ASTOR
Thread Starter
ASTOR
You'll have all five jets by the end of the year, and there'll be one in the Static at Farnborough.
There's said to be an 'aspiration' to deploy at the end of the year, but why has it taken so long?
Why are there still only two LCR crews?
Surely to god this was all supposed to have happened months ago?
There's said to be an 'aspiration' to deploy at the end of the year, but why has it taken so long?
Why are there still only two LCR crews?
Surely to god this was all supposed to have happened months ago?
Champagne anyone...?
'cos they've realised you can do all that and a whole lot more in a Bag. All aircraft delivered, working and proven (but not a shiny RAF toy that Grown Ups can get promoted off)
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Red Red Back to Bed
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
StopStart - really not is talking about a Fleet Air Arm asset (hence quote of no promotion for Crab airships) .
And he's not wrong, to a certain extent, however I would suggest the 2 capabilities are complimentary as opposed to being in competition.
Oggin
And he's not wrong, to a certain extent, however I would suggest the 2 capabilities are complimentary as opposed to being in competition.
Oggin
Champagne anyone...?
Thought that was what he was referring to but don't really think one can claim that an ASAC sea king can do everything an Astor can..
Agree with your competitive no, complimentary yes statement.
Agree with your competitive no, complimentary yes statement.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'cos they've realised you can do all that and a whole lot more in a Bag. All aircraft delivered, working and proven (but not a shiny RAF toy that Grown Ups can get promoted off)
Regards,
MM
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: SOUTH OF EGQS
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So how high can a Bag fly? It would be interesting to compare the operational radar horizon of a Bag with a Sentinel when on orbit. I reckon the Bag is only good for close in surveillance.
Also, I thought that Sentinel is only part of the ASTOR system, and the Tactical Ground Station is just as important. I didn't think the Bag can link up to a Tactical Ground Station.
Since ASTOR is quoted as a joint Army/RAF project perhaps it is not just the Senior RAF officers that would be on a promotion push. However, at the Waddington Air Show last week end they said there was now a handful of Navy personnel now on ASTOR. Might be from the Baggies.
Also, I thought that Sentinel is only part of the ASTOR system, and the Tactical Ground Station is just as important. I didn't think the Bag can link up to a Tactical Ground Station.
Since ASTOR is quoted as a joint Army/RAF project perhaps it is not just the Senior RAF officers that would be on a promotion push. However, at the Waddington Air Show last week end they said there was now a handful of Navy personnel now on ASTOR. Might be from the Baggies.
Stoppers, I would say that the fish heads' comments were somewhat less than complimentary. But their clattering old egg-beaters do indeed offer some complementary capabilities.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Red Red Back to Bed
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A SKASaC is in no way able to offer the capability of Sentinel and the ASTOR system.
The Sea King ASaCs are a bit busy - according to this.
Today a headline in the Western Morning News caught my eye.
WARSHIPS SEIZE TALIBAN DRUGS
Commodore Keith Winstanley, Commander of Royal Navy forces in the Gulf, said: "The scourge of illegal drugs is one of the gravest threats to the long-term security of Afghanistan, and a vital source of funding for the Taliban warlords who seek violence against Afghan, British and Nato forces.
"Our mission in Afghanistan is one of absolute importance and by seizing these drugs, we have dealt a significant blow to the illegal trade. News of these successes has been kept quiet for operational reasons, but I am delighted that the tremendous efforts can now be recognised."
He said coalition forces had seized more than 30 tonnes of illegal drugs over the past five months - with more than 70 per cent as a result of Royal Navy interceptions. HMS Chatham and HMS Montrose worked with the Portsmouth-based destroyer HMS Edinburgh in the operations.
They were supported by the Royal Fleet Auxiliary helicopter support ship Argus and her Sea King aircraft.
Today a headline in the Western Morning News caught my eye.
WARSHIPS SEIZE TALIBAN DRUGS
Commodore Keith Winstanley, Commander of Royal Navy forces in the Gulf, said: "The scourge of illegal drugs is one of the gravest threats to the long-term security of Afghanistan, and a vital source of funding for the Taliban warlords who seek violence against Afghan, British and Nato forces.
"Our mission in Afghanistan is one of absolute importance and by seizing these drugs, we have dealt a significant blow to the illegal trade. News of these successes has been kept quiet for operational reasons, but I am delighted that the tremendous efforts can now be recognised."
He said coalition forces had seized more than 30 tonnes of illegal drugs over the past five months - with more than 70 per cent as a result of Royal Navy interceptions. HMS Chatham and HMS Montrose worked with the Portsmouth-based destroyer HMS Edinburgh in the operations.
They were supported by the Royal Fleet Auxiliary helicopter support ship Argus and her Sea King aircraft.
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 25th Jul 2008 at 16:29.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Astor will be crap at maritime force protection whereas the bag is not - different capability.
As you say, they are complimentary rather than mutually exclusive capabilites in the same way as an E-3D and SKASaC are.
Regards,
MM
Some years ago, I was informed by a knowledgeable TP that to beef up the Sentinel structure for AAR would have been the last straw on its weight limited camel's back.
