Having had, what is now clearly, the last experience of flying MRA4 as a current RAF pilot, I can only say that I am completely and utterly dumbfounded at today's decision. Not only is it contrary to all of the apparent criteria required to be met in terms of cost benefit/capability/roles/future expansion, it appears that the single main issue is it was called Nimrod. Having spent the last 10 years (nearly half of my so called RAF career) on this project, I still cannot understand the logic. There is no credible military argument for this decision (but apparently there is for the E3!) and I am still struggling to understand the so called financial benefits (we've already paid for it, so what are we saving?).
But all of that is bye the bye. What nation, with any maritime aspirations, needs a platform with 15 hours un-refuelled flight duration, 2100 mile radius of action, an F18E derived 1760 Mil Std weapons databus with 13 weapons hardpoints (9 bomb bay and 4 wing), a radar with a 250 mile range, SAR and ISAR modes, Link 11 and Link 16, SHF Satcom, HFx2, V/UHF x 5 and fitted for but not with UHF Satcom, capable of operating from 36000ft to 200ft. All integrated, working and demonstrated for the last 10 months.
Certainly not a nation that intends to keep a submarine based nuclear deterent and surely not a nation that intends to launch 2 new carriers in the next 10 years (with a much reduced surface fleet screen capabilty).
Anyway, all of this is irrelevant. The decisions are irreversible apparently.
Thank you to all who have supported the MRA4/ maritime aviation over the years.
Please, do not ask the Defence Secretary, Prime Minister and anyone else who cares to listen, why there are currently several foreign MPA deployed to RAF Kinloss.
SFO