BAE RAF P3 procurement feasibility report

[Siggie]

An alleged report (around June this year) looking at the feasibility of obtaining P3s from the USA, either leased or bought, from 'Desert' storage or line aircraft.

Fact or fiction?

[1.3VStall]

It would be nice if it were true, but God help us if BAE Systems get involved!:\

[cornish-stormrider]

and cue Yakkety sax and spiing bow ties..... I'm off to check if someone has moved t'Barons calender forward to April the first.

[aw ditor]

P3 Modernisation' by Airbus Military?

[Roadster280]

Fit some modern jet engines and a state-of-the-art mission system.

I'm sure some of those were knocking around in Cheshire earlier this year.

[Biggus]

What if it is fact? That doesn't mean it will happen!!

Reports are written all the time, to look at costs, timescales, options, capabilities, etc, etc.

No doubt during the SDSR a variety of reports were written, on a number of options, it didn't mean those options were taken up.

This could be a BAE internal report, to enable them to having costings/options up their sleeve if so asked - and to actually get the costs right this time.

It could be an MOD sponsored/funded report, so the next time someone in government asks "...how much would it cost for the UK to get back into the MPA game..", the answer, "..the last time this was examined was in 2011, when the cheapest cost/least capable option was assessed to cost £X billion, with an estimated in service date of YY months from initiation. Of course minister, costing may well have risen since then...", all said in a Sir Humphrey type voice, will be readily available!


Fact or fiction, the possible existence of such a report in itself doesn't mean anything at his stage of the game!

[Sun Who]

If I was betting man, and I am, I'd suggest a converted UK version of this:ARMEE DE L'AIR Alenia/CASA CN-235 '52-ID' 066 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tiger111/4829564724/)
was more likely.

Sun.

[Biggus]

You mean something along the lines of the Irish CN-235....

253 - Ireland - Air Corps Casa CN-235 Aircraft Photo ID: 44082 | Airplane-Pictures.net (http://www.airplane-pictures.net/image44082.html)

[Cpt_Pugwash]

Siggie,
That's just one option in an on-going study into methods (or combination of methods ) of delivering a Wide Area Maritime Underwater Surveillance capability.:ok:

Edit - Biggus post #6 has the measure of it.

[grandfer]

Could do a lot worse than have half a dozen or so P-3s .:ok:

[Sun Who]

Biggus,

Yes Sir, I do.

Sun.

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

Sun,

I'd fly one of those. Not sure how happy I'd be at LL at 30W; but you have to cut your cloth to fit. It's infinately better than what we have at the moment!:mad:

Duncs:ok:

[The Helpful Stacker]

What do we need P3s for?

I thought the SDSR came to the conclusion that a nation surrounded by water, who is a net importer of goods and thus requires unhindered sea access and possessing ICBM armed submarines doesn't need maritime patrol aircraft?

[Siggie]

Biggus,

The fact that such a report has been asked for shows that the government has, at the best, doubts about the wisdom of scrapping the MPA fleet. Even if the report is only used to prove how expensive it would be to replace them.

Why would they feel the need to argue their case if there was no need for it?

[VX275]

Before anyone signs up for the P3 I do hope they have asked to see all the design source material for it so that the MAA can be satisfied.
"What do you mean Mr Lockheed when you say the US Navy wasn't bothered with all that stuff and so you trashed the Electra source material years ago because it cost money to store".
My guess is that the holes in the information will cost millions to fill for no obvious benefit.

[RileyDove]

Airbus has been modernising U.S supplied P-3's for Brazil at its facility in Spain. The RAF will undoubtedly go for the P-8 -its just a matter of time.

[Sun Who]

MoD can't afford the P8 and won't be in a position to do so inside a sensible timeframe.

Sun.

[Biggus]

Siggie,

First of all, I'm not trying to start a pis*ing contest!! Having said that....

You start off by asking if an "alleged" report is fact or fiction. I respond along the lines that even if it is fact (and I don't know if it is...) then that doesn't really prove anything! A case of "don't get your hopes up".

You are now saying, in response to my comment, "... The fact that such a report has been asked for shows that the government has, at the best, doubts about the wisdom of scrapping the MPA fleet. Even if the report is only used to prove how expensive it would be to replace them. ....".

First of all, this implies you now believe the "alleged" report to actually exist. Even if it does - who commissioned it? You talk of "the government" having doubts, but was it a report formally commissioned by what you refer to as "the government". Was it an internally commissioned MOD report, in which case it is someone within the MOD (CAS perhaps) who maybe has doubts. You mention BAE, is it a BAE report, in which case it is about possible commercial interests (perhaps a non-solicited bid?), and once again doesn't necessarily reflect a formal government view.

Finally, even if it was a "government", for which case I suppose you should read MOD minister (i.e. politician), commissioned report, it doesn't necessarily mean they have doubts. It could alternatively mean that they know some people won't let this go (a bit like WEBF and his Sea Harrier) and this is just further ammunition for the "no" to MPA camp the next time it comes up in an interview/discussion/debate.




For what it is worth, these are my own thoughts. The UK will eventually have to get back into the LRMPA game, but maybe at nowhere near the level of sophistication we previously had. Perhaps something along the lines of the CN-235 mentioned. It will not happen for at least another 5-6 years, on the basis it will require new money (unless something else is cut to pay for it) and we are currently broke, and the current band of politicians won't want to be seen to be doing a U-turn.

In terms of The Helpful Stackers comments on the SDSR, I believe the current government decided that the Nimrod MRA4 was non viable, but rather than saying it was a dead duck but we still need an MPA, came up with the line that "we don't need MPA" to help justify getting rid of the white elephant that the MRA4 had become. However, as I said, those are just my personal thoughts on the matter.

[Clockwork Mouse]

The RAF will undoubtedly go for the P-8
Perhaps it is just as likely, and logical, that the RN will go for the P-8.