So the decision was made not to provide the aircraft with an AAR capability.
So the decision was made not to provide the aircraft with an AAR capability.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beags,
I think weight has been used as a bit of an excuse for the AAR issue. More significant was the cost of integrating the AAR probe onto a composite fuselage. Even a former CAS, Peter Squire is on record as doubting the wisdom of the decision although anyone bearing such a resemblance to Norman Wisdom always suffers from credibility issues!
Dan,
The Sentinel is not that small. Placing it on an aircraft such as the GX ensures it has a much improved operating ceiling in comparison to an airliner sized asset. That in itself offers advantages in radar/comms horizon and potentially stand off range.
However, if the Nimrod MRA4 project had been better managed (and with a little more foresight) a very capable SAR/GMTI capability could have been incorporated. Then we could have a maintained a larger fleet of Nimrod MRA4s, and a manned SAR/GMTI asset with both a weapons capability and improved C2 capacity. Meanwhile, significant savings could have been made in avoiding purchase of the Sentinel airframe.
Interestingly, and according to open press, the decision by Boeing to move the P-8A weapons bay aft of the wing was taken to ensure the P-3C Littoral Surveillance Radar System (LSRS) antenna could migrate from the P-3C.
Regards,
MM
I think weight has been used as a bit of an excuse for the AAR issue. More significant was the cost of integrating the AAR probe onto a composite fuselage. Even a former CAS, Peter Squire is on record as doubting the wisdom of the decision although anyone bearing such a resemblance to Norman Wisdom always suffers from credibility issues!
Dan,
The Sentinel is not that small. Placing it on an aircraft such as the GX ensures it has a much improved operating ceiling in comparison to an airliner sized asset. That in itself offers advantages in radar/comms horizon and potentially stand off range.
However, if the Nimrod MRA4 project had been better managed (and with a little more foresight) a very capable SAR/GMTI capability could have been incorporated. Then we could have a maintained a larger fleet of Nimrod MRA4s, and a manned SAR/GMTI asset with both a weapons capability and improved C2 capacity. Meanwhile, significant savings could have been made in avoiding purchase of the Sentinel airframe.
Interestingly, and according to open press, the decision by Boeing to move the P-8A weapons bay aft of the wing was taken to ensure the P-3C Littoral Surveillance Radar System (LSRS) antenna could migrate from the P-3C.
Regards,
MM
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good post MM, P8-A is defined as a multi mission aircraft. Surely in the cost conscious noughties this makes an awful lot of sense? Only 9 MRA4 airframes have been purchased, but I bet they will be pressed into overland operations as soon as they come into service.
The American Mil appear to have been far smarter with their procurement.
The American Mil appear to have been far smarter with their procurement.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: VMC on top
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back in the mid nineties, I took the ASTOR project team flying on an E3D sortie. I seem to remember that they came from a variety of backgrounds but only included one pilot. He was from the AAC with a background in helicopters. He was quoting performance figures at the time, based on the business jet version. I suggested they needed to look at some of the following issues and get some firm answers from the manufacturers.
1. Proposed ZFW and its relationship to MTOW and useable fuel load.
2. Higher weights and the effects on undercarriage strength/fatigue.
3. External pods reducing cruise speed, altitude and maybe crosswind limits.
4. Useful load with respect to crew compliment and all their baggage.
5. Cooling issues with avionics and number of available radios (small airframe).
6. Need for AAR and if the extra plumbing could be fitted/carried.
He told me that he wasn't aware if anyone had been discussing these issues and he certainly hadn't done so. I got the impression that the MOD was believing the brochure figures from the manufacturers (FL 510, M.90 etc) and there wasn't the level of experience/knowledge within the team to ask the right questions. The RAAF team involved with the Wedgetail project appeared to have a better grip on the airframe issues at the time.
Not criticizing individuals directly, but more of an observation of how the MOD can often go into something with their eyes wide closed. I have lost contact with those who went on to be involved with ASTOR but I wonder if some of the above points are relevant to the chosen airframe. It does look a little over loaded. A dozen fat business men with their golf clubs is what the machine was originally designed for.
1. Proposed ZFW and its relationship to MTOW and useable fuel load.
2. Higher weights and the effects on undercarriage strength/fatigue.
3. External pods reducing cruise speed, altitude and maybe crosswind limits.
4. Useful load with respect to crew compliment and all their baggage.
5. Cooling issues with avionics and number of available radios (small airframe).
6. Need for AAR and if the extra plumbing could be fitted/carried.
He told me that he wasn't aware if anyone had been discussing these issues and he certainly hadn't done so. I got the impression that the MOD was believing the brochure figures from the manufacturers (FL 510, M.90 etc) and there wasn't the level of experience/knowledge within the team to ask the right questions. The RAAF team involved with the Wedgetail project appeared to have a better grip on the airframe issues at the time.
Not criticizing individuals directly, but more of an observation of how the MOD can often go into something with their eyes wide closed. I have lost contact with those who went on to be involved with ASTOR but I wonder if some of the above points are relevant to the chosen airframe. It does look a little over loaded. A dozen fat business men with their golf clubs is what the machine was originally designed for.