Does the UK need a dedicated FW MPA and if so should it be operated by the military?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: North of Down There!
Age: 52
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does the UK need a dedicated FW MPA and if so should it be operated by the military?
Good afternoon everyone,
I’m writing a short general dissertation on FW maritime aviation and would very much like your thoughts on the following question:
“Does the UK need a dedicated FW MPA and if so should it be operated by the military?”
The possible options that spring to my mind could be:
Yes and it should be operated by the RAF as the Nimrod MR1/2 was because…
Yes but it should be operated by the RN because….
Yes but it should be operated by a civil agency like the coastguard because……
No, the current contingency as stated by the government (use of RN ASW assets, C-130 and Allies) is sufficient.
I’m aware of the on-going Nimrod threads and do not want this to turn in to an argument on the rights and wrongs of the withdrawal of the MR2 and the cancellation of the MRA4. This is a general dissertation on whether there is still a requirement for a dedicated LRMPA and who should operate it.
For what it’s worth my own background is as Nimrod MR2 aircrew (5000+ Hrs) and up until SDSR some MRA4 experience.
I’m particularly interested in hearing from anyone with knowledge of the Royal Netherlands Navy and how they coped/are coping following the transfer of their P3C’s to Germany and Portugal. Also how effective have the Coastguard Dash 8's been out in the Antilles.
I’m more than happy for anyone to PM me and thank you in advance for sharing any thoughts you have on the subject.
Regards to all.
D.
I’m writing a short general dissertation on FW maritime aviation and would very much like your thoughts on the following question:
“Does the UK need a dedicated FW MPA and if so should it be operated by the military?”
The possible options that spring to my mind could be:
Yes and it should be operated by the RAF as the Nimrod MR1/2 was because…
Yes but it should be operated by the RN because….
Yes but it should be operated by a civil agency like the coastguard because……
No, the current contingency as stated by the government (use of RN ASW assets, C-130 and Allies) is sufficient.
I’m aware of the on-going Nimrod threads and do not want this to turn in to an argument on the rights and wrongs of the withdrawal of the MR2 and the cancellation of the MRA4. This is a general dissertation on whether there is still a requirement for a dedicated LRMPA and who should operate it.
For what it’s worth my own background is as Nimrod MR2 aircrew (5000+ Hrs) and up until SDSR some MRA4 experience.
I’m particularly interested in hearing from anyone with knowledge of the Royal Netherlands Navy and how they coped/are coping following the transfer of their P3C’s to Germany and Portugal. Also how effective have the Coastguard Dash 8's been out in the Antilles.
I’m more than happy for anyone to PM me and thank you in advance for sharing any thoughts you have on the subject.
Regards to all.
D.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: On The Road
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes and yes and the most compelling reasons for the second yes can't be fully aired in public, as I think Dave must be aware (begging the question why take on a dissertation that can't be properly argued).
Without the full picture the answer to the second question might come out as no and then we wouldn't need a military FW MPA and we could scrap them............................ooer
Without the full picture the answer to the second question might come out as no and then we wouldn't need a military FW MPA and we could scrap them............................ooer
Go to this link: - IQPC Maritime Reconnaissance and Surveillance 2011
and click on the Maritime Domain Awareness by Tom Bennington and have a listen.
Some good stuff.
and click on the Maritime Domain Awareness by Tom Bennington and have a listen.
Some good stuff.
To save people repeating themselves can't you just trawl through
Here, the latter part of here, here, perhaps a bit from here, here, definately here, and perhaps the odd line or two from here because, let's be honest, it's going to be the same characters (with the same arguments and counter-arguments) that are going to reply. And despite all that has been written, all of the real compelling reasons will probably not be for open forum discussion! Could you not find a 'friend' at the Centre of Excellence near Swindon to do the research and work for you (it's about that time of the year isn't it?).
Or is this a challange to see if the whole of page 1 of the Mil Aircrew forum can be dedicated to Nimrod threads. Poor old WEBF's threads on the carrier keep getting knocked off the front page!
Here, the latter part of here, here, perhaps a bit from here, here, definately here, and perhaps the odd line or two from here because, let's be honest, it's going to be the same characters (with the same arguments and counter-arguments) that are going to reply. And despite all that has been written, all of the real compelling reasons will probably not be for open forum discussion! Could you not find a 'friend' at the Centre of Excellence near Swindon to do the research and work for you (it's about that time of the year isn't it?).
Or is this a challange to see if the whole of page 1 of the Mil Aircrew forum can be dedicated to Nimrod threads. Poor old WEBF's threads on the carrier keep getting knocked off the front page!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The real world
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having returned from a stint in the states recently I would argue that yes we do need some sort of MPA and no it does not need to be Military, it all depends what you want it to do.
Take the US Coastguard.
Direct from their homepage.
