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 Sep 2014, 05:57
  #601 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,905
I think the RJ airworthiness experience has skewed the views of a number in the MoD and have caused them to question US recognised standards. The truth is there is nothing wrong with US standards and we continue to use them seamlessly with our own. Where RJ fell down is that it does not meet US airworthiness standards. Clearly it should and some things will need sorting but this is no reason to doubt everything from the US.
Just This Once... is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2014, 11:18
  #602 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Outside the Matz
Posts: 219
“I think the RJ airworthiness experience has skewed the views of a number in the MoD and have caused them to question US recognised standards

Who the hell are we to take the moral and intellectual high ground?
Should we be following BAE recognised standards?

This is arrogance of the highest order if true.

If they want to question the standards of any organisation they should start by standing in front of a mirror.

Last edited by Bannock; 12th Sep 2014 at 11:51.
Bannock is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2014, 11:35
  #603 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The US of A, and sometimes Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 537
Jet In Vitro

If you think I'm supporting Engerland...
betty swallox is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2014, 12:12
  #604 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK/ USA
Posts: 111
I am looking forward to the Last Night at the Proms tonight.

I shall be singing Loud and Clear.

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

When Britain first, at heaven's command,
Arose from out the azure main,
This was the charter of the land,
And Guardian Angels sang this strain:

(Chorus)

The nations not so blest as thee
Must, in their turn, to tyrants fall,
While thou shalt flourish great and free:
The dread and envy of them all.

(Chorus)

Still more majestic shalt thou rise,
More dreadful from each foreign stroke,
As the loud blast that tears the skies
Serves but to root thy native oak.

(Chorus)

Thee haughty tyrants ne'er shall tame;
All their attempts to bend thee down
Will but arouse thy generous flame,
But work their woe and thy renown.

(Chorus)

To thee belongs the rural reign;
Thy cities shall with commerce shine;
All thine shall be the subject main,
And every shore it circles, thine.

(Chorus)

The Muses, still with freedom found,
Shall to thy happy coasts repair.
Blest isle! with matchless beauty crowned,
And manly hearts to guard the fair.

(Chorus)
Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

I would like to observe.

Britain comprises Scotland, Wales, N Ireland and England.

Let's hope common sense will prevail.
Jet In Vitro is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2014, 12:45
  #605 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 1,549
“I think the RJ airworthiness experience has skewed the views of a number in the MoD and have caused them to question US recognised standards”

Who the hell are we to take the moral and intellectual high ground?
Should we be following BAE recognised standards?

This is arrogance of the highest order if true.

If they want to question the standards of any organisation they should start by standing in front of a mirror.
If I understand correctly, it's not US standards that are the issue, let alone their equivalence to UK standards. What is/was missing is documentary evidence of the aircraft's design intent and how the aircraft meets that intent - which are required to comply with UK MAA regs. No-one (at least no-one of any credibility) is suggesting that the aircraft is inherently unsafe, or a bag of bolts, they're merely pointing out that a critical piece of evidence required by our process is missing, either because it was never generated under the US process when the aircraft was designed, or because the use of the aircraft has changed from the original intent, or because compliance with regs that did not exist when C135/137 was designed is now required.

In the post HC / XV230 environment that was and is always going to be an issue, particularly for a conversion of an ageing type, irrespective of how many have flown / are flying.

This does not mean we can't / don't use US standards - far from it. AIUI, the safety case for the UK C17s is (or was) basically predicated on operating the aircraft to US procedures, using US kit and with a US training pipeline.
Not_a_boffin is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2014, 12:46
  #606 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The US of A, and sometimes Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 537
Jet In Vitro

If you think in a nationalist, I'm insulted.
betty swallox is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2014, 13:16
  #607 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK/ USA
Posts: 111
BS,

My thoughts are along the lines of defending our island.

The song talks about Britain.


N a B,

I agree. How much does it cost to provide the documentary evidence required. Can it be reverse engineered?
Jet In Vitro is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2014, 14:51
  #608 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,545
I think, seriously, that the P-8A is a different case from the RJ. The P-8A base design is a civilian aircraft with a full FAA/CAA/EASA paper trail back to the year dot. The RJ base is a 1950s military aircraft, out of production for 50 years.

The P-8A design was a single, recent program; the RJ combines several major separate mods (mission equipment, re-engine, glass cockpit) done over many years, all a long time ago.

