Project Seedcorn - MPA Skill Retention

[Lyneham Lad]

As reported on Flight International (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/uk-reveals-scope-of-seedcorn-maritime-patrol-project-368936/)

Not sure if this has already been discussed on the forum. If it has then Mods please delete or merge as appropriate.

Efforts by the Royal Air Force to retain core skills in maritime patrol aircraft (MPA) operations will include 33 personnel and a total investment of £3.2 million ($5.1 million) for the current financial year, the UK government has revealed.

Dubbed Project "Seedcorn", the measure is intended to allow RAF crew to fly with allied air forces to maintain experience in MPA operations following the cancellation of the UK's BAE Systems Nimrod MRA4 programme. This covers anti-submarine and anti-surface warfare duties, plus intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance tasks.

The agreements now in place have enabled the RAF to allocate personnel to support operations involving MPA assets flown by Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the USA, including during last year's NATO-led operation to protect Libyan civilians.

Detailing a planned allocation of £2.1 million, plus additional travel and subsistence costs of £1.2 million for 2011-2012, Lord de Mauley said: "Much of this cost would be present in the budget in another form if the personnel were undertaking other roles."

A small price to pay in the overall context but for just how many years will the project need to run?

[Courtney Mil]

And how many will leave/PVR before the replacement?

[5 Forward 6 Back]

I seem to remember hearing it comes with a fairly hefty return of service to avoid that sort of thing. Something like 3 or 4 years for the tour followed by 3 or 4 years afterwards.

[Rigga]

Only 3-4 years after tour length?...obviously not enough time for a reasonable return of substantial investment.

Should be more like a minimum of 5 and onwards after return to UK. MOD should learn to get real and treat all its people in a more cost-effective way.

There is no gentle way of paying debts or getting your money's worth back from employees.

[airborne_artist]

Nice idea Rigga, but make the terms too onerous and you won't get the volunteers you need.

While I'm sure many signed up to this totally willingly, it only came about because the head sheds (past and/or present) screwed up big-time.

[Neptunus Rex]

MOD should learn to get real and treat all its people in a more cost-effective way. There is not a problem. Most LRMP aircrew are dedicated professionals who view their job as the best in the Air Force, or Navy, depending on which country you reside. Besides which, the 'Desk Officers' would surely be most circumspect when deciding who to send, weighing up experience versus current time to serve.

What is more, if any did 'Jump Ship,' they would be going to the old Commonwealth countries, who all helped dear old Blighty out in the past.

Quid pro quo?

[Courtney Mil]

Well, there's nothing new about the exchange system. It does a great job. But when I was selected for mine there was no hint of strings attached. Nor with many of my colleagues that are doing it now. Desk officers are far more concerned with selecting the people with the right quals, etc, and how long they appear to have to serve. Anyone can change their mind afterwards if they feel so inclined.

[Rigga]

All good points - and I understand the niceties - but I don't think you're getting the beancounters view...

[orca]

I don't really understand who would sign up for an exchange tour with a tour plus five year return of service.

I am guessing that these guys are experts and are/were probably qualified Nimrod guys. Would a three year tour really be enough to get you to agree to a 8 year (total) return of service at that stage in your career?

I doubt it. But a promotion or specialist pay scale or (dare I say it) FRI might.

Less stick, more carrot!

[Scuttled]

There was a queue.

Dedicated professionals all, a good investment/gamble.

[Pontius Navigator]

http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/476180-future-uk-maritime-requirement-remain-secret.html

[Red Line Entry]

A good investment? Let's say these guys do (reasonably) 3-4 years with a 3-4 year RTS at the end of it.

First of all, who are we going to send in 3-4 years to replace the first tranche? All the MPA dudes will either be gone or well out of currency.

What are we going to do with the guys who come back? How long do we realistically think it's going to be before we get a new MPA? If Hammond announces a balanced budget in a couple of weeks' time, then that guarantees there is no money until at least 2022. Far better to save the dosh for a decent build up programme when we do have a planned MPA on its way.

A nice sop to those Kinloss guys who've been treated like poo, but let's not kid ourselves that this is a rational investment.

[Courtney Mil]

RLE, I was thinking the same thing. It's just too early to give people experience with the expected delivery date do far in the future. Rather like starting to get people carrier experienced so far ahead of all the deliveries required to have our own capability.

Scuttled, I'm pleased to hear it. I didn't mean to suggest they wouldn't be, more that peoples' circumstances change and so do conditions in the Service - as we're seeing.

[althenick]

Could some elements of seedcorn be covered by using the FAA They are still in the ASW Business?

[Lima Juliet]

Ever the optimist; is there a chance that the books balance in PR12 that runs for 10 years that has provisioned for an off-the-shelf purchase?

[Scuttled]

It is a good investment. 3 million a year is peanuts to keep the skills of those personnel current whilst we work out what our plans are mpa wise.

There are 4 pilots in the pool in the USA alone. What does a pilot cost to train today? If we were doing so......

The maritime skills are perishable. Quickly perishable. If we buy off the shelf, these guys are the - wait for it - 'seed corn' that the new fleet will be built around in the near future. If it is to be the P8, they are involved in development of the aircraft - that's their role.

And if it all goes wrong and we get nothing, so what? We'll have gambled pennies for a few years and the personnel with a broadened skill set can move on elsewhere.

All the other boys and girls from isk have run away, mostly out, and are doing very well by all accounts. There aren't many maritime experts left, and we may need them in a few years.

[RumPunch]

With potential pension changes very soon , can these guys still apply to pvr if the terms change enough for them too loose out financially. I just ask as its a big unanswered question that I dare say many are considering.

[Whenurhappy]

This is a thoroughly good scheme at a low cost to UKMOD and repairs Commonwealth links that have been allowed to wither, of late. A couple of points:

- ROS is practically impossible to enforce, even if imposed.
- those out there will undergo the same cuts to allowances (especially LOA). COL in Oz is particulalry high!
- spouse employment opportunities are likely to be limited, especially in OZ.
- a not insignificant number of RAF pers will elect to stay...

[Canadian WokkaDoctor]

Many RAF Officers who exchange to Canada decide to stay, I'm sure that the MPA guys would be no different. Anyhow, I'm told the RCAF is looking for MPA experience right now to populate the CP-140 fleet, any takers?

CWD

[Samuel]

A few references here to an "exchange" posting when they are clearly not! They are secondments to other air forces in fact as those air forces are not sending an equivalent number on a return posting. Not a lot of point in doing so I would have thought!

[ancientwarrior]

Surely the commonsense approach to a rebirth of a British long range maritime air force would be to make it a branch of the Royal Navy.
This would result in a single language force unlike previous manifestations and also solve the captaincy election by making them the senior rank on board.
;)

[Finnpog]

Matelot Bomb launched there:eek: :E

[Scuttled]

I agree totally. We would probably still have an mpa if it were crewed by the dark blue.

The senior rank bit is up for debate.

[althenick]

agree totally. We would probably still have an mpa if it were crewed by the dark blue.

I dont know about being crewed by the dark blue but there is certainly a strong argument for the RN holding the operational control & MPA budget ie Like when coastal command was brought under the direct control of the admiralty during WW2.

[Scuttled]

If the mpa capability were resurrected, objectively why not go the whole hog and give to the navy.

Most other countries do, it's really just the ones who stuck with the original RAF structure who have not.

And yes, this is turning into yet another repetitious MPA thread before the usual comments appear.

[althenick]

f the mpa capability were resurrected, objectively why not go the whole hog and give to the navy.


Only problem I see with this is Sea time. Anyone who gets streamed into MPA at the start of their career would never go to sea with the possible exception of WSO's. Meanwhile the rest of the FAA have to serve up to 9 months at sea.
Better having it as an RN asset under an RN budget with maybe RN personell Fighting the Aircraft and the RAF Flying and maintaining it. I think the Dutch did it this way until the demise of MPA.

[thunderbird7]

And of course, the 'senior rank' is always the most switched on cookie on board.... :rolleyes: Typical Navy!

[alfred_the_great]

This question is being dealt with at the moment. If rumours are anything to go by, the RAF want to keep the putative money for an MPA, but are unwilling to commit to an MPA. This is not to say there aren't lots of RAF guys rooting for a future MPA capability, but the RAF as an entity isn't convinced.

This follows some fairly bad behaviour by the RAF in PR11 regarding money in budget saved by deletions of capability, so unsurprisingly the RN are pushing very hard for the entire MPA capability (and associated funding) to be transferred to 1SL's budget, and he is then held to account for the capability he chooses to invest in.

[engineer(retard)]

and would the 1st SL then use that money for a MPA or catapults for his big boats?

[Red Line Entry]

Alfred,

You imply that there's a pot of gold with 'MPA capability' written on the side of it, ready to be transferred to the Service with the best argument.

I don't think that's the case at all - post PR11, Defence had a set of outputs which did not include MPA, and PR12 has shown that there is still insufficient money for those outputs that PR11 did include.

Thus, there ain't no money to fight over.

[alfred_the_great]

Then 1SL would be held to account by the SoS for the decisions he makes, about money he owns, for capability he is to provide.

IF 1SL decides that he can do all the stuff an MPA can/should do, but with something else, he makes the case, elucidates the risk and will carry the can. If the SSBN is compromised, or an MCT event fails, and that risk is realised, then he gets the blame.

At the moment, all that happens is no-one is really blamed, and no one is held to account.

It's exactly the same for things like helicopters - CAS will be held to account to provide a certain capability. If he thinks he can do that with a load of Puma (or whatever), and invests the rest in shiny fast jets, that's great. But the day he can't provide the capability then he gets a kick up the pants.

H2A (as the MoD buzz-word bingo has it) is a great thing, as long as it's done properly. Unfortunately there are some toes that are going cold in 'Town' about it all, so expect to see fudges galore.......

[alfred_the_great]

But there's a whiteboard, and PR13+ money to get, and an SoS who is reputedly sympathetic to the entire idea. Why do you think Seedcorn was signed off in the first place. It's not like CAS just called up his oppo's and asked for a couple of spare seats. Don't forget, FF2020 did indicate that an MPA capability might be required.....

[Red Line Entry]

I agree with you that the aspiration still exists. A lot will rest on how the whiteboard argument gets played out but MPA is unlikely to fare well against the whiteboard items in the near term (not least due to political embarrassment of yet another U-turn), and once capability is delegated out to the FLCs then the programme will be full for at least the next 10 years.

[engineer(retard)]

But while the 1SL makes that decision to can MPA because he likes big boats, the land domain loses an ISTAR component. However, he could tell CAS that he doesn't need it and then he can by fast pointy things or hydraulic palm trees

[alfred_the_great]

MR2 was not designed for Land ISTAR, neither was MRA4 (and same same with P8 for example). The only reason they were there was to try and justify themselves during the Iq/Afg years....

[engineer(retard)]

AtG

Are you trying to say that if it was not for Afg/Ir then there was no requirement for an MPA for the last 10 years? Why would 1SL keep MPA money safe if that was the prevalent point of view?

[Biggus]

A.T.G

That's a fairly inflammatory statement....

from someone who would appear not to be in possession of all the facts....

[WhiteOvies]

I'd suggest that Nimrod (and Sea King ASAC 7) was used in Afghan and Iraq because it had a capability that was as useful over land as it is over the sea. It may not have been designed to do that particular role but when it works then why not use it?

My first contact with the MPA world was on long trails to the US and Malaysia where the Nimrod provided SAR for our jets. Very useful and comforting it was too to have that sort of asset close on hand if the worst happened to our single engined aircraft.

In the UK our Armed Forces have always had to make best use of any and all assets available and both recent theatres have ben rather large for Sentinal (which was designed for the job) to take on alone.

As far as I know the Nimrod force still provided all the usual benefits of an MPA to the UK and other areas (V boat protection, long range SAR, over water ISTAR etc) at the same time as Telic and Herrick. For a maritime nation, which we are due to the fact that there is water on all sides, to not have an MPA is very odd. It does not matter who owns it, and there are both dark and light blue already involved in P8, it is a capability we need if the Treasury will ever let us.

[Jayand]

The sentinel most certainly was not designed to do the job that the MR2 did in either Iraq or Afghanistan. Nor is it doing them now, predator however....

[Ivan Rogov]

AtG, the US, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, France and others also use their MPA for overland ISTAR, your statement is simply wrong.

It just so happens that an airframe with long range, endurance, extra capacity (space, electricity, crew positions) and bunch of sensor operators is quite good at being adapted at short notice and low technical risk to do lots of other rolls. The term MPA should be put in the history books, MMA (Multi Mission Aircraft) would be a much better description of what they are.

[Vim_Fuego]

Unless there is a plan for procuring an MPA in the next 5-6 years what use can this serve? As the gap continues into 7-8 years or greater do we leave them out there indefinately or do we bring them home and start the skill fade clock? There just doesn't seem to be any apparent thought going into this aside from being seen to be doing 'something' at the moment...unless the double-secret plan is about to be announced due to surprise pot of cash being discovered under the mattress...

If we wanted to buy COTS tomorrow how long from signing a contract to buy to placing it on a dispersal for the seedcorn guys to start developing policy, process and the mixings of an OCU? Plus how long to spark up a training system, write course material, find training aircraft, build sims at the training and operational bases and so on....I would say, having experience of flight trials and now bringing in new capability, albeit in a non-aviation form, that things don't happen nearly as quickly as you would think...

[Ken Scott]

Should the RN get the new MPA/ MMA or whatever it's designated who will they get to operate it? If it's a similar size to MRA4 with around a dozen crew members ( and 10 crews on a squadron?) where is the FAA going to get them all from? What little fixed wing maritime experience that still exists is lodged within the RAF & the FAA can't rob from its rotary fleet without leaving that seriously undermanned. Do they expect all the ex-Nimrod guys to join the RN? With the seedcorn crews apparently being held to a stiff ROS would the RAF let them go even if they did want to crossover? Does the FAA need a big recruiting drive to get them trained before the ac arrive (if they in fact do)?

[ancientwarrior]

Bring back Charlie Lusty's balloon force !
Or maybe operators could be positioned on the maritime windmills.
There have been crazier schemes.

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

Ken,

There are a fair few MPA (or MMA) guys and girls who don't really care what colour their uniform is. The RAF 'shafted' them; they would happily give the RN a go, I'd suggest.

Off to swab the poop deck, me hearties!

Duncs:ok:

[Adam Nams]

The RAF 'shafted' them; they would happily give the RN a go, I'd suggest.

Shafted by the Wavy. A novel idea!

[Pontius Navigator]

Ken, remember there was a very heavy light blue presence on the carriers with RAF manning AEW, F4 and Bucc. When AEW, F4 and Bucc transferred to light blue a number of dark blue moved across too. No question of changing uniforms just changing quarters and bases.

The precedent has been set many decades ago.

[Biggus]

A few points about the MPA (MMA) seedcorn.

First of all the return of service is 5 years back in the UK, although there are no doubt ways around it.

Secondly, be under no illusion that in a few years time seedcorn will represent almost (yes I did say almost) all the remaining RAF MPA experience. The number of MPA WSOps that have been made redundant is very large, and those over 50 will not be players in any future UK MPA venture. Likewise most of the non-pilot officer expertise, Nav and AEO, will soon disappear, either through redundancy, non retention at the 38/40 point or natural wastage at 55. The WSO school is also closed, and the trade is effectively dead.

Any future MPA crews (with the possible exclusion of some pilots trawled back from AT/RJ etc) will have to be recruited from the high street and trained by the "seedcorn".

As to seedcorn itself, it is something of a fig leaf, a ready answer for the minister to give if asked an awkward question. They are either already overseas, or about to go, no doubt planned to return in 2015. The scheme might just work if the UK orders "off the shelf" MPA (P-8?) in 2015 for delivery in 2018. That gives the recently returned seedcorn a couple of years to put together a training package, and start training the first crews.

However, given the state of the economy, and the fact that the current government has already been driven off its course for "balancing the books" by 2015, the chances of ordering new aircraft in 2015 must be considered to be extremely thin. If no such aircraft are ordered then the value of the seedcorn initiative must be considered minimal.

Still, it was a relatively low cost no risk option, but whether anyone considers it a serious endeavour is open to debate....

[TheSmiter]

Hansard 8th Mar 2012:

Q. Lord West of Spithead (Labour)
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Astor of Hever on 17 February (WA 194) and 14 February (WA 143-4), why the Ministry of Defence is funding a Royal Air Force Seedcorn initiative using ex-Nimrod aircrew; and what are the costs involved.

A. Lord Astor of Hever (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Defence; Conservative)
The Seedcorn initiative will sustain the UK's ability to operate high-end fixed-wing maritime patrol aviation in a range of complex operating environments by maintaining highly perishable skills, particularly in anti-submarine warfare, anti-surface unit warfare, search and rescue, and maritime intelligence, target acquisition and reconnaissance.
The approximate cost of the 33 RAF aircrew serving overseas as part of the Seedcorn initiative is £3.25 million for financial year 2011-12. This includes service pay costs, overseas allowances and travel and subsistence costs.


So that's unequivocal then - MoD to purchase 12+ MRA4 type MMA rather than squeezing 33 peeps into a Cessna Caravan.



That's what he's saying, isn't it?

[Scuttled]

I'm sorry, I genuinely do not understand your comment/point? I thought the answer given was pretty straight forward. What are you inferring from this?

[Eminence Gris]

Well it's hardly an answer to the question, is it? Lord West is asking why they are doing it (recalling no doubt all the previous statements that we don't need an MPA because we can do the job just as well with Merlin, Type 23, C130 etc.) and he just gets the answer as to what it might achieve (ie skill retention against a capability that we don't require......apparently.)

EG

[Paul Chocks]

I'm no MPA specialist at all, but it strikes me that a better approach would be rather than spending money, for an indefinite period, to send guys overseas to retain/learn MPA skills we should wait until our replacement MPA has been selected and due for arrival, and then pay foreign experts to come to Uk to set up our OCU. We could hire in current foreign serving personnel or recently retired guys as contractors.

That way you are only paying for what you need. You could also have some RN experts and ex-nimrod guys as observers/advisors within the OCU just to make sure that any specific old Uk lessons lerned in the past were retained or included within Trg.

[TheSmiter]

EG, actually my noble Lord Astor does answer the question - that's why I inserted the post.

Scuttled (I take it you're of the damp persuasion), the inference I'm making from this politco speak, which I'm sure as an intelligent chap you can understand, is that if we need to maintain the highly perishable skills required for HIGH END maritime patrol aviation then does that not imply a future platform?

Why spread your wee MPA cadre to the 4 winds to maintain and improve their MPA abilities on our allies HIGH END platforms, unless the intent was to bring them back to introduce into service a new (and as yet unannounced) HIGH END MPA platform. Why?

So that's what I infer from Lord Astor's reply, and is that not what this thread is about?

If we do end up with a number of P8 Poseidon, then I would wish the seedcorn peeps the very best of luck in creating (virtually from scratch) the basic and advanced training systems, SOPs, tactics and standardisation development, operational support including software production and development, oh and an operational Sqn or two. In the twilight of your career, they're just the sort of tasks you want to be contemplating as you relax in the * Florida sunshine, rum punch in hand. * Insert Oz / NZ as required. The Canada 7 I assume will be awash with moose milk / purple death and will therefore be beyond caring.

Paul Chocs - interesting suggestion. Especially the we could hire in current foreign serving personnel or recently retired guys as contractors. There may be some merit in that, I'm sure there's a large cadre of WIWON's who would be more than willing to dispense their decades of maritime (and other ISTAR) nuggets of knowledge and cunning at a very reasonable price, when the call comes. If, that is, you can prise them away from the lucrative and contented civvy lifestyle most have carved for themselves since Oct 2010.

Its another option for the MoD when they decide what they want to do. :)

[betty swallox]

Alfred the Great,

I am frankly disgusted by your comment as regards "justification".

How on earth could you write this????

Would you like to tell this to the grieving relatives of XV 230?

What is wrong with you, and MODs PLEASE have a word.

[StopStart]

Sorry but I fail to share your outrage.

Alfred the Great made no comment about the loss of XV230 but merely expressed an opinion as to the general use of the Nimrod as an ISTAR platform. I suspect the relatives won't care what "someone on the internet" thinks about MPA multi-tasking as a) it in no way questions the professionalism with which the crew of XV230 took on the job with which they were tasked and b) it won't bring their loved ones back. XV230 could just have easily as met it's tragic fate coming off the tanker over the North Sea on a training sortie.

I could say that the conflict in Afghanistan (and Iraq) isn't worth the hundreds of lives it has cost this country to date. I'm clearly entitled to that opinion but it does in no way denigrate the sacrifices those servicemen and women made whilst carrying out their duties.

It is possible to discuss these matters without considering every contentious comment made to be a slur on those who have made the ultimate sacrifice.

[Pheasant]

Interesting thread. The MPA as a capability has been disposed of (wrongly) and there is no programme for replacement in the future, yet we are paying to retain seedcorn and no-one is moaning (not even the RN)

There is another programme that is funded and the RN are retaining a seedcorn capability with the USN and FRN and yet I hear lots of moaning from the light blue (because they are not involved cos it means sea-time) - ah yes, it must be the CVF programme.

[Jackonicko]

Should we take a leaf out of the UAE's book, or perhaps go down the CASA C295 route?

"UAE Air Force Dash 8 1321 (ex A6-ADG) Night Stopped at Shannon on delivery to Dubai via Palermo. Another one will follow soon (ex A6-ADF)."

1321 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mcdee6174/6823632888/in/photostream)
1321 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mcdee6174/6969754951/in/photostream/)
1321 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mcdee6174/6823631422/in/photostream/)
1321 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mcdee6174/6823629790/in/photostream/)
1321 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mcdee6174/6969751383/in/photostream/)
1321 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mcdee6174/6823626546/in/photostream/)
1321 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mcdee6174/6823625858/in/photostream/)

It might not be a P-3 or a P-8, but it's better than nothing, surely?

[cyrilranch]

This aircraft looks more like for use as a Elint/ISTAR aircraft then a Standard Maritime patrol aircraft

[betty swallox]

StopStart.
No snags...

(are you Alfred's dad?!)

[The Old Fat One]

BS

Mate, your post is well OTT. There are many of us ex Nimrod folk who held broadly similar views regarding the use of an MPA in such roles. Whether they are valid views or not, there is surely no need to bring such outrage to the debate.

Pour yourself a stiff one.

[Hoots]

Just remember there's quite a few nimrod guys not doing seedcorn but trying something else within the RAF. You don't forget MPA things overnight so could comeback should the need arise. So a bit more than 33 and with standards and ocu experience.

[tonyosborne]

Perhaps they'll get a close look at a P-8 when one turns up at Lossie for Joint Warrior next month?

[andyy]

i have no doubt that i'll be shot down for the following but I don't really understand the "seedcorn" idea. If its airborne ASW/ ASuW skills that we are trying to protect then thats a good thing but surely the FAA are doing that on a daily basis. Sure the team is small (but larger than the RAF seedcorn group, I'd guess) and not moving around at above 100Knts but what is it about operating an MPA to detect subs that is special compared to operating a helo (apart from the fact that the helo also has the significant advantage of a active dipping sonar). The ASW/ ASuW principles are similar & the kit that the seedcorn guys are operating will be different to that that eventually comes in to service anyway, so presumably we are not getting familiarity with equipment.

If/ When we need to resurrect the MPA capability full time then, sure, the RN's Observer/ Aircrewman school would need to ramp up but then so would the RAFs equivalent. The RN also already trains EW & Comms operators (albeit not airborne) but they could be trained to wear a green jump suit, i guess.

ASW/ ASuW is a core skill for the RN, practiced every day; its not as though UK PLC has lost that skill completely. UK PLC has just lost the ability to do it at extended ranges and endurances from the air (and don't misunderstand me, thats a significant loss in my view). Or am I missing something? Happy to be educated without being flamed. Thanks.

[anita gofradump]

MR2 was not designed for Land ISTAR, neither was MRA4 (and same same with P8 for example). The only reason they were there was to try and justify themselves during the Iq/Afg years....

A trolling statement, if there ever was one. And completely without substance or fact.

All the signs of someone looking for an argument or who is retarded.

[betty swallox]

anita....my point EXACTLY!!! Thank you.

andyy. Your understanding of the role of MR2 and MRA4 is making you post that last one. No snags, and I'm not having a go, but the role of an MPA is not just ASW/ASuW. I'm not trying to big up both of the Nimrod maritime varients, but do a google search/or Amazon search for "Nimrod, Rise and Fall"; there's loads of great info in there.
Regards.

[Ivan Rogov]

Don't pick on the retards :=

Andyy, that's like saying SH and AT are the same as it is transport, or a pistol and a sniper rifle do the same job just at different range (analogys are not my strong point!).

Some of the sensors may be similar but they are used in very different ways, that is the skill which needs to be maintained. Even the most direct comparison of Acoustic Operators needed to do full OCUs when they did RN/RAF exchange tour. It then took the same time as everyone else to become CR, the ones I know would be the first to admit that it was a steep learning curve to learn effectively a different role.

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

Hoots, as I would have expected, makes a valid point; there are a few of us around and about that are not on Seedcorn who hope to be able to help resurrect the capability in the middle future.

Duncs:ok: