MoD to buy 5 x P8 from USA - maybe
Not often I find myself agreeing with Roland, but the SC-130J Sea Herc and HC-130J are two very different beasts Martin.
The former is, as Roland says, still just a concept that offers Level 2 (anti-surface warfare) and Level 3 (anti-submarine warfare) capability, whereas the HC-130J, although fielded by the USCG, is purely a Level 1 maritime surveillance platform with no offensive capability whatsoever (the same is true for other MPAs mentioned previously in this thread - Saab MSA, Boeing MSA to name but two).
I guess it all depends on exactly what kind of MPA we're wanting to field.
The former is, as Roland says, still just a concept that offers Level 2 (anti-surface warfare) and Level 3 (anti-submarine warfare) capability, whereas the HC-130J, although fielded by the USCG, is purely a Level 1 maritime surveillance platform with no offensive capability whatsoever (the same is true for other MPAs mentioned previously in this thread - Saab MSA, Boeing MSA to name but two).
I guess it all depends on exactly what kind of MPA we're wanting to field.
Last edited by melmothtw; 28th May 2014 at 14:40.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: SWAPS Inner
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's the bit that all the naysayers don't really get. Nimrod was more than just an MPA. Fair enough, the role evolved over the years but by the time it was binned it was probably the most flexible tasking platform the RAF had, thanks to a lot of clever, hardworking people and a backup organisation that learnt to think on its feet over the years.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Consortium Offers Proposal if UK Re-establishes Maritime Patrol Requirement
LONDON — A consortium involving L-3 Communications, Selex and Ultra Electronics has thrown its hat into the ring as a bidder for a possible British government requirement to re-establish a maritime patrol aircraft capability. The industrial trio took the wraps off a multimission maritime patrol and surveillance aircraft based on a modified Bombardier Q400 commercial turboprop in a briefing for reporters here today.
Britain’s fixed-wing maritime patrol capability was axed when the Nimrod MRA4 program was canceled by the Conservative-led coalition in 2010, although the previous Labour administration had already withdrawn an earlier version of the aircraft ahead of the introduction into service of the new and much-delayed Nimrod. The consortium joins fixed-wing contenders like Airbus, Boeing, Lockheed Martin and unmanned air vehicle supplier Northrop Grumman positioning for an expected decision by the British government’s 2015 strategic defense and security review (SDSR) on whether to fill a yawning capability gap left by a budget-driven decision in the last review to do away with fixed-wing maritime patrol capability.
L-3 Mission Integration announced in February it was collaborating with Bombardier Aerospace and Cascade Aerospace of Canada and Britain’s Marshall Aerospace to develop an extended-range version of the Q400 for maritime patrol and surveillance duties. Cascade was working on the auxiliary fuel tanks and Marshall Aerospace the internal fuel system integration. Now, L-3 has revealed British sensor and mission systems suppliers Selex ES and Ultra Electronics have signed up to collaborate in the development of an aircraft that initially, at least, has the possible Royal Air Force requirement as its main target.
The aircraft features auxiliary fuel tanks running down the side of the fuselage and a large under-fuselage canoe capable of housing weapons and sensors. Executives at the briefing said they have also been looking at the options for inflight refueling to extend the range of the machine even further than the 10 hours or so offered by the Q400 with auxiliary fuel tanks. Selex’s sensor fit offering include its Seaspray 7500 radar and the Eagle active electronically scanned array wide-area radar.
Officials said an Eagle with a 4-meter-long array would provide nearly the air-surveillance capabilities offered by the RAF’s E-3D Sentry airborne early warning fleet. Ultra is proposing an in-development airborne acoustic system which, along with a new generation of sonar buoys, would be capable of countering the increasing threat posed by a proliferation of small quiet submarines operating in the littoral. Weapon options include lightweight torpedoes and anti-surface ship missiles like the Harpoon. Weapons could be carried in the fuselage canoe or wing hard points.
Flash Gordon, L-3 communications director of international programs here, said the consortium had already acquired an ex-airline Q400 for modification into a test bed and demonstration platform. The airframe is due to be moved to aircraft modifier Cascade later in the year for installation of auxiliary fuel tanks fitted down the sides of the fuselage and payload systems ahead of type certification and fitting out of further systems next year. Gordon said they could have an aircraft with an initial operating capability ready by early 2019.
The L-3 executive said multirole flexibility and low whole life costs of a platform like the 400Q were the key to adoption by customers who could no longer afford single mission aircraft.
Gordon said British MoD officials had already been briefed on the aircraft’s capabilities. The aircraft would provide 80 percent of the capabilities of Boeing’s P-8 maritime patrol aircraft but at a third of the acquisition and operating cost, he said.
Pressure on budgets here, though, continue to raise questions about if and when a maritime patrol capability might be reinstated. Further government spending cuts are expected after the May 2015 election even though the Conservative government says it remains committed to a 1 percent real growth in the equipment budget for several years starting in 2016.
Brian Burridge, Finmeccanica UK’s vice president of strategic marketing, told reporters at the briefing that plugging the gap in British maritime patrol capabilities has emerged as the highest priority in the next SDSR. “The general rhetoric is that filling this capability gap is currently the highest priority for SDSR 2015 ... but the issue remains affordability,” said the retired RAF air chief marshal.
Recent events in the Atlantic and Indian oceans have added to the growing recognition that the UK has a capability gap, he said. “The Malaysian Airlines flight MH370 and the yacht [sunk in the Atlantic earlier this month] have conjured the notion of what if that happened here? What if we had to mount that sort of search operation, what degree of national embarrassment would that bring with it?” said Burridge.
Earlier this month, Britain had to send an RAF C-130 Hercules into the Atlantic equipped only with binoculars to look for the yacht — an accident in which the crew of four lost their lives.
Officials from the three companies said they reckoned a fleet of between 10 and 12 aircraft would be a starting point to plug the gap left by the SDSR decision in 2010.
LONDON — A consortium involving L-3 Communications, Selex and Ultra Electronics has thrown its hat into the ring as a bidder for a possible British government requirement to re-establish a maritime patrol aircraft capability. The industrial trio took the wraps off a multimission maritime patrol and surveillance aircraft based on a modified Bombardier Q400 commercial turboprop in a briefing for reporters here today.
Britain’s fixed-wing maritime patrol capability was axed when the Nimrod MRA4 program was canceled by the Conservative-led coalition in 2010, although the previous Labour administration had already withdrawn an earlier version of the aircraft ahead of the introduction into service of the new and much-delayed Nimrod. The consortium joins fixed-wing contenders like Airbus, Boeing, Lockheed Martin and unmanned air vehicle supplier Northrop Grumman positioning for an expected decision by the British government’s 2015 strategic defense and security review (SDSR) on whether to fill a yawning capability gap left by a budget-driven decision in the last review to do away with fixed-wing maritime patrol capability.
L-3 Mission Integration announced in February it was collaborating with Bombardier Aerospace and Cascade Aerospace of Canada and Britain’s Marshall Aerospace to develop an extended-range version of the Q400 for maritime patrol and surveillance duties. Cascade was working on the auxiliary fuel tanks and Marshall Aerospace the internal fuel system integration. Now, L-3 has revealed British sensor and mission systems suppliers Selex ES and Ultra Electronics have signed up to collaborate in the development of an aircraft that initially, at least, has the possible Royal Air Force requirement as its main target.
The aircraft features auxiliary fuel tanks running down the side of the fuselage and a large under-fuselage canoe capable of housing weapons and sensors. Executives at the briefing said they have also been looking at the options for inflight refueling to extend the range of the machine even further than the 10 hours or so offered by the Q400 with auxiliary fuel tanks. Selex’s sensor fit offering include its Seaspray 7500 radar and the Eagle active electronically scanned array wide-area radar.
Officials said an Eagle with a 4-meter-long array would provide nearly the air-surveillance capabilities offered by the RAF’s E-3D Sentry airborne early warning fleet. Ultra is proposing an in-development airborne acoustic system which, along with a new generation of sonar buoys, would be capable of countering the increasing threat posed by a proliferation of small quiet submarines operating in the littoral. Weapon options include lightweight torpedoes and anti-surface ship missiles like the Harpoon. Weapons could be carried in the fuselage canoe or wing hard points.
Flash Gordon, L-3 communications director of international programs here, said the consortium had already acquired an ex-airline Q400 for modification into a test bed and demonstration platform. The airframe is due to be moved to aircraft modifier Cascade later in the year for installation of auxiliary fuel tanks fitted down the sides of the fuselage and payload systems ahead of type certification and fitting out of further systems next year. Gordon said they could have an aircraft with an initial operating capability ready by early 2019.
The L-3 executive said multirole flexibility and low whole life costs of a platform like the 400Q were the key to adoption by customers who could no longer afford single mission aircraft.
Gordon said British MoD officials had already been briefed on the aircraft’s capabilities. The aircraft would provide 80 percent of the capabilities of Boeing’s P-8 maritime patrol aircraft but at a third of the acquisition and operating cost, he said.
Pressure on budgets here, though, continue to raise questions about if and when a maritime patrol capability might be reinstated. Further government spending cuts are expected after the May 2015 election even though the Conservative government says it remains committed to a 1 percent real growth in the equipment budget for several years starting in 2016.
Brian Burridge, Finmeccanica UK’s vice president of strategic marketing, told reporters at the briefing that plugging the gap in British maritime patrol capabilities has emerged as the highest priority in the next SDSR. “The general rhetoric is that filling this capability gap is currently the highest priority for SDSR 2015 ... but the issue remains affordability,” said the retired RAF air chief marshal.
Recent events in the Atlantic and Indian oceans have added to the growing recognition that the UK has a capability gap, he said. “The Malaysian Airlines flight MH370 and the yacht [sunk in the Atlantic earlier this month] have conjured the notion of what if that happened here? What if we had to mount that sort of search operation, what degree of national embarrassment would that bring with it?” said Burridge.
Earlier this month, Britain had to send an RAF C-130 Hercules into the Atlantic equipped only with binoculars to look for the yacht — an accident in which the crew of four lost their lives.
Officials from the three companies said they reckoned a fleet of between 10 and 12 aircraft would be a starting point to plug the gap left by the SDSR decision in 2010.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Rugby UK
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting snipit
Another new US military aircraft taking part in RIAT 2014 will be a Boeing P-8A Poseidon from the US Navy. A single example from test and evaluation squadron VX-1 at NAS Patuxent River, Maryland, will make the type's Air Tattoo debut in the static aircraft park. A number of British crew members, maintaining national maritime patrol experience since retirement of the RAF Nimrod fleet, will be among those on board for the visit.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
P8 ! Now!
What rubbish a UK consorts is putting together a bid for an MPA ........ It will be years before we see it it will be over budget and useless for years after it enters service, the only function it will satisfy is to let the Whitehall incumbents tell us they are doing something.
Forget all this rubbish we need an aircraft that can do the job and we need it now! The P8 is the cheapest and fastest way to get that aircraft without letting the British Defense industry push the price through the roof.
Forget all this rubbish we need an aircraft that can do the job and we need it now! The P8 is the cheapest and fastest way to get that aircraft without letting the British Defense industry push the price through the roof.
And so the game begins:
L3 (Q400) v Airbus (C295) v Boeing (P-8)
Pro's and cons:
P-8 - In service, proven, tested, biggest, best, already operated by RAF aircrew. Can replace Sentinel and E-3 (Wedgetail).
Problem is cost.
C295 - In service, proven, tested, 80% performance for 30% of cost of P-8. AWACs variant available.
Problem is capability.
Q400 - Brian Burridge and Flash Gordon on the team (influential), 80% performance for 30% of cost of P-8. AWACs variant available.
Problem is capability and not yet designed, tested or proven.
Maybe it will come down to the best leasing package? and we know Boeing have a proven track record with that one (C17)......
L3 (Q400) v Airbus (C295) v Boeing (P-8)
Pro's and cons:
P-8 - In service, proven, tested, biggest, best, already operated by RAF aircrew. Can replace Sentinel and E-3 (Wedgetail).
Problem is cost.
C295 - In service, proven, tested, 80% performance for 30% of cost of P-8. AWACs variant available.
Problem is capability.
Q400 - Brian Burridge and Flash Gordon on the team (influential), 80% performance for 30% of cost of P-8. AWACs variant available.
Problem is capability and not yet designed, tested or proven.
Maybe it will come down to the best leasing package? and we know Boeing have a proven track record with that one (C17)......
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sussex By The Sea
Age: 79
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What rubbish a UK consorts is putting together a bid for an MPA ..
Interesting to see the '80% capability for 30% cost' claims trotted out again. Amazing how it is almost always these same figures that are quoted no matter what the project. Makes one wonder whether anyone has actually done the calculations .... hang on, mustn't be cynical.
Unless the UK wants to build an all-new platform, Japan-style, there isn't going to be an all-UK MPA. Even the brain of the MRA4 was from Seattle.
On the other hand, there's a lot of scope for UK content in the acoustics and radar systems, and with its experience in ASW/MPA, the UK could lead a program that might (if done properly) fill a few national needs, doing a large percentage of the P-8A mission for a small percentage of the cost.
Displays, computing, lighter and better radars and other technologies (like electric torpedoes that don't have to be carried in a bay) can give you a bit more effectiveness in a small package. And props are more efficient than fans in this regime. Also, before anyone falls over laughing at the Q400 idea, the Q400 has >80 per cent of the payload-range of the Lockheed L-188, which IIRC turned out OK as the basis for an MPA.
Difficulty: ASW. Both MRA4 and P-8A were big and expensive, in large measure, because they are designed to carry a metric
ton of sonobuoys to do multistatic active coherent (MAC) acoustics, which may be necessary to hunt AIP boats and modern nukes. How does a smaller aircraft handle that?
On the other hand, there's a lot of scope for UK content in the acoustics and radar systems, and with its experience in ASW/MPA, the UK could lead a program that might (if done properly) fill a few national needs, doing a large percentage of the P-8A mission for a small percentage of the cost.
Displays, computing, lighter and better radars and other technologies (like electric torpedoes that don't have to be carried in a bay) can give you a bit more effectiveness in a small package. And props are more efficient than fans in this regime. Also, before anyone falls over laughing at the Q400 idea, the Q400 has >80 per cent of the payload-range of the Lockheed L-188, which IIRC turned out OK as the basis for an MPA.
Difficulty: ASW. Both MRA4 and P-8A were big and expensive, in large measure, because they are designed to carry a metric
ton of sonobuoys to do multistatic active coherent (MAC) acoustics, which may be necessary to hunt AIP boats and modern nukes. How does a smaller aircraft handle that?
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the 20% the small aircraft can't do is the thing you most need then you have got 100% of nothing for 80% of the cost of what you need.
It's time to buy the P8..... Now!
It's time to buy the P8..... Now!
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"there's a lot of scope for UK content..."
Oh no.... we've been down that route so often - delays, cost overruns, impaired capabilities
We buy the P-8 as is, where is with NO "improvements" - that way we might actually get them on time and on budget
Oh no.... we've been down that route so often - delays, cost overruns, impaired capabilities
We buy the P-8 as is, where is with NO "improvements" - that way we might actually get them on time and on budget
Q400 - Brian Burridge and Flash Gordon on the team (influential),
Flash Gordon - away from maritime for quarter of a century
YS
Burridge - always rated as 2 steps ahead of his peers group and former VSO and leader of the RAF.
Flash Gordon - Not too far removed from a key RAF ISTAR position.
Both will have remaining high level connections and will be 'listened to' by the decision makers. Maritime awareness will have nothing to do with it.
Flash Gordon - Not too far removed from a key RAF ISTAR position.
Both will have remaining high level connections and will be 'listened to' by the decision makers. Maritime awareness will have nothing to do with it.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sussex By The Sea
Age: 79
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Burridge - always rated as 2 steps ahead of his peers group and former VSO and leader of the RAF.
Flash Gordon - Not too far removed from a key RAF ISTAR position.
Both will have remaining high level connections and will be 'listened to' by the decision makers. Maritime awareness will have nothing to do with it.
Flash Gordon - Not too far removed from a key RAF ISTAR position.
Both will have remaining high level connections and will be 'listened to' by the decision makers. Maritime awareness will have nothing to do with it.
'Maritime awareness will have nothing to do with it' .No, but the fact that they dont actually have a product will have something to do with it!
By the way, I didnt know that Burridge had been CAS???
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK/ USA
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PA,
P-8 - In service, yes with limitations and falls short, in significant areas, of satisying UK requirements.
proven - yes but did not get a glowing report during OT&E.
tested - see above.
biggest - fuel hungry. Requires complex infrastructure.
best - less than 80 % of requirement.
already operated by RAF aircrew. Irrelevant. Will provide some mitigation in terms of training but nothing else.
Can replace Sentinel and E-3 (Wedgetail). Requirement for Sentinel is still, being debated. WedgeTail sub optimal.
I would say P8 satisfies less than 70% of requirement.
To get it to 80% will be a massive extras cost that will require further testing etc making an expensive platform even more expensive.
P-8 - In service, yes with limitations and falls short, in significant areas, of satisying UK requirements.
proven - yes but did not get a glowing report during OT&E.
tested - see above.
biggest - fuel hungry. Requires complex infrastructure.
best - less than 80 % of requirement.
already operated by RAF aircrew. Irrelevant. Will provide some mitigation in terms of training but nothing else.
Can replace Sentinel and E-3 (Wedgetail). Requirement for Sentinel is still, being debated. WedgeTail sub optimal.
I would say P8 satisfies less than 70% of requirement.
To get it to 80% will be a massive extras cost that will require further testing etc making an expensive platform even more expensive.
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK/ USA
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts