UK Maritime Patrol Aircraft - An Urgent Requirement
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sussex By The Sea
Age: 79
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Norway, Canada and Germany operate quite well with around 5 crews
The window for an RAF only solution closes when the seedcorners leave the building. After that, the RN will have to be part of the crew, because the RAF will have lost its ASW expertise for ever.
We used to consider that most second and third tier ASW nations would never achieve our levels of expertise because they didnt get the live submarine contact time. With the dramatic reduction in UK submarine availability I would guess that this assessment now applies to UK.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Outside the Matz
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"AFAIK Canada has been operating with 18 Aurora plus 3 Arcturus"
Nope. Arcturus is long gone. 18 was a long time ago. Someone needs to invest in a new Janes.
My point is, irrespective of how many toys they have, they are operating with a lot fewer crews( as a ratio to aircraft) than we ever did or indeed aspire to. Over a pint those in the know will tell you how many crews were at ISK in 2004 on 4 Sqdns sharing 12 jets.
Nope. Arcturus is long gone. 18 was a long time ago. Someone needs to invest in a new Janes.
My point is, irrespective of how many toys they have, they are operating with a lot fewer crews( as a ratio to aircraft) than we ever did or indeed aspire to. Over a pint those in the know will tell you how many crews were at ISK in 2004 on 4 Sqdns sharing 12 jets.
Last edited by Bannock; 21st Oct 2014 at 19:52. Reason: Only had a couple of mins before briefing so didnt have long to compose an adequate response. Scrub Dances - They work!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Outside the Matz
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"where are we supposed to conjure up 10, 15 crews for the anticipated MMA fleet when most of the specialists now work in the oil & gas industries"
Military Aircraft
Question
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Astor of Hever on 26 September (HL1820), how many ex-Nimrod aircrews are still serving in maritime patrol aircraft appointments worldwide; and how many are flying in other roles in the United Kingdom.[HL1950]
15 Oct 2014 : Column WA42
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Astor of Hever) (Con): There are currently 32 personnel deployed overseas in Maritime Patrol Aircraft roles under the Seedcorn initiative with a further seven on traditional exchange programmes. 115 personnel are currently operating in other flying roles in the UK.
Military Aircraft
Question
Asked by Lord West of Spithead
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Astor of Hever on 26 September (HL1820), how many ex-Nimrod aircrews are still serving in maritime patrol aircraft appointments worldwide; and how many are flying in other roles in the United Kingdom.[HL1950]
15 Oct 2014 : Column WA42
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Astor of Hever) (Con): There are currently 32 personnel deployed overseas in Maritime Patrol Aircraft roles under the Seedcorn initiative with a further seven on traditional exchange programmes. 115 personnel are currently operating in other flying roles in the UK.
I am not sure just how much Air ASW expertise the RN will be able to bring.
Oh, and they should be getting these in 2015 I believe...
LJ
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 4 Civvy Street. Nowhere-near-a-base. The Shires.
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Astor of Hever) (Con): There are currently 32 personnel deployed overseas in Maritime Patrol Aircraft roles under the Seedcorn initiative with a further seven on traditional exchange programmes. 115 personnel are currently operating in other flying roles in the UK.
Unless anybody thinks the other fleets will be happy with a major reduction in manpower to spring the 115 (who probably don't all wish to move anyway)
So thats 39 then - 4 crews.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sussex By The Sea
Age: 79
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LJ
Nothing to do with self importance - just quoting very senior officer (do not wish to 'out him') from Illustrious prior to her final deployment. The point I am making is the lack of submarine contact time which (as I am sure you know 
) is all important in ASW.
Oh, do have a word with your self importance, purlease!
) is all important in ASW.
You also have to ask what the age breakdown of the 39 + 113 is?
I believe that one of the 39 was 48 when he started the seedcorn programme. Therefore, extensions not withstanding, he has minimal longevity in any future UK MPA fleet.
