Could the MRA4 deploy Paveway
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could the MRA4 deploy Paveway
Might a bit of a silly question....but...
Could the Nimrod MRA4 carry such weapons as Paveway or Storm Shadow within the bomb bay or on the pylons.
It is already designed for Harpoon and of course the AIM-9...
Could the Nimrod be deployed as a limited 'strategic' bomber, and if so, why hasn't it been designed as such as of yet?
Afterall the designation is there... "Maritime Reconnaissance and Attack"
Please be gentle
Could the Nimrod MRA4 carry such weapons as Paveway or Storm Shadow within the bomb bay or on the pylons.
It is already designed for Harpoon and of course the AIM-9...
Could the Nimrod be deployed as a limited 'strategic' bomber, and if so, why hasn't it been designed as such as of yet?
Afterall the designation is there... "Maritime Reconnaissance and Attack"
Please be gentle
, means more money to BWOS 
when the capability is required.
Was told by an MRA4 project geezer at warton that the 4 was capable of carrying some ridiculous number of generic PGMs, in the high teens iirc. He reckoned it could also be tweaked to carry amraam.... hehe
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But would the MoD deploy the MRA4 in any conflict armed with the Storm Shadow, probably not.
Is it the fact our Government doesn't believe in strategic bombers nowadays or is it another factor, other than cost?
The USAF have B1B and B52H bombers orbiting over Iraq and Afghanistan providing CAS to the troops on the ground with JDAMs and other ordnance.
A Nimrod MRA4 with a suitable weapon load of Precision Guided Bombs in the bay and/or pylons could also do this, it has inflight refuelling, a long endurance.... and it has the capability to do other mission profiles while its at it, such as ISTAR.
Also, wouldn't One or Two Nimrods oribiting the theatre with its long 'on-station' time be cheaper than using several ground attack jets on several sorties which require inflight refuelling in each from the old VC-10s?
Is it the fact our Government doesn't believe in strategic bombers nowadays or is it another factor, other than cost?
The USAF have B1B and B52H bombers orbiting over Iraq and Afghanistan providing CAS to the troops on the ground with JDAMs and other ordnance.
A Nimrod MRA4 with a suitable weapon load of Precision Guided Bombs in the bay and/or pylons could also do this, it has inflight refuelling, a long endurance.... and it has the capability to do other mission profiles while its at it, such as ISTAR.
Also, wouldn't One or Two Nimrods oribiting the theatre with its long 'on-station' time be cheaper than using several ground attack jets on several sorties which require inflight refuelling in each from the old VC-10s?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Wilts
Age: 53
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And if it was flying for any other countries air force, they would probably use it to it's maximum potential. Here in the UK they seem to do it differently.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't you mean MIL STD 1760 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Wilts
Age: 53
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C130K, C-130J and A400M all have 1553 but they can't launch weapons such as PW4 and SS.
True you need 1553 to talk amongst the military mission systems, but you need 1760 to be able to talk to a weapon like SS or PW4.
True you need 1553 to talk amongst the military mission systems, but you need 1760 to be able to talk to a weapon like SS or PW4.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Magnetogorsk
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Standby For Action!
The MRA *could* carry any number of different PGM options but the only weapon currently contracted for integration is Stingray. Full stop.
The project team needs to complete and deliver the contracted standard before anyone starts thinking about exotica like Storm Shadow or Paveway IV.
VC
The project team needs to complete and deliver the contracted standard before anyone starts thinking about exotica like Storm Shadow or Paveway IV.
VC
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MIL-STD-1760 is a variant of the MIL-STD-1553 bus, primarily used with weapons buses on aircraft. It follows the normal 1553 protocol but certain messages require a Cyclical Redundancy Check (CRC) be used as the last word in the message. There are also a number of discretes used for weapon power supplier, switching and launcher interlocks.
regards
retard
regards
retard
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 52
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Finally, the MRA4 went through an enhanced capabilities programme in 2003, which looked at several options. It was agreed that, due to cost, the extra ordnance would not be looked at. However, to ensure future compatibility, it was agreed that it would be sensible to include the wiring enablers for the extra 'toys' during the build phase of the MRA4. Whether this has been carried out, I do not know, however, it showed pretty good foresight from an IPT that has, in the past, overlooked many aspects.
M7 Sends
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: ici
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FFS
Do you have any idea about planning considerations for employing LGBs?
What's the minimum release speed?
What's the FT of a PW 2/3/4?
How many Storm Shadows do you think we have?
Why would we use one of the huge fleet of MRA4 to employ SS when there are several more ac vastly more suited to fire the damn things?
Do you have any idea about planning considerations for employing LGBs?
What's the minimum release speed?
What's the FT of a PW 2/3/4?
How many Storm Shadows do you think we have?
Why would we use one of the huge fleet of MRA4 to employ SS when there are several more ac vastly more suited to fire the damn things?
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: over here
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
passportout.
Spoken like a true FJ mate.
Couldn't possibly fit useful munitions to something as unpunchy as a MEng A/C unless of course it just happens to be overhead the target for hours anyway. No no that just wouldn't be right.
The ME guys would probably be "utterly utterly useless" at it anyway.
Hang on a minute... I've heard that phrase before....
Standing by
Spoken like a true FJ mate.
Couldn't possibly fit useful munitions to something as unpunchy as a MEng A/C unless of course it just happens to be overhead the target for hours anyway. No no that just wouldn't be right.
The ME guys would probably be "utterly utterly useless" at it anyway.
Hang on a minute... I've heard that phrase before....
Standing by
Might a bit of a silly question....but...
Could the Nimrod MRA4 carry such weapons as Paveway or Storm Shadow within the bomb bay or on the pylons.
It is already designed for Harpoon and of course the AIM-9...
Could the Nimrod be deployed as a limited 'strategic' bomber, and if so, why hasn't it been designed as such as of yet?
Afterall the designation is there... "Maritime Reconnaissance and Attack"
Could the Nimrod MRA4 carry such weapons as Paveway or Storm Shadow within the bomb bay or on the pylons.
It is already designed for Harpoon and of course the AIM-9...
Could the Nimrod be deployed as a limited 'strategic' bomber, and if so, why hasn't it been designed as such as of yet?
Afterall the designation is there... "Maritime Reconnaissance and Attack"