Pouring oil on troubled waters and all that.
Expanding on my last post. Many of us ex-MPA guys on here would love to throw out into the open all of what was accomplished by the MR2 (warts and all) and thus expand the argument of why many of us feel strongly that a replacement should be brought into service. As we know the requirement and tasking for an MPA remains extant. It was the method of delivery (MRA4) was removed. This is where the problem lies. Even though much of the Nimrods tasks and endeavours have been hinted at and in some cases written about in privately funded books, I do not believe that the MOD has released the details of the Operations we were involved in and our achievements. On a public forum you cannot fully argue the relevance and requirement of an asset unless all the facts are taken into account. For obvious reasons this we cannot do.
During the aftermath of the SDSR announcement the House of Commons was briefed that the tasks accomplished by the MR2 would be taken up by other assets, both UK and selected foreign partners. I guess the question now should be “Are all those stated tasks being maintained to the same required level as were previously”.
Furthermore, shortly after the SDSR, Nick Harvey (Armed Forces Minister) visited Kinloss to listen to gripes and concerns. He was asked what was going to happen to the tasks that could only be accomplished by a UK asset. His reply was “that they may have to go undone”…..surprisingly honest for a Lib/Dem politician, but I would suggest not an ideal state for defence to get into.
I guess the bottom line is working out what you want to achieve with your platform, then matching your asset to your task. If you just want to work close to shore on a basic level then an all singing and dancing MPA/MMA is probably not what is required. We shouldn’t just be looking at our requirements now but how are we going to integrate and provide for defence post 2020. How are you going to operate with our new aircraft carriers as they operate around the world? With a reduction in the RN surface fleet, could more slack be taken up by an air asset providing ISTAR? If a more capable asset is required then that is going to cost. If the Govt want it, they’ll find the money – always do.
TOFO – We didn’t lose our toys, we lost our careers. Thanks for your compassion. Many of us have successfully retrained and moved our employability and skill sets to other areas and are getting on fine. But please don’t confuse wanting to move with having to move.