UK Maritime Patrol Aircraft - An Urgent Requirement
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You mean huge potential to fix the problems that have been dogging it and delayed the Final Operational Capability.
As regards to future potential, I will leave that to your imagination, but potential there certainly is!
Y_G
I can't help noticing that (apparently) search operations in the Indian Ocean for MH370 have been affected by the endurance of the aircraft involved. If there were still Nimrods with AAR capability in service, would this have made any difference?
Re AAR and MH370, the time on task is achieved by launching more airframes. There is quite a fleet available . The P-8 will have AAR in the next tranch and this has been specified by RAAF . Timing of equipment in arvo is always an issue going back to WW1.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Worcestershire
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BL,
I assume there are enough dedicated workstations, processing grunt and comms to support the AAS role in the P8A or do you need to re-role with the additional capability.
A version to replace EP3 and you have the complete set.
All sounds fantastic. Just the sort of capability a first world military force needs.
I assume there are enough dedicated workstations, processing grunt and comms to support the AAS role in the P8A or do you need to re-role with the additional capability.
A version to replace EP3 and you have the complete set.
All sounds fantastic. Just the sort of capability a first world military force needs.
Interesting multi-role potential... Note that the P-8A also has ALQ-218, a version of the Growler ESM, which would do some decent SIGINT with the right operators on board.
However, if you look at the USAF's plans to replace Joint STARS, they are based on a large business jet. 10-15 kft more altitude is a big advantage in terms of terrain shadows once you get beyond the littorals. However, the Boeing-Raytheon team is very well placed to win this - the main change needed would be a smaller antenna.
However, if you look at the USAF's plans to replace Joint STARS, they are based on a large business jet. 10-15 kft more altitude is a big advantage in terms of terrain shadows once you get beyond the littorals. However, the Boeing-Raytheon team is very well placed to win this - the main change needed would be a smaller antenna.
He wasn't.....
He was referring to LowObservable's comment about 3 posts back that said:
if you look at the USAF's plans to replace Joint STARS, they are based on a large business jet.
He was referring to LowObservable's comment about 3 posts back that said:
if you look at the USAF's plans to replace Joint STARS, they are based on a large business jet.
Sorry to be late... HAS59, you are so wrong about the Tornado and Tankers on Ellamy. The combinations enabled the longest range precision attacks out and back from the UK. TBH, I think most players, inc the most hi-tech, were supported by AAR. On the subject of budgets, we have to "cut our cloth". However, I do not agree that saving money makes no difference and, older platforms can fit the bill if their operating enviroment and capability still get the job done. As an example, the incredible waste on FSTA has seen a highly expensive, less capable and ponderous contract replacing a sound capable type that required a tiny fraction of the cost to provide a better service. Surely, it would have been better to life-extend TriStar and use the huge savings to help fund at least some UK MPA!
Muppets
OAP
Muppets
OAP
Long Range
Onceapilot,
I don't believe I am wrong, but I do agree that we may differ...
I do not doubt that some of the Tornado/Tanker/Tanker/Tanker combinations carried out some successful long missions, to their great credit.
As you say "older platforms can fit the bill if their operating environment and capability still get the job done"... but only some of the time.
Lugging a pair of StormShadows into a distant theatre to hit a target which is no longer viable rendering them useless is not getting the job done. Having the weapon on a long range aircraft may well have enabled it to be updated before launch and not wasted ... as may have been the case on Op Ellamy.
Don't get me wrong, for decades I worked 'getting things done' despite what we had in the RAF rather than doing it properly if only we had the right kit. I do not imagine that we are ever going to get into the true long range bomber game again, sadly. But we should not kid ourselves that we have that capability when we do not.
A future RAF Long Range Maritime/Multi-Mission aircraft may however be able to bring some smart weapons into a distant theatre to provide a useful capability.
This would then leave the Tornado (and whatever we can afford to replace it) to stick to the interdiction range job it is best suited to.
Peeing into a sponge in a sick-bag on long sorties in an aircraft not designed to do that is not going to entice many young bloods to join a force which claims to 'Rise above The Rest' ...
I don't believe I am wrong, but I do agree that we may differ...
I do not doubt that some of the Tornado/Tanker/Tanker/Tanker combinations carried out some successful long missions, to their great credit.
As you say "older platforms can fit the bill if their operating environment and capability still get the job done"... but only some of the time.
Lugging a pair of StormShadows into a distant theatre to hit a target which is no longer viable rendering them useless is not getting the job done. Having the weapon on a long range aircraft may well have enabled it to be updated before launch and not wasted ... as may have been the case on Op Ellamy.
Don't get me wrong, for decades I worked 'getting things done' despite what we had in the RAF rather than doing it properly if only we had the right kit. I do not imagine that we are ever going to get into the true long range bomber game again, sadly. But we should not kid ourselves that we have that capability when we do not.
A future RAF Long Range Maritime/Multi-Mission aircraft may however be able to bring some smart weapons into a distant theatre to provide a useful capability.
This would then leave the Tornado (and whatever we can afford to replace it) to stick to the interdiction range job it is best suited to.
Peeing into a sponge in a sick-bag on long sorties in an aircraft not designed to do that is not going to entice many young bloods to join a force which claims to 'Rise above The Rest' ...
HAS59, you are right, the UK will never get the B2. We will be operating short range combat aircraft at extreme (refuelled) range for evermore. 
Also, IMO the tanker would make a good home for mission specific support. A pity then, that the FSTA cannot have any changes like that made to it for less than £Billion*. Yes, a great pity because the TriStar that we already had, and just scrapped, could have had any modifications you might like done to it for no additional cost. BTW, you are still way wrong in your Ellamy UK return UK "Tornado/Tanker/Tanker/Tanker" inference. Don't expect me to fill you in though
.
Long range MPA. To keep on pointing out folks, if we had binned FSTA and instead had a modest enhancement/life extension of the TriStar fleet, there would be money to support UK LRMPA, IMO.
*My estimate
OAP
Also, IMO the tanker would make a good home for mission specific support. A pity then, that the FSTA cannot have any changes like that made to it for less than £Billion*. Yes, a great pity because the TriStar that we already had, and just scrapped, could have had any modifications you might like done to it for no additional cost. BTW, you are still way wrong in your Ellamy UK return UK "Tornado/Tanker/Tanker/Tanker" inference. Don't expect me to fill you in though.Long range MPA. To keep on pointing out folks, if we had binned FSTA and instead had a modest enhancement/life extension of the TriStar fleet, there would be money to support UK LRMPA, IMO.
*My estimate
OAP
Neither were fatuous. Of course I don't want to see the Defence budget wasted. So again, a genuine question, where would the spares have come from? Maybe you could answer this time and play the ball rather than the man....
As to the deletion of Tornado, lets just say thats my outside bet for SDSR '15.
As to the deletion of Tornado, lets just say thats my outside bet for SDSR '15.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
downsizer
Yeah, that should do it, fill an MPA with Tornado crews!
Anyway, there will be plenty of manpower and money for MPA when Tornado gets binned early in next years SDSR.
Lets see DS.... the last time the Cpl sent you to stores for "a long weight" you had the time to poke your nose around and you didn't see any boxes with "TriStar spares"? Is that it, or are you going to tell us?
OAP
OAP