Project Seedcorn - MPA Skill Retention
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Newquay,Cornwall
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely the commonsense approach to a rebirth of a British long range maritime air force would be to make it a branch of the Royal Navy.
This would result in a single language force unlike previous manifestations and also solve the captaincy election by making them the senior rank on board.
This would result in a single language force unlike previous manifestations and also solve the captaincy election by making them the senior rank on board.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: troon
Age: 61
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
agree totally. We would probably still have an mpa if it were crewed by the dark blue.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Somewhere nice overseas.
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the mpa capability were resurrected, objectively why not go the whole hog and give to the navy.
Most other countries do, it's really just the ones who stuck with the original RAF structure who have not.
And yes, this is turning into yet another repetitious MPA thread before the usual comments appear.
Most other countries do, it's really just the ones who stuck with the original RAF structure who have not.
And yes, this is turning into yet another repetitious MPA thread before the usual comments appear.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: troon
Age: 61
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
f the mpa capability were resurrected, objectively why not go the whole hog and give to the navy.
Better having it as an RN asset under an RN budget with maybe RN personell Fighting the Aircraft and the RAF Flying and maintaining it. I think the Dutch did it this way until the demise of MPA.
Typical Navy!
This question is being dealt with at the moment. If rumours are anything to go by, the RAF want to keep the putative money for an MPA, but are unwilling to commit to an MPA. This is not to say there aren't lots of RAF guys rooting for a future MPA capability, but the RAF as an entity isn't convinced.
This follows some fairly bad behaviour by the RAF in PR11 regarding money in budget saved by deletions of capability, so unsurprisingly the RN are pushing very hard for the entire MPA capability (and associated funding) to be transferred to 1SL's budget, and he is then held to account for the capability he chooses to invest in.
This follows some fairly bad behaviour by the RAF in PR11 regarding money in budget saved by deletions of capability, so unsurprisingly the RN are pushing very hard for the entire MPA capability (and associated funding) to be transferred to 1SL's budget, and he is then held to account for the capability he chooses to invest in.
Alfred,
You imply that there's a pot of gold with 'MPA capability' written on the side of it, ready to be transferred to the Service with the best argument.
I don't think that's the case at all - post PR11, Defence had a set of outputs which did not include MPA, and PR12 has shown that there is still insufficient money for those outputs that PR11 did include.
Thus, there ain't no money to fight over.
You imply that there's a pot of gold with 'MPA capability' written on the side of it, ready to be transferred to the Service with the best argument.
I don't think that's the case at all - post PR11, Defence had a set of outputs which did not include MPA, and PR12 has shown that there is still insufficient money for those outputs that PR11 did include.
Thus, there ain't no money to fight over.
Then 1SL would be held to account by the SoS for the decisions he makes, about money he owns, for capability he is to provide.
IF 1SL decides that he can do all the stuff an MPA can/should do, but with something else, he makes the case, elucidates the risk and will carry the can. If the SSBN is compromised, or an MCT event fails, and that risk is realised, then he gets the blame.
At the moment, all that happens is no-one is really blamed, and no one is held to account.
It's exactly the same for things like helicopters - CAS will be held to account to provide a certain capability. If he thinks he can do that with a load of Puma (or whatever), and invests the rest in shiny fast jets, that's great. But the day he can't provide the capability then he gets a kick up the pants.
H2A (as the MoD buzz-word bingo has it) is a great thing, as long as it's done properly. Unfortunately there are some toes that are going cold in 'Town' about it all, so expect to see fudges galore.......
IF 1SL decides that he can do all the stuff an MPA can/should do, but with something else, he makes the case, elucidates the risk and will carry the can. If the SSBN is compromised, or an MCT event fails, and that risk is realised, then he gets the blame.
At the moment, all that happens is no-one is really blamed, and no one is held to account.
It's exactly the same for things like helicopters - CAS will be held to account to provide a certain capability. If he thinks he can do that with a load of Puma (or whatever), and invests the rest in shiny fast jets, that's great. But the day he can't provide the capability then he gets a kick up the pants.
H2A (as the MoD buzz-word bingo has it) is a great thing, as long as it's done properly. Unfortunately there are some toes that are going cold in 'Town' about it all, so expect to see fudges galore.......
But there's a whiteboard, and PR13+ money to get, and an SoS who is reputedly sympathetic to the entire idea. Why do you think Seedcorn was signed off in the first place. It's not like CAS just called up his oppo's and asked for a couple of spare seats. Don't forget, FF2020 did indicate that an MPA capability might be required.....
I agree with you that the aspiration still exists. A lot will rest on how the whiteboard argument gets played out but MPA is unlikely to fare well against the whiteboard items in the near term (not least due to political embarrassment of yet another U-turn), and once capability is delegated out to the FLCs then the programme will be full for at least the next 10 years.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But while the 1SL makes that decision to can MPA because he likes big boats, the land domain loses an ISTAR component. However, he could tell CAS that he doesn't need it and then he can by fast pointy things or hydraulic palm trees
MR2 was not designed for Land ISTAR, neither was MRA4 (and same same with P8 for example). The only reason they were there was to try and justify themselves during the Iq/Afg years....
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AtG
Are you trying to say that if it was not for Afg/Ir then there was no requirement for an MPA for the last 10 years? Why would 1SL keep MPA money safe if that was the prevalent point of view?
Are you trying to say that if it was not for Afg/Ir then there was no requirement for an MPA for the last 10 years? Why would 1SL keep MPA money safe if that was the prevalent point of view?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: A lot closer to the sea
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd suggest that Nimrod (and Sea King ASAC 7) was used in Afghan and Iraq because it had a capability that was as useful over land as it is over the sea. It may not have been designed to do that particular role but when it works then why not use it?
My first contact with the MPA world was on long trails to the US and Malaysia where the Nimrod provided SAR for our jets. Very useful and comforting it was too to have that sort of asset close on hand if the worst happened to our single engined aircraft.
In the UK our Armed Forces have always had to make best use of any and all assets available and both recent theatres have ben rather large for Sentinal (which was designed for the job) to take on alone.
As far as I know the Nimrod force still provided all the usual benefits of an MPA to the UK and other areas (V boat protection, long range SAR, over water ISTAR etc) at the same time as Telic and Herrick. For a maritime nation, which we are due to the fact that there is water on all sides, to not have an MPA is very odd. It does not matter who owns it, and there are both dark and light blue already involved in P8, it is a capability we need if the Treasury will ever let us.
My first contact with the MPA world was on long trails to the US and Malaysia where the Nimrod provided SAR for our jets. Very useful and comforting it was too to have that sort of asset close on hand if the worst happened to our single engined aircraft.
In the UK our Armed Forces have always had to make best use of any and all assets available and both recent theatres have ben rather large for Sentinal (which was designed for the job) to take on alone.
As far as I know the Nimrod force still provided all the usual benefits of an MPA to the UK and other areas (V boat protection, long range SAR, over water ISTAR etc) at the same time as Telic and Herrick. For a maritime nation, which we are due to the fact that there is water on all sides, to not have an MPA is very odd. It does not matter who owns it, and there are both dark and light blue already involved in P8, it is a capability we need if the Treasury will ever let us.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AtG, the US, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, France and others also use their MPA for overland ISTAR, your statement is simply wrong.
It just so happens that an airframe with long range, endurance, extra capacity (space, electricity, crew positions) and bunch of sensor operators is quite good at being adapted at short notice and low technical risk to do lots of other rolls. The term MPA should be put in the history books, MMA (Multi Mission Aircraft) would be a much better description of what they are.
It just so happens that an airframe with long range, endurance, extra capacity (space, electricity, crew positions) and bunch of sensor operators is quite good at being adapted at short notice and low technical risk to do lots of other rolls. The term MPA should be put in the history books, MMA (Multi Mission Aircraft) would be a much better description of what they are.