[EW73]

In my humble opinion, the P3 is infinitely better than the P8...

I was really looking forward to the P7!

As an aside, did you know that the South Koreans have just signed up for eight additional P3Cs, which will double their fleet!

EW73

[Siggie]

Biggus,

In terms of The Helpful Stackers comments on the SDSR, I believe the current government decided that the Nimrod MRA4 was non viable, but rather than saying it was a dead duck but we still need an MPA, came up with the line that "we don't need MPA" to help justify getting rid of the white elephant that the MRA4 had become. However, as I said, those are just my personal thoughts on the matter.

and I 100% agree with those thoughts.

[FATTER GATOR]

'MoD can't afford the P8 and won't be in a position to do so inside a sensible timeframe.'

Quite a sweeping statement.
How much does a P8 cost?
How many do we need?
What is a 'sensible timeframe?'

Why is the RAF sending it's former Nimrod personnel to other countries to preserve their MPA skills?

[QTRZulu]

FG

While I fully applaud the 'Seedcorn' idea you refer too, only a handful of people will be departing for foreign shores (currently only about 10 I believe). Certainly not enough to resurrect a capability in 3 years or so when they are due to return. That's not to say it will never happen, but if the government were serious about getting back into maritime patrol with a half decent platform they sure have a strange way of going about it. A more realistic time frame is 15 years in my opinion and unless those guys that are going can remain overseas for that long (never going to happen) I fail to see what the MoD/RAF will really gain?

The 3 year overseas tour will most certainly not fit in with any government timetable for regenerating a/the capability, especially when we hear on a daily basis, we are broke and will be for quite some time to come. Even if we had the money, I don't see the political will let alone a champion within the MoD to try and drive this forward.:ugh:

Don't get me wrong I would love for UK plc to get back into maritime aviation as its an amazing job, performed by some truly amazing people, but I wouldn't hold your breath.

[glhcarl]

"What do you mean Mr Lockheed when you say the US Navy wasn't bothered with all that stuff and so you trashed the Electra source material years ago because it cost money to store".


Unless you know something I don't, that data is still stored in the basement vaults under Building B-1?

[Biggus]

My personal opinion - once again - is that the seedcorn concept represents little more than a fig leaf. At little, or no, cost the government/MOD can tell the world (and kid themselves too probably!) that the capability (MPA) can be re-generated rapidly if it is required.

As QTR says, what will happen in 3 years time, when the seedcorn are due to return home? Are they extended in post (indefinitely?) until the UK start to acquire a new MPA. If they are to be replaced - who by? Surely by definition, the reason you created the seedcorn in the first place, to preserve perishable skills, anyone you replace them with will have been out of the MPA game at least 4 years and will have less skills than those they are replacing!

If the UK went out tomorrow and ordered P-8s (still under development) or converted P-3s, we wouldn't see anything in this country for at least 3-4 years, quite possibly longer. Given the finances of the UK/MOD, any such MPA order won't be placed for at least 3.5 years. Thus any future capability is in the order of 6+ years away.

Posting a few (10?) people who are highly skilled in their specialization (MPA), but are probably relatively unemployable anywhere else in the RAF for some time, on an overseas MPA tour doesn't exactly require much effort on the part of the RAF/MOD but gives some (minimal) credibility to the words they are uttering about preservation of skills....




The MR2 stopped flying in Apr 2010, that's already 18 months ago. :(

[Jimlad1]

Interesting - ties in with what I've heard coming from exceptionally well placed individuals that there may well yet be an MPA capability, just not Nimrod.

The issue as I have understood it when briefed wasn't that the UK couldnt afford MPA, it was that it couldnt afford MRA4. MPA may yet return to our skies...

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

The plan is for a few more than 10 on Seedcorn; probably not enough, by the way, but more than 10. Moreover, most of the personnel best equipped to perform the Seedcorn roles were made redundant on 1 Sep 11.

Duncs:ok:

[Sun Who]

Fatter Gator said:

'MoD can't afford the P8 and won't be in a position to do so inside a sensible timeframe.'

Quite a sweeping statement.
How much does a P8 cost?
How many do we need?
What is a 'sensible timeframe?'

Why is the RAF sending it's former Nimrod personnel to other countries to preserve their MPA skills?

Fair point.
For clarity, MoD can't afford ONE P8 and appropriate DLoD support and won't be in a position to do so inside a sensible timeframe. Unitary cost is likely to be itro USD$280 million P-8A Poseidon / 737 MMA, Multi-Mission Maritime Aircraft (http://www.deagel.com/Maritime-Patrol-Aircraft/P-8A-Poseidon_a000294001.aspx). Admittedly unitary cost and price are not the same thing but it ain't gonna be cheap and we're broke. A sensible timeframe is this side of FF2020. Anything the other side puts you into a completely different set of planning assumptions.

The RAF is sending it's former Nimrod personnel to other countries to preserve their skills iot be able to man (or woman Reg) a platform it will be able to afford. I contend that platform is likely to be an Alenia 235/239 or simliar.

Best,

Sun Who.

[QTRZulu]

Duncs,

I know the plan is for more than that, but at the moment that is all that has been agreed with host nations. Unless something else has happened this week that number is woefully inadequate. Saying that, even if another 20 to 25 go, its sadly probably not going to be enough to get back anything approaching what has just been thrown away:{

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

QTR Z,

Nothing particular this week - that I am aware of, anyway. However, CA, NZ and AUS still add up to more than 10. USN 'will' add more.

Oh, and with the risk of sounding like an AEO - I concur!

Duncs:ok:

[Biggus]

Duncs,

AEOs don't concur!


They disagree by 5-10 degrees and 1 knot, to try and show that they actually have an opinion of their own!! ;)

[RileyDove]

I dont think its a case of P-8 being 'unaffordable' -I think the financial commitments of the various campaigns have been a big draw on finances.
However if we think 'small' in terms of a buy of six aircraft which could potentially be two 'North' -two 'South' acting as detached flights with two in maintainance / training and it becomes achievable.

[QTRZulu]

Duncs,

I didn't count the CA contingent as they had already gone before Seedcorn really got off the ground, although I suppose they are all part of the grand master plan. Even taking those guys into account we are still only in the mid teens until 'uncle Sam' comes knocking.

Still not enough in my opinion, but I suppose it really all depends on what the lords and masters have in mind - if indeed they actually have anything in mind!

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

QTR Z,

I agree entirely!

Duncs:ok:

[Aus_AF]

From what I've heard the P3's stored in the desert are not a really good option as the yanks had been calculating their fatigue life mathmatically incorrectly. I guess if the intent of the MoD was to go with the P3 option then the re-wing option would have to be on the cards straight up.

[QTRZulu]

Aus_AF

I would not be surprised by the fatigue life measurement and if memory serves me well I think we've been there, done that and got the T-shirt.

I can't remember it working out too well though:rolleyes:

[Always a Sapper]

A400M?

Simplistically put, but how about taking the electronic bits left over from the Nimrods (if they kept them that is) and make up palletised roll in/roll out mission modules that will fit in the back of a A400M and mount the sensors etc on wing hard points (if there any of course).

Or use the same airframe as the new supa-dooper tanker so you cut cost on the maintenance and flight deck training side of things?

Could always just buy a few 'Bears' (they gotta be well cheap these days) and then shoehorn the Nimrod bits in....

[RileyDove]

I think we need to clarify -the eight Indian P-8's are in production with the first one having flown . The US Navy machines are under evaluation -this isnt a concept aircraft -its a maritime patrol aircraft in production.

Forget any ideas of getting worn out P-3's -the push will be for RAF P-8 aircraft -BAe Systems already has input in the computing suite and I am sure its only a matter of time once a European launch customer has signed.

[Biggus]

An open source article states that the Indian P-8s were ordered in Jan 2009, and "....First deliveries aren’t expected until 2013 at the earliest, and the jets are expected to enter service “before 2015.”



All of which seems to confirm some of my comments in my post of 1339 21st Oct... That's post 25 of this thread.

[Aus_AF]

If you do look at P8 then wait till Spiral 12 of development, then it will be approaching the capability of what's getting around P3 wise at the minute.

[Biggus]

Riley Dove,

This gives a good picture of where the P-8 programme stands right now:

P-8A Poseidon - Naval Technology (http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/mma/)

In many ways it is comparable with where MRA4 was when it was cancelled, with 5 development aircraft still apparently undergoing testing and development, and low rate initial production of aircraft having commenced.

The first Indian P-8I has indeed flown, as this article illustrates:

Boeing P-8I aircraft for Indian Navy completes first flight - Economic Times (http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-09-29/news/30218415_1_p-8a-poseidon-reconnaissance-and-anti-submarine-warfare-maritime-)

but only a few weeks ago. Also note that the article says that mission systems are still to be installed!

While the P-8 is not a concept aircraft, it is still some way from being an operational, proven MPA. However, if you want new, it's pretty much the only game in town!





I still also believe that if we ordered them tomorrow (which we won't), we wouldn't see them for 3 years!

[OafOrfUxAche]

Perhaps it is just as likely, and logical, that the RN will go for the P-8.


If you accept that the likelihood is zero! It's never going to happen!

Every day that passes without Armageddon is further reassurance to the Government that we can cope fine without an MPA. And if it all goes Pete Tong, we can simply add Russia/China/whoever to our Overseas Development recipients and pay them not to float around in British waters...

[BBadanov]

Biggus: However, if you want new, it's pretty much the only game in town!

Agreed, I think Aus will order at least 8 over the next 3 yrs. The AP-3C MPA role (about 19 airframes I think) will be taken over by P-8 and UAV.

We could probably start selling a few AP-3Cs to UK (the most advanced P-3 flying, but NZ P-3K2 looks pretty good too) with the mid-east draw-down. :ok:

[The Old Fat One]

Duncs,

AEOs don't concur!


They disagree by 5-10 degrees and 1 knot, to try and show that they actually have an opinion of their own!! http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/wink2.gif


Not quite. They work out the correct course and speed. Extrapolate the mean from the Lead Weight, and two directional consultants, apply a correction factor and give the "tactical" directional consultant a slightly spurious figure so that once he has mixed it all up the answer comes back what the AEO wanted in the first place. Then he allows the tactical directional consultant to take the credit, get his B Cat, get promoted, and become a Sqn Cdr.

None of this matters to the AEO because he has the fastest car, the biggest house and the prettiest wife.

Happy Days:ok::ok::ok:

[Party Animal]

TOFO,


None of this matters to the AEO because he has the fastest car


Certainly don't want to start a bun fight over the house or good looking Mrs piece but I have to call you on the car front. Having scratched my head on this, I can't honestly think of any AEO (in my 28 years of maritime) who had a decent car, let alone a fast one? Seem to remember Terry Anning as a young snco had an E Type that he used to drive home from Kinloss to St Mawgan every weekend but that was before he became an AEO.

I can however, remember lots of Cortinas, things by British Leyland and more latterly Hyundai's and Kia's but that's about it!

[Biggus]

T O F O,

Surely the "tactical" directional consultant worked out his own value for the targets course and speed, then compared it to the figures from the wet team, AEO and the other directional consultant before coming up with the compromise figure to be used by the system/whole crew and base future tactics on.

The compromise figure the "tactical" directional consultant settled on was of course the targets correct course and speed, AND WAS (COINCIDENTALLY? ;)) HIS OWN ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE ENTIRE CYCLE!!


Happy days indeed - even happier when the seas were full of submarines, the aircraft full of DCS and the scruffs bar full of aircrew.... :ok::ok::ok:



I'm with Party Animal on the issue of AEOs and cars though. There were however quite a few co-pilots I knew who spend all, and I mean ALL, their money on flash cars - the irony of driving a "babe magnet" in Forres and Elgin seemed to be lost on them!!!

[Aus_AF]

I think Aus will order at least 8

12 is the latest word.

[GeeRam]

However, if you want new, it's pretty much the only game in town!

Almost......

Kawasaki P-1....... ;)

[Party Animal]

Biggus,


Happy days indeed - even happier when the seas were full of submarines, the aircraft full of DCS and the scruffs bar full of aircrew.... http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gifhttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gifhttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif




Agree - but even happier days spent in Andoya, Bodo, Bergen, Vaeloose?, Nordholz, Valkenburg, Guernsey, Lan Bihou, Moron, Gib, Nimes, Sigonella, Akrotiri, Muscat Intercon, Diego Garcia, Butterworth, Singapore, Edinburgh (UK one for JMC briefs and Adelaide one for Fincastles), Whenuapai, Fiji, Samoa, Hawaii, Comox, San Diego, Houston (gives me away!), Niagra Falls, Brunswick, Weymouth (Boston), Oceana, Jax, Patrick AFB Cocoa Beach, Homestead (Miami), Key West, Puerto Rico, Bermuda, Greenwood, Halifax, Lajes, Ascension, MPA, Rio (when the VC10 was bust!), Keflavik and various other places that have Nimrod zaps stuck to bar walls.

As for the 10W rule, the crews I flew with always went for 5DME from the Forres Little Chef! :ok::eek::ooh::cool:

[OilCan]

Party Animal

Thanks mate, your last post brought a smile to face:ok:....first time in ages.

Yep, been to most of those....including Houston (or should that be Galveston!!):hmm: .....Still got a certificate for my ride in a B17.:O

[FATTER GATOR]

"Skipper from Route-Nav, that's us past PNR, next stop......:ok:"

[Yeller_Gait]

As for the 10W rule, the crews I flew with always went for 5DME from the Forres Little Chef!

To think of all those years that I lived in Elgin and lived by the 10W rule!

:{:{:{

Y_G

[lovegroove]

I know that it's a while since this thread was last active, but does anyone know what the outcome of this was? Has a decision been made yet?

As an ex-RAF technician that worked on Nimrods, I was sad to see the project get scrapped when it looked like it was so close to completion, but not totally surprised given the pathetic, short sighted people that we have in the UK pulling the budget strings.

I'm currently working in Seville on the Brazilian P-3 conversion and am really impressed with the capability of the new electronics suite, but the airframes are in a shocking state and are really showing their age. I think that the RAF would be much better off going down the CASA route with a 235 or 295. Apparently a 235 goes for about €45M with the electronics suite. Seems like a bargain to me!

[devsan]

im interested in what extent these airframes are being refurbished

air the engines being refurbished for example

[salad-dodger]

latest rumour is that the RAF is looking to buy 24. They will be fully refurbished with a mission system based on the kit that came out of the MRA4. Engine choice is still being decided, but whatever the RAF go for, it's bound not to fit very well. Sources close to the project suggest that they will also be give a damned good polishing!

One squadron to go to RAF Kinloss - so stand fast on closing the place down. The other squadron is going to RAF St Mawgan - there are negotiations going on right now with the council to lease back a small parcel of Newquay Cornwall Airport.

It is also rumoured that the RAF is looking for a sponsor for the aircraft. A queue has not yet been formed.

S-D

[Jimlad1]

How does these rumours sit with the SofS standing up in Parliament last week and explicitly stating that an MPA was not on the cards?

[salad-dodger]

Don't believe all that you hear. Or read for that matter.

S-D

[Surplus]

a slightly spurious figure so that once he has mixed it all up the answer comes back what the AEO wanted in the first place I wasn't an AEO, but I once got in trouble with the Gestapo for doing just that. (Didn't realise the AEO was doing it as well, I did once hear a 365@10kts though)

[Donna K Babbs]

Don't believe all that you hear. Or read for that matter.

S-D

......but I just read that we were rumoured to get 24 P3s!!!

[Jimlad1]

S-D - I'm well aware of the power of rumour. I find it difficult to believe that having scrubbed Nimrod, made public announcements that the Army will move to Kinloss, then publicly announcing that an MPA requirement is not funded, that SofS is going to change his tune.

The idea that the RAF is somehow magically planning to deliver 24 MPA, to two bases (one which no longer has an active RAF runway, one of which is due to become an Army base), and do so in direct contravention of a series of ministerial announcements to Parliament does seem a little odd...

[Fokkerwokker]

S-D - I'm well aware of the power of rumour.

With respect Jimlad a government that can backpedal on a new Seajet can back pedal on this too!

Furthermore the strip of concrete doesn't know who it belongs to.

[Biggus]

I think some of you are making the mistake of taking salad-dodger seriously (to be fair to him he did drop quite a few hints along the way) ....

When he says don't believe all you read, did it ever occur to you that he might be talking about his own work?

[salad-dodger]

I have a further update. The RAF have been talking to the good people at the Oxford English Dictionary - looking to have the word 'gullible' removed from the next update to the dictionary!

S-D

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

I can't believe how S-D managed to get all this highly confidential material - and publish on an internet rumour forum. After all, he/she is only 12!

Duncs:ok:

By the way, we only need 18; and they will all be based at Lossiemouth. :O

[lovegroove]

Well, here's another rumour to throw into the mill. I was asking one of the mission system designers about this today and was told that some RAF guys had been over to have a look at the CASA's, but he didn't know more than that. It suggests to me that someone, somewhere must be at least considering rethinking the UK's MPA requirement.

[MFC_Fly]

Well, here's another rumour to throw into the mill. I was asking one of the mission system designers about this today and was told that some RAF guys had been over to have a look at the CASA's, but he didn't know more than that. It suggests to me that someone, somewhere must be at least considering rethinking the UK's MPA requirement.
Or they are ex-Kipper Fleet looking at jumping ship to help Oman set up it's fleet of 295's :ok:

[betty swallox]

Salad-dodger!

