UK Maritime Patrol Aircraft - An Urgent Requirement
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sussex By The Sea
Age: 79
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Smart Mine available to the Nimrod was the Stonefish
HAS59
You sound a bit confused between Depth Charges and Nuclear Depth Bombs. One of them had a conventional explosive capability, went bang and resulted in a spout of water rising over the drop point. The other one had a nuclear explosive capability, went B_A_N_G and boiled lots of fish.
As N.R. said - the Nimrod Force did not carry Depth Charges. They did however, carry fishboilers until their removal from service in 19
You sound a bit confused between Depth Charges and Nuclear Depth Bombs. One of them had a conventional explosive capability, went bang and resulted in a spout of water rising over the drop point. The other one had a nuclear explosive capability, went B_A_N_G and boiled lots of fish.
As N.R. said - the Nimrod Force did not carry Depth Charges. They did however, carry fishboilers until their removal from service in 19
I wish I hadn't bothered ...
or
read what I actually said ...
I am not confused between nuclear weapons and ye olde depth charges - only 'NR' mentioned his role in history re Air Dropped Depth Charges shortly after a quote which mentioned Nuclear weapons, not much of a link but I mistakenly made it and responded. Then I said I should have read it twice.
Nimbev is correct - the Nimrod was not Cleared to carry Stonefish - however Stonefish was available (along with other weapons) to be cleared and then used should that have been necessary - like bleedin' Sidewinders!
Does this always result in thread drift?
What of the future - and the Urgent Requirement?
My open question remains ...
what type of weapons do we imagine a future UK Maritime Reconnaissance Aircraft will need to carry?
Respectfully Yours
...
read what I actually said ...
I am not confused between nuclear weapons and ye olde depth charges - only 'NR' mentioned his role in history re Air Dropped Depth Charges shortly after a quote which mentioned Nuclear weapons, not much of a link but I mistakenly made it and responded. Then I said I should have read it twice.
Nimbev is correct - the Nimrod was not Cleared to carry Stonefish - however Stonefish was available (along with other weapons) to be cleared and then used should that have been necessary - like bleedin' Sidewinders!
Does this always result in thread drift?
What of the future - and the Urgent Requirement?
My open question remains ...
what type of weapons do we imagine a future UK Maritime Reconnaissance Aircraft will need to carry?
Respectfully Yours
...
weapons etc
so if my boys book of 'planes is right, the P-8A comes with:
High-Altitude Antisubmarine Weapon Capability
Multi-static active coherent acoustic capability
Maritime surveillance radar
Signal intelligence system
Magnetic anomaly detection system
Electro-optical and infrared sensor turret
Mark 54 lightweight anti-submarine torpedoes (fitted with wing kits)
Free-fall bombs
Depth charges
Mines
Harpoon anti-ship missiles
SLAM or AGM-65 Maverick land attack missiles
AIM-9 Sidewinders or AIM-120 AMRAAMs.
That's quite a list ...
... would we add to that stuff we already have?
like:
Stingray Torpedo
Mark 11 depth bombs (for shallow water ops)
Stonefish mine
(are they comparable with the US Navy weapons?)
Enhanced Paveway IV LGB & Litening Pod (in the place of the USN Free-fall bombs)
Storm Shadow - we have it - and we used to have Harpoon.
I know it rather rattled some Airships to see a mock-up four Storm Shadow's on a 'N' MRA Mark 4 but what else are we going to have in 20 years time with the range? (Cue the inevitable 'Drone' response)
A sensor suite worth considering might be;
A high altitude long range real time reconnaissance system. Perhaps a development of ‘Rapid Deployment Electro-Optical System’(RADEOS). With the ability to work alongside a long range Synthetic Aperture mapping radar with MTI capability. To give the ability to detect, classify and identify potential targets at range.
We have all this too ...
Now I'm not suggesting this should, or could happen all at once, when we get the capability back it will have to be re-introduced one step at a time.
