Sentinel R1- Under the Radar
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sentinel R1- Under the Radar
How come there is very little information about the withdrawal of the Sentinel R1 'when no longer required to support ops in Afghanistan'?
It doesn't appear in the MoD's Business Plan or most reports on SDSR fallout.
Are they going to replace this new aircraft to continue the capability or is it another (less publicised) cessation of UK military capability?
It doesn't appear in the MoD's Business Plan or most reports on SDSR fallout.
Are they going to replace this new aircraft to continue the capability or is it another (less publicised) cessation of UK military capability?
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Twas probably part of the great UOR tidal wave and therefore not in any business plan past or present.
It is a fine example of blue suits flying planes that primarily serve the purposes of brown jobs and the resultant in-fighting over who is boss and who should drive between the two leading to the loss of the capability.
Nice one!
It is a fine example of blue suits flying planes that primarily serve the purposes of brown jobs and the resultant in-fighting over who is boss and who should drive between the two leading to the loss of the capability.
Nice one!
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: SOUTH OF EGQS
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Twas probably part of the great UOR tidal wave and therefore not in any business plan past or present.
It is a fine example of blue suits flying planes that primarily serve the purposes of brown jobs and the resultant in-fighting over who is boss and who should drive between the two leading to the loss of the capability.
Nice one!
As far as I am aware, Sentinel and its associated ground stations were not part of any UOR, but a fully funded joint RAF/Army procurement programme.
Unfortunately it suffered from setbacks in the development phase and was late into service. Now that is in service I have no experience of any inter service rivalry over who owns the platform or product. 5 (Army Co-operation) Squadron is a fine example of RAF/Army jointery and seems to be doing a fine job in theatre.
I think you will find that the demise of Sentinel was probably a Treasury driven decision and had nothing to do with the military.
It is a fine example of blue suits flying planes that primarily serve the purposes of brown jobs and the resultant in-fighting over who is boss and who should drive between the two leading to the loss of the capability.
Nice one!
As far as I am aware, Sentinel and its associated ground stations were not part of any UOR, but a fully funded joint RAF/Army procurement programme.
Unfortunately it suffered from setbacks in the development phase and was late into service. Now that is in service I have no experience of any inter service rivalry over who owns the platform or product. 5 (Army Co-operation) Squadron is a fine example of RAF/Army jointery and seems to be doing a fine job in theatre.
I think you will find that the demise of Sentinel was probably a Treasury driven decision and had nothing to do with the military.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suppose we should be thankful that it actually made it into service, unlike the Nimrod MRA4!
I not aware of any reasons why it is going to be binned, not even on financial grounds. Never the less, it is another capability loss as I'm not convinced that a MALE RPAS (Scavenger) can replace this.
If you look at MALE RPAS radar (SAR & GMTI) published capabilities such as Selex Gallileo PicoStar's 20 km max range, it is a LONG way short of Sentinel's.
Maybe a HALE RPAS replacement such as Global Hawk, would have been a more understandable plan. Are we going to sign up for Eurohawk instead?
That's assuming there was/is a plan!!!
I not aware of any reasons why it is going to be binned, not even on financial grounds. Never the less, it is another capability loss as I'm not convinced that a MALE RPAS (Scavenger) can replace this.
If you look at MALE RPAS radar (SAR & GMTI) published capabilities such as Selex Gallileo PicoStar's 20 km max range, it is a LONG way short of Sentinel's.
Maybe a HALE RPAS replacement such as Global Hawk, would have been a more understandable plan. Are we going to sign up for Eurohawk instead?
That's assuming there was/is a plan!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shadow has always been an UOR which probably puts it in a different bucket. But you're right, there has been no future plan for either.
Again, was/is there a plan?
At least amongst the serving RAF personnel, it would generate a massive amount of respect for the SLT if they actually put forward their thoughts behind SDSR and stopped treating us all like a bunch of kids. Smoke and Mirrors IS NOT AN OPTION.
Again, was/is there a plan?
At least amongst the serving RAF personnel, it would generate a massive amount of respect for the SLT if they actually put forward their thoughts behind SDSR and stopped treating us all like a bunch of kids. Smoke and Mirrors IS NOT AN OPTION.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wouldnt despec'd sentinel/shadow provide an excellent low hours comms fleet solution?
Sentinel in particular would excel at the aeromed role, has exceptionally long legs and is fuel efficient. It would provide an excellent solution for the Government, seeking a new ministerial transport solution, as it is already bought and paid for.
I am imagining however the costs of converting both back to original spec may be an issue...
Sentinel in particular would excel at the aeromed role, has exceptionally long legs and is fuel efficient. It would provide an excellent solution for the Government, seeking a new ministerial transport solution, as it is already bought and paid for.
I am imagining however the costs of converting both back to original spec may be an issue...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would you re-role the Sentinel. It will be (is) bought and paid for in the ISTAR role. It can't be much more expensive in it's current role than it becoming an Aeromed or Comms platform.
Not sure if it fulfils the Combat ISTAR 'flavour if the month' though?
Interesting to see that after USAF were thinking about binning their JSTARS in 2009- they've decided to re-engine, add SYERS III and increase the performance of the radar. Do they know something we don't? (apart from having more money to invest in the military)
Not sure if it fulfils the Combat ISTAR 'flavour if the month' though?
Interesting to see that after USAF were thinking about binning their JSTARS in 2009- they've decided to re-engine, add SYERS III and increase the performance of the radar. Do they know something we don't? (apart from having more money to invest in the military)
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
The lack of fuss compared with MRA4 and Harrier is no doubt down to its newness and low profile. Few of the public will have heard of it and there is no history attached to it.
Like the Nav School Dominies - 40 years service but no real public awareness and no real Service history. I have heard that the Dominie is going but seen nothing else of this. Same deal really.
Like the Nav School Dominies - 40 years service but no real public awareness and no real Service history. I have heard that the Dominie is going but seen nothing else of this. Same deal really.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder if the UK military would actually keep the airframes, for whatever mission. Seems a lot of a cop out. Much of the role of Sentinel is not in the public eye, but as it was rushed into Op HERRICK before it's true, complete capability was evaluated, it is deemed to be a bit of a 'one trip pony'- a label which has apparently sealed it's fate.
As far as I am aware, Sentinel and its associated ground stations were not part of any UOR, but a fully funded joint RAF/Army procurement programme.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,559
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
The external shape of the Sentinel is bought and paid for in terms of design, performance and handling qualities. For these bespoke users the clearance of the external payload shapes is quite an investment and modern types (as opposed to the more forgiving and over-engineered older types) are more difficult to modify and clear. In these terms the external shape of the Sentinel is more marketable to the niche customers looking to update, replace or launch new capabilities.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Grimsby, Lincolnshire
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Better results if there was a horse!
The project had issues from the start.
Ex-RAF staff moving over to join Raytheon and then employing their mates didn't help. This merely put up civilans' backs and that's not to mention their views on how the project should be run based on their previous 'experience'! You see, the in-fighting was not between the RAF and Army, but internal, ex-RAF vs Civilians.
The system has reliabilty issues which is visually obvious by any half brained IT engineer, which was all planned apparently, so that you, I and every other tax paying person can pay for a much needed upgrade to put things right. Although it still won't be 100% compatible with the US systems as the uplinks / downlinks / baud rates, etc. are completely different.
It has potential, but needs new management and to employ people who have gained some commercial experience and not directly from uniform / the institutionalised bullying. Unfortunately, in my opinion, until their house is sorted, the guys on the ground will not be covered as per the original design ideas.
Ex-RAF staff moving over to join Raytheon and then employing their mates didn't help. This merely put up civilans' backs and that's not to mention their views on how the project should be run based on their previous 'experience'! You see, the in-fighting was not between the RAF and Army, but internal, ex-RAF vs Civilians.
The system has reliabilty issues which is visually obvious by any half brained IT engineer, which was all planned apparently, so that you, I and every other tax paying person can pay for a much needed upgrade to put things right. Although it still won't be 100% compatible with the US systems as the uplinks / downlinks / baud rates, etc. are completely different.
It has potential, but needs new management and to employ people who have gained some commercial experience and not directly from uniform / the institutionalised bullying. Unfortunately, in my opinion, until their house is sorted, the guys on the ground will not be covered as per the original design ideas.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Balmullo,Scotland
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mark I have to disagree with you there.I was the seniour QA engineer on the air platform and never came across any infighting at all in fact it was pleasure to work on the project.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's face it. The Sentinel is vulnerable because the role it was designed for doesn't really exist anymore.
It is kind of ok at what it does at the moment in theatre, but it is a lot of money for a role that the Baggers are in many/most ways superior.
It is kind of ok at what it does at the moment in theatre, but it is a lot of money for a role that the Baggers are in many/most ways superior.
Ah a bagger that can transit large distances at 0.9M, provide wide area GMTI and coherent SAR from large stand-off ranges, whilst sharing data with their US equivalents...
Not that anyone would have a use for such a thing in these very stable times.
Not that anyone would have a use for such a thing in these very stable times.