At last. Something that's really got me laughing!! That's been a long time coming on The Prune. Keep it up!
BS

[salad-dodger]

worth getting this one back up to the top seeing as the competition is in town. Well the Saab MPA in Aberdeen anyway.

S-D

[BEagle]

I was asking one of the mission system designers about this today and was told that some RAF guys had been over to have a look at the CASA's...

Since the Spanish cannot even get the A330MRTT AAR mission system to work, what hope is there for their prowess in designing something as demanding as an MPA mission system?

Don't forget that mañana is far too urgent a concept for many of them!

[FoxtrotAlpha18]

Since the Spanish cannot even get the A330MRTT AAR mission system to work, what hope is there for their prowess in designing something as demanding as an MPA mission system?

Too true Beags, and they still have the gaul and temerity to bleat about the Aust Govt not taking advantage of their very generous offer of a sixth tanker!

From Australian Aviation online today...
Urena also said Airbus Military had yet to receive a response from the Australian government on its unsolicited proposal to convert a sixth A330 into a KC-30 for the RAAF with Qantas Defence at Brisbane, which would keep the conversion line open ahead of potential future work for other A330 MRTT customers.

“This offer is still on the table, but unfortunately by the end of the month we [begin to] shut down the Qantas Defence [conversion activity], we are going to finalise how we are going to finish aircraft number five, and then unfortunately those capabilities are going to be lost,” he said.

“We have never got an answer from the Australian government … [but] every country has the sovereign right to say something or to say nothing, so [I make] no criticism of that, [I have] no opposition to how they acted.”
:eek::*:=:hmm:

What he didn't mention is that Qantas owns the conversion facility, NOT Airbus, and Qantas are rightly pissed off with Urena's threats.

[Whenurhappy]

Egdg - you sound bitter? Didn't you get selected for seed corn? Bless


And I think you need a reality check to see how far GBP 22M will go to 'manage a fleet of cheap aircraft'. And whilst we are at it, why the RN to operate them?

[ExAscoteer]

EGDG what make you such an expert on LRMPA?

Why do you think the WAFUs would be better at it than the Light Blue when thay have bugger all experience with it?

[just another jocky]

He's a govt stooge.....divide and rule and all that. The attitude he displays is what 'they' want so we infight and all become weaker instead of joinig together to become stronger. Shame on you. :=

Why are we still thinking single service on anything? Joint operations would bring the best from all, surely?

[Roland Pulfrew]

The RN could manage a fleet of cheap aircraft to patrol the shores for less than £22 M a year,

Really? You might run a couple of King Airs for a short period, but anything else? May be in the 1960s, but today? Not a chance!! Come on egdg, this is the second time on different topics you have raised seedcorn (and this topic has been dead for 10 months), what is your issue? What do you really understand the guys are doing in the States?

[Party Animal]

Egdg's language and tone have immaturity and bitterness written throughout and clearly looks like a seedcorn applicant who failed at the first hurdle. As a 23 year old, he probably qualifies as an expert on school dinners and that's about it.

JAJ has a good point though about a future MMA (Multi Mission Aircraft which includes MPA capability) Sqn being joint. A mix of light and dark blue would certainly be best placed to fully exploit it's potential.

[FATTER GATOR]

Good on the Seedcorn guys if they are having a nice time. It's the good times we have that remind us why we joined in the first place.

And- egdg lovie-I wouldn't exactly call it over for the RAF guys in Pax River, Jax, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Damneck (for christs sake), the MAOC, DSTL and attached to industry (ultra, general dynamics, BAEs, Boeing etc).

Finally, however unlikely, IF a decision is taken to acquire an MPA capability, it will be the RAF chaps who fly the planes and no amount of trolling on pprune will change that...I would bet your pension on it.

[Genstabler]

Apart from historical precedent (which is a pretty lame argument) and hysterical my toy box syndrome, I can see no logical reason why the RAF should own and operate LRMP aircraft instead of the RN. The opportunity exists now, for admittedly very unpalatable reasons, to start again with a clean slate. For God's sake let us take that opportunity. Control, defence and overwatch of the maritime environment (aka oggin) belongs primarily to the navy. It is their environment. I speak as an old, wise Pongo with no axe to grind. Trust me!

[Aus_AF]

Fincastle in Adelaide this year, hurry up and get something.! We might have some 2nd hand airframes for you by then as well.

[Courtney Mil]

the maritime environment (aka oggin) belongs primarily to the navy

Yeah, but aeroplanes fly in the air, not the oggin.

[Trim Stab]

Genstabler - agreed (from another neutral ex Pongo). Also, giving maritime air back to the RN might appease them a bit when the carriers inevitably get the chop.

[Party Animal]

No extra money, certainly - but perhaps a re-prioritisation on what assets are most important to Defence. Particularly if some of the assumptions that went into SDSR 10 have now shown up to be flawed. Obviously that would be robbing Peter to pay Paul but you never know. Although personally I'm not optimistic, at least we will be prepared through the adoption of Seedcorn.

[oldmansquipper]

SDSR 10 Flawed????

Surely not. :eek:

Those nice politicians insist it is the way ahead and they never lie.....

[Winco]

A great forum, full of typical Maritime humour, love it.
Back on topic - the P3 is a great aircraft and I would have no problems with us operating it however....
If BWOS are involved in any way at all - forget it! It will end up a disaster, and...
Whilst I wouldn't have an issue with the aircraft, I'm not sure that the MAA and the other 'safety' people wouldn't have an issue. After all, it is old technology.
I do hope that something can be sorted out soon. More importantly, it mustn't involve BWOS.

[Clockwork Mouse]

Yeah, but aeroplanes fly in the air, not the oggin.
Ah! The old "if it flies, we should own it" mantra from the Junior Service.

[Biggus]

There have been many emotive comments about regenerating UK MPA capability, much of which are frankly rubbish. So let's examine, hopefully logically, a few of the issues:

What type of aircraft? The two most obvious options are a "high end spec" MPA, or a "low spec" option. For the first we are looking at something like the P-8, fully capable of carrying out the full range of MPA tasks, including autonomous ASW. For the second we are looking at something more like the CN-235, for a reduced number of roles. Which do you go for? Well it's the classic trade off between capability and cost. Does the military requirement call for an MPA that is capable of all roles - and can the budget afford it? Personally I think that if (AND IT'S A BIG IF!!) the UK gets back into the MPA role it will more likely at the lower spec end, purely on cost grounds. Maybe 5-6 CN-235s?

When? Everyone talks about the 2015 SDR being the decision point. Lets discuss that. First of all, it's the very earliest a decision would be made. But when will the 2015 SDR take place? The next UK general election is set for 7 May 2015. Personally I can't see the SDR taking place before the election, so we are talking mid to late 2015, assuming the Tories get back into power - if Labour win they aren't committed to holding an SDR that year, if at all, that was a Tory pledge. Assuming the current lot get back in, what will be the state of the nations finances? Well, their original plan was to halve the UK annual deficit by 2015. That now isn't going to happen until at least 2017, and Cameron and Osborne have both talked about austerity measures going on until at least 2020. So, money will still be very tight, no great extra pot of money is likely to be available. Given what I used to know about MOD procurement budgets, there used to be a 10 year core spending plan - if MPA provision isn't already in it then either more money will have to be found, or something else will have to go. In terms of "something else going", they are already talking about keeping Sentinel beyond 2015, which wasn't in the original plan, and will need to find it's own funding stream to continue, even more reason why funding for an MPA would be problematic. Most likely outcome in this scenario - put things off until the 2020 SDR? Finally, if some sort of MPA was ordered in late 2015, when would it arrive? Well, the Indians were due to receive their first P-8 3 years after their initial order, so, unless the US gives us priority in the production line, we are talking 3 years, 2018, for first aircraft delivery, more like 2020 until in service, maybe quicker for a lower spec aircraft.

Who will operate it? Firstly RAF or RN? I have no issues with the RN operating MPA, many navies around the world operate their nations MPA, and it makes logical sense. However, depending on the fleet size, and number of crew per aircraft, can the small FAA produce the number of aircrew that may be required in the relevant timescale? If the RN does operate any future UK MPA, it makes the RAF seedcorn initiative fairly pointless, which isn't in itself a reason not to do so. If the RAF do operate a future MPA, then who will they man it with, in terms of rearcrew? The seedcorn consists of WSOs and AEOps (I know they are all technically WSOps - but they have AEOp training and experience) with Nimrod experience. Well, we no longer have a WSO trade, we don't recruit or train, and the available pool will be pretty small by 2020, especially for an aircraft with a 20+ year lifespan. Start recruiting again? Is a training system for the very few that would be required cost effective? Do they do RN observer training prior to an RAF MPA OCU? Is the back end manned purely by SNCO aircrew (why not?). In terms of AEOps, once again the training system is closed (basically all WSOp training these days is effectively LM), and the vast majority of AEOps were made redundant. Start recruiting and training again?


So, in summary. We probably can't afford as a nation to go "high spec" MPA again. No decision will be made until at least 2015, at which point the country will still be broke, and we may have just had a change of government. If the decision was to proceed the earliest we are likely to have anything in service would be 2020. Neither the RAF or RN are particularly well placed to man any future MPA, although they would have a few years to prepare. The RAF have in place a seedcorn initiative of redundant trades who, while they might form the basis of an OCU staff, probably aren't sufficient in numbers, or young enough (average age of seedcorn personnel?), to provide any long term front line experience on a new aircraft - FTRS until 60 anyone?

All in all a pretty bleak picture - but some out there still believe.



See post 25 for my opinion of seedcorn - it represents little more than an excuse for ministers to say the capability can be quickly regenerated.

[Courtney Mil]

if it flies, we should own it

My thoughts exactly, Mouse. Although in my case "they", not "we".

[Jacks Down]

All in all a pretty bleak picture - but some out there still believe.

Spot on. We are not going to be able to afford to keep what we currently have. Reaper, Sentinel, the comms fleet and RAPTOR are all excellent capabilities we have now which are about to become un-funded and will demand further painful choices if they are to be kept.

However tempting, and however much expectations have been raised by measures designed to soften the Nimrod blow, it is utter fantasy to believe that the UK is going to be able to afford to resurrect this capability in any shape or form.

[Arclite01]

I agree - an excellent post by Biggus.

More to the point at the moment is the lack of long range SAR for me which no one really mentions but which in peacetime is a really key role for the platform.

Just how capable is P8 or 239 in this scenario ??


Arc

[Bastardeux]

it is utter fantasy to believe that the UK is going to be able to afford to resurrect this capability in any shape or form.

With all due respect, this notion that mpa is gone forever and ever is total bollaeux...we're 3 years out of the worst recession we've experienced since the end of WW1, of course were not immediately going to be able to replace nimrod, but don't let that pessimism dominate your view for the rest of history gees!!

Biggus, you're getting confused between debt and deficit, my friend. The coalition's goal was to have eliminated the deficit and halved the national debt by 2015, which it has now pushed back to 17, after which budgets start to rise in line with economic growth...the single biggest reason the MoD was only guarenteed a 1% increase in its budget after 2015 was because no sane government would guarentee a bigger increases without knowing what the long term growth rate is going to be.

And by the looks of things, defence may well escape another hit, if the economy is growing at 2.5% a year after 2016, what reason is there to believe that all budgets wouldn't increase by 2% a year...we would still be paying down the debt, but departments would be seeing real increasing budgets!

