Sentinel R1 to be scrapped next year due to ‘obsolescence’ say MoD

[Beatts]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/sentinel-r1-to-be-scrapped-next-year-due-to-obsolescence-say-mod/


The Ministry of Defence claim that the aircraft is “now increasingly obsolescent and will face increasing reliability issues as time progresses” and will still leave service in March 2021, as originally planned.

Jeremy Quin, Minister of State at the Ministry of Defence, stated that Sentinel was introduced in 2008 in the knowledge that a significant equipment upgrade would be required in the mid 2010s.

“The Sentinel R1 has been operationally deployed in support of a number of operations. Some operations are considered to be both conventional and counter-insurgency; for example operations in Afghanistan (Op HERRICK) and Iraq (Op SHADER). It has also been deployed on operations in Libya (Op ELLAMY), Nigeria (Op TURUS) and Mali (Op NEWCOMBE), all considered conventional operations.

Sentinel was introduced in 2008 in the knowledge that a significant equipment upgrade would be required in the mid 2010’s. The Defence Review in 2010 cancelled this expected upgrade bringing forward the likely out of service date. The SDSR 2015 determined that Sentinel should be retained for a further period and set a new out of service date of March 2021. While some work was conducted on the on-board equipment this fell well short of a full system upgrade.
The radar and mission system are now increasingly obsolescent and will face increasing reliability issues as time progresses. Retaining the capability would have required significant upgrade expenditure and the March 2021 out of service date has been retained.

No identical capability is operated by the UK (though similar capabilities exist in the NATO inventory). The UK does however have a number of other intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities that collect different types of intelligence information, including long-range strategic assets (Sentry, Rivet Joint and Poseidon) and shorter-range more tactically-focused assets (including Shadow, Reaper and Watchkeeper).”
The aircraft, described on the Royal Air Force website (https://www.raf.mod.uk/aircraft/sentinel-r1/) as “the most advanced long-range, airborne-surveillance system of its kind in the world”, provides long-range, wide-area battlefield surveillance, delivering intelligence and target tracking information to British forces.The aircraft has been operationally deployed in support of operations in Afghanistan, Libya and Mali, and is currently deployed in support of British and Coalition operations in Iraq and Syria.

[chopper2004]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/sentinel-r1-to-be-scrapped-next-year-due-to-obsolescence-say-mod/

P-8 Poseidon probably replaces it

https://rusi.org/publication/rusi-defence-systems/case-replacing-raf’s-sentinel-r1-fleet-additional-p-8a-poseidon

cheers

[Party Animal]

I think the word ‘probably’ would more accurately be replaceable with ‘could possibly’. Subject to the US allowing the UK into another highly classified technical capability (not helped by the Hauawii deal) and another chunk of money that defence would have to find in the current climate. My guess is that it’s very unlikely although quite a decent RUSI article anyway.

[VX275]

How many stays of execution has it had already? One, two or is it three?

[Meester proach]

Was that money well spent or not ?

[NutLoose]

I found this quite amusing only three scant years ago

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/11614/usaf-or-nato-should-snap-up-the-rafs-retiring-r1-sentinel-radar-planes

[atakacs]

Isn't that the kind of mission that would gradually migrate to UAV? Triton anyone?

[Two's in]

"Smart Procurement" was the latest snappy catch phrase in use as I was departing Bristol's premier centre of excellence for pissing away tax-payers money. Obviously that never caught on.

[MarkD]

Could RAF eke some value from the aircraft by removing the electronics and converting them back to a passenger/transport role, maybe replacing some of 32 Sqn's 146s? Or will all the extra bits bolted on have compromised fatigue life too much?

I think the word ‘probably’ would more accurately be replaceable with ‘could possibly’. Subject to the US allowing the UK into another highly classified technical capability (not helped by the Hauawii deal) and another chunk of money that defence would have to find in the current climate.
Boeing's lobbyists would probably create significant pressure to excuse any such issues since it gives them an opportunity to ship something which won't spend years in adjacent parking lots, and it would at least have some commonality with the existing P-8 MPAs. And as for the money, with COVID bloating borrowing all over the world, what better time to splash a little more red ink?

[tucumseh]

"Smart Procurement" was the latest snappy catch phrase in use as I was departing Bristol's premier centre of excellence for pissing away tax-payers money. Obviously that never caught on.

Indeed. I recall us being dragged into the main lecture theatre to hear a talk by the 3 Star Deputy CE and hangers-on about 'faster, cheaper, better' and how they were going to develop a way of achieving it. He set out all the things they were looking at, claiming most were 'hard targets' and there was no realistic way of achieving them quickly, so concentrate on a few 'quick wins' to begin with.

It was pointed out to him that his hard targets were routinely met with minimal fuss if one simply implemented a mandated Def Stan. And if he cared to study the major projects that were successful, he'd see a correlation. And on the disasters, like Nimrod and Chinook Mk3, he wouldn't. He turned his back and walked away.

[HAS59]

Bloody thing! It is exactly what we needed in the late 70's for BAOR. The concept of a broad area radar ONLY asset is so dated.
It could be used to cue other assets onto a possible target for detailed analysis.
(If Sentinel & Watchkeeper could be made to work). But on its own it was always limited in it's ability.
It was kept alive by an effective Int Corps publicity machine and the mantra of 'Jointery'.

Did they ever find those missing Algerian Schoolgirls with it?

It would have been interesting to see the jet fitted with the ex Canberra RADIOS sensor.
But that was never going to happen. The weight issue alone was always a limiting factor with the Sentinel too. .. ...
We will be better off with Wedgtail.

[pr00ne]

HAS59,

The role of Wedgetail is completely and totally different from the role of Sentinel. You might as well say we will be better of with Grob Tutors!


And for all those pushing the P-8A as an alternative to Sentinel, the RAF have already formally declared that this will not happen as there are nowhere near enough of them and they will be 100% focussed on the Maritime role.

So we will withdraw the capability unreplaced and suffer yet another Tory capability "window" or gap.

[Cpt_Pugwash]

Indeed. I recall us being dragged into the main lecture theatre to hear a talk by the 3 Star Deputy CE and hangers-on about 'faster, cheaper, better' and how they were going to develop a way of achieving it.
Tuc, I recall a similar "town hall" meeting led by your favourite CDP, where he stated that he saw no place for technical staff in his department. That sort of expertise could all be hired in. That worked well, didn't it?
Still, glad all that's behind me.
Hope you are keeping well.

[Just This Once...]

Ahh Sentinel - the first and only RAF aircraft to be fitted with but not for.

[Lima Juliet]

On capability gaps, the MQ-9 Reaper and the MQ-9B Protector can offer both Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) and Ground Moving Target Indication (GMTI) with its Lynx multimode radar. Here is some info: https://www.ga-asi.com/lynx-multi-mode-radar

Now the Lynx is not as powerful as the Sentinel’s radar, but there are many more Protectors on order than we have Sentinels - so in this case quantity gives a quality better than before. Further the fidelity of the data from Protector is superior as it is closer to the area being surveilled. It can also deliver product beyond line of sight - indeed from anywhere on the planet with the right satellite coverage and bandwidth (which there is).


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/977x266/image_22e908a679a647850e61353dfab974466190f0b6.jpeg
So the RAF retains a SAR/GMTI capability with the 20+ Protectors on order. So all is not lost when it comes to capability - the Reapers already being flown offer that capability now, but in smaller numbers. :ok:

[unclenelli]

Seems like they've found a hanagar for the Reds!

[tucumseh]

Tuc, I recall a similar "town hall" meeting led by your favourite CDP, where he stated that he saw no place for technical staff in his department. That sort of expertise could all be hired in. That worked well, didn't it?
Still, glad all that's behind me.
Hope you are keeping well.

Thank you. Despite an apparent shift in Government policy this week, I have refrained from exposing myself to the locals.

Yes, I think that was 1997. Having uprooted everyone to the dreaded AbbeyWood, he announced 600 engineering jobs would go. A few years later an old colleague complained to me that he'd inherited an Integrated Project Team where 70% of the staff were costing him around £3k a day each via an agency.

On this Sentinel issue, and to be fair, the policy was (is?) that one cannot proceed unless there is assurance that the kit can be supported for 15 years. The problem is, that clock can start running 10 years before ISD, especially on avionics.

The other issue is 'five years useful life'. The piecemeal way in which Sentinel seems to have been extended for a year or two at a time militates against receiving any proper funding, as it reduces in each of the last five years of life anyway. If you slip the OSD a year, that just means you have six years of reduced funding, not five. Such a practice is, in effect, planned obsolesecence; as well as a stealth cut in the defence budget.

[Evalu8ter]

'So we will withdraw the capability unreplaced and suffer yet another Tory capability "window" or gap.'

Odd comment, at least in recent history. Having worked in Cap at the fag end of Brown's awful regime, I can attest to the utter lack of reality that Labour apparatchiks (and simpering politically-friendly CS) worked in. Kit was ordered for red-top headlines with absolutely no rational plan for how it was to be funded, procured and supported (I was working on the proposed new buy of 24 CH-47s at the time). We accepted that, whoever won the 2010 GE, much of what we were doing would be undone. It was simply not affordable. Most on the second floor were looking at it each other wondering who, if anybody, senior enough had the minerals to tell the Govt that it was, effectively, a naked emperor. Brown's bunker mentality refused engagement in the real world. He happily eschewed Austerity post the crash and continued Defence Largesse in the vain hope he'd scrape through the looming election (especially trying to buttress Scotland against the SNP). His decision to not invoke austerity, and to keep spending, between 2008-10 made the subsequent austerity (and associated SDSR10) much worse. The 'Tory capability holidays' in SDSR 10 were as a direct result of the dire state of the national finances and the fantasy which was the Defence EP at the time. It's not all the politicos fault, of course. The Service chiefs happily took lumps out of each other to preserve turf, funding, prestige and sacred cows……SDR15 looked at the progress made and then started to 'buy back' capabilities that had been 'snoozed' as affordability improved. Sentinel has always been on borrowed time. There are significant long terms savings to remove a type from the inventory, and the potential savings of P8/E7 commonality will help significantly, especially if a modest additional buy of P8s (4-6) were sanctioned (the serial numbers are allotted) and it would ease the RAF's concerns regarding over-stretching the force. Additionally, Protector will help, as will a new generation of Air Launched Effectors and other UAV tech, the potential of which is probably being studied by the likes of 216 Sqn….Just my 2p. Hopefully the boys and girls on V (AC) will continue to dig out until OSD.

[WingsofRoffa]

Shame you can only have Aircrew on board that drink G&Ts with slimline tonic and discard their top bun when eating a burger...

[HAS59]

Thanks, pr00ne, I realise that the roles of Wedgetail are indeed different to the role of Sentinel.
When I said we’d be better off with Wedgetail, that’s what I meant. It’s a better use of money and people.
The ELINT capability it will provide is a decent target cueing facility, especially when used alongside other assets.

The experience gained on Sentinel will be useful to the operators of the General Atomics Lynx radar on the Protector RPV’s.
I am grateful to Lima Juliet for mentioning, indeed demonstrating, the SAR-MTI capability of the Protector,
I wasn’t sure how much of this information is already ‘out there.’

The one- foot resolution SAR image is simply astonishing,
and with the ability to cross-cue an EO/IR sensor it surpasses everything that Sentinel tried to achieve.

[Toadstool]

Bloody thing! It is exactly what we needed in the late 70's for BAOR. The concept of a broad area radar ONLY asset is so dated.
It could be used to cue other assets onto a possible target for detailed analysis.
(If Sentinel & Watchkeeper could be made to work). But on its own it was always limited in it's ability.
It was kept alive by an effective Int Corps publicity machine and the mantra of 'Jointery'.

Did they ever find those missing Algerian Schoolgirls with it?

It would have been interesting to see the jet fitted with the ex Canberra RADIOS sensor.
But that was never going to happen. The weight issue alone was always a limiting factor with the Sentinel too. .. ...
We will be better off with Wedgtail.

You mean the Nigerian school children captured by Boko Haram?

A single use SAR MTI asset nowadays is slightly outdated but Sentinel has done exactly what was required of it, in multiple theatres, both as an asset in its own right and as a force multiplier.

On several occasions it was the asset of choice. In Nigeria for example.

Yes, having a persistent asset such as Protector with multiple sensors with the latest technology, in addition to being able to be upgraded, makes Sentinel less of a priority.

[pr00ne]

Evalu8ter,

Not an odd comment at all, it is a standard Tory practice, witness the premature retirement of the Vulcan ahead of the Tornado introduction, the early disbandment of the Canberra PR squadrons ahead of the introduction of the Tornado GR1A, the halving of 8 Squadrons complement well ahead of the E-3 introduction, and the supreme example of the art in Cameron's retirement of the Harrier and the carriers a decade ahead of the introduction of their replacements, all announced as deliberate 'capability windows'.

I agree with you re the 737 commonality of the P-8 and E-7, perhaps they could take it a stage further and buy/lease BBJ as a replacement for the 146's?

As to austerity, I think we are going to have to agree to disagree about that now much maligned policy!

HAS59,

I do agree with you about use of money and resources, but ELINT? Surely that is the role of 51 Sqn and their highly specialised assets, with some help from 14 Squadron and the Defender R2's now that they are RAF. The E-7 is a direct E-3D Sentry AEW1 replacement in SAEW, or AWACS or ASACS as the role now seems to be called.

The Reaper/Protector may well go a long way to providing a replacement capability, just as long as the RAF makes sure that it also buys the sensors, they do have history here!

[Evalu8ter]

Proon,
Re the Vulcan. As many of the pilots/navs were going to transfer to the GR1, perhaps they had to reduce the Vulcan fleet to free up crews? Other examples are perhaps minor compared to Labour’s gross fiscal / industrial incompetence in the mid 60s which forced the ‘nothing East of Suez’ mantra, mass cancellations and a whole raft of capability gaps/holidays which left the UK barely able to fight OOA in 1982. The Harrier / carrier decision in SDR10 was an ‘enforced’ gap caused by? Oh yes, more fiscal incompetence and political cowardice from Labour - the original plan was to run on both till QEC IOC to maintain skills. SDSR10 had to make tough and unpopular decisions due to the mess the EP and SP were in as Labour simply kept spending money they didn’t have between 2008-10. The Tories happily carved out a Peace Dividend in the early 90s, but I’m sure you would have supported that? We’ll agree to disagree over the merits or otherwise of Austerity; but I’m convinced it provided more headroom to cope with the current crisis than we would have had if we’d had another decade of Labour profligacy.....anyway, G&T anyone?

[DCThumb]

Could RAF eke some value from the aircraft by removing the electronics and converting them back to a passenger/transport role, maybe replacing some of 32 Sqn's 146s? Or will all the extra bits bolted on have compromised fatigue life too much?

Not a hope. Much cheaper to buy a second hand Global Express.

[DCThumb]

On capability gaps, the MQ-9 Reaper and the MQ-9B Protector can offer both Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) and Ground Moving Target Indication (GMTI) with its Lynx multimode radar. Here is some info: https://www.ga-asi.com/lynx-multi-mode-radar

Now the Lynx is not as powerful as the Sentinel’s radar, but there are many more Protectors on order than we have Sentinels - so in this case quantity gives a quality better than before. Further the fidelity of the data from Protector is superior as it is closer to the area being surveilled. It can also deliver product beyond line of sight - indeed from anywhere on the planet with the right satellite coverage and bandwidth (which there is).


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/977x266/image_22e908a679a647850e61353dfab974466190f0b6.jpeg
So the RAF retains a SAR/GMTI capability with the 20+ Protectors on order. So all is not lost when it comes to capability - the Reapers already being flown offer that capability now, but in smaller numbers. :ok:


What Protector lacks is the ability to look at large areas in the same way as Sentinel - even with 20 of them! I note in the manufacturers blurb, it quotes a 'long range' of 80km.....thats almost 'on top'!

[Fortissimo]

I enjoyed teasing the IPT during the development phase on their traffic lights for, amongst other things, hitting ISD. It was 'green', of course. I asked what the confidence level was: "50%" came the reply. "So, it's actually red" says I. IPTL: "No, it's green!" Me: "That's red." Him: "No, it's green!" Me: "But at 50% it could be green or red, both would be right." Him: "Errrr…" Me: "Shall we call it Amber?" Him: "OK..."

50% confidence was indeed hopelessly wide of the mark, and the main processors had been specified using a standard that was obsolete before the printer ink had dried, which caused further delays. Still, it will be a shame to see it go. And trying to turn the 5 Sqn hangar back into something the Reds can use will probably cost enough to have funded the upgrade in the first place.

[ExAscoteer2]

Proon,
The Tories happily carved out a Peace Dividend in the early 90s, but I’m sure you would have supported that?

Peace Dividend?

I'll have some of what you're smoking please.

[Misformonkey]

I enjoyed teasing the IPT during the development phase on their traffic lights for, amongst other things, hitting ISD. It was 'green', of course. I asked what the confidence level was: "50%" came the reply. "So, it's actually red" says I. IPTL: "No, it's green!" Me: "That's red." Him: "No, it's green!" Me: "But at 50% it could be green or red, both would be right." Him: "Errrr…" Me: "Shall we call it Amber?" Him: "OK..."

50% confidence was indeed hopelessly wide of the mark, and the main processors had been specified using a standard that was obsolete before the printer ink had dried, which caused further delays. Still, it will be a shame to see it go. And trying to turn the 5 Sqn hangar back into something the Reds can use will probably cost enough to have funded the upgrade in the first place.
I've worked in DT's (new name for IPTs) and the use of Google random number generator is more reliable than some of the WAG assessment I've seen for IOC or FOC dates. Don't even ask about 3PE!

[AF03-111]

And trying to turn the 5 Sqn hangar back into something the Reds can use will probably cost enough to have funded the upgrade in the first place.

Mind you, it's got a nice balcony for watching the display....

[Brewster Buffalo]

One these up today and having flown a hexagon pattern around East Anglia then moved onto a race track pattern over Manchester producing a slightly phallic result!
Is the intention still to retire the Beechcraft Shadow aircraft next year as well?

[LincsFM]

As a Raytheon employee at Waddington this will result in my redundancy and around 100 of my colleagues. Whilst I am sad this is the case I think most of us are not shocked! The Sentinel has been constantly deployed on Ops for the last 12 years and over that time has been underfunded hence the obsolescence . The Airframes are good for another 15 years so I wouldn't be surprised if they get sold on, upgraded and carry on flying. Oh well time to dust off that CV

[pr00ne]

Brewster Buffalo,


"Is the intention still to retire the Beechcraft Shadow aircraft next year as well?"

Nope. They are being upgraded to R2 standard, and the fleet is being expanded by turning the trainer a/c into an operational machine and acquiring two more.

[pr00ne]

Proon,
Re the Vulcan. As many of the pilots/navs were going to transfer to the GR1, perhaps they had to reduce the Vulcan fleet to free up crews? Other examples are perhaps minor compared to Labour’s gross fiscal / industrial incompetence in the mid 60s which forced the ‘nothing East of Suez’ mantra, mass cancellations and a whole raft of capability gaps/holidays which left the UK barely able to fight OOA in 1982. The Harrier / carrier decision in SDR10 was an ‘enforced’ gap caused by? Oh yes, more fiscal incompetence and political cowardice from Labour - the original plan was to run on both till QEC IOC to maintain skills. SDSR10 had to make tough and unpopular decisions due to the mess the EP and SP were in as Labour simply kept spending money they didn’t have between 2008-10. The Tories happily carved out a Peace Dividend in the early 90s, but I’m sure you would have supported that? We’ll agree to disagree over the merits or otherwise of Austerity; but I’m convinced it provided more headroom to cope with the current crisis than we would have had if we’d had another decade of Labour profligacy.....anyway, G&T anyone?

Evalu8ter,

Prefer a nice glass of crisp sparkling white if you have it?

That may have been a consequence of the early Vulcan and Canberra withdrawals but it certainly was not the reason, that was purely financial. I knew some of the aircrew of the time and they were all rather long in the tooth to be heading towards Tornado, though some of course will have gone that way. Totally disagree about the other examples being minor in comparison, and TOTALLY disagree with your weird recollection of the mid 60's! The 1964 Labour Govt inherited a broken and devastated economy from the Tories, it was the origin of the "there's no money" note left for the incoming Chancellor. Wilson and Healey both wanted to retain a presence in the Far East but subsequent devaluation and runs on the £ led to the decision to withdraw, and as for the cancellations of 64/65 they would have happened which ever Govt was in power. TSR2 was unaffordable, didn't work and was an outdated concept, and P1154 and HS681 simply would not have worked! I may surprise you but I most certainly would NOT have supported the Tory Peace dividend as it was obvious that the UK armed forces were going to be used a lot, an awful lot, and we needed the numbers and capabilities squandered by Rifkind in 1992 as a financial saving. Oh, and the 2008 financial crisis was caused by US sub prime mortgages and complicated debt packages in the financial sector world wide, NOT the Labour Government, in fact to the contrary it was the leadership and innovative and rapid moves by Gordon Brown which showed the rest of the world the way out of the crisis. I thought he was a lousy PM and a bad leader, but he DID get that right.

[langleybaston]

If [go on, laugh] capability gaps were allowed after intelligence-based risk assessments [more laughter] then we might have to admit that no great harm came from the decisions.

[pr00ne]

If [go on, laugh] capability gaps were allowed after intelligence-based risk assessments [more laughter] then we might have to admit that no great harm came from the decisions.

Can't argue with that langleybaston, and Cameron could well make that exact same claim re the Harrier and CVS retirement of 2010. BUT we know that they were financial decisions and NOT intelligence risk based decisions.

[langleybaston]

Can't argue with that langleybaston, and Cameron could well make that exact same claim re the Harrier and CVS retirement of 2010. BUT we know that they were financial decisions and NOT intelligence risk based decisions.

i do hope that risk assessments were made, even if only after the decisions were drafted but not yet acted on.
I pay a lot of tax each year to be protected, if it is just luck then I want a rebate.

[H Peacock]

Evalu8ter,

Oh, and the 2008 financial crisis was caused by US sub prime mortgages and complicated debt packages in the financial sector world wide, NOT the Labour Government, in fact to the contrary it was the leadership and innovative and rapid moves by Gordon Brown which showed the rest of the world the way out of the crisis. I thought he was a lousy PM and a bad leader, but he DID get that right.

Labour/Brown made the crisis far worse for us in the UK than it should ever have been!!

[chopper2004]

Bloody thing! It is exactly what we needed in the late 70's for BAOR. The concept of a broad area radar ONLY asset is so dated.
It could be used to cue other assets onto a possible target for detailed analysis.
(If Sentinel & Watchkeeper could be made to work). But on its own it was always limited in it's ability.
It was kept alive by an effective Int Corps publicity machine and the mantra of 'Jointery'.

Did they ever find those missing Algerian Schoolgirls with it?

It would have been interesting to see the jet fitted with the ex Canberra RADIOS sensor.
But that was never going to happen. The weight issue alone was always a limiting factor with the Sentinel too. .. ...
We will be better off with Wedgtail.

‘Twas the Nigerian schoolgirls (also around the time, lot of departures of MC-130 from the ‘Hall also departed heeding south).

Anyhow your ASTOR statement begs the question, during the Cold War, why ddI we have not a small fleet say handful of fixed wing SIGINT / ELiNT for 1 BR Corps keeping an eye on our end of the IGB. USAREUR V and VII Corps had OV-1D Mohawks with SLAR from 60s ,onwards, RU-21 Ute, RC-12D .

Cheers

[HAS59]

Hello chopper, yes thank's for the correction, I thought that the Boko Harem kidnapping was further north.
The point I was making was that even with MTI the Sentinel was never going to find them.
Neither, it has to be said did any other air asset. Thankfully some of them survived.

As for ASTOR, I have had a long involvement with it over the decades! I was part of the evaluation team in the late 1970's which looked into the problem and the various types of solution.
The problem was the size of aircraft needed and who would fly it.
The government of the day ruled-out a foreign purchase, so we were left with either the Army solution based on the Islander/Defender,
Or, I am sad to say, the RAF solution which was to be based on the Canberra, but never actually existed.
We did fly some sensors on the RAE Viscount but all the RAF did for years was to hinder progress.

The OV-1D Mohawk would have been the perfect fit - we were banned form looking at it.

Eventually by the mid 80's the US Government made a proposal to sell the RAF the U-2 system with two ground stations, one for 1 BR Corps and the other for RAFG or Strike Command.
The offer was declined on the basis that 'we would go it alone'.
It never happened ... we ended up with the Westinghouse owned kit in an aeroplane which was too small to carry it.

As with all this sort of thing, there is a lot which is sensitive, and personalities played a major part in making things difficult.
It's history - the past - it can't be change and ... the older I get the more often I see the same mistakes being made by successive generations.

Oh well ...

[West Coast]

The OV-1D Mohawk would have been the perfect fit - we were banned form looking at it.

Out of curiosity, who banned the U.K. from looking at it?

[Haraka]

As HAS 59 will recall:
CASTOR. "Can Anybody State The Operational Requirement?."

ASTOR . "Anybody can State The Operational Requirement!"

[HAS59]

Out of curiosity, who banned the U.K. from looking at it?The US Army were keen to fly a Mohawk into an RAF airfield in West Germany (Gutersloh probably).
It got to the planning stage in the early 80's with HQ 1 BR Corps, 50 missile Regt RA and HQ RAFG with 4 Sqn RAF (Harriers) all keen to take part.

A senior RAF Officer on the RAF 'Air Force Board' a former Canberra gentleman stopped it.
However, I need my pension to survive on and will not go further into it.

It doesn't matter anyway, by then the whole thing was so confused with the budget for it being diverted every which-way at each planning year.
In the end neither service was prepared to fund it from their dwindling budget.
The Army got Phoenix (chortle) and the RAF got new sensors for the Canberra.

As Haraka correctly said of the 'Corps Area Stand - Off Radar'.
CASTOR = "Can Anybody State The Operational Requirement?"

The Harrier Force Recce squadron shouldered the burden of confirming the targets for the Lance regiment and we did what we always do ...
just got on with it using what we had and not what we might have liked or thought we needed.

Sentinel came along - way too late and struggled to find an Operational Requirement.
Work was found for it to do but that's not the same thing.

[DCThumb]

[QUOTE Work was found for it to do but that's not the same thing.[/QUOTE]

Interesting. I always had a fairly cynical view of the utility of Sentinel but some time ago I met a PJHQ planner who said that the data was ‘absolutely vital’ and that in Afganistan, ‘nothing moved without Sentinel MTI data’ - at the planning stage that is presumably.

However, it is an asset primarily used away from home shores (I believe that the risk an invasion of the U.K. mainland by armed forces is reasonably low!) and with the declining appetite for foreign intervention you can see how it is an easy capability to drop when finances are tight. Once the programme, and the required rolling updates, were strangled under SDSR then writing was on the wall for a premature retirement no matter what. :(

Genuinely sorry for what it means to all the Raytheon guys. All the RAF guys will no doubt move elsewhere.

[ORAC]

Watch RAF Sentinel R1 being intercepted by Russian Su-30s ? Alert 5 (http://alert5.com/2020/05/31/watch-raf-sentinel-r1-being-intercepted-by-russian-su-30s/)

https://youtu.be/6B33yQnhuIw

[HAS59]

I some time ago I met a PJHQ planner who said that the data was ‘absolutely vital’ and that in Afganistan, ‘nothing moved without Sentinel MTI data’ - at the planning stage that is presumably.


MTI only tells you that something is moving. It doesn't tell you what it is. For planning I guess it can say that 'something moved from one place to another' but you still need to send another asset else to see what it is.
I suppose it was 'vital' if that's all we had. Would we have bought it just for that?
As you say mate, sad for the Raytheon guys, at least they would have had an inkling that the end was near.
Good luck to all who move on from here.

[DCThumb]

HAS59 - that's exactly what we bought it for - WP Tanks on the German plains, Iraqi tanks in the desert! However, we found it equally useful in other ways. When it comes to MTI, you are just thinking with a tactical hat on. Don't forget if something stops, SAR can help ID it although you will always need PID from a visual/IR source before going further. However, as a strategic asset MTI is much more useful - knowing the pattern of life in a target area can be hugely important, and that is what the PJHQ planner was on about. Unsure of the exact detail because I wasn't there, but when the French 'borrowed' Sentinel in West African order to help identify rebel strongholds, I understand that the job was pretty much complete after one trip - a scan which took in the whole country, look for the MTI hot spots. Here be rebels. Try that in your Protector!

I'm sure some of the AIA's who lurk on here can provide much more detail !

[HAS59]

" ... ... that's exactly what we bought it for - WP Tanks on the German plains, Iraqi tanks in the desert! ... ..."


Hi 'Tom',
by the time the first one became operational (2008) the threat of hordes of Soviet tanks in the Northwest German plain had diminished.
It had to wait three years to find a job in Afghanistan assisting the mantra of ‘Pattern of Life’ being used as a cue for targetting persistent UAV surveillance.
Was it ‘vital’? It may have been, but this was also a case of ‘we have this, it’s not exactly what it was designed for but it will help’. I know it worked well, thankfully that situation is now behind us.

In Libya I gather that it was able to follow the movement of the battle fairly well.
But without any visual backup – the product was always just a ‘probable’ at best.
Anyway, with the Storm Shadows being programmed in the UK, by the time the jets got to their mobile targets – it wasn’t there.
A bit disappointing but at least they were able to tell the jets not to hit an empty space.

I get what it can do (I know many Int Analysts) I also know what it can’t do.
One problem with it was that the aircraft was too small for the kit.
We needed either lighter kit, fewer racks of kit or a bigger ‘plane.
It would have been an absolutely fabulous system if it had some sort of long range EO capability to make sense of the dots of MTI or the sketchy images of the SAR.
Interestingly the current SAAB GlobalEye has an EO sensor alongside the Maritime radar, which rather confirms the point.
There may be more similarly equipped aircraft in the future.

So when it goes we will lose the capability of broad area radar coverage of large areas of reasonably flat landscapes.
Well I guess the vastly reduced force we now find ourselves will have to learn to live with that.
We may find that some of our allies’ space-based systems will fill some of the capability gap if required.

The Sentinel is going because it is now considered obsolete. It certainly wasn’t useless but it wasn’t perfect either.
If there is to be a new system at some time in the future one hopes that the Operational Requirement will be drawn up by people who fully understand the limits of a radar only aircraft.



I offer my best wishes and good luck to all those who will move on from V(AC) Sqn.

[DCThumb]

Sentinel didn't wait 3 years after 2008, the first deployment was in the same year...

Regrettably the sole reason for its obsolescence was SDSR 2010. There was a very simple paperwork solution to the (overstated) weight issue at that point and Raytheon had even scoped an EO sensor and underwing hard points (Globaleye is the same airframe). Once SDSR pulled the rug from under its feet, development was limited and penny packets were thrown at it to keep it running when the servers became no longer supportable. The original servers specified as late in the programme as possible and at the time were the highest spec items cleared for airborne access to TS info. Regrettably the pace of computer technology moves much faster than the CIS people that clear hardware for such uses......

We seem to have managed to keep it constantly deployed on operations since 2008, other than a short break to allow the crews to recuperate, which seems to suggest there is a need for its data. However, we do have to cut our suit according to our cloth and nowadays we can only afford sackcloth - I fully accept that the need for Poseidon and Wedgetail is far greater than wide area battlefield surveillance....I just hope that the politicians begin to reign in their ambitions overseas to match!

[MJ89]

Government, we disposed of Sentinel, as we no longer required it. current thinking would surely say to the contrary

[Wensleydale]

Government, we disposed of Sentinel, as we no longer required it. current thinking would surely say to the contrary

I am quite sure that J-Stars can cope.....