I don't profess to know anything about Crowsnest. I gave up in December 2000 when MASC (one of its predecessors) was recruiting, and announced prior experience on AEW/ASaC was irrelevant as MASC would bear no relation to it. This, despite their plan at the time being to re-use the ASaC Mk7 kit in a Merlin. However, their costings didn't reflect reality, and it was all delayed. Again. When such a decision is made, one often as to wait many years for that person to disappear to allow resurrection. MPA is a good example.
MoD's recent announcement was:
"DASA is looking for ideas that can improve ‘horizon surveillance and/or target detection capability’, ‘operational effectiveness through timely processing and dissemination of information’ and ‘operational efficiency through optimisation of system functionality’."
To me, that implies more than the latest Searchwater derivative is lacking. If you were to ask what was lacking after the Mk7 programme, it was the refusal to integrate the aircraft with the ships (CVSs). This was #1 operational risk from day 1, and where the boundary of responsibility lay was a hot topic. The Mk7 teams (2 of them in the same Directorate, 2 engineers in each) were instructed to leave well alone, that FONA would manage it with FLEET. But if you're managing a boundary, both sides must be involved. Ultimately, and as confirmed in the Board of Inquiry report into the 2003 mid-air .... well, let's just say that MoD statement above is the best summary. In short, the ships' procedures and capability still reflected the old ASW Mk2. The aircraft was in itself capable, and in many ways exceeded the specification. But as a system of systems (aircraft & ship) there was a complete disconnect. In much the same way Nimrod and its tanker were, in isolation, reasonably safe, but when mated the 'system' was totally unsafe. (Tanker, after modification, delivered twice the flow rate Nimrod's fuel lines could cope with). There's obviously a lot more to this, but you get the idea.
This makes me wonder if the approach to Crowsnest was too simplistic. Their starting point should have been, at least, the ASaC Mk7 Post Project Evaluation Report, that laid all this out. (The report listed the three main contributory factors to the mid-air, 2 years before it occurred. It also, as a matter of interest, explained the 2003 Tornado/Patriot shootdown). Crowsnest would/should have used the Mk7's Risk Register as a baseline (the original one, not the two subsequent ones drawn up by senior admin management to conceal MoD-owned risks). I wonder if they were shown it. With MASC's rejection of ASaC staff in 2000, there was no-one in MoD after about 2004 who could explain this to them.
As to the comments about old equipment, there's an old adage - 'Don't modify a modification'. It's not a hard and fast rule, but a warning as to where your main technical risks will be. Searchwater in Nimrod had already been significantly upgraded. Searchwater LAST in Sea King had been upgraded in 1986/7 (G9 Autotrack and INS, which are loosely linked to the above problems, and which were upgraded again for Mk7 - itself a clue as to where technical difficulties lay). This baseline was studied very carefully during planning for what became ASaC, and the result was that a different radar won the competition. The political overrule, directing that Searchwater LAST be retained, meant an evaluation was necessary, for the first time, as to what would constitute 'Retained Searchwater Equipment' (RSE). The overrule meant a significant hike in costs, but with no more funding granted something had to give, and there was quite a bit of RSE that ideally should have been new. The very fact that Crowsnest retained ASaC kit suggests they faced the same restrictions.
In many ways, we're not discussing a system with an ISD of 2023. We're discussing something that is instantly recognisable to anyone who worked on the bid evaluation in 1993. Without knowing them, I think the Crowsnest teams have done a pretty good job given that background. But the standing risks and certainties were, it seems, insurmountable. Now, we could go back further and resurrect the hot air balloon idea....
Last edited by tucumseh; 10th Jun 2021 at 07:25.