The mood on the last few posts makes me want to hang myself, Jesus!

[Hoots]

EGDG if you came across as not having a major chip on your shoulder then you may earn more credibility.

As for £22m its not much in the overall great scheme of things. What the seedcorn guys bring to the P8 programme will bring benefits to the UK, who do you think will be operating in our back yard in the time to come. The one thing that the UK were world leaders was MPA operations, Ops and Exercises have all the evidence of that over the years. Note I said MPA operations not just ASW. The experience our guys take to the programme can only lead to a better operated product.

If we want to talk about cash being wasted, then why not discuss A400M, Voyager, Astute, Type 45, Bowman and JSF to name but a few. How late and how much more than originally planned are these for starters. How much additional costs are there from changing the spec then changing it back to the original. Then there are all the little things, I went to a meeting once were some software was being discussed, the item was accepted into service with some known faults, I would expect these to be resolved by the manufacturer after all if you had a car and had an issue then it would be rectified. But no, thats not how MOD contracts work, the company charged for the software to be rectified. I stated that this was ridiculous only to be told that "its always been done this was", I saw it as being charged twice for a product. Total bollocks I know, but try multiplying this with the thousands of minor items like this and it all adds up. At least we get something back from seedcorn, even if its not hardware.

Ask the MOD how much it spends on so called specialist advisors, then we have the so called wet behind the ears ministerial advisors, having met some they had no life experience and very little if any practical experience on the subject matter. How many times do you see an article on defence that you know it total spin and blantantly misleading.

So EGDG why dont you go off and have and immature rant on some of those subjects, or just come clean on what you do and why the chip on your shoulder.

[Jacks Down]

Sorry Bastardeux but I can't agree. Military equipment inflation will eat up a 2% increase in defence spending and then some. See the F35 thread for further details! Wage inflation (because at some point the pay freeze/chill will end) will do the same with the other big element of the budget - the people. Even a 2% real terms increase will see us cut numbers or outright capabilities, not add new ones. And we are a long way off a 2% real terms increase.

Pessimistic maybe, but you have to face facts.

[The Old Fat One]

we're 3 years out of the worst recession we've experienced since the end of WW1

Three factual errors in one sentence. Good effort :D

I'm sure we all salute Bastardeux and his admirable optimism...but back to reality for one moment.

Biggus, nice post and spot on re Seedcorn.

I don't think anybody is big headed or arrogant enough to say never will we have another MPA, but those with a firm grasp of reality understand it is a dim and distant prospect at best.

Trying to talk it up has something of the King Canute about it.

PS

In case you are wondering...

The recession trough was over five years ago.
We were still in it one year ago (and probably, we are in it still)
The worst recession in the last 100 years took place after WW1 and was a sh1tload worse than the current one.

[The Helpful Stacker]

....let the RN keep it as their core business.

And there was me thinking the Royal Navy's 'core business' was ships and subs? The manner by which the RN hierarchy have treated/failed to support the WAFU over the years seems to suggest this view of 'core buisness' priorities too.

[The Old Fat One]

Hoots,

I can well imagine why you are being defensive about Seedcorn (although methinks thou dost protest too much), but many believe the wider MPA debate trumps a wee bit 'o vested interest.

However, if you want a grown up rationale on Seedcorn, read on...

Operating an MPA takes a number of skills, specifically:

Maritime Ops knowledge...Seedcorn not required, RN has this in abundance.

Piloting skills...Seedcorn not required, RAF quite good at this.

Generic sensor skills...Seedcorn might help a wee bit, but most of this stuff is taught in basic flying training schools, like what was NAAS (or AEELS in my day).

Specific aircraft skills...Again Seedcorn might help a wee bit, if we end up with something similar, but plenty of new aircraft have been brought into service throughout the history of the RAF without any such Seedcorn type project.

Here's a none Seedcorn route back to capability.

Buy/lease some ac (for arguments sake let's say P8)

Buy some training off the spams...ie send two crews (mixed RN/RAF whatever) out to the States and run them through an OCU.

Bring them back and they kick off an OCU whatever.

Point is it's not rocket science...it's pretty bloody obvious and that's why Seedcorn has obviously had a political edge to it from day one.

I'm a gambling man...I'll give you evens, they will come home at the end of their tours and it will be allowed to quietly whither.

And you know what, I really, really hope I'm wrong.

[Hoots]

Thats a bit more reasonable egdg, however what we need is the younger guys to get experience now from the older ones, which is whats happening to a degree. Not all seedcorn guys are due to be retired in 10 years time. I do think the RN has something to offer, hence the reason that RAF rearcrew are possibly going to be utilising RN facilities in future. Of course rearcrew were not forgotten about much when MFTS was thought of.

I will be surprised if we get a MPA replacement within the next 10 years if at all. But dont rule out future simulator instructors, ground instructors etc with current modern MPA experience if we do get one. What we can not afford is an interservice bun fight, which sadly I see far too often. Although I have also seen inter-cap badge fights also in todays climate with each fighting to take over jobs to preserve their corps identity. I know I will be accused of bias, but from what I have witnessed recently the RN and Army need to embrace jointness and not fight to take over jobs which will just cause the barriers to up.

I agree with you old fat one, but if you ask me joint is the way forward, as an aside Im not on seedorn, just expressing my view as an ex MPA person

[Biggus]

Bastardeux,

I'm afraid you're the one that's confused. The coalition was attempting to halve the national annual deficit, from £160 Bn odd a year down to something like £80 Bn a year. See the first graph in this article for recent annual deficits:

Deficit, national debt and government borrowing - how has it changed since 1946? | News | guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/oct/18/deficit-debt-government-borrowing-data)


However, even if they had achieved that, then over 5 years the national debt would have gone up by say £160Bn + £130Bn + £110Bn + £95Bn + £80 Bn. They won't even manage that, the situation is worse than planned and all the while the national debt continues to rack up:

UK National Debt - Economics Blog (http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/334/uk-economy/uk-national-debt/)

It's current about £1,145 Bn and rising every year:

UK National Debt Clock - No-nonsense Guide to Britain's Debt Crisis (http://www.debtbombshell.com/)

The coalition had no ambitions to halve the national debt, that would have been impossible!! That would require us to have annual budget surpluses and pay off some of the national debt!!

With regard to the national debt, the major economic issue is what percentage of GDP it represents, most countries owe say 40% of their GDP, when that figure rises significantly markets get very twitchy, and borrowing becomes very expensive. The coalition might well have been attempting to reduce the growth of the national debt (by bringing down annual deficits), while hopefully expanding the size of the economy so that the overall debt when measured as a % of GDP decreased, even though the actual size of the debt had still increased!! However, their main stated aim was halving the annual deficit!!

[Bastardeux]

Three factual errors in one sentence. Good effort

Oh for the love of god, okay we'll split hairs then, it's been 4 years since the worst recession we've had since the very beginning of 1919. A recession's end is marked by the first quarter of growth, not its trough and we weren't still in it a year ago, we were in a different one. And the statistics suggest blistering growth for Q1 this year...okay the last bit was a lie, but modest growth is predicted.

I'm not here to wave dicks about economics; my argument was not to let the financial situation of what is 5 years in the 300 year history of the United Kingdom lead you to believe that as a country surrounded by water on all 4 sides, we aren't ever going to be able to find £2billion? a year out of a £680 national budget, to spend on regenerating a MPA capability. I'm not in anyway suggesting it's starting back up in 2014, but the early 2020s? Perhaps.

[Lowe Flieger]

http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/502239-unmanned-drones-likely-take-over-nimrod-spy-duties-7.html#post7709650

A link to my post in another thread that may be pertinent to the discussion of future MPA options. Apologies if it has already been debated in this thread.

LF

[Wrathmonk]

egdg

Fella.

the RAF has memories of those type of Ops, they were good at them,possibly the best.......but Seedcorn! Forget it, maybe 2015 would have justified it, but like everybody seems to acknowledge, the guys will be too old to start up the generic/ specialist/ conversion/ PFA side of things- let alone a bit thin on numbers.

Same could be said about the RN keeping people fast jet qual'd / deck current for F35/QEII operations (using a launch/land system that won't even be on our carriers....). And when are the Carriers expected ..... 2017? 2018? 2019?

Seedcorn is likely to go the day Ed moves in.

I doubt he even knows the meaning of seedcorn, nor given the amounts involved, is even interested in it. Bigger fish (heads) to fry! :E

[Bastardeux]

Biggus, I'm sorry I didn't see your post.

The coalition's policy from 2010 was always to eliminate the budget deficit by 2014/15, which has now been pushed to 2015/16

BBC News - UK economy: Deficit (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17381952)

However, even if they had achieved that, then over 5 years the national debt would have gone up by say £160Bn + £130Bn + £110Bn + £95Bn + £80 Bn

This again, isn't true I'm afraid, the original plan was always to have national debt falling after 2013/14, which like the deficit elimination, has been pushed back by a year. It is possible to have a deficit and see debt falling in the short run, so long as government bonds reaching maturity are cumulatively worth more than the deficit.

Admittadly, I got overzealous in claiming that the government would half the national debt by 2015, but you'll find that as soon as a surplus is reached, debt can fall very rapidly yada yada yada

[Biggus]

We'll have to agree to differ.

Please explain to me how, if you're still running an annual deficit prior to 2015 (i.e. in 2013/14) you can pay off any of the national debt. You're in deficit, so by definition you're borrowing more than you earn, which means the national debt is going up!!

It simply cannot work!

[Bastardeux]

I'm not making it up...it's information that's readily available in any article from the budget.

It simply cannot work!

It can, if government bonds are maturing in a given year and are cumulatively worth more than the value of the budget deficit; then yes the deficit is adding to the national debt, but government bonds maturing are also paying it off...to put it simply, there is going to be a point where we start paying back more than we borrow and at that point, national debt will begin to fall.

National debt as a % of GDP is of course the main thing as you say, but it's deficits that get markets twitchy, not the overall national debt. As I say, as soon as the budget is neutral, real terms growth will return to government departments.

[Justanopinion]

Same could be said about the RN keeping people fast jet qual'd / deck current for F35/QEII operations (using a launch/land system that won't even be on our carriers....). And when are the Carriers expected ..... 2017? 2018? 2019?

No, not really. RN are growing maritime strike pilots for the maritime strike platform rather than "keeping people fast jet qual'd". First tourist joining the USN fleet 2013, finishes 2016, adqual tour, 2019 JSF. Useful? Yes.

[Roland Pulfrew]

Just a random thought, and I apologise for continuing a topic that is long past it's sell by date, but what-if.......

No-one really knows what the effects of sequestration is going to be on US programmes in the near term. I have read the list from the Head of the US Navy about what he is going to have to do if he doesn't receive his allocated share of the budget (eye watering).

We have in the UK recently experienced/managed/had a very successful lease-purchase programme on one of our major capabilities. We have some unallocated money in the procurement programme.

And we have guys in the US on the P8 OCU and OEU........... :E

[Frostchamber]

Apparently there's £8bn unallocated in the procurement budget. There's also a fairly substantial wishlist of "whiteboard" items that the MOD hopes to fund out of it, including Typhoon capability enhancements, some army stuff and further RFAs following the MARS tankers currently on order. ISTAR also features on the whiteboard wishlist - detail not yet specified, partly because, as MoD explains it, as technology matures fresh options for delivery can open up. But I get the impression that MPA options now get badged under the ISTAR heading.

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

Of the almost 850 personnel on exchange in the US (I think that is all Services) almost 20 are part of Maritime Seedcorn. I think that we can probably cope.

Duncs:ok: