British Future MPA

[TBM-Legend]

One less competitor in the Fincastle we say. That can't be bad!:D

[FATTER GATOR]

One less competitor in the Fincastle we say.


We always suspected you wanted to turn it into a Commonwealth cricket competition;)

[Eminence Gris]

It seems that the MoD have been upset by the AVM's honest answer and have put out a smoke screen with a blatant attempt to recontextualise the AVM's answer by alleging with complete dishonesty that the question was a hypothetical one about what type of aeroplane the gap filler might be. That question was asked, but much later in the session to which the answer was: "There is no active consideration nor an active requirement to buy an MPA at the moment. Any decision along those lines would be part of the SDSR 2015......The Seedcorn initiative gives us decision space till 2019". You can watch the whole session on the Parliament TV website, if you wish. It was wrong of the Daily Mail to suggest that anyone said the answer would be P-8 and my guess would be CN295 as a more likely outcome. It is sad also that the MoD once again fall back on the excuse of major problems with the MRA4 aeroplane, a fairly recent policy line and one they were too afraid to make in 2010, when there were more people around who knew the truth and were in a position to protest.

Incidentally the Daily Mail article is still viewable on line. Watch out for the next headline: "AVM Green to be OC RAF Kinloss".;)

EG

[Avionker]

One less competitor in the Fincastle we say. That can't be bad!

Gives you a chance of a win for a change doesn't it?

[Scuttled]

Ref the link by xv208 Snoopy to Hansard.

Sqn Ldr Rab Forbes. Outstanding.

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

[Donna K Babbs]

Scuttled,

Well said - I completely agree.

[Bannock]

Ref posts 258 and 259

I concur!!!

[Clockwork Mouse]

Excellent. I wonder if any MPs read, understood and took notice. Probably not as there aren't any immediate votes in it.

[tucumseh]

our ability to operate maritime patrol aircraft is being maintained.
Which is not the same as saying we actually have any aircraft to operate.



Only one Nimrod MRA4 had been delivered to the RAF and it had not passed air worthiness tests....
Think about this one! It was (apparently) delivered to the RAF (which would require an agreement by ACAS that it was airworthy), yet it (apparently) wasn't. Who in DPA/DE&S would knowingly deliver an unairworthy a/c to the Customer?

......the project was hundreds of millions of pounds over budget, years late, and needed considerable extra funding to rectify long-running technical problems.
As advised in 1998 to the MoD(PE) 2 Star responsible for management oversight of the programme. We still wait for him to be asked to explain his actions (or rather, lack of).

See above question^^^ Same 2 Star ruled in 2001 (letters dated 10.1.01 and 16.3.01), that it was acceptable to deliver unairworthy a/c to the Services, having declared they were airworthy but in the full knowledge they were not.

[keesje]

Revealing the company's investigation of a gunship development, head of market development for light and medium transport aircraft Jerónimo Amador says: "We have seen a growing interest from customers." This has been prompted by a need to perform counter-piracy operations, participate in low-intensity conflict and provide protection for critical national infrastructure, he adds.

"Amador confirms that Airbus Military has held talks with ATK over the US company's work to modify two ex-Spanish air force CN-235s as gunships for Jordan, and that it is "looking for a partner to allow us to offer an efficient solution".

Aircraft could be manufactured in a dedicated armed reconnaissance and combat support configuration, to include an electro-optical/infrared sensor, fuselage-housed 30mm (1.2in) cannon and potentially laser-guided rockets and missiles. A surveillance radar could also be carried, along with intelligence-gathering equipment and up to four onboard operator stations. Alternatively, customers could be offered elements of this system as a removable kit.

Potential customers exist in Asia, Latin America and the Middle East, Amador says."

Airbus Military studies gunship versions of medium transports (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/airbus-military-studies-gunship-versions-of-medium-transports-371664/)

[OafOrfUxAche]

Potential customers exist in Asia, Latin America and the Middle East, Amador says


Even the industry man accepts that he'd be wasting his time trying to flog his aircraft to us or any European country. British Future MPA? Never going to happen.

[Genstabler]

Activity at last on Future UK MPA?
For the last couple of days there has been, what appears to be, a DC3 with a MAD boom trundling in straight lines at low level up and down North Yorkshire. Is this a trial of a possible Nimrod replacement? Or is it something to do with Google mapping?
This is, of course, a serious question!

[ORAC]

See here. (http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?p=1909319)
Basler BT-67 reg C-FTGI

[Genstabler]

Thanks Orac; that's the feller.

[Gene Genie]

NOTAMed this week, carrying out aerial survey work.

[polyglory]

PICTURES: India's second P-8I makes flight debut, as testing advances (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pictures-indias-second-p-8i-makes-flight-debut-as-testing-advances-374442/)

Why are we not going down this road?

[A4scooter]

Polyglory - because we have politicians in all parties who don't care and would rather spend money on foreign aid, supporting the feckless, paying for the 25% of social housing in London occupied by people not born in the UK etc etc.
Apologies - rant over

[Jayand]

Or maybe because the Government has decided that it's not paying billions for
an insurance policy that we are never going to need, not when every other dept is cutting by record ammounts.