Leasing P-8A is a fast, low-risk way back into ASW/MPA, but one that has some high costs associated with it. It's disturbing that it seems to be being done without an analysis of alternatives, particularly one that addresses other ISR needs.
LowObservable is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2014, 15:24
  #609 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A long long way from ISK!
Posts: 34
Leasing P-8A is a fast, low-risk way back into ASW/MPA, but one that has some high costs associated with it. It's disturbing that it seems to be being done without an analysis of alternatives, particularly one that addresses other ISR needs.
(My bold)

Has there been a decision made then? Must have missed the announcement in all the referendum in-fighting!
Ventre A Terre is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2014, 15:24
  #610 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Outside the Matz
Posts: 219
LO, Since MR4 was transferred to Gillete, there has been continued analysis of alternatives. I would be interested to hear some examples of the other ISR needs that need to be concidered.

VAT - pop over to E goat and search "poseidon" . POSS HI BS, but still good gossip.
Bannock is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2014, 16:03
  #611 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 76
Posts: 16,657
Originally Posted by Roland Pulfrew View Post
Got any examples of this fantastic capability?
MK 1, IIRC, dual role maritime/transport carry up to 46 pax I believe

Like all good plans, never happened.

Retasking was a fact of life.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2014, 17:15
  #612 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,905
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin View Post
What is/was missing is documentary evidence of the aircraft's design intent...
That was the starting position but after detailed inspections and investigations it became clear that what had been done to the aircraft, even in very recent times, was just not good enough to meet US / UK / international safety standards. As our aircraft is pretty much identical to the US aircraft we have inherited these safety issues. Clearly the UK and US must address these issues in turn and I have no doubt the USAF has the ability, intent and resources to do so.

Anyway, back to the P8A which in no way reflects the RJ program.

Just This Once... is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2014, 17:42
  #613 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK East Anglia
Age: 62
Posts: 668
I was at an RAeS lecture yesterday evening on the Airlander (Hybrid Air Vehicle) - I nearly fell off my chair when the role of MPA was suggested. I had to bite my lip to conceal my laughter. How did the dignitaries sat at the front manage to conceal any emotion or facial expression at this suggestion.
dragartist is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2014, 10:24
  #614 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: England
Posts: 1,870
Question

Leasing P-8A is a fast, low-risk way back into ASW/MPA, but one that has some high costs associated with it. It's disturbing that it seems to be being done without an analysis of alternatives, particularly one that addresses other ISR needs.
Genuine question, but what makes you think it isn't being done?
Roland Pulfrew is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2014, 11:47
  #615 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,545
Having talked to a couple of people who think they have something to offer, my sense is that if there is an AoA, it is a classic black box. You can put data in and there are not many questions being asked in return, and there's no clue as to the internal logic (for instance, how is MPA being tied to the Sentinel or AWACS long-term missions?). Since the basic requirements could very easily be arranged to eliminate one or more of the potential candidates, this is not encouraging.
LowObservable is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2014, 19:45
  #616 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: GB
Posts: 47
Pontious - nearly got close to carrying 46 though.


When Cyclone Tracey hit Darwin on 25 Dec 1974 42 Sqn Crew 8 (R T----n)was sent from the MARDET at Tengah to pick up survivors. XV255 with a crew of six picked up 38 persons (18 adults & 20 children) and returned to Tengah on 27 Dec.
Nimman is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2014, 22:24
  #617 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 51
Posts: 1,599
Here's a 2+2=8 scenario - If the Scots do their own thing, and the SSBN fleet moves to Devonport, and UK MOD acquires an MPA fleet, where would they go?

St Mawgan? Yeovilton? Waddington?
Roadster280 is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2014, 11:29
  #618 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,085
Belfast, Carlisle, Newcastle, Culdrose/Newquay would be the obvious places I'd have thought

depends on if they are armed or just PATROL aircraft
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2014, 14:33
  #619 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: North West
Age: 69
Posts: 90
Waddington.

All your ISTAR assets in one place. It's cheaper, although one bomb takes them all out, but cost, as always, will win out.

The other station might seem viable, but the infrastructure required to support such aircraft is immense.
AQAfive is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2014, 15:45
  #620 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Sunny Side
Posts: 3
Here's a 2+2=8 scenario - If the Scots do their own thing, and the SSBN fleet moves to Devonport, and UK MOD acquires an MPA fleet, where would they go?

St Mawgan? Yeovilton? Waddington?
St Mawgan? There's an RAF station there still, but it doesn't have a runway. Although the adjacent Newquay Cornwall Airport may be glad of the business!

S-D
salad-dodger is online now  

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.