay at Suffisant POW Camp (with inedible food :yuk:) averaged less than 10 hours a week with flight times averaging less than 5h30m compared to my previous 'visit' during which I flew more than 25 hours a week averaging 8h20m per flight.

We were there to fill the hole left in the Dutch SAR cover whilst they chopped from one aircraft type to another (poor planning if you ask me - getting rid of one aircraft type before its replacement is ready and then having to rely on other nations to help you out - oh, hang on, that sounds familiar :ugh:)

MFC

[Mad_Mark]

Caribbean (happy Madmark???)
Yes thanks MFC :E

MadMark!!! :mad:

[NURSE]

Simple answer yes we do need a MPA.
Should we continue pouring money into MRA4 no.

Given that we are an Island and rely on seaborne trade to provide many of the products we use being able to patrol our aproaches from sea and air is a vital function.
The MPA role is now proving to be more important given piracy is on the rise and the smuggling of weapons, drugs and people into this country are major concerns. And thats before Anti sub, SAR and Int gathering are taken into account.
Yes Nimrod was a superb aircraft but it has an unhappy history when it comes to new variants AEW3 was a failure and so has MRA4 due to poor planning, contracting and execution. It is sad to see them go but how close to being an operational aircraft was the MRA4 and how much spin is being put out by BaE systems. We could probably pour another £4 billion into it and get the same result and there are only a few countries producing "New" MPA's at present. But I do think the descision should be revisited at a later date and Britian should get back into the Maritime Patrol game.

[andyy]

Surely much of the cost of a LRMP a/c is the systems/ sensors & not necessarily the airframe. The system/ sensor designs still exist, so if the Govt recognises the need for an LRMP at some point in the near future (unlikely, I know) then those systems could be integrated in to a new airframe. OK, I know its not that simple, as there's weapons carriage & sonobuouy dispensing to consider but it could be done. The Nimrod airframes may have been broken up but the Intellectual Property behind the black boxes that were supposed to actually make the aircraft in to a weapon system still exists.

In the short term, is there any way at all that any of those ASW/ ASuW systems/ sensors could be integrated into the E-3D? Probably not but is it worth asking these sorts of lateral questions?

[Pontius Navigator]

A lot of mention has been made about the loss of longe range SAR. . . . Long range SAR is not necessarily the responsibility of the MOD.

Long range SAR was established for MILITARY rescue.

We have the Maritime and Coastguard Agency who should bear the responsibility, given the resources, of course.

Which would have led to duplication of effort. And use of Military SAR for non-military incidents has always been accepted as it is good training for military rescues.

Now that we are without Nimrod, the loss of long range SAR is no longer a MOD problem to resolve, except when we deploy our single engine fast jets overseas (oh, no we won't have any soon!). Perhaps it is for this reason that a central figure (the PM) was seen to take the decision to cancel Nimrod MRA4.

We have been both lucky and the beneficiaries of greatly improved engine reliability.

[davejb]

Jayand,
And I am fully aware of the other tasks it carried out and was never scared of what might of been had they not been around.


From that statement I can confidently state you ARE NOT fully aware of the other tasks that were performed, you may well know of SOME of the other tasks Nimrod has performed over the years. Policemen, in several situations I was involved in, would have got rather wet....

Also, if you are going to reduce protection on your SSBN force, on the grounds that 'you'll be up **** creek by then anyway' then it makes no sense to have the BNs in the first place - so cancel Trident and save even more money. If our lords and masters insist on retaining the BNs then they should ensure they can deploy safely.

Dave

[Jayand]

Dave you should never assume as to be confident of what other people know, it makes an ass of u and me!! lol could not resist.
I AM fully aware of the tasks and not having the capability does not scare me, unless I go windsurfing at 30 West:ok:
The SSBN debate is a good one and for what it's worth yes I would consider scrapping it.

[sargs]

I AM fully aware of the tasks

Fella, you've just put yourself firmly in the "I know everything the Nimrod ever did" camp. I have to say, after many years flying MR1 and MR2, I don't know everything that happened - other squadrons carried out some unique tasks that others did not need to know, even fellow maritime aircrew.

Dave, you can't tell youngsters anything these days.......

[davejb]

Which would be all well and good, but I am not talking about any task that would occur anywhere near 30W.

