MRA4 Shelved?
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Lowlevel UK
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although reminiscent of a Blue Peter sketch, making a Nimrod MRA4 was updated only yesterday.
Inter Arma Enim Silentius Lex Legis
Join Date: May 2000
Location: England
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote from the web site,
On 26 August 2004, PA1, the first of three Nimrod MRA4 development aircraft took off from BAE SYSTEMS Woodford site on the historic first flight of Nimrod MRA4, landing some 2 hours later at BAE SYSTEMS Warton following a successful maiden test flight.
Well I had to eat my hat over that, after predicting it would never fly!! But then I also predicted my beloved Toon to win the Premiership that year as well...
Another quote from the site,
Any commitment to full production will be dependent on acceptable design maturity and the agreement of an acceptable price.
I think this could possibly be the as yet unsigned death warrant for the project but I am not going to make any predictions!
On 26 August 2004, PA1, the first of three Nimrod MRA4 development aircraft took off from BAE SYSTEMS Woodford site on the historic first flight of Nimrod MRA4, landing some 2 hours later at BAE SYSTEMS Warton following a successful maiden test flight.
Well I had to eat my hat over that, after predicting it would never fly!! But then I also predicted my beloved Toon to win the Premiership that year as well...
Another quote from the site,
Any commitment to full production will be dependent on acceptable design maturity and the agreement of an acceptable price.
I think this could possibly be the as yet unsigned death warrant for the project but I am not going to make any predictions!
Registered User **
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing new on that page though, it's all been there for a while.
Have alook on the "Nimrod MRA4 - At A Glance" page on the same site though. Now I am wondering how they have judged the aircrafts complexity in relation to others, surely it is not simply based on total lines of code, any thoughts anyone ?
Safety_Helmut
Have alook on the "Nimrod MRA4 - At A Glance" page on the same site though. Now I am wondering how they have judged the aircrafts complexity in relation to others, surely it is not simply based on total lines of code, any thoughts anyone ?
Safety_Helmut
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Lowlevel UK
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Following on from Gorilla, on 11 August 2005, BAe Systems published NIMROD MRA4 completes Italian Job. It noted that 'the third and final Nimrod MRA4 development aircraft, PA03, will join the fleet shortly, following its first flight from Woodford airfield, near Manchester.' Anyone know when it is due?
Inter Arma Enim Silentius Lex Legis
Join Date: May 2000
Location: England
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps the article should say, if the morale thread is anything to go by:
hundreds of servicemen and women were forced to cheer and wave as the aircraft passed overhead.
hundreds of servicemen and women were forced to cheer and wave as the aircraft passed overhead.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Lowlevel UK
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last web entry seems to be on 14 Sep when Defence.com considered that NIMROD development gathers pace with the third MRA4 development aircraft (PA03) now flying as part of the test fleet. One thing in MRA4s favour is 14 hours ‘loiter time’ without the need for refuelling, considering the plans for the AAR/AT fleet to deal with new requirements.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Under The Sea
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To plagiarise from another thread: -
Reading a thread like this it makes you wonder where alot of people get their info from.
When you know a few details about an incident like this, it becomes readily apparent that most people don't have a bl00dy clue what they're on about!
I know it's a rumour website but speculating or making stuff up about aircraft procurement is neither sensible or constructive.
Reading a thread like this it makes you wonder where alot of people get their info from.
When you know a few details about an incident like this, it becomes readily apparent that most people don't have a bl00dy clue what they're on about!
I know it's a rumour website but speculating or making stuff up about aircraft procurement is neither sensible or constructive.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Lowlevel UK
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DEL Mode. Methinks you are too hard. If I might speculate because that is what we do to ease frustration, your post could be tinged with another hard day at the office fighting off the civil serpents and dark blue/brown/green vultures who might be eager to see weakness in any other project than theirs. One of the most effective posts I have seen to counter wild, and possibly unhelpful, comments about early demise of a project ran to two letters: NO.
With the possible exception of Green Flash, almost all of the info in this thread is taken from websites dedicated to inform the public about essential, and usually expensive, projects. Where is the
With the possible exception of Green Flash, almost all of the info in this thread is taken from websites dedicated to inform the public about essential, and usually expensive, projects. Where is the
making stuff up about aircraft procurement?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Del Mode- I think from judging previous procurements the public is
more than welcome to speculate on how a project is going. If I am not mistaken it's the public purse paying for it.
The Nimrod revamp was greeted by some of the guys at Kinloss with more than a degree of doubt. After being slashed from twenty one to the present number I think it's even more
critical to know how the money is spent. The old formula used to be the more you build the cheaper the unit cost becomes - it doesn't seem to be happening in this case .
Can you enlighten me as to how much cash we have saved by having a third less of the MRA.4's - no need to speculate - the hard numbers will do!
more than welcome to speculate on how a project is going. If I am not mistaken it's the public purse paying for it.
The Nimrod revamp was greeted by some of the guys at Kinloss with more than a degree of doubt. After being slashed from twenty one to the present number I think it's even more
critical to know how the money is spent. The old formula used to be the more you build the cheaper the unit cost becomes - it doesn't seem to be happening in this case .
Can you enlighten me as to how much cash we have saved by having a third less of the MRA.4's - no need to speculate - the hard numbers will do!
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sim Building
Well, if it all goes down the pan, Kinloss will have a 1 huge surplus building. On the up side, they can make up some of the lost money in rent. Forres has always needed an ASDA....may be RAF Kinloss can have the worlds best NAAFI! NICE.
Still, it'll all be a dead arguement when they move the fleet and close the base.
Still, it'll all be a dead arguement when they move the fleet and close the base.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Lowlevel UK
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks DEL Mode. Just the ticket. Keep updating the websites and it might help the IO campaign if Nigel could fix a phot of one of the PAs over the sea (proper environment) and an additional milestone of a suitable number of combined flying hours. This is real achievement.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: On the outside looking in
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
S_H,
Perhaps for the uniniated this will sound worse than it could be.
A single point of failure is not necessarily intolerable, provided that the integrity of the piece of equipment is high enough. As an example, all our FJ fleet have single points of failure because they have only one pilot. (I'll let someone else make the quips about that
). Because there is only one pilot, he has only one set of AEA, one sitck, one set of throttles etc etc.
The issue here (if correct) is more likely to be:
a) What is the required integrity of the single point of failure?
b) How much is is going to cost to fix it?
sw
I heard that a SPOF had been cunningly designed into the rudder
A single point of failure is not necessarily intolerable, provided that the integrity of the piece of equipment is high enough. As an example, all our FJ fleet have single points of failure because they have only one pilot. (I'll let someone else make the quips about that
). Because there is only one pilot, he has only one set of AEA, one sitck, one set of throttles etc etc.The issue here (if correct) is more likely to be:
a) What is the required integrity of the single point of failure?
b) How much is is going to cost to fix it?
sw