UK Maritime Patrol Aircraft - An Urgent Requirement
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: U.K.
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At Kinloss in 1970 I was banned from speaking to visiting VIPs for expressing my opinion that instead of the Nimrod, we could have had twice as many purpose built Atlantiques to replace the Shack. I have seen nothing since to change my mind, and note that the French are renovating their fleet for another 20 years!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lol
In 1997 I was banned by the then Stn Cdr from speaking to anybody about expressing my views about Nimrod 2000 ("This project will end in tears") and I was not the only one.
The wheel turneth.
In 1997 I was banned by the then Stn Cdr from speaking to anybody about expressