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

BAE RAF P3 procurement feasibility report

Wikiposts
Search
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.

BAE RAF P3 procurement feasibility report

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 22nd May 2012, 08:36
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Chilterns/Blighty
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
S-D - I'm well aware of the power of rumour.
With respect Jimlad a government that can backpedal on a new Seajet can back pedal on this too!

Furthermore the strip of concrete doesn't know who it belongs to.
Fokkerwokker is offline  
Old 22nd May 2012, 08:59
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The Roman Empire
Posts: 2,452
Received 72 Likes on 33 Posts
I think some of you are making the mistake of taking salad-dodger seriously (to be fair to him he did drop quite a few hints along the way) ....

When he says don't believe all you read, did it ever occur to you that he might be talking about his own work?

Last edited by Biggus; 22nd May 2012 at 09:19.
Biggus is online now  
Old 22nd May 2012, 09:16
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Sunny Side
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have a further update. The RAF have been talking to the good people at the Oxford English Dictionary - looking to have the word 'gullible' removed from the next update to the dictionary!

S-D
salad-dodger is offline  
Old 22nd May 2012, 12:19
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: home: United Kingdom
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I can't believe how S-D managed to get all this highly confidential material - and publish on an internet rumour forum. After all, he/she is only 12!

Duncs

By the way, we only need 18; and they will all be based at Lossiemouth.
Duncan D'Sorderlee is offline  
Old 22nd May 2012, 14:11
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: CAMBRIDGE
Age: 44
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well, here's another rumour to throw into the mill. I was asking one of the mission system designers about this today and was told that some RAF guys had been over to have a look at the CASA's, but he didn't know more than that. It suggests to me that someone, somewhere must be at least considering rethinking the UK's MPA requirement.
lovegroove is offline  
Old 22nd May 2012, 17:34
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Right here, right now
Posts: 270
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well, here's another rumour to throw into the mill. I was asking one of the mission system designers about this today and was told that some RAF guys had been over to have a look at the CASA's, but he didn't know more than that. It suggests to me that someone, somewhere must be at least considering rethinking the UK's MPA requirement.
Or they are ex-Kipper Fleet looking at jumping ship to help Oman set up it's fleet of 295's
MFC_Fly is offline  
Old 22nd May 2012, 20:29
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The US of A, and sometimes Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Salad-dodger!

At last. Something that's really got me laughing!! That's been a long time coming on The Prune. Keep it up!
BS
betty swallox is offline  
Old 24th May 2012, 22:45
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Sunny Side
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
worth getting this one back up to the top seeing as the competition is in town. Well the Saab MPA in Aberdeen anyway.

S-D
salad-dodger is offline  
Old 25th May 2012, 06:32
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 26,819
Received 271 Likes on 110 Posts
I was asking one of the mission system designers about this today and was told that some RAF guys had been over to have a look at the CASA's...
Since the Spanish cannot even get the A330MRTT AAR mission system to work, what hope is there for their prowess in designing something as demanding as an MPA mission system?

Don't forget that mañana is far too urgent a concept for many of them!
BEagle is offline  
Old 25th May 2012, 08:42
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by BEagle
Since the Spanish cannot even get the A330MRTT AAR mission system to work, what hope is there for their prowess in designing something as demanding as an MPA mission system?
Too true Beags, and they still have the gaul and temerity to bleat about the Aust Govt not taking advantage of their very generous offer of a sixth tanker!

From Australian Aviation online today...
Urena also said Airbus Military had yet to receive a response from the Australian government on its unsolicited proposal to convert a sixth A330 into a KC-30 for the RAAF with Qantas Defence at Brisbane, which would keep the conversion line open ahead of potential future work for other A330 MRTT customers.

“This offer is still on the table, but unfortunately by the end of the month we [begin to] shut down the Qantas Defence [conversion activity], we are going to finalise how we are going to finish aircraft number five, and then unfortunately those capabilities are going to be lost,” he said.

“We have never got an answer from the Australian government … [but] every country has the sovereign right to say something or to say nothing, so [I make] no criticism of that, [I have] no opposition to how they acted.”


What he didn't mention is that Qantas owns the conversion facility, NOT Airbus, and Qantas are rightly pissed off with Urena's threats.

Last edited by FoxtrotAlpha18; 25th May 2012 at 08:47.
FoxtrotAlpha18 is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2013, 20:19
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere Sunny
Posts: 1,601
Received 14 Likes on 8 Posts
Egdg - you sound bitter? Didn't you get selected for seed corn? Bless


And I think you need a reality check to see how far GBP 22M will go to 'manage a fleet of cheap aircraft'. And whilst we are at it, why the RN to operate them?
Whenurhappy is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2013, 21:37
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Sneaking up on the Runway and leaping out to grab it unawares
Age: 61
Posts: 684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
EGDG what make you such an expert on LRMPA?

Why do you think the WAFUs would be better at it than the Light Blue when thay have bugger all experience with it?
ExAscoteer is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2013, 07:24
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: front seat, facing forwards
Posts: 1,158
Received 12 Likes on 5 Posts
He's a govt stooge.....divide and rule and all that. The attitude he displays is what 'they' want so we infight and all become weaker instead of joinig together to become stronger. Shame on you.

Why are we still thinking single service on anything? Joint operations would bring the best from all, surely?
just another jocky is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2013, 07:34
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: England
Posts: 1,930
Received 7 Likes on 4 Posts
The RN could manage a fleet of cheap aircraft to patrol the shores for less than £22 M a year,
Really? You might run a couple of King Airs for a short period, but anything else? May be in the 1960s, but today? Not a chance!! Come on egdg, this is the second time on different topics you have raised seedcorn (and this topic has been dead for 10 months), what is your issue? What do you really understand the guys are doing in the States?
Roland Pulfrew is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2013, 07:38
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 657
Received 8 Likes on 4 Posts
Egdg's language and tone have immaturity and bitterness written throughout and clearly looks like a seedcorn applicant who failed at the first hurdle. As a 23 year old, he probably qualifies as an expert on school dinners and that's about it.

JAJ has a good point though about a future MMA (Multi Mission Aircraft which includes MPA capability) Sqn being joint. A mix of light and dark blue would certainly be best placed to fully exploit it's potential.
Party Animal is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2013, 08:17
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: .
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good on the Seedcorn guys if they are having a nice time. It's the good times we have that remind us why we joined in the first place.

And- egdg lovie-I wouldn't exactly call it over for the RAF guys in Pax River, Jax, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Damneck (for christs sake), the MAOC, DSTL and attached to industry (ultra, general dynamics, BAEs, Boeing etc).

Finally, however unlikely, IF a decision is taken to acquire an MPA capability, it will be the RAF chaps who fly the planes and no amount of trolling on pprune will change that...I would bet your pension on it.
FATTER GATOR is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2013, 09:09
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Far North of Watford
Age: 82
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Apart from historical precedent (which is a pretty lame argument) and hysterical my toy box syndrome, I can see no logical reason why the RAF should own and operate LRMP aircraft instead of the RN. The opportunity exists now, for admittedly very unpalatable reasons, to start again with a clean slate. For God's sake let us take that opportunity. Control, defence and overwatch of the maritime environment (aka oggin) belongs primarily to the navy. It is their environment. I speak as an old, wise Pongo with no axe to grind. Trust me!
Genstabler is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2013, 09:26
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Broome WA
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Fincastle in Adelaide this year, hurry up and get something.! We might have some 2nd hand airframes for you by then as well.
Aus_AF is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2013, 09:28
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Southern Europe
Posts: 5,335
Received 17 Likes on 6 Posts
Originally Posted by Genstabler
the maritime environment (aka oggin) belongs primarily to the navy
Yeah, but aeroplanes fly in the air, not the oggin.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2013, 09:29
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,780
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Genstabler - agreed (from another neutral ex Pongo). Also, giving maritime air back to the RN might appease them a bit when the carriers inevitably get the chop.
Trim Stab is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.