As experience grows so could capability.
An aircraft with range and the ability to deliver real-time reconnaissance and weapons effect is a valuable asset with growth potential.
What d'you think?
High-Altitude Antisubmarine Weapon Capability
Multi-static active coherent acoustic capability
Maritime surveillance radar
Signal intelligence system
Magnetic anomaly detection system
Electro-optical and infrared sensor turret
Mark 54 lightweight anti-submarine torpedoes (fitted with wing kits)
Free-fall bombs
Depth charges
Mines
Harpoon anti-ship missiles
SLAM or AGM-65 Maverick land attack missiles
AIM-9 Sidewinders or AIM-120 AMRAAMs.
That's quite a list ...
... would we add to that stuff we already have?
like:
Stingray Torpedo
Mark 11 depth bombs (for shallow water ops)
Stonefish mine
(are they comparable with the US Navy weapons?)
Enhanced Paveway IV LGB & Litening Pod (in the place of the USN Free-fall bombs)
Storm Shadow - we have it - and we used to have Harpoon.
I know it rather rattled some Airships to see a mock-up four Storm Shadow's on a 'N' MRA Mark 4 but what else are we going to have in 20 years time with the range? (Cue the inevitable 'Drone' response)
A sensor suite worth considering might be;
A high altitude long range real time reconnaissance system. Perhaps a development of ‘Rapid Deployment Electro-Optical System’(RADEOS). With the ability to work alongside a long range Synthetic Aperture mapping radar with MTI capability. To give the ability to detect, classify and identify potential targets at range.
We have all this too ...
Now I'm not suggesting this should, or could happen all at once, when we get the capability back it will have to be re-introduced one step at a time.
As experience grows so could capability.
An aircraft with range and the ability to deliver real-time reconnaissance and weapons effect is a valuable asset with growth potential.
What d'you think?
Last edited by HAS59; 28th Oct 2014 at 14:13.
Upgrade Sentinels - why bother?
You can’t blame Raytheon for touting for more defence cash –they are in business to make a profit. But Sentinel even with a ‘tweaked’ radar is still just a one sensor platform.
The parliamentary undersecretary of state for defence, Philip Dunne, said that a contract for the development and installation of the maritime-capable software upgrade aboard the Royal Air Force's (RAF's) five aircraft will be signed in spring (Q2) 2015.
I wish they wouldn’t bother, it is going to look as if we have Maritime capability, when in fact we will not.
His statement confirms that there will be no additional equipment saying, “… the upgrade would largely involve modifying the sensor'ssoftware rather than installing new hardware.”
Adding, “This upgrade should enable the Sentinel R.1 to detect surface vessels and potentially submarine periscopes.”
This would give, at best a limited detection capability not an identification of what it had detected.
Then there is the almost meaningless sentence, “Additional sensors could be fitted to further boost the platform's maritime surveillance capability.”
Given the jet’s apparent weight problems they might be able to carry a decent pair of binoculars provided the crew are all on the slim side.
The real value of the Sentinel squadron is that it keeps the manning level in the service ready to be replaced with the next generation of Maritime crews.
The joint Green/Light Blue nature of the squadron could change to a Dark Blue/Light Blue mix when we get whatever we’re getting.
There is no real value in keeping Sentinel after then equipped as it is. Despite all the propaganda, Sentinel is a radar only asset with its roots in an Army Staff Requirement from the 1970’s. It lacks the IR/EO sensor of the MQ-4C Triton, so it still fails in the identification of targets at sea.
We could ask Raytheon to take their radar out and fit amodern long range recce sensor in its place, airborne analysts could use that …but who’s going to pay to replace the Canberra type capability when we have Reaper/Peaper drone things?
There will be no need for a ‘Low-end’ Sentinel to complementany P-8A (or B?) Poseidon. Crowsnest Merlins would do the radar detection Maritime job so much better in areas where long range and persistence is not required.
I was there at the beginning with CASTOR, I wish now that they hadn't bothered ...
The parliamentary undersecretary of state for defence, Philip Dunne, said that a contract for the development and installation of the maritime-capable software upgrade aboard the Royal Air Force's (RAF's) five aircraft will be signed in spring (Q2) 2015.
I wish they wouldn’t bother, it is going to look as if we have Maritime capability, when in fact we will not.
His statement confirms that there will be no additional equipment saying, “… the upgrade would largely involve modifying the sensor'ssoftware rather than installing new hardware.”
Adding, “This upgrade should enable the Sentinel R.1 to detect surface vessels and potentially submarine periscopes.”
This would give, at best a limited detection capability not an identification of what it had detected.
Then there is the almost meaningless sentence, “Additional sensors could be fitted to further boost the platform's maritime surveillance capability.”
Given the jet’s apparent weight problems they might be able to carry a decent pair of binoculars provided the crew are all on the slim side.
The real value of the Sentinel squadron is that it keeps the manning level in the service ready to be replaced with the next generation of Maritime crews.
The joint Green/Light Blue nature of the squadron could change to a Dark Blue/Light Blue mix when we get whatever we’re getting.
There is no real value in keeping Sentinel after then equipped as it is. Despite all the propaganda, Sentinel is a radar only asset with its roots in an Army Staff Requirement from the 1970’s. It lacks the IR/EO sensor of the MQ-4C Triton, so it still fails in the identification of targets at sea.
We could ask Raytheon to take their radar out and fit amodern long range recce sensor in its place, airborne analysts could use that …but who’s going to pay to replace the Canberra type capability when we have Reaper/Peaper drone things?
There will be no need for a ‘Low-end’ Sentinel to complementany P-8A (or B?) Poseidon. Crowsnest Merlins would do the radar detection Maritime job so much better in areas where long range and persistence is not required.
I was there at the beginning with CASTOR, I wish now that they hadn't bothered ...
Last edited by HAS59; 28th Oct 2014 at 17:24. Reason: Word spacing
It lacks the IR/EO sensor of the MQ-4C Triton, so it still fails in the identification of targets at sea.
A specific maritime function for the aircraft's radar system.
Options for long-range optics
Options for SIGINT
An enhanced airborne mission system.
The maritime function is especially seen as a quick win, given that this would largely be a software upgrade to the sensor, but that doesn't mean the Sentinel won't get an EO/IR capability also.
Then there is the almost meaningless sentence, “Additional sensors could be fitted to further boost the platform's maritime surveillance capability.”
Crowsnest Merlins would do the radar detection Maritime job so much better in areas where long range and persistence is not required.
Weight ...
What are they going to take out to add extra sensors on? The Raytheon locked boxes? If so - goody, but read what they said. Next year they are (maybe) going to sign off the radar tweak.
Don't hold your breath ...
Don't hold your breath ...
Weight and systems have been removed or in the process of being removed. This has offered-up space and weight for new sensors. Some of the other systems are being updated with more modern systems that weigh a lot less too.
good
JTO - Good to hear that about the weight and hopefully corporate excess baggage.
Maybe - just maybe it might come good - but ...
Maritime Training for the crews?
Still going to use the Army Int Corps?
there is still a long way to go.
Maybe - just maybe it might come good - but ...
Maritime Training for the crews?
Still going to use the Army Int Corps?
there is still a long way to go.
With 3 years left in service for Sentinel, are we really going to waste money on an upgrade? Has anyone involved with the radar tweak compared the delta between the effect required by the RN and DI Mar customer and the actual capability that the modified platform could actually provide?
Thought not
Thought not
So you have checked with MoD and the various end-users to confirm that this is going ahead without them championing the requirement?
Thought not.
Why is everything the MoD does to try and recover maritime capability met with such negativity, even for something as low risk as a software drop?
Thought not.
Why is everything the MoD does to try and recover maritime capability met with such negativity, even for something as low risk as a software drop?