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

UK Maritime Patrol Aircraft - An Urgent Requirement

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.

UK Maritime Patrol Aircraft - An Urgent Requirement

Old 12th May 2014, 06:06
  #441 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,543
More Japanese flying boat fun. Not for those prone to seasickness...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKo6...GJtAvAKqJyHibG
LowObservable is offline  
Old 14th May 2014, 09:25
  #442 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 4 Civvy Street. Nowhere-near-a-base. The Shires.
Posts: 560
I hadn't really noticed but...

"The UK also operates an airborne maritime surveillance capability."

Source - National Strategy for Maritme Security 2014 - published this month. This is what it has to say about the futue for Maritime Air:

Aerial Surveillance. In order to deliver more cost-effective aerial surveillance of the UK Marine Areawhile satisfying the needs of the MCA, Border Force and MMO, we will work to harmonise contractedAerial Maritime Surveillance provision by 2015. This new provision will take full advantage of advances in technology and deliver some contingent capability to other agencies and government departments.The UK Armed Forces requirements and capabilities in air-based Intelligence,Surveillance, Targetingand Reconnaissance (ISTAR), including future maritime surface and sub-surface surveillance, will beconsidered in 2015, within the Strategic Defence and Security Review process.

More than I expected to find to be honest.

CS
camelspyyder is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2014, 11:41
  #443 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,085
This weeks "Flight" quotes the USN estimate for FY 2015 of the unit cost of a new P-8 (based on 8 aircraft ordered) of $ 270 mm including weapons systems
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2014, 12:00
  #444 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: home for good
Posts: 460
discount for being "special friends"?
Sandy Parts is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2014, 20:09
  #445 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 16,492
Interesting reading on the P8

Analysis: OT&E Report Details Systemic Failures in US Weapon Testing

P-8A Poseidon: Not Mission Effective, But in Full-Scale Production

What is Gilmore’s “specific example?” He told the JCS Vice Chairman that “the P-8A Multi-Mission Maritime Patrol Aircraft could be fully compliant with all Key Performance Parameter (KPP) and Key System Attribute (KSA) threshold requirements, and nonetheless possess significant shortfalls in mission effectiveness.”

He also added that “The P-8 requirements define supporting system characteristics or attributes that are necessary, but not nearly sufficient, to ensure mission effectiveness.”

In an extreme case, he continues, “the contractor could deliver an aircraft that meets all the KPPs but has no mission capability whatsoever. Such an airplane would only have to be designed to be reliable, equipped with self-protection features and radios, and capable of transporting weapons and sonobuoys across the specified distances, but would not actually have to have the ability to successfully find and sink threat submarines in an Anti-Submarine Warfare mission (its primary mission).”

So how did the Joint Chiefs and the US Navy react to the “specific example” of the P-8A, which Gilmore concluded “is not effective for the intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance mission, and is not effective for wide area anti-submarine search?”

They must be taking lessons from the UK.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2014, 10:02
  #446 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,085
as the article points out they never listen to him -

the sellers, the buyers, the politicians and the operators just ignore what he says as they all have their own vested interests in doing so
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2014, 22:06
  #447 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The US of A, and sometimes Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 536
...yawn...
betty swallox is offline  
Old 13th Jul 2014, 09:02
  #448 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 2,129
RAF crewed P-8 at Waddo

Last sunday at Waddo, came across the P-8 with the all Brit crew and here's my pics









Maybe in RAF roudels in the future who knows?

Cheers
chopper2004 is offline  
Old 13th Jul 2014, 09:21
  #449 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 56
Betty,

A question for those in the know:

If the UK decide to purchase the P8 (and the rumour mill is in full force at the moment) then will that be a COTS buy, or will the MOD want it's own sensors on the platform? If it is a COTS purchase then how will the many sensors (thinking EW) be supported? Will this be UK personell placed into EWC in the US or would we be expected to set up our own EW support section in the UK (not a quick or simple suport section to set up)? To do so could be approx 5 years+ to be effective.

Along the same lines; I understand the mission system is similar to the MRA4 (at least the Boeing architecture) and therefore will require some sort of MSS. Will this be COTS or would the UK be expected to develop its own and integrate?

I understand the platform is excellent, and like all new aircraft will have it's teething problems, but I do feel that there is an assumtion that the jets can just be bought and flown "as is", but to do so requires a huge support organisation that I think has not even been considered. How many simulalators would be required? Would these have emulated mission systems, or simulated? Having seen the cluster that was the MRA4 rear crew simulator, I would hope some lessons had been identified there. (That is not a slur on those supporting that sim, but the decisions made on how to emulate the sensors).

The systems above are just a couple, and we have not even gone into acoustic support, an area where the RAF (standby RN) removed the capability to support with the retirement of the MR2.

Would you be able to add any info on how some of these areas would be managed?

Enjoy the US - when are you lot coming back anyway? If you are......
grousehunter is offline  
Old 13th Jul 2014, 11:29
  #450 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 2,875
then will that be a COTS buy, or will the MOD want it's own sensors on the platform?
That's a pretty good question. Last time I managed a Sonics programme (20 years ago) the winner of the blind trial, by a VERY long way, was a Computing Devices (Canada) Off The Shelf device. I was kicked up and down every corridor in St Giles Court for running the trial, because Sonics was a protected technology and the contract WOULD be awarded in the UK, regardless of quality, price, supportability, performance, time to develop etc. Nothing anyone in MoD could do. Some waivers were granted over the years; for example HELRAS in Merlin (BAeS/Bendix) which was allowed to compete with Plessey's Guillemot in the early 80s. Not sure what the current political directive is, but for example ELINT was the same and now we've bought Rivet Joint and US kit.
tucumseh is online now  
Old 14th Jul 2014, 07:10
  #451 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 645
grousehunter

I imagine the RAAF acquisition model may be one to follow closely. We're getting 8 (+4) P-8s from 2017, and will likely leverage off RAAF/Boeing Wedgetail AEW&C support facilities for deeper maintenance and EW support at Amberley, and will establish a flightline maintenance, spares warehouse and flight and cabin training facility at Edinburgh to mirror that of the Wedgetail's at Williamtown.

It's expensive to setup and run your own support and training facilities, but it can be done with initial deep support from Boeing and the US Navy - the old saying 'buy cheap, buy often' applies!

Cheers
FoxtrotAlpha18 is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2014, 08:14
  #452 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 180
UK to extend Sentinel surveillance program with Raytheon support

Raytheon Co (RTN.N), the U.S. maker of radar, missiles and other defense electronics, said it would improve software on the Sentinel to make it better equipped for maritime surveillance to help support the government's plan to extend its lifespan.
hulahoop7 is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2014, 10:38
  #453 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: home for good
Posts: 460
yikes - weren't our mushroom farming friends (UK E-3) relying on that to keep their pot full?
Sandy Parts is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2014, 11:30
  #454 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 932
This may be of interest: New report calls for MPA competition

Though with Hammond gone, and Fallon in, presume any chance of an early decision is put back.

S41
Squirrel 41 is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2014, 11:46
  #455 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 48
Posts: 505
With the new Japanese policy regarding all things defence related might I ,once again, advocate the Japanese (turbofan equipped) next gen ORION, aka the KAWASAKI P-1;



4 engined vs 2, much more range, speed, altitude and more weapons.
kbrockman is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2014, 12:17
  #456 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 932
But the P-1 however good isn't for export, is it?
Squirrel 41 is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2014, 13:03
  #457 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 48
Posts: 505
Export rules severely relaxed in April and will further relax at the end of 2014,
The Shinmaywa is already cleared for export to the Indian NAVY, I cannot imagine that the P1 (or C2) would be problematic for any nation with good ties with the US (like all NATO members)
kbrockman is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2014, 14:34
  #458 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NSW
Posts: 261
Place your order....
TBM-Legend is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2014, 16:00
  #459 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Planet Earth (mostly)
Posts: 1
Hate to point out the elephant in the room...

Being able to see 'blips' on the surface of the sea is not maritime surveillance, just like putting searchwater in anti-col does not constitute a RAP.

Loving the look of the Kawasaki, but highly unlikely that the UK would buy Japanese.
Gradius is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2014, 02:29
  #460 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Outside the Matz
Posts: 219
Looks like a little wager I made in the office a few months back is going to pay off

http://mobile.defensenews.com/article/307150034

The price is starting to look pretty good for an outright buy instead of a lease as well.
Bannock is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.