[Heathrow Harry]

Yorkshire Exploration | Rathlin (http://www.rathlin-energy.co.uk/content/yorkshire-exploration)

probably for these guys - they were flying geophyics in Ireland recently as well

[A4scooter]

Jayand - you could use the same argument with a Trident replacement and I appreciate money is tight but the Nimrod was more than a MPA/ASW aircraft with its extensive use as an ISTAR platform in Afghanistan, anti piracy patrols in the Gulf region and more importantly it SAR role.
New Zealand, Spain, Portugal, Canada, Norway, Ireland and Malta etc all keep a MPA capability and I can't believe all these countries are wrong.
Maybe its humanitarian / law enforcement role makes a MPA requirement an essential asset we should not be without.

[Wensleydale]

(http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pictures-indias-second-p-8i-makes-flight-debut-as-testing-advances-374442/)PICTURES: India's second P-8I makes flight debut, as testing
advances (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pictures-indias-second-p-8i-makes-flight-debut-as-testing-advances-374442/)

(http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pictures-indias-second-p-8i-makes-flight-debut-as-testing-advances-374442/)
Why buy one from the Indians when the one from the cowboys did not work?

[Jayand]

Scooter, my argument about insurance is aimed at trident replacement, which was one of the leading arguments for keeping MPA.

As for Istar role in Afghan, it was a stop gap that went on far too long and now they have other platforms doing the job.

SAR is the only real issue and littoral Asuw, I suspect a very cheap and limited capability
Ac covering these two roles is about all you have any hope of getting. Imo.

[A4scooter]

Jayand - Surrounded by some of the busiest shipping lanes in the world and a huge EEZ to Police I think we are in agreement and an aircraft with the ability to patrol and assist with SAR is an asset we should have.

[Charlie Luncher]

Jayand
Can you tell me the other assets that can complete all the ISTAR roles of the Multimission large aircraft such as the Nimrod overland and water??
Charlie sends

[Jayand]

That isn't what I said, and no not on an open forum!

[QTRZulu]

Jayand - Not to turn this into a pi55ing contest as what has been done has been done and there is no point in rehashing old arguments, but your claims that it was a stop gap are somewhat wide of the mark.

If you had ever flown it, you would know that what we did in theatre was an extension to a number of existing roles that had been carried out for years before hand. I admit we got some new kit, but that just replaced some of the old role fit kit we had.

So, to say it was a stop gap is not really that accurate. Its more a matter of the platform was the best choice for the job at hand and it is only now, several years later that a 'better platform' has been introduced, which by and large uses the same kit we used 5 years ago!

[Jayand]

The use of a Nimrod doing overland EO ops was in existence before Iraq or Afghan however, it was an add on and not a main role.
Ambition remained to have a more dedicated platform in place, in the mean time and for longer than was needed the Nimrod soldiered on.
That role has been happily been taken on by another platform and any new MPA would not need to be equiped for it.

[Roland Pulfrew]

For longer than necessary

Er, No. There wasn't anything to replace MR2 until its recent UOR replacement!

any new MPA would not need to be equiped for it.

Which sort of flies in the face of CAS's suggestion that new platforms need to be multi-role rather than role specific. When you look at the systems that were fitted to the MR2 (and without reopening an old debate, the MRA4) lots of roles could be accomodated in a single platform providing Defence with a lot more options. Personally I can't think of any platform that was as multi-role as the Nimrod.

[Jayand]

Somebody should have gone to specsavers, those rose tinted specs need replacing.

[tucumseh]

it was an add on and not a main role

This, and similar comments about operating intent and use, gets to the nub of the problem.

Very few of these "add ons" were reflected in the Build Standard, and hence Safety Case, and the longer it took to accept this the more difficult and expensive it became to regress. It is invariably cheaper in the long run just to do the job properly in the first place.

[Roland Pulfrew]

those rose tinted specs

Not rose-tinted, just knowledge of the facts. :cool:

[chopper2004]

I must have missed this walking around a fortnight ago at Farnborough, but just thinking a Herk down Stanley Way did have a secondary role of limited maritime patrol so I read once.

SC-130J: The Sea Hercules - YouTube

Cheers

[Finnpog]

Sea Herk - an interesting concept, particulalry the conformal weapons bays.

If you could also bolt in the Harvest Hawk package it could cover a number of roles, including martime interdiction of the piracy problems (if there was the political will).

I wonder if LM are just raising it up the flag pole to see if they get a salute.

[QTRZulu]

Jayand,

As RP has already stated it is fact. If we accept your argument that it was not needed/wanted/desired why was the capability built into the MRA4 as a KUR from day one?

I'm not just talking mission specific rolefit stuff here either as much of the kit you allude to was catered for in the original design. Any other additional kit was catered for via a dedicated role fit station which provided an element of future proofing and was intentionally designed that way.

That to coin RP is fact!

Perhaps wearing your rose tinted specs, you see it as the designers at BAE just coming up with it on a whim and thinking 'I know, lets shove all this expensive kit in, bill the customer, hope they don't notice and oh create a load of work for ourselves!' - plausible but not very likely!

[Heathrow Harry]

what is the price of some of those P-8's?

We could subcontract their running to Ryanair ................. at least we'd get some hours out of them that way

[Jayand]

Qtr, I never said it was not needed or not wanted but simply stated that it was an add on that ended up being used in theatre for far longer than it should have (procurement issues of better suited platform)
If we get an MPA it won't be nearly as capable, I reckon we will be lucky to get much more than a coastal ac that covers SAR and basic Asuw.

[Just This Once...]

The Sea Hercules concept with P-3 derived mission system has been kicking around for a while and it looks a pretty good option for some markets.

http://www.stratpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/SC-130J2.jpg

http://www.stratpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/SC-130J1-600-x-337.jpg

[Widger]

Please please please stop banging on about SAR. SAR was and is, a tertiary role for an MPA and IMHO the concentration on 'SAR' of much of the argument for retention of an MPA capability was it's main downfall. It is an easy argument to undermine and was, leading to the loss of MRA4 without any planned replacement. That is not to say there were no issues with MRA4 but just that the programme was cancelled without any idea what was going to replace it. There are other far more important reasons than SAR for MPA capability.

[Jayand]

There are a lot of reasons for having a fully capable MPA and SAR is only one of them, you can argue that SAR is not the most important but I believe that what the MOD will get will be not much more than a Littoral Asuw ac with SAR responsibilities and capabilities. I think ASW, overland EO and any other roles have gone forever in an "MPA" that this country will see.
just my opinion.

[BATCO]

Whilst SAR might have been a lower priority role, it is high profile. Yes, yes, MPA/ASuW(search and warn?) went on throughout Cold War, but it's story untold - or at least not heard by the general public. Whereas SAR occurs on a more 'acute' basis, but then grabs headlines and the public's imagination.

I expect we in the RAF will feel regret at the outcome of the decision to cut the RAF's MPA and SAR capability at some time in the future. Unfortunately, the public will probably either not know (ASuW) or care (SAR) for very long.

Batco
PS. I thought of raising the C-130J frames that will be available, but thought better of starting another 'MOD procurement nightmare' thread. You know, the one where we are offered a COTS/MOTS MPA/SAR solution but then decide it would be cheaper to recycle our airframes and then discover that it wasn't.

[keesje]

I think a Sea Herc would be another heritage, large, can do all, coldwar 4 hauler, like the Orion, Nimrod, Bear and Ill-38.

Its just not the route MPAs seem to be going. Smaller multirole platforms as part of complicated networks seem to have the future.

E.g. EADS added/ is adding inflight refuelling, AEW, anti ship missiles, guns, Mk46s, winglets to its C295 platform.

The maximum take off weight of the C295MPA is 23,200kg. More then 4 times as low as the MR4s (105k)..

Adversaries are not the same / at the same place they were in the Nimrod/ P3C era. IMO a Sea Herc provides an answer to a big requirement that isn't there anymore, just like the MR4. Neither are the budgets.

Search and Rescue (SAR) | c295 (http://www.c295.ca/resources/multimedia-library/search-and-rescue-sar/)
http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=26812&Itemid=107

http://www.abload.de/img/c295-torpf6p2.jpg

[Genstabler]

MPA is of central importance and interest to UK defence so will continue to feature prominently on these forums. However, would it not be sensible to extend this excellent one rather than generate yet another?

[hval]

Gentlemen,

I think it is time for us to think outside the box with some blue sky mind mapping.

This is what I came up with.

Who has LRMPA in the regions we need? Top of my list was Russia. The French wont help, nor will the rest of Europe as we keep upsetting them. The USA is focussing on the Pacific, that leaves Russia.

Can we not ask them to keep an eye out for submarines? Even offer to share the costs.

[Heathrow Harry]

Some Tu-142's??

great idea.... that'll fix the people who complain about the noise of the odd Hercules...............................

[hval]

Heathrow Harry,

Those TU 142's do not even have to land in the UK. Crewed and maintained by the Russians. If they spot any Russian subs they just have to let us know. :O

[Heathrow Harry]

Indded - but it's an easy job - most of them are on the surface asking for help these days -

But we'd probably have to incentivise them a little - for a $100 a proven contact we'd get REAL service I think

They 'd probably split it 50:50 with Northern Fleet so the boats surfaced regularly at fixed locations........

[Pontius Navigator]

Shades of milominder bender. Just think how much money we could have saved in the cold war. Instead of bumping the opposition miles from home we could have agreed a mutal bump in home waters. Save all that hassle.

Also arrange to scuttle a sub outside the harbour after evacuating the crew :)

Or running aground on the Isle of Wight rather than Lord Howe island.

[Genstabler]

This is a deadly serious topic! Please take it seriously! Who knows who may be reading it. :O

[hval]

Genstabler,

Whos ays that we are not being serious.

Think of the budget savings. Would also impress the public and them upstairs at how good the R.A.F. is at submarine detection.

[Heathrow Harry]

Pontius

maybe they need to investigate the RN - running that Astute ashore at Broadford sounds just like the arrangement I was suggesting with our ex Allies ('41-'45) in the East