Nimrod crews, and occasionally squadrons, have deployed over the past 30 years to my knowledge (not having been in maritime prior to 79) on a wide variety of jobs - some of which you will still find those involved will not talk about, even 30 years later. It is a fact that being on the squadrons didn't even mean that you got to know what everyone was doing, and you could even be on a crew flying a sortie and not be privy to all that was involved... there are probably even ex Nimrod crew out there who never did anything at all unusual....

So, some of the things I was involved with were important to the UK (and sometimes our allies), and I can see how those jobs probably still need doing, and we currently have no means to do them. I can also think of several things that MAY need doing, that will cause a big problem if they do come up and we still have no capability.

We are taking a capability holiday, which is a bit of a gamble - now in all truth we may well get away with it, get off scot free, never find ourselves looking at something with a sick feeling in our stomachs knowing there's nothing we can do about it. On the other hand we could get caught out very badly ... it's really a question of risk, how much risk is appropriate? I and several others think the risk is too high, but like all risk it's only actually proved to be too high when something goes badly wrong, and if the coin toss doesn't turn out all wrong then eventually some weasel turns round and claims that because $**t didn't happen that the risk was justified... so let's hope we never have to find out how bad it could get.

Dave

Sargs - just as I was typing! I have no idea what it was like in the rest of the RAF, but Nimrod int was always compartmentalised - if you didn't need to know, then generally you didn't get to know! (That isn't to say that onve you'd been around the block a few times you didn't, occasionally, get quite good at guessing).

[Jayand]

What about ASTOR, couldn't it be converted, tweaked a little given a few radar software updates and be used as a SAR, ASUW platform relatively cheaply?
Its going to be out of a job after Afghan and is paid for.

[Pontius Navigator]

I thought Sentiel was maxed out for weigh before you even consider stores.

Has it even got a galley?

The Sunderland even had a Wardroom but the Shack had to make do with a Mess and the Nimrod only had a galley/canteen :)

[Mad_Mark]

Jayand, what is your background? It is clear from your posts that you have no idea about the jobs that that Nimrod MR did or what was actually done to achieve the mission, be it SAR, ASUW, ASW, Spec Ops, etc... :ugh:

MadMark!!! :mad:

[keesje]

sargs, you make me curious,

do mean checking out friends, relay for folks that shouldn't be there, flag waving, tracking contacts, mapping environments, cat and mouse, listening, dropping weird stuff in strange places?

[Pontius Navigator]

keesje, you missed out being in two or even three places at the same time.

And then saying you were some place else doing something different.

[Ubehagligpolitiker]

Check Keesje's background
Age:43Biography:Airline / aerospace for 20 yrsLocation:netherlandsInterests:watersportsOccupation:aeros pace

I think that that the closest he's been to an MPA is his current fishing expedition

[Jayand]

Mad mark my background is not relevant, the question I asked was.
I am talking about a platform that could perform SAR and a level of ASUW.
I am not saying it will do everything that an MR 2 did or an MRA 4 might of, however the sentinal has an extensive comms fit including link, satcome etc, a modern glass cockpit, a modern military radar and some sort of mission system.
Now it is not beyond the means of some clever people with a bit of money to redevelop this platform and make it a useable SAR ASUW bit of kit.
If you think it is not possible then fine but you have your head in the sand and are still smarting after loss of the Nimrod.

[Tiger_mate]

I think that people will be 'smarting the loss of Nimrod' for decades to come, and it will go down in history as has the TSR2.
Personally I think that the UK public should smart the loss of MPA LRSAR until such time as the glaring gap in defence is resolved.
....and I have no MPA time whatsoever. But I am a UK Citizen & Taxpayer.

It is not often I would wish for a Fishing Rights dispute, but right now the Icelandics or Spanish could do us all a big favour. Cod War anyone?

[aw ditor]

There is' a Mackerel dispute going on with the Faero Islands. Will that do?

[Pontius Navigator]

Would aircraft in the mushroom farm be better aboe to take on an ASUW role? They have the weight capacity, reasonable radar, and a reasonable comms suite. They have the space for additional dedicated consoles so could carry a modern electro-optic turret and any additional comms gear.

SAR top cover would be a breeze but surface search would be a waste of flying time.

[andyy]

PN, thnat's the very question I asked in post #65 but didn't get an answer from anyone.