RAF's Sentinel fleet could escape retirement
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Island of Aphrodite
Age: 75
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF's Sentinel fleet could escape retirement
From Flight Global
RAF's Sentinel fleet could escape retirement, says MoD
The UK Ministry of Defence is reviewing its decision to remove the Royal Air Force's Bombardier Global Express-based Sentinel R1 surveillance aircraft from use in 2015, as the capability continues to support military operations in Afghanistan and Mali.
The proposal to retire the synthetic aperture radar- and ground moving target indication sensor-equipped Sentinel fleet and its associated ground exploitation equipment was among a number of controversial announcements contained within the coalition government's Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) of September 2010.
Five of the Raytheon Systems-modified aircraft are assigned to the RAF's 5 Sqn, based at RAF Waddington in Lincolnshire. The MoD says two are currently on overseas deployments: one supporting the NATO International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan and the other providing ground surveillance for France's Operation Serval in Mali. The latter is being operated from Dakar in Senegal, where the UK's open-ended Sentinel contribution involves around 70 personnel.
"The department is currently considering how it might retain Sentinel beyond 2015, with the final decision to be taken as part of the next SDSR," minister of state for defence personnel, welfare and veterans Mark Francois said in response to a parliamentary question on 6 February.
First indications that at least part of the Sentinel capability could be retained emerged in May 2012, when NATO said France and the UK had offered to make contributions in kind in support of the future Alliance Ground Surveillance system, which will use a fleet of five radar-equipped Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk unmanned air vehicles.
The UK's Sentinel R1s were acquired via the MoD's Airborne Stand-Off Radar programme, worth more than £1.2 billion ($1.9 billion), including support arrangements. The system was declared formally in-service in November 2008.
RAF's Sentinel fleet could escape retirement, says MoD
The UK Ministry of Defence is reviewing its decision to remove the Royal Air Force's Bombardier Global Express-based Sentinel R1 surveillance aircraft from use in 2015, as the capability continues to support military operations in Afghanistan and Mali.
The proposal to retire the synthetic aperture radar- and ground moving target indication sensor-equipped Sentinel fleet and its associated ground exploitation equipment was among a number of controversial announcements contained within the coalition government's Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) of September 2010.
Five of the Raytheon Systems-modified aircraft are assigned to the RAF's 5 Sqn, based at RAF Waddington in Lincolnshire. The MoD says two are currently on overseas deployments: one supporting the NATO International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan and the other providing ground surveillance for France's Operation Serval in Mali. The latter is being operated from Dakar in Senegal, where the UK's open-ended Sentinel contribution involves around 70 personnel.
"The department is currently considering how it might retain Sentinel beyond 2015, with the final decision to be taken as part of the next SDSR," minister of state for defence personnel, welfare and veterans Mark Francois said in response to a parliamentary question on 6 February.
First indications that at least part of the Sentinel capability could be retained emerged in May 2012, when NATO said France and the UK had offered to make contributions in kind in support of the future Alliance Ground Surveillance system, which will use a fleet of five radar-equipped Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk unmanned air vehicles.
The UK's Sentinel R1s were acquired via the MoD's Airborne Stand-Off Radar programme, worth more than £1.2 billion ($1.9 billion), including support arrangements. The system was declared formally in-service in November 2008.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't see why you'd get rid off them - they are run in, they are (relatively) cheap to run and they give us the capabilityy to assist others without getting in the firing line
Oh sorry - they aren't fast jet fighters.............
Oh sorry - they aren't fast jet fighters.............
Beerdrinker,
I think this was what we always expected. Say whatever is needed to get it into service (largely a tribute to OC 5 at the time - HK) and keep promising to get rid of it. But we just need it until we pull out of (insert name of current op here).
Great piece of kit, bought and paid for now, so well worth keeping alive.
I think this was what we always expected. Say whatever is needed to get it into service (largely a tribute to OC 5 at the time - HK) and keep promising to get rid of it. But we just need it until we pull out of (insert name of current op here).
Great piece of kit, bought and paid for now, so well worth keeping alive.
Whoever lets Sentinel go frankly, needs to follow the capability out of service! And PDQ.
I'm surprised we haven't leveraged support from the Army seeing as they are the primary beneficiaries out in Herrick.
I'm surprised we haven't leveraged support from the Army seeing as they are the primary beneficiaries out in Herrick.
I'm surprised we haven't leveraged support from the Army
Personally I'm yet to be convinced that we need a land-battle reconnaissance radar enough to warrant chopping anything else.
Edited to add: I found this interesting history of the CASTOR / ASTOR projects, in which I particularly liked this line:
[MOD] ruled out the E-8C J-STAR, as it could only operate at around 42,000ft and anyway the MOD were not keen to acquire such an old and essentially obsolete airframe
Last edited by Easy Street; 8th Feb 2013 at 21:17.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Buy 10 ish P-8s and you can adapt the fleet to match the mission rather than having a one trick pony,
Navy Moves Forward On Advanced Airborne Radar
But keep the capability until then of course! Once something is gone it becomes 'normal' not to have it and easier to convince ourselves we can manage without it, in reality we do what we can with what we've got and don't notice what we can't do anymore. No more managing the gap, capability holidays and then removal of capability
A MMA fleet would have been of great use in virtually every conflict scenario we have been in for the last 50 years and the next 50. The technology is mature and entering service with other nations providing a real capability for many military tasks, the costs are known and it has an efficient support structures
Still we have Typhoon which will do everything (it better as it cost enough, at the expense of other fleets/capabilities), and sometime this century F-35 and we don't have a clue what it will cost
Navy Moves Forward On Advanced Airborne Radar
But keep the capability until then of course! Once something is gone it becomes 'normal' not to have it and easier to convince ourselves we can manage without it, in reality we do what we can with what we've got and don't notice what we can't do anymore. No more managing the gap, capability holidays and then removal of capability
A MMA fleet would have been of great use in virtually every conflict scenario we have been in for the last 50 years and the next 50. The technology is mature and entering service with other nations providing a real capability for many military tasks, the costs are known and it has an efficient support structures
Still we have Typhoon which will do everything (it better as it cost enough, at the expense of other fleets/capabilities), and sometime this century F-35 and we don't have a clue what it will cost
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: SWAPS Inner
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this was what we always expected. Say whatever is needed to get it into service (largely a tribute to OC 5 at the time - HK) and keep promising to get rid of it. But we just need it until we pull out of (insert name of current op here).
