Do we really need an MPA?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The real world
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do we really need an MPA?
Devils advocate here, do we really need a dedicated MPA and why?
Yes we are an Island nation, yes we are reliant on the sea for the vast majority of out trade I understand that.
The tasks that the MR2 undertook as their main role, ASW, ASUW, SAR and overland comms and surveilance were carried out brilliantly but which of them are missed now since she has gone?
The Overland role in Afghan has been taken over by other assets without too many grumbles, ASUW is vital in a Navy vs Navy conflict or war which we have not had since 1982, any chance of it happening again is being taken on risk by MOD.
ASW is an insurance poilcy against the extremely unlikely ever happening, what are the chances of us ever being under seige or attack from a Submarine fleet? even if that does happen then they mitigate their own risks with help form their own service, true it's not the same service the Nimrod could provide but it is a measured risk weighed against the smallest chance of it ever happening.
You wouldn't pay for extremely expensive flood insurance in the middle of the desert!
Sar is a tricky one, obviously this is the most likely to be used and the one that often has a happy outcome, many people owe their lives to a nimrod and are extremely grateful for it, however a smaller, cheaper, less technical aircraft could be utilised as a perfectly good SAR and Homeland defence ASUW asset, slap in a radar give it a good comms fit, a camera and a well trained small crew and off you go.
The days of having an aircraft that does the lot are seemingly over for the UK at least, if there is a way forward then perhaps this much cheaper option is it.
What do you reckon?
Yes we are an Island nation, yes we are reliant on the sea for the vast majority of out trade I understand that.
The tasks that the MR2 undertook as their main role, ASW, ASUW, SAR and overland comms and surveilance were carried out brilliantly but which of them are missed now since she has gone?
The Overland role in Afghan has been taken over by other assets without too many grumbles, ASUW is vital in a Navy vs Navy conflict or war which we have not had since 1982, any chance of it happening again is being taken on risk by MOD.
ASW is an insurance poilcy against the extremely unlikely ever happening, what are the chances of us ever being under seige or attack from a Submarine fleet? even if that does happen then they mitigate their own risks with help form their own service, true it's not the same service the Nimrod could provide but it is a measured risk weighed against the smallest chance of it ever happening.
You wouldn't pay for extremely expensive flood insurance in the middle of the desert!
Sar is a tricky one, obviously this is the most likely to be used and the one that often has a happy outcome, many people owe their lives to a nimrod and are extremely grateful for it, however a smaller, cheaper, less technical aircraft could be utilised as a perfectly good SAR and Homeland defence ASUW asset, slap in a radar give it a good comms fit, a camera and a well trained small crew and off you go.
The days of having an aircraft that does the lot are seemingly over for the UK at least, if there is a way forward then perhaps this much cheaper option is it.
What do you reckon?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: various
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jayand, some points for you to ponder.
1. AsuW covers a wide range of activities- not just involvement in fleet Vs fleet scenarios.
2. Submarines are used for much more than "Battle of the Atlantic" scenarios. This includes SF insertion, recce (both above and below water). Just consider the effect of an enemy sub thought to be in a certain area- but not known for sure.
3. To not have an MPA as an island nation with a Submarine based nuclear deterrant is not measured risk- it is neglegance.
4. As an island nation we now have no way of discovering effectively and quickly what is happening 200 miles off our own shores.
1. AsuW covers a wide range of activities- not just involvement in fleet Vs fleet scenarios.
2. Submarines are used for much more than "Battle of the Atlantic" scenarios. This includes SF insertion, recce (both above and below water). Just consider the effect of an enemy sub thought to be in a certain area- but not known for sure.
3. To not have an MPA as an island nation with a Submarine based nuclear deterrant is not measured risk- it is neglegance.
4. As an island nation we now have no way of discovering effectively and quickly what is happening 200 miles off our own shores.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Now, I wonder what the Irish do? (You can hang whizzy-bang things on 'em, too). Next MPA course to be run at Baldonnel?!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Alternatively, maybe the USCG has some experience in these matters?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks good for a new build.
To be honest I have no idea just how shagged out our Herc's are, however
" The upgraded HC-130H fleet will also receive structural enhancements to extend their service lives."
Is telling especially if operated in the maritime low level environment.
To be honest I have no idea just how shagged out our Herc's are, however
" The upgraded HC-130H fleet will also receive structural enhancements to extend their service lives."
Is telling especially if operated in the maritime low level environment.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Waiting to return to the Loire.
Age: 54
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For me, it is a certainty that we need an MPA.
If we had a budget to have a dedicated SAR frame, and then an ASW / ASuW frame all supported by a dedicated E3 Sentry for C3 then there might be different answers.
If we have to multirole the aircraft, both to make the initial purchase affordable and also to get the best return on the purchase by getting effective operationao use out of it - then the Nimrod, Orion, Poseidon, Kawasaki P1 stylee of aircraft have a point.
The overlanding comms roles might have been handed on, and I suppose demonstrates the versatility of the MR2 in the fact that it could pick up that role too.
Reading Dr Fox's little article, the message that I interpret is that the problem was the Nimrod programme, rather than a desire to get rid of the MPA capability. in fairness he is right when he says that Nu Labour got rid of the capability - the Tories have just killed off the specific replacement which may or may not have been able to be delivered to service with no a single extra penny of tax payers money going on it.
I'm not knocking the folks on the line. My father-in-law has spent the whole of his adult life in hangers working for what has become BAES.
There is a point where the criminal level of either incompentance, negligence or corruption which has brough about this shoddy state of affairs MUST be stopped
If you want to hang AGM-84s off the wings (not just for Jutland type naval conflicts, but also for terrorist / nutter interdiction), then why not try and fit Storm Shadow / Scalp as they are practically the same weight & size.
In fact, if we are only going to go to war with air supremacy or with effective SEAD, then go for the Brimstone & PWIV fit and then use it as a CAS package.
If we had a budget to have a dedicated SAR frame, and then an ASW / ASuW frame all supported by a dedicated E3 Sentry for C3 then there might be different answers.
If we have to multirole the aircraft, both to make the initial purchase affordable and also to get the best return on the purchase by getting effective operationao use out of it - then the Nimrod, Orion, Poseidon, Kawasaki P1 stylee of aircraft have a point.
The overlanding comms roles might have been handed on, and I suppose demonstrates the versatility of the MR2 in the fact that it could pick up that role too.
Reading Dr Fox's little article, the message that I interpret is that the problem was the Nimrod programme, rather than a desire to get rid of the MPA capability. in fairness he is right when he says that Nu Labour got rid of the capability - the Tories have just killed off the specific replacement which may or may not have been able to be delivered to service with no a single extra penny of tax payers money going on it.
I'm not knocking the folks on the line. My father-in-law has spent the whole of his adult life in hangers working for what has become BAES.
There is a point where the criminal level of either incompentance, negligence or corruption which has brough about this shoddy state of affairs MUST be stopped
If you want to hang AGM-84s off the wings (not just for Jutland type naval conflicts, but also for terrorist / nutter interdiction), then why not try and fit Storm Shadow / Scalp as they are practically the same weight & size.
In fact, if we are only going to go to war with air supremacy or with effective SEAD, then go for the Brimstone & PWIV fit and then use it as a CAS package.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WRT smaller platforms, the first thing you need to do is decide what you want to do.
If that is peacetime patrol of your EEZ, medium range SAR (e.g.: get to 500miles in a reasonable time and do a search for 4 hours plus), etc. then many of the medium range twin prop aircraft are the most efficient solution. But that is nearing the limit of their capability.
If you want to do hostilities you need to bolt on extra bits IFF, data links, secure radios, DAS, armour vital areas, ensure adequate redundancy of airframe and equipment, etc.
Now if you want to do ASW that needs much more equipment (Acoustics, buoys, launchers, MAD and operators) and add more fuel for work at longer range. Soon you end up with something the size of a P-3, Nimrod, P-8, and Atlantique. C-130 is that size but no one uses it for that task, the USCG C-130s are really a long range EEZ, SAR platform and if it was suitable for the task the US would have used it. Props also provide an issue for ASW.
If that is peacetime patrol of your EEZ, medium range SAR (e.g.: get to 500miles in a reasonable time and do a search for 4 hours plus), etc. then many of the medium range twin prop aircraft are the most efficient solution. But that is nearing the limit of their capability.
If you want to do hostilities you need to bolt on extra bits IFF, data links, secure radios, DAS, armour vital areas, ensure adequate redundancy of airframe and equipment, etc.
Now if you want to do ASW that needs much more equipment (Acoustics, buoys, launchers, MAD and operators) and add more fuel for work at longer range. Soon you end up with something the size of a P-3, Nimrod, P-8, and Atlantique. C-130 is that size but no one uses it for that task, the USCG C-130s are really a long range EEZ, SAR platform and if it was suitable for the task the US would have used it. Props also provide an issue for ASW.
Last edited by Ivan Rogov; 29th Jan 2011 at 16:39.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Finn
Ref your
Wiki-p comes up with
Ref your
If you want to hang AGM-84s off the wings (not just for Jutland type naval conflicts, but also for terrorist / nutter interdiction), then why not try and fit Storm Shadow / Scalp as they are practically the same weight & size.
In fact, if we are only going to go to war with air supremacy or with effective SEAD, then go for the Brimstone & PWIV fit and then use it as a CAS package.
In fact, if we are only going to go to war with air supremacy or with effective SEAD, then go for the Brimstone & PWIV fit and then use it as a CAS package.
AC-130 a standoff capability using either the AGM-114 Hellfire missile, the Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (based on the Hydra 70 rocket), or the Viper Strike glide bomb.[13]
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nr.EGHI, UK
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not MPA, it's LRMP (as in long range maritime patrol). As in Focke Wolf Condor, Catalina PBY, Sunderland, Shackleton, Argus.......etc etc.
This is not a pedantic point, it is essential. It is the reach, speed, endurance, flexibility, payload and sensor/communications fit that gives the LRMP its totally unique and irreplaceable capability.
Outwith the fertile imagination of the wannabee military geek, this is not a job for airships, unmanned vehicles or any other such non-existent, yet-to-be-invented fantasy. Outwith the agenda of bean-counters, opportunists and contending military vested interests, this is not a job for helicopters, ships or transport aircraft.
Of course we need one and of course we need a public enquiry to find out exactly how we have ended up without one.
I don't know if we will get a public enquiry (I doubt it) but I do know that the aircraft has already gone, and the LRMP capability infrastructure that has been developed since the 1930's will be gone over the course of the next 1-2 years. By the time the politicians that have nailed their colours to the mast over the demise of the LRMP have gone from power, our LRMP capibility will have long since become nothing more than a footnote in history and it will never come back.
Perhaps it is now time to move on?
This is not a pedantic point, it is essential. It is the reach, speed, endurance, flexibility, payload and sensor/communications fit that gives the LRMP its totally unique and irreplaceable capability.
Outwith the fertile imagination of the wannabee military geek, this is not a job for airships, unmanned vehicles or any other such non-existent, yet-to-be-invented fantasy. Outwith the agenda of bean-counters, opportunists and contending military vested interests, this is not a job for helicopters, ships or transport aircraft.
Of course we need one and of course we need a public enquiry to find out exactly how we have ended up without one.
I don't know if we will get a public enquiry (I doubt it) but I do know that the aircraft has already gone, and the LRMP capability infrastructure that has been developed since the 1930's will be gone over the course of the next 1-2 years. By the time the politicians that have nailed their colours to the mast over the demise of the LRMP have gone from power, our LRMP capibility will have long since become nothing more than a footnote in history and it will never come back.
Perhaps it is now time to move on?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Blighty
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the original post:
This is exactly what we do with the Nuclear Deterrent.
Defense of a nation isn't about fighting off the invaders. Its about stopping the "enemies" from even thinking about invading.
Your "thesis" doesn't cover half of the jobs Nimrod did. Until you take those roles into account you are always going to get a skewed answer. There are plenty of government and military agencies now asking what can do the job that Nimrod did for them, and the answer is that there is nothing that has the same capability.
You wouldn't pay for extremely expensive flood insurance in the middle of the desert!
Defense of a nation isn't about fighting off the invaders. Its about stopping the "enemies" from even thinking about invading.
Your "thesis" doesn't cover half of the jobs Nimrod did. Until you take those roles into account you are always going to get a skewed answer. There are plenty of government and military agencies now asking what can do the job that Nimrod did for them, and the answer is that there is nothing that has the same capability.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.
Meanwhile the Germans move on. 5 for $ half a billion, including development ~$1 billion. Maybe they'l order another 5. Australia, Canada and Japan are interested too. They have a range of 25.000km / 36 hours.
Based on what I know what information was gathered and processed in 1990 P3C's I think the same job can be done by a crew of 6-7 with artificial intelligence, network capabilities and dozens of colleagues "online". And thats pretty conservative.
I think Europe needs to have a long rang patrol capability, also for the UK. I'm not going to discuss why UK decided on the Nimrod rebuild strategy and some here still seem to approve.
I think for Europe / Western Europe / EC or what ever you name it, the interest is such capabilities are much the same. By now I think Scandinavia, Benelux, UK, Germany, France, Spain and some more countries share the same values and thoughts.
If **** happens most likely the populations (sharing the same (interactive) media, opinions, values etc.) will agree on a united action pretty quickly.
So probably a common naval air force with spread out airbases in geographical smart locations sharing a fleet of medium and heavy MPAs, ULR UAV's and satelite systems has become feasible.
4000km ranges from various European air bases:
http://www.gcmap.com/map?P=&R=4000km...d&RC=%23ffff00
The location of the different platforms should be optimized for the various environments and tasks. Transport and tanker capabilities could be added or even combined.
Meanwhile the Germans move on. 5 for $ half a billion, including development ~$1 billion. Maybe they'l order another 5. Australia, Canada and Japan are interested too. They have a range of 25.000km / 36 hours.
Based on what I know what information was gathered and processed in 1990 P3C's I think the same job can be done by a crew of 6-7 with artificial intelligence, network capabilities and dozens of colleagues "online". And thats pretty conservative.
I think Europe needs to have a long rang patrol capability, also for the UK. I'm not going to discuss why UK decided on the Nimrod rebuild strategy and some here still seem to approve.
I think for Europe / Western Europe / EC or what ever you name it, the interest is such capabilities are much the same. By now I think Scandinavia, Benelux, UK, Germany, France, Spain and some more countries share the same values and thoughts.
If **** happens most likely the populations (sharing the same (interactive) media, opinions, values etc.) will agree on a united action pretty quickly.
So probably a common naval air force with spread out airbases in geographical smart locations sharing a fleet of medium and heavy MPAs, ULR UAV's and satelite systems has become feasible.
4000km ranges from various European air bases:
http://www.gcmap.com/map?P=&R=4000km...d&RC=%23ffff00
The location of the different platforms should be optimized for the various environments and tasks. Transport and tanker capabilities could be added or even combined.
Last edited by keesje; 29th Jan 2011 at 13:22.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: In My Own Little World
Age: 44
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
that's fine, but...
@keesje:
The Eurohawk is fine if all you want to do is Maritime/Overland surveillance. Long Range Maritime patrol is about more than that. Eurohawk cant drop liferafts to the poor stranded sailor whose fishing boat is sinking; it cant search for, detect and prosecute and attack on submarines, and I'm sure it cant to a lot more that we would want a dedicated MPA/LRMP manned platform to do for UK PLC.
The Eurohawk is fine if all you want to do is Maritime/Overland surveillance. Long Range Maritime patrol is about more than that. Eurohawk cant drop liferafts to the poor stranded sailor whose fishing boat is sinking; it cant search for, detect and prosecute and attack on submarines, and I'm sure it cant to a lot more that we would want a dedicated MPA/LRMP manned platform to do for UK PLC.
Slight thread drift perhaps but have we still got UK individuals on MPA / LRMP (
) exchange tours around the world or have they all been recalled as we no longer offer a reciprocal seat on a Nimrod sqn? And if we do still have exhangees are they likely to be replaced on tourex? Or indeed, are we seeking more exchange posts to keep some form of, albeit, limited "knowledge" about as I believe the RN are (were?) doing with USN F18 drafts.
) exchange tours around the world or have they all been recalled as we no longer offer a reciprocal seat on a Nimrod sqn? And if we do still have exhangees are they likely to be replaced on tourex? Or indeed, are we seeking more exchange posts to keep some form of, albeit, limited "knowledge" about as I believe the RN are (were?) doing with USN F18 drafts.
Wrathmonk,
Pure guesswork on my part, but I would suggest the clue is in the word "exchange"....
We no longer have anything to exchange. I would expect that we have not immediately recalled anyone (if we actually have anyone) on overseas MPA exchange, as it would be unfair to the host nation, not to say downright rude, to cause them a loss of trained personel at no notice. They will not simply not be replaced at tourex.
In the grand scheme of things we are probably talking about no more than half a dozen posts I would assume...
Pure guesswork on my part, but I would suggest the clue is in the word "exchange"....
We no longer have anything to exchange. I would expect that we have not immediately recalled anyone (if we actually have anyone) on overseas MPA exchange, as it would be unfair to the host nation, not to say downright rude, to cause them a loss of trained personel at no notice. They will not simply not be replaced at tourex.
In the grand scheme of things we are probably talking about no more than half a dozen posts I would assume...