The U.S. Coast Guard is one of the five armed forces of the United States and the only military organization within the Department of Homeland Security. The Coast Guard protects the maritime economy and the environment, defends our maritime borders, and saves those in peril.
Now although they are considered part of the military our MPA don't have to be, you could have the Navy looking after the Bomber fleet and the rest could lie with the Coastguard.
Why does SAR have to be military when the overwhelming majority of jobs are for civilians?
Surface surveilance again could be a Coastguard job with at times if need be specialist law enforcement officers on board.
It does not even need to be Coastguard it could be put out to tender to a private company,the advantage of having a privately run FW MPA/SAR asset is the reduction in costs to the Government, as long as it was regulated and maybe subsidised I don't see why it could not work.
Obviously it would not be the same as it was but it could be a cheap compromise.
Take the US Coastguard.
Direct from their homepage.
The U.S. Coast Guard is one of the five armed forces of the United States and the only military organization within the Department of Homeland Security. The Coast Guard protects the maritime economy and the environment, defends our maritime borders, and saves those in peril.
Now although they are considered part of the military our MPA don't have to be, you could have the Navy looking after the Bomber fleet and the rest could lie with the Coastguard.
Why does SAR have to be military when the overwhelming majority of jobs are for civilians?
Surface surveilance again could be a Coastguard job with at times if need be specialist law enforcement officers on board.
It does not even need to be Coastguard it could be put out to tender to a private company,the advantage of having a privately run FW MPA/SAR asset is the reduction in costs to the Government, as long as it was regulated and maybe subsidised I don't see why it could not work.
Obviously it would not be the same as it was but it could be a cheap compromise.
How about the MOD, Home Office, MAFF, Department of Transport and NHS all cough up and share a properly funded Coast Guard, undertaking SAR, MPA, Air Ambulance and Border Agency support?
We take the trained people we already have, and have one HQ. Next we provide them with an economical fleet of common type helicopters. A couple of long range FW based at the HQ, and dispersed helicopters across the UK utilising existing real estate at MOD/NHS sites.
Get them some proper boats and encourage them to work together. I don't see a problem, other than the MOD providing any procurement or management support.
We take the trained people we already have, and have one HQ. Next we provide them with an economical fleet of common type helicopters. A couple of long range FW based at the HQ, and dispersed helicopters across the UK utilising existing real estate at MOD/NHS sites.
Get them some proper boats and encourage them to work together. I don't see a problem, other than the MOD providing any procurement or management support.
even little old Australia has 19 x P-3's PLUS 12 x Dash 8 patrollers with Coastwatch [Border Protection Command] PLUS 5 x Do328 SAR birds....
Last edited by TBM-Legend; 22nd Feb 2011 at 20:54.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK, sometimes!
Age: 74
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It IS little compared to the UK - when it comes to population. 22.5 million in Oz compared to 62 million in the UK, yet they can afford to protect their surrounding waters whereas we can't 
MadMark!!!
MadMark!!!
TBML,
If people were trying to get into the UK instead of leaving it now it's broke, then you might need something like this.
Numbers can seem impressive, however, I remember sitting on SAR at ISK with no serviceable A/C after several were declared 'S' at morning prayers.
even little old Australia has 19 x P-3's PLUS 12 x Dash 8 patrollers with Coastwatch [Border Protection Command]
Numbers can seem impressive, however, I remember sitting on SAR at ISK with no serviceable A/C after several were declared 'S' at morning prayers.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 48
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Defence should go down the route of the RNLI.
The RNLI don't wish to be paid for by the 'govern'ment, they consider the less the 'govern'ment has to do with the RNLI the better, and it shows.
1) Turn the Army, RAF & Navy in to a charity, Help For Heroes has kicked it off anyway.
2) Bin the 'govern'ment and ask a corner shop owner to do the job as they're probably better qualified and have real world experience.
Billions saved, no longer a laughing stock, Job Jobbed
The RNLI don't wish to be paid for by the 'govern'ment, they consider the less the 'govern'ment has to do with the RNLI the better, and it shows.
1) Turn the Army, RAF & Navy in to a charity, Help For Heroes has kicked it off anyway.
2) Bin the 'govern'ment and ask a corner shop owner to do the job as they're probably better qualified and have real world experience.
Billions saved, no longer a laughing stock, Job Jobbed
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK, sometimes!
Age: 74
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Siggie...
Well those numbers are infinitely better than ours - it doesn't matter how many times you multiply 0 MPA you get nowhere near 19! Now crews don't need to worry about "sitting on SAR at ISK with no serviceable A/C after several were declared 'S' at morning prayers" as none are available to declare 'S' at morning prayers and no-one is holding SAR to worry about it.
MadMark!!!
Numbers can seem impressive, however, I remember sitting on SAR at ISK with no serviceable A/C after several were declared 'S' at morning prayers.
MadMark!!!