British Future MPA
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
- a 2-3 engined platform having an airtime of max 18 hours,
- get refuelled, refuel buddies / others including helicopters,
- suitable to transport 4-5t of pallets and or up to 20 people.
- Multiuser stations for 4-6 operators with ability to have a decent sleep in those seats. Usual galley/lavatory.
- A lot of communication space incorporated on top of the aircraft for multiple high bandwidth satellite connections with ground teams, internet etc.
- A big belly able to launch / drop all kinds of stuff (e.g SAR, UAV).
- A big radar able to map / monitor large areas.
- Moderate stealth (you can't see it from 200nm's)
- Low noise propulsion for "unrestricted" operations from populated areas.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,020
Received 2,900 Likes
on
1,242 Posts
Take it this is about all we have now.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure why an MPA also needs to be AT/AAR.
It's a big machine with big fuel tanks. The days of a tanker is a tanker, a transport a transport and a MPA a MPA are probably gone.
If the dutch MPA's would have had the above capabilities, being smalller /cheaper, having operational flexibility instead of stubborn sticking to cold war ASW, the squadron probably would have still existed.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: home: United Kingdom
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
keesje,
Showing a picture of a C130 tanking a Merlin still doesn't explain to me why an MPA should be AT/AAR.
As for using the ISTAR asset to refuel to attack package, I think that you may have forgotten what ASuW (or tanking for that matter) involves.
Duncs
Showing a picture of a C130 tanking a Merlin still doesn't explain to me why an MPA should be AT/AAR.
As for using the ISTAR asset to refuel to attack package, I think that you may have forgotten what ASuW (or tanking for that matter) involves.
Duncs
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Duncan,
I think the past 10 years showed that sticking to old assumptions, mission profiles and capabilities, as the RAF and MLD did for their fixed wing aircraft, proved the wrong idea. We should learn from our mistakes.
I think the RAF has to open up, start with a blank sheet of paper and draw up & check the requirements for the next 40 years. And they probably don't look like the past 40 years.
Flexibility is the answer in a global environment that proves unstable, ask our ally, Tu-16 pilot Mubarak who had it all sorted out.
I think the past 10 years showed that sticking to old assumptions, mission profiles and capabilities, as the RAF and MLD did for their fixed wing aircraft, proved the wrong idea. We should learn from our mistakes.
I think the RAF has to open up, start with a blank sheet of paper and draw up & check the requirements for the next 40 years. And they probably don't look like the past 40 years.
Flexibility is the answer in a global environment that proves unstable, ask our ally, Tu-16 pilot Mubarak who had it all sorted out.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bury St. Edmunds
Age: 64
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All this speculation about what we ough to have as a dedicated MPA platform is pointless. Given the way the whole RAF is being sliced up there won't be anything left in 10 years' time.
All the best lessons of history are being lost and we'll never be able to afford to get back even a fraction of the capabilities we once had. Crass decision-making by our lords and masters have left this country woefully exposed at a time of increasing international instability, in places which we ignore at our peril.
Bases we once had will never re-open and the rhetoric of "cutting the tail, to sharpen the teeth" has been pretty hollow for years.
I dispair.......
MB
All the best lessons of history are being lost and we'll never be able to afford to get back even a fraction of the capabilities we once had. Crass decision-making by our lords and masters have left this country woefully exposed at a time of increasing international instability, in places which we ignore at our peril.
Bases we once had will never re-open and the rhetoric of "cutting the tail, to sharpen the teeth" has been pretty hollow for years.
I dispair.......
MB
NURSE,
I seem to remember one of the original bids for the MR2 replacement was based on the re-use of "surplus" P-3 Orions. That bid didn't win, so presumably it wasn't the cheapest.
If you take a "surplus" P-3 then you are probably going to have to re-engine it, gut the interior, put in new avionics, etc. Didn't we try to re-use an old airframe for the maritime role recently? How did that work out again?
Thunderbird 7,
You need to be careful posting a link like that. Before you know it some armchair pprune CAS/CDS/procurer will be talking about getting some "cheap", "surplus" F-4 airframes, shoving some "cheap" modern avionics in them and using them to replace Tornado/Typhoon/F-35/etc as a money saving measure. Thankfully that will be on a different thread to this one though!
Edited to add:
NURSE,
I forgot to reply to your comment regarding the use of "spare" C-130J frames once A400M arrives. If you read the comments made by the AT guys regarding the C-130J you will see that it is eating up fatigue at a rapid rate of knots on Ops (wind centre boxes are I believe the area suffering most) and they will generally be as knackered as a knackered thing when the A400M eventually arrives (later than the planning date currently being used no doubt!).
I seem to remember one of the original bids for the MR2 replacement was based on the re-use of "surplus" P-3 Orions. That bid didn't win, so presumably it wasn't the cheapest.
If you take a "surplus" P-3 then you are probably going to have to re-engine it, gut the interior, put in new avionics, etc. Didn't we try to re-use an old airframe for the maritime role recently? How did that work out again?
Thunderbird 7,
You need to be careful posting a link like that. Before you know it some armchair pprune CAS/CDS/procurer will be talking about getting some "cheap", "surplus" F-4 airframes, shoving some "cheap" modern avionics in them and using them to replace Tornado/Typhoon/F-35/etc as a money saving measure. Thankfully that will be on a different thread to this one though!
Edited to add:
NURSE,
I forgot to reply to your comment regarding the use of "spare" C-130J frames once A400M arrives. If you read the comments made by the AT guys regarding the C-130J you will see that it is eating up fatigue at a rapid rate of knots on Ops (wind centre boxes are I believe the area suffering most) and they will generally be as knackered as a knackered thing when the A400M eventually arrives (later than the planning date currently being used no doubt!).
Last edited by Biggus; 9th Mar 2011 at 13:31.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the time of the flying battle ships Orions, Atlantics Nimrods is gone.
Lean & mean is the future.
I remember looking at the internal navigation package of P3C, with all the gyro's etc. In the cockpit there was also a little handheld GPS device. Comparing the costs was useless, guess which one was by far more accurate and reliable (everything was still connected to the big one though) . Same for the big central processing units.
Future processing and interpretation will be automated further and done by specialists in well equipped ground stations (or at home, or wherever they are...), looking over the shoulder of the crew & giving / discussing their inputs). Merging it with all other info from many other sources.
Lean & mean is the future.
I remember looking at the internal navigation package of P3C, with all the gyro's etc. In the cockpit there was also a little handheld GPS device. Comparing the costs was useless, guess which one was by far more accurate and reliable (everything was still connected to the big one though) . Same for the big central processing units.
Future processing and interpretation will be automated further and done by specialists in well equipped ground stations (or at home, or wherever they are...), looking over the shoulder of the crew & giving / discussing their inputs). Merging it with all other info from many other sources.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: home: United Kingdom
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I think the time of the flying battle ships Orions, Atlantics Nimrods is gone."
I think not.
Boeing: P-8A Poseidon Home
Duncs
I think not.
Boeing: P-8A Poseidon Home
Duncs
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: North East England
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't know what to make of this. Possibly a bit of out of the box thinking might get an MPA for the future.
RN MPA. A New Dawn In Defence Procurement? | Dan Entwisle's Blog
RN MPA. A New Dawn In Defence Procurement? | Dan Entwisle's Blog
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: North Yorkshire
Age: 82
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“The Royal Navy is looking to buy a fleet of maritime patrol aircraft for up to £1 billion just weeks after the MoD scrapped the new Nimrod aircraft at a cost of £3.6 billion”.
Well, that is an interesting and novel idea! The Navy taking over the task of patrolling the oceans from the air! Dare I suggest that there is more than a smidgen of logic and practical common sense in the proposal? For that reason alone it is probably doomed and we can look forward to the next suggestion that the RAF should take over operation of the aircraft carriers.
Bets on the P8 anyone?
Well, that is an interesting and novel idea! The Navy taking over the task of patrolling the oceans from the air! Dare I suggest that there is more than a smidgen of logic and practical common sense in the proposal? For that reason alone it is probably doomed and we can look forward to the next suggestion that the RAF should take over operation of the aircraft carriers.
Bets on the P8 anyone?
Bets on the P8 anyone?
This from the organisation that has the two largest money pits in defence procurement ?
