Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

British Future MPA

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

British Future MPA

Old 21st Jun 2011, 09:54
  #201 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: North of Down There!
Age: 49
Posts: 75
Wink Tourist's real identity

Has anybody else noticed that Tourist has the anagram: Sour Tit

Explains a lot
Dave Angel is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2011, 23:24
  #202 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 53
Posts: 736
A few strong sensors and high speed network connections, range, a few pilots and IT folks.

ItemID=41092

The aircraft (below) already has an MX-15 sensor installed beneath its rear fuselage, plus a large fairing above its cabin to accommodate satellite communication equipment. ... Other systems could include a line-of-sight tactical common data link, self-protection equipment, signals intelligence-gathering sensors and a maritime search radar, all integrated with L-3's onboard processing, exploitation and dissemination system.
Fraction of the costs of a full blown MPA. The specialist are on the ground, not in the air.

PICTURE: How L-3's re-nosed 'Spydr' King Air will look
keesje is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2011, 04:10
  #203 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Somewhere nice overseas.
Posts: 226
Oh Tourist really.........

Yes Tourist, what are you thinking? This is all very good stuff and I, for one, fully expect to see most of the Take Hart efforts in the gallery sent here by our talented viewers to be in service very soon.

I hope that you are very ashamed of yourself.

Scuttled is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2011, 07:06
  #204 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 53
Posts: 736
Scuttled, I guess in reality the thousands of more conservative, more of the same, proven airframe folks, were blown out of the water, sadly. If the RAF would have gone innovative, smaller, leaner and more flexible 10-15 yrs ago, some of the members around here would still have been flying MPA misisons. Lessons learned the hard way in the UK and the Netherlands..
keesje is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2011, 09:52
  #205 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: home: United Kingdom
Posts: 780
Keesje,

Probably not a bad MPA - kit dependant, of course. I'm not sure how much ASW it could do based on the likely sonobuoy storage area and release system. There are, however, a couple of things that confuses me: how is it going to give away its fuel when in AAR role? how much can it carry in the AT role? Or, have you decided that that was not such a clever idea after all?

Duncs
Duncan D'Sorderlee is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2011, 10:21
  #206 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,519
If the RAF would have gone innovative, smaller, leaner and more flexible 10-15 yrs ago, some of the members around here would still have been flying MPA misisons. Lessons learned the hard way in the UK and the Netherlands..
A mixture of 20/20 hindsight and misguided naivety.

The RAF has visited this concept repeatedly over the years. Multi role platform versus smaller, less complex, role specific platforms. All sorts of very clever dudes (in different league to you or I) have expended vast amounts of energy and money looking into this sort of stuff..and (unlike you or I) have put their professional reputations on the line by making a decision.

There was a long documentary on the space shuttle last night in the UK. Fascinating for some one like me who was a space geek back in the Apollo days and has a library on the subject to hear some of the views of the people behind the project, thirty years on.

I can remember NASA trumpeting how reuseable vehicles would dramtically lower the cost of getting stuff into Earth orbit. Thirty years on, turns out the cost of turning round the shuttle was 3 times higher than using a disposable booster, like Apollo. The moral of the story...hindsight is easy, foresight is hard and prone to error.

Your toy aircraft above is littoral surface surveillance platform. That's about ten percent of the MPA role. Add in a UAV for overland comms (and we all know how cheap they are) that's about another 10-20 percent. Then a modified C130 squadron (or adaptable container fit) for SAR. Then we have still have to address open ocean ASW and long range surface surveillance....um how about 10 or so Nimrods..?

OK I've given you some insight, and not for the first time. Tourist has given you the short answer...for those that would decry him, he happens to be spot on.
The Old Fat One is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2011, 11:16
  #207 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 77
Posts: 16,693
There is also an indefined something about a large MPA crew in a small tube.

Even in the Sim you had this symbiosis (?) where team members would have an off-mic discussion and then pop an idea or make a proposal. With the flight deck, nav team, wet and dry you had 4 separate groups considering a problem.

Would the beanies countenance a 12 man crew on the ground controlling an MPUAV?

It might be attractive to prune the acoustics and radar teams by a couple of bods but the 2nd nav, 3rd wet and 3rd dry were what made for a particularly strong MPA team. How else could the experienced masters bring on their replacements for future years?
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2011, 11:56
  #208 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SALISBURY
Age: 73
Posts: 706
How else could the experienced masters bring on their replacements for future years?
Normally in the scruff's bar when I flew with "Soggy" Goss on 206.
fincastle84 is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2011, 12:28
  #209 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 77
Posts: 16,693
Fincastle, very true but the sprogs had to be on the crew to be privvie to the one on one debrief.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2011, 12:34
  #210 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Forres
Age: 65
Posts: 637
The point is that if you've never done it, you don't know what you need to do it. Finding a surface contact and classifying it without getting yourself counter detected (or, in wartime, shot down) is not easy, and it won't be achieved with a small boll on radar, tracking submerged subs via acoustics - and nobody, despite decades of stirling effort, has found an effective alternative - requires large numbers of sonobuoys, whilst effective on task periods require an aircraft with a long loiter time.

King Airs and the like would be perfectly decent platforms for inshore patrolling, which is - as has been pointed out above - a small fraction of what we require an MPA to do. You don't design an MPA by deciding to go small, use this kit and that kit, you design it by identifying the tasks it must perform and then designing the platform around the requirement.

Still, why would those of us with thousands of flying hours on MPA know what's needed, compared to the average Joe walking in off the street who likes playing with photoshop?

davejb is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2011, 12:37
  #211 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Forres
Age: 65
Posts: 637
BTW PN,
I try to avoid joining the grammar police, but I hope you meant privy - or was that a freudian slip regarding the Sgts mess pigs' bar?
davejb is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2011, 14:00
  #212 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 77
Posts: 16,693
oh ok, but it is Sunday
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2011, 20:38
  #213 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 53
Posts: 736
There are, however, a couple of things that confuses me: how is it going to give away its fuel when in AAR role? how much can it carry in the AT role? Or, have you decided that that was not such a clever idea after all?
The drogue installation would be permanent. The concept has a large fuel capacity that can be used for increasing range or for transferring it to e.g. other MPAs/ helicopters depending on mission requirements.

All sorts of very clever dudes (in different league to you or I) have expended vast amounts of energy and money looking into this sort of stuff..and (unlike you or I) have put their professional reputations on the line by making a decision.
Sorry I'm not from the militairy AND from the Netherlands. That gives me weak respect for authorities and allergy for directions solely based on ranks.

Then we have still have to address open ocean ASW and long range surface surveillance....um how about 10 or so Nimrods..?
Still, why would those of us with thousands of flying hours on MPA know what's needed, compared to the average Joe walking in off the street who likes playing with photoshop?
All the decades of global experience and knowledge let to totally missing out on what was really important. To much looking back / respect/ sticking to mantras and too little independently looking forward. They (Dutch and UK) navy people were too convinced of their truth and the world as they saw it that they didn't really pick up on the world / support for them changing & we all know what happened.

What has gone wrong sofar after the Nimrods were grounded?
keesje is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2011, 20:54
  #214 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: England
Posts: 63
Theres the old proverb, keesje. When having dug himself into a hole, a wise man stops digging.
4thright is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2011, 20:55
  #215 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,655
The drogue installation would be permanent. The concept has a large fuel capacity...
So your concept is going to carry about 1500kg of AAR equipment (pods, pylons, pipework, extra high flow rate pumps, valves, vent lines) on a permanent basis? Plus there's the drag penalty of the pods and pylons....

What do you consider to be a 'large' fuel capacity? Your sketch shows a few fuselage tanks - what about the wing tanks?
BEagle is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2011, 21:38
  #216 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 53
Posts: 736
Theres the old proverb, keesje. When having dug himself into a hole, a wise man stops digging.
IMO the must be 12 crew 150k lbs 4 hauler MPA supporters dug themselves a hole, and it isn't a concept hole

So your concept is going to carry about 1500kg of AAR equipment (pods, pylons, pipework, extra high flow rate pumps, valves, vent lines) on a permanent basis? Plus there's the drag penalty of the pods and pylons....

What do you consider to be a 'large' fuel capacity? Your sketch shows a few fuselage tanks - what about the wing tanks?
No wing pods, center line. The wing tanks would carry most of the fuel.
keesje is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2011, 22:02
  #217 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,655
So if it has a centreline hose (just the one...??), how are you going to avoid compromising weapon bay and sonobuoy carriage space?

How much fuel is your design intended to carry?
BEagle is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2011, 22:09
  #218 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: home: United Kingdom
Posts: 780
keesje,

Have you ever wondered why no-one has ever used a KingAir as a tanker?

Duncs
Duncan D'Sorderlee is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2011, 05:47
  #219 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Right here, right now
Posts: 258
Sorry I'm not from the militairy
IMO the must be 12 crew 150k lbs 4 hauler MPA supporters dug themselves a hole
Says it all really. Those that know about MPA ops are the same people that are saying what the requirements really are, not the ones pushing for a "I can do everything - but only for 5 minutes within a mile of the coast" type plane

from the Netherlands
Stick to talking about what you know best then... Flowers, cheese, drugs, tarts and 'chocolate shprinklesh'
MFC_Fly is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2011, 05:58
  #220 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,932
AO ISTAR briefed in recent days that it will be 5 x P8 on lease and that 'seedcorn' will get additional resources. Longer term has yet to be decided or funded.
Just This Once... is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.