Someone has already asked what the trade breakdown of the 39 + 113 is. I know of at least 2 ex Nimrod air engineers still serving, who would have no flying role in a UK MPA fleet.
I believe that one of the 39 was 48 when he started the seedcorn programme. Therefore, extensions not withstanding, he has minimal longevity in any future UK MPA fleet.
Someone has already asked what the trade breakdown of the 39 + 113 is. I know of at least 2 ex Nimrod air engineers still serving, who would have no flying role in a UK MPA fleet.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 4 Civvy Street. Nowhere-near-a-base. The Shires.
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
48 would have been the absolute maximum age for seedcorn because applicants were ineligible if they had less than 7 years to serve.
The NEM might help here because those approaching 55 may have the opportunity to go on to 60 soon.
The NEM might help here because those approaching 55 may have the opportunity to go on to 60 soon.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unless anybody thinks the other fleets will be happy with a major reduction in manpower to spring the 115 (who probably don't all wish to move anyway)
The RAF did away with it's effective aircrew reserve when it replaced many of the aircrew in ground appointments with the introduction of the ops support branch.
No way will all the 40 odd seedcorn become operational on a future MPA in 2017. You'll be lucky to get half that number.
And, outwith seedcorn, I don't think there are many wetties floating about (no pun intended).
When I mentioned ASW skills, I meant it "relatively". No one anywhere has the ASW skills we had in the cold war, because no one has the in contact time. Technology will make up for some of this gap however.
In sum, 90 odd percent of any of a new MPA force will have to be recruited and trained from scratch.
And I don't think anybody in the know is under any illusions about that.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BS
I think you've missed the nature of discussion (maybe LJ did too IDK). We are not discussing who does ASW in capability terms (now or in the future), but who would have to operate the acoustics in a future MMA/MPA. Some of us contend that the RAF is close to losing its entire ASW expertise forever. Thus if/when an MPA capability is restored (fingers crossed hey), the aircraft would be operated either by, or with, the RN because they still have plenty of acoustics operators (airborne, surface or subsurface). The RAF soon won't have any (or at least none with anything approaching currency).
And by soon, I mean when seedcorn ends.
I think you've missed the nature of discussion (maybe LJ did too IDK). We are not discussing who does ASW in capability terms (now or in the future), but who would have to operate the acoustics in a future MMA/MPA. Some of us contend that the RAF is close to losing its entire ASW expertise forever. Thus if/when an MPA capability is restored (fingers crossed hey), the aircraft would be operated either by, or with, the RN because they still have plenty of acoustics operators (airborne, surface or subsurface). The RAF soon won't have any (or at least none with anything approaching currency).
And by soon, I mean when seedcorn ends.
TOFO - exactly.
BS - my point was not to say that the helicopters are long reach assets, but they have plenty of 'expertise' to man the sensors and to also fly a long range MPA should one be profured. As TOFO so rightly points out, there are people in dark blue that are current, competent and probably willing to do the job too.
Nimbev - that is not what you said in your original statement about a lack of "Air ASW expertise" which seemed to completely discount the Royal Navy's WAFU 'pingers'.
LJ
BS - my point was not to say that the helicopters are long reach assets, but they have plenty of 'expertise' to man the sensors and to also fly a long range MPA should one be profured. As TOFO so rightly points out, there are people in dark blue that are current, competent and probably willing to do the job too.
Nimbev - that is not what you said in your original statement about a lack of "Air ASW expertise" which seemed to completely discount the Royal Navy's WAFU 'pingers'.
LJ
or with, the RN because they still have plenty of acoustics operators (airborne, surface or subsurface)
Exactly
The simple fact is, most of the Armed Forces of the UK are now one brick thick. We have, as TOFO mentioned, shot ourselves in the foot by removing aircrew from as many non-flying (but flying related) posts as possible. We are about to handover another 200 or so "flying branch" posts to other branches (not sure where they are going to find more people to fill them though).