Marshall proposes C-130 MPA conversion to UK

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Marshall proposes C-130 MPA conversion to UK (http://www.janes.com/products/janes/defence-security-report.aspx?ID=1065929958&channel=defence)

Marshall Aerospace is offering to upgrade the UK Royal Air Force's (RAF's) Lockheed Martin C-130 Hercules transport aircraft with a palletized 'roll-on roll-off' maritime patrol aircraft (MPA) mission kit.

The upgrade would help fill the capability gap that has resulted from the retirement in May 2011 of the BAE Systems Nimrod MR.2 and the cancellation of the Nimrod MRA.4 MPAs in the 2010 Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR).

With the retirement of the 1970s-era MR.2 (upgraded from the MR.1 standard which entered RAF service in 1969) and the axing of MRA.4, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) declared it would take a 'capability holiday' from the dedicated airborne maritime patrol mission. Instead, the role would be taken on by other assets in the RAF inventory, it said.

Marshall Aerospace feels that, of all the platforms in RAF service, the C-130 is best placed to assume the added mission. "The feasibility of using the C-130 in maritime patrol activity is a reasonable extension of the [aircraft's] role, using its adaptability and flexibility as a platform able to accept role changes," a company spokesperson told Jane's .

The concept would see any of the RAF's 24 C-130Js and approximately 11 C-130Ks (the 'K' fleet is being drawn down with aircraft being retired on a monthly basis) equipped to take a 'quick change conversion' mission kit.

Comments?

[BEagle]

Well, we all know how very well Arfur Daley's glass-cockpit TriStar conversion went, so there can be little doubt that they'd find no difficulty at all with a C-130 MPA conversion.....:\

Has ZD949 now been scrapped?

[Shackman]

And of course the crews will all come fully trained (and motivated), and the weapons/SAR kit/Buoys will all be cleared for release as soon as the role change has been applied and the hours for role currency training will be available in between Op hours etc etc etc.

[TheSmiter]

Wise words Shackman!

I was gonna say it's a shame you can't get roll on-roll off crews, cos from where I'm sitting, they long gone brother. See that swingin door? :ugh:

[StopStart]

And of course the crews will all come fully trained (and motivated), and the weapons/SAR kit/Buoys will all be cleared for release as soon as the role change has been applied and the hours for role currency training will be available in between Op hours etc etc etc.

That's the spirit! Especially as everything else we've ever bought has come with Instant Crew Qualification & Role Clearances. :rolleyes:

Working on the assumption that burying a couple of Nimrods in the Pet Cemetary in the hope they'll rise from the dead probably isn't going to work, how about trying to find a solution with what we have actually got? How about actually hard-modifying a few Hercs to be role specfic LRMP/LRSAR? We're scrapping a few Js early (mental, obviously) so perhaps that could be refitted as dedicated maritime assets. They're obviously never going hunt down and sink Russian subs but they'd be pretty good for long range SAR/Patrol and for lobbing stuff out the back of.

The Herc is a very versatile and capable platform as the Americans repeatedly demonstrate (105mm guns, Hellfires, TV stations, rescue platforms, jammers etc etc). The RAF could do a lot more with its C130s if it wasn't quite so scared of anything even vaguely out of the ordinary :rolleyes:

[Neptunus Rex]

Where are they going to put the weapons bay for Lindholme, Torpedos etc?

What about lookouts for SAR? Hanging off an open ramp?

They're 'avin' a laugh!

[muppetofthenorth]

USCG seems to think they're decent enough for SAR and -limited- MPA ops. Not that crazy an idea.

[DummyRun]

Neptunus,

The SAR lookouts sit on the stools by the extra large SAR windows in the paradoors on the C-130J when we are carrying out the SAR role in the Sth Atlantic and now that we are also carrying out the SAR role in UK post Nimrod, so yeah, good point about the SAR lookouts..........

Anyway, all ridiculous, someone will suggest converting C-130J Mk5s into MPA/tankers next!

I'm looking forward to seeing Voyager and Atlas sat on the ramp at Mount Pleasant.

Er, Stoppers, do you think I'll live that long?

DR.

[ShortFatOne]

If the Hercs are available as a platform then that can only be for one of 2 reasons;

1. The airframes are knackered and have no useful life left (without major overhaul) or
2. We can't afford to keep them in service.

Assuming that we are actually removing the Hercs from Service because of 2, why would we suddenly have the money to produce a lash-up using a palletised mission system (which doesn't exist in that sense - yes there are some MRA4 mission systems on pallets, that's a whole world away from a "palletised mission system")?

The capability has gone and it won't come back with half-arsed Frankensteinian attempts at resurrecting life from a dead corpse. It will take a lucid, coherent and, most importantly, properly funded strategy to begin to regain even a small part of the capability that has been unceremoniuosly dumped overboard.

Pulling My Yellow and Black handle tomorrow. :sad:

[StopStart]

Lookout? Hmmm... no idea

http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h64/judgesaw/IMG_0537.jpg http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h64/judgesaw/IMG_0536.jpg

Weapons? Damn......

http://cdn.wn.com/pd/1e/e7/405aed9d5ebaadaee182cc6acb79_grande.jpg
http://wapedia.mobi/thumb/4d8e504/en/fixed/470/313/Ac130_gunship.jpg?format=jpg

Airdrop rescue gear/boats? This is futile, it'll never work......

http://cdn.wn.com/pd/28/ee/2ba0aa23c341f7b7570fbfa19fbc_grande.jpg


Next please..... :cool:

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

SFO,

"It will take a lucid, coherent and, most importantly, properly funded strategy to begin to regain even a small part of the capability that has been unceremoniuosly dumped overboard."

Will you stop that nonsense. Right now!

Duncs:ok:

PS. You got a job yet?

[StopStart]

If the Hercs are available as a platform then that can only be for one of 2 reasons;

1. The airframes are knackered and have no useful life left (without major overhaul) or
2. We can't afford to keep them in service.

Or of course

3. The mighty A400 is coming to save the day so we can make a saving ditching the Mk5s.

Do we then:

a) sell at wa below market value as is our way
or
b) Use them as a LRMP SAR platform given that the rest of the C130J fleet will be soldiering on anyway (minimal additional support, IPT blah costs).

As I said before, it would never be a Nimrod but it would answer all those woe-is-me-we-have-no-SAR points that keep being raised.

[ShortFatOne]

Stopping it now Sir!

Nope, trusting to luck (and hoping the CPL/IR arrives in the post - they've taken the money!).

Got the next 4 months deployed to get the CV sorted and then start the fun of resettlement and terminal leave in the New Year.

Worst comes to the worst, I think Stagecoach are still hiring in Elgin!:ok:

[ShortFatOne]

It won't answer anything without money.

[StopStart]

Correct. But if they decide they want a LR SAR aircraft then modding something we already have is a "cheap" option.

It's all pie in the sky though as if we all survive the next few years of capability gap it will simply prove we don't need an LRMP. Job done :(

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

MPC-130 works for me; however, as stated previously - we're skint!

I just hope that it gets sorted before the lack of LRMPA results in unnecessary deaths.

Duncs:ok:

[ShortFatOne]

"Correct. But if they decide they want a LR SAR aircraft then modding something we already have is a "cheap" option."

Which is a common mistake that many people make. Modding the MR2 to make the MRA4 was seen to be the cheap option, it didn't save anything at all, just made the job more complex and more costly.

[NutLoose]

Well what does this say.............

Marshalls have recognised what our Government seem to have missed, there is a requirement for an MPA aircraft.....

What else does it say?

Possibly they believe the UK Gov is stupid enough to scrap a complete package that was on its eve of delivery and will then shell out tons of money to develop another one, Money that could have been used to see the one we had into service........

Just about right that!

[Mend em]

SFO,

Completely the wrong place, but can't think of another place, so - best of luck to you (and to Mrs SFO) from a former colleague in the NW - it was a blast while it lasted and a privilege to work with people such as yourself. We tried our best, but it wasn't enough.

Regards

[Two's in]

Possibly they believe the UK Gov is stupid enough to scrap a complete package that was on its eve of delivery and will then shell out tons of money to develop another one, Money that could have been used to see the one we had into service........

Because that's never happened before.

The capability has gone and it won't come back with half-arsed Frankensteinian attempts at resurrecting life from a dead corpse.

Don't be too harsh - the MRA4 wasn't all that bad.

[sturb199]

I heard that as GR4 is taking on most other roles, 41 Sqn are trialling a Lindholme fit for the Tonka as we speak!!! ;)

[airpolice]

Marshalls?

Is this the same company that drilled holes in the wrong part of Tornado fleet?

[Evalu8ter]

Hmm,
The problem with the RAF have with the multi-role potential is twofold. Firstly, we've seldom had any spare capacity as we've flogged the frames to death - often in the semi-strat role it wasn't meant for to paper over the failings in procurement and the supportability issues with other aging fleets. Secondly, the RAF hierarchy has always ignored the usefulness of multi-role large ac whenever they became a threat to FJ; AC130 or Harvest Hawk - might endanger Jag/Harrier/GR4 (as would the Nimrod if it had been allowed to drop wpns when based at Basra rather than rely on GR4s/Tankers etc miles away...). The irony is that we've lost the Jag/Harrier anyway and savaged the GR4 front line....Genius...

As for dedicated ASW, perhaps a non-starter, but as a multi-role LRMPA why not? Oh, perhaps BAES have a pod that'll fit on a Typhoon...

[ShortFatOne]

Thank you for the kind words, I shall pass them on to Mrs SFO!

And I hope that life is starting to return to some sort of normality for you and the many great people I had the pleasure of working with over the last 9 years.

I had hoped to get back down over the summer hols to catch up with folks but I am deploying to sunnier climes next week for 4 months (they are getting their pound of flesh - to be fair, I've got plenty spare!).:ok:

[Rigga]

Evalu8r has about the best option.

The "RAF" has never made any good or long lifed item from messing about with Mods to develop some new roles. All attempts have resulted in over-weight and over-stressed airframes that needed to be carefully nurtured to preserve the frame's life, and the crew's.

The only cash-effective answer is to start with a new frame built for the job.

Some areas of the forces have filled their gaps with smaller fuel efficient frames (B350's) and yes there is some new larger frames about.

But trying to reinvent the old "dreamship" from scrapped vans is a pure pipedream belonging to fans of BA Barracus. (And even his team didn't think of doing that to an aircraft!)

Of course, another obstacle SHOULD be the new MAA...if it ever gets its Sh1t together. The MAA should not be able to approve another bVggered-about botch job for future use.

[Doptrack]

SFO

What Mend Em said - Keep yourself safe and good luck with the job hunting

DS

[Modern Elmo]

As I said before, it would never be a Nimrod but it would answer all those woe-is-me-we-have-no-SAR points that keep being raised.

What could a Nimrod that a P-8 can't do as well or better?

Or, if you want a turboprop maritime patrol plane, let's compare the merits of Marshall's C130 mods. to the price and capability of a rebuilt and modernized P-3? There's going to be some such P-3's on the market.

Maybe the RAF could benefit from having a couple of AC-130's. That's something to talk about.

[ShortFatOne]

Thanks D, I shall endeavour to keep myself intact, although it will be hard in downtown Naples!

Take care and best of luck for the future.:ok:

[Widger]

The problem is, that all discussion regarding the loss of the MRA4 focusses first and foremost on SAR. A LRMPA is much more than that and SAR is but a small element of its role and indeed, if you look at the international requirements, the MOD legally, only has to legally provide for Military operations.

LRMPA is about (amongst other tasks) locating tracking and prosecuting submarines and other surface contacts. To do that you first of all need a high transit speed to get you to the location, then the ability to loiter for a long period whilst using a multitude of sensors, in all sea states to find, fix and track and then if required, deliver a weapon to remove any threat.

By focussing on Search and Rescue, the argument is over simplified and does not recognise the true requirement of blue water maritime patrol.

[The Helpful Stacker]

Does anyone else get a feeling of dread when they see that Marshalls want to fiddle about with RAF aircraft in a new and previously untried manner?

[4mastacker]

airpolice,

I think it was Airworks with hammers and chisels rather than drills.

[cyrilranch]

How much would it cost to say have up to 7 radar kits able to roll-on /roll-off for about 6 aircraft which are re-lifed.
1. aircraft are already bought-need( overhauling.)
2.pilots/Nav's A/v current on C130J
3. radar operator may need be re-trained(I think somewhere there are some on exchange tours)
4.Seaseacher Radar already bought and pay for along with console.with Bae/Thales
assuming that was not destroyed aswell as the aircraft.
5.Thales have already done the design proving paperwork for aonther type of aircraft with apalletize option for another country.(TOSS)
6.Navy says they have some dosh a/v to pay for this.

What could go wrong:rolleyes:

[Willard Whyte]

USCG are keen.

USCG: Long Range Surveillance Aircraft (http://www.uscg.mil/acquisition/lrs/default.asp)

[Clockwork Mouse]

We don't need a long range surveillance aircraft. We need a long range maritime patrol aircraft with a surface and sub-surface target location and attack capability. Search and rescue is important but is a second priority.

[Two's in]

Marshalls?

Is this the same company that drilled holes in the wrong part of Tornado fleet?

No. Hansard is your friend.

Mr. Morgan To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the flight safety risk of the damage done by Airwork Ltd. in the course of the F3 Tornado modification programme; and if he will make a statement.

§ Mr. Aitken The damage, if unrepaired, would have reduced the aircraft's safe fatigue life and could have posed a flight safety risk. The detailed investigation now underway will assess the extent to which the damage to each aircraft affects its structural integrity and determine the most appropriate repair scheme.

[Modern Elmo]

How much would it cost to say have up to 7 radar kits able to roll-on /roll-off for about 6 aircraft which are re-lifed.
1. aircraft are already bought-need( overhauling.)

You seem to assume that the RAF has otherwise idle C130's on hand, or else the money to buy more low-time C-130's.

Also, why would a radar display on a roll-around cart be needed?

[pr00ne]

Clockwork mouse

"We need a long range maritime patrol aircraft with a surface and sub-surface target location and attack capability."

Actually we don't, not according to the Prime Minister, Defence Secretary, Chief of the Defence Staff and Chief of the Air Staff.

[dalek]

Widger

I am not even sure that a government of any persuasion is interested in a re-run of the cold war, hunting down Russian submarines.
At some stage in the foreseeable future, a large cruise liner is going to sink in the Eastern Atlantic.
We have nothing that can even carry any rescue/ survival equipment to 20W.
If / when this sinking happens with the subsequent loss of life, the political repercussions will be enormous.
If the USCG find the C130J a suitable SAR aircraft, I am sure we could use it, as we are planned to have airframes to spare.
I wish we could find someone other than Marsall's for the conversion.

[500N]

dalek

Re "We have nothing that can even carry any rescue/ survival equipment to 20W."

What about C17 ?

Can anything be pushed out the back of one like on a Herc ?

(This is a genuine question).

[Modern Elmo]

How much would it cost to say have up to 7 radar kits able to roll-on /roll-off for about 6 aircraft which are re-lifed.

How does the antenna attach? :confused:

[The Old Fat One]

We don't need a long range surveillance aircraft. We need a long range maritime patrol aircraft with a surface and sub-surface target location and attack capability. Search and rescue is important but is a second priority.

Spot on...and you not even maritime!

SAR is emotive because it is a human life issue, but if you take the emotion (and public relations) out of it...in operational terms it was a minor and relatively insignificant task....nothwithstanding the occasional major event, such as Piper Alfa (a task, by the way, which a C130 could not hope to do because it does not have the radar, comms fit, tactical naviagtion system and a trained crew to put it all together)

As you now know, most of the people who post about MPA, and the platforms that might fill the capability gap, simply don't know what the job entails and no amount of posting by ex Nimrod types is going to stop their misguided nonsense.

As to the reason the capability has gone...the government does not seem to be sure about this...

One day it is because the MRA4 programme was fundamentally flawed; the next day it is because we don't need this old cold war capability. Yer man Fox seems to change his mind like the weather on this one.

Defence is an insurance policy isn't it? We don't really know if we need any given capability until the balloon goes up. Funny thing though...every other major player maritime nation have got them and seem to be keeping them.

Still, we're Brits...we always know best.

[cyrilranch]

How does the antenna attach?

antenna is mounted on the tail-ramp which is aslo part of the roll/on roll off pallet

[ShortFatOne]

"antenna is mounted on the tail-ramp which is aslo part of the roll/on roll off pallet"

I haven't laughed so much in ages :D Thank you, it made my week!

[dalek]

500N

Apologies. A C17 would certainly work. But for the forseeable future, every airframe could be tasked a dozen times over.
The current plan does give us spare C130J from2015 onwards.

[jamesdevice]

SFO

You can laugh, but I'm sure I can remember a similar plan from the 1970's proposed as an Orion replacement (or maybe a budget alternative to the AEW3)
The concept was for a complete plug-in demountable module which slid into place once the tail ramp had been removed. Sensors were in a rear fairing / pressure bulkhead on the module, replacing the ramp
Details were in one of the journals but I can't remember which after all these years. Memories are hazy but I seem to remember it was another joint Lockheed / Marshalls concept

[ShortFatOne]

JD, I don't doubt that there was a concept back in the 1970s. But AEW is a completely different role to LRMP.

Assuming that you could get someone in the MAA to sign off on the crew being irradiated every time the scanner (attached the pallet) was fired up, what happens when the aircraft then turns to investigate the radar contact?

If the ramp is removed to fit the mission system, where do the stores/weapons go?

[airpolice]

This all sounds a bit like Thunderbird 2.

[QTRZulu]

500N

Currently the UK has no intention of pushing stuff out of the back of a C17 unless its parked on a ramp somewhere in the world.

As much as the capability exists (the US do air drop with their C17s) and that the crews might like to do it, the current UK usage model does not allow for it I'm afraid!

[jamesdevice]

sorry I had a brain-fart there when I said AEW3. I wasn't thinking clearly
It was definitely a maritime patrol fit that they were talking about, not AEW

As far as i can remember they were talking about increased internal fuel capacity with weapons / survival equipment dropped from underwing racks - fitted in place of the external tanks

As regards irradiation - your guess is as good as mine

[tucumseh]

but I'm sure I can remember a similar plan from the 1970's proposed as an Orion replacement

This is perfectly true, but I recall it being the 80s. Perhaps I just caught the tail end of it. I believe it got further than concept and Boscombe were involved. The mod design should still exist somewhere (a Service Engineered Mod I think, so Marshall should have a copy:E) and should be dug out in case we're wasting money on duplicated effort!

I always assumed this to be the basis of AML's (Suppliers, not Engineers) extraordinary claim of 1996 that C130 was fitted with Active Dipping Sonar, to try to justify them wasting money on such kit for C130, while at the same time refusing to spend money on less important things, such as ESF/DAS.

[davejb]

I think you'll find that a towed, active dipping sonar is feasible Tuc.
You just require (in essence) an anvil, a length of cable to hang it from, and a microphone mounted a couple of feet above the anvil.

The sonar is deployed, and towed towards the estimated position of the submarine. Upon the acoustics operator hearing the 'clang' a button is pressed, a red light flashes beside the open C130 tail ramp, and the loadie pushes a palletised torpedo solution off the ramp.

Now here's the clever bit - the pallet dissovles in water, allowing the torpedo to swim free.

I'm surprised nobody else thought of it.

Dave

(c) Wile E Coyote/Acme Inc

[tucumseh]

davejb

The requirement, as stated by an AML Gp Capt supplier, was the same ADS as that fitted to RN Sea Kings. (Still got the minutes!). That is, pit head gear, honking great hole in floor, winch, 700+ feet of cable, submersible body, integrated with aircraft comms, radar, passive sonics etc. All designed assuming one is in the hover.

We thought him wrong, the hovering bit a dead giveaway, but apparently not and they pursued the order with rigour and the bosses' agreement. Actually, insistence. Even when the company pointed out the order was for obsolete versions of the kit from the early 80s which the RN no longer used, never mind C130s, they carried on. Luckily, the company simply refused to quote, but the practical effect was the money was committed so could not be used to buy kit we actually needed. Sorry, the serious element of a light-hearted reply.

[The Old Fat One]

DaveJB

Priceless.

True story...

In a position of responsibility I was once ordered by OC PSF to staff a GEMs proposal by an in flight catering SAC on "reusable sonobuoys" (very green).

My memo reply would nowadays be summed up by the internet vernacular...LOL.

I received a phone call from OC PMS suggesting I was "undermining" the purpose of GEMs and if I did not respond seriously, I would be hearing more about it.

So I did...in length. I think it filled about 3 days at work, but hey ho, I was still in the gym by 3.30 pm.

JD

I think SFO was not denying the existence or otherwise of the proposal of palletising the C130 with an MPA fit, although he is younger than me, so maybe he did not know it was a serious suggestion sometime back.

I think he was alluding to the fact that it was an idea somewhat lacking in common sense, sanity and any knowledge whatosever of maritime MPA operations.

It still is.

[jamesdevice]

just came across this from 2003

Hairy Buffalo II (http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.NavairNewsStory&id=2401)

not far from what Marshalls propose I assume???


"The Hairy Buffalo II system consists of an operator pallet, C4 shelter, and wing mounted ISR sensor pods based on Lockheed Martin’s reconfigurable SAMSON pod design. The sensors will provide all-weather static and moving target detection, tracking, identification, and targeting, for a variety of applications, including close air support, chemical/biological/radiological detection, and search and rescue. The operator pallet can be configured with up to four, mission-tailored operator positions that will perform sensor analysis and fusion, covering all mission phases. A 20-foot command, control, communications, and computer (C4) shelter, built by BAE Systems, will house the mission systems for processing sensor information into actionable targeting data. The Hairy Buffalo II C4 shelter is completely platform independent, suitable for ship and ground-based applications in addition to the C-130 configuration. "


details of the Lockheed Martin Special Avionics Mission Strap-On-Now (SAMSON) pod (http://articles.janes.com/articles/Janes-Electro-Optic-Systems/Lockheed-Martin-Special-Avionics-Mission-Strap-On-Now-SAMSON-pod-United-States.html)

[Siggie]

What a wonderful idea, build various interchangeable mission suites that can easily be slid in and out of the back of a Hercules, giving no visual indication that this aircraft had a different purpose to that of a transport aircraft. You'd almost wonder why somebody hasn't thought of it already.

http://i1007.photobucket.com/albums/af197/Philaitch/Herc.png

The USAF's Senior Scout roll-on/roll-off SIGINT capability includes the cargo bay operator shelter shown here, being loaded aboard a C-130E Senior Scout-configured transport aircraft. (Lockheed Martin)

[jamesdevice]

am I right in thinking that Snoopy's equipment was also installed in the same way?

[barit1]

Prolly 30 years ago a roll-on/roll-off module was available for the C-130. It was - TATAAAA - a VVIP suite. Secure comms, soundproofed, all the comforts (on smaller scale) of the Big Cheese's palace.

And about the same time I actually worked on a DHC-5D purpose-built for this role, not a RO/RO rig.

[ExAscoteer]

am I right in thinking that Snoopy's equipment was also installed in the same way?

Not exactly.

The sensors were hard wired but the Met Office st up down the back was effectively Portakabins.

[The Old Fat One]

I'm going give you just a few clues as to why this remains on non-starter for the MPA role...although I'm probably wasting my time.

Radar

The MPA needs a powerful surface search/ASW capable radar (Searchwater...one of the best). That's a lot of parts...some of which, notably the scanner, are not going to go in/on the pallet/container. No doubt the C130 nose can be modified to take the right sort of radar/scanner, but two problems arise...

Do you fit it common to all C130? (expensive)

Or do you just fit it to a few? (in which case your interchangeable roles just went out the window)

Sonobuoys

MPAs use heaps of them. They have to be stored (and they take up a sh1t load of space) and they have to be deployed (to be tactically sound, you ned both pressurised and unpressurised launcher options).

Where are the sonobuoys going to be stored? Inside or outside the pallet/container. If they are inside, boy is it going to be squashed. Where are the launchers? Will they be hull mounted and preloaded like the P3 (which will still need an internal supplement). Will the internal launchers be inside or outside the pallet. If they are inside that is going to required some pretty funky engineering to get the sonobuoy through the pallet wall and the aircraft hull? Good luck with that.

By the way, before suggesting that you can load up (and unload) the complete sonobuoy fit before and after each flight you might want to talk to armourer for an idea of exactly how long that takes. The sonbuoy manuracturers will be happy with that option though...all the mandhandling will see the unserviceability rate skyrocket, so they'll get to sell twice as many units.

Weapons

The C130 don't have a weapons bay do it? We gonna just shove all the dinghys/torpedos/harpoons/flares/ASTIs and whatever else they decide on the wings. It'll look good at air displays no doubt.

Pilots

Gotta say, I didn't think that coming off a CAMBS buoy onto the correct attack track on a fast evading nuc, at 300 ft, at night, was an intuituive pilot skill. I always was under the impression that our chaps worked pretty hard day in day out to get up to speed on that sort of thing. I guess these herc pilots will just take that in their stride, without the need for months of extra training and flying hours?

Or maybe we just keep the flight deck for their specific roles. Oops there goes the the interoperability idea again.

I could go on (and on and on) but you get the point. VIP fits, weather, SAR coastguard, SIGINT maybe, it's fine old bird. No doubt you could turn one into a purpose built MPA (although it seemed the Orion was a better candidate).

But sliding an MPA pallet/container in and out of a standard C130. Nope.

Let it go.

PS that does not suggest the Government won't throw money at it...in fact the more stupid the idea the more likely they are to try it.

[RileyDove]

In the entire history of the Nimrod fleet exactly how many air to surface weapons were used in anger -I suspect very few! The proposal from Marshall's seems to focus on providing a SAR enhanced role for the C-130 not a dedicated sub hunter machine . I should imagine that having the ability to drop meaningful equipment to those in distress is better than having no capability at all.

[jamesdevice]

Could that Telephonics 1700A martitime search radar in the Navy's new King Air trainers be fitted into one of those SAMSON pods?
It seems to be a fairly compact unit - and using it would give commonality with the navy helicopters


http://www.txgyro.com/10G_avionics_data_pn/telephonics/rdr-1700_flyer.pdf

[Rakshasa]

If we're truly that desperate for a fixed-wing pinger, there's a pair of MR.2 Shackletons at Gatwick, one at Coventry and two more at Paphos. They might need a bit of TLC though... :E

[Widger]

Riley Dove,

You do not have to drop a weapon to deter, that is the whole point but, you will have to drop a shedload of other stuff and have the endurance to hang around and the speed to get back and reload or you will need a fleet of about 100 dedicated C130MPA types, just to maintain a continuous patrol in the deep Atlantic. C130s, Dash 8s etc, will not cut the mustard. You need a large integrated platform, with high cruise speed and the ability to loiter for long periods, preferably AARA capable = less aircraft maximum effect = global reach = multi-tasking

Dalek

At some stage in the foreseeable future, a large cruise liner is going to sink in the Eastern Atlantic.
We have nothing that can even carry any rescue/ survival equipment to 20W.
.

So if the Department of trade or the IMO would like to bung the MOD a few million, then maybe the MOD could take on this task!

Responsibility for civil aeronautical and maritime SAR policy rests with the
Department for Transport, (DfT). As such, the DfT is responsible, through
the UK SAR Strategic Committee, for assessing the adequacy of UK civil
aeronautical and maritime SAR resources, response and co-ordination.

[QTRZulu]

jamesdevice

Not saying it would/could never happen but when you compare the RDR1700 to Searchwater (original not even 2k!) there is no comparison!

Its even worse if you look at what Searchwater 2K could have of achieved compared to a podded C-130 with what can only be described as a mediocre maritime radar.

I'm not trying to dwell in the past as what is done is done and any capability would be better than none at all, but to compare this to what the MR2 was capable of even just considering the SAR role is just wrong in my opinion.

[dalek]

Preaching to the converted Widger. I accept you expertise that a C130 will never make a decent MPA aircraft.
I know from my time at MPA that it could make a passable attempt at SAR.
Given a new radar and a palletised Comms cabin to bring it to USCG standard, it could do even better.

Whether the SAR aircraft is run by DfT or MOD will no doubt cause the usual inter departmental p**sing competition, but as far as operators and survivors are concerned, who cares.

Don't get me wrong, I would like the RAF to go back to the good old days of Blue Water anti-submarine capability. I just don't think the money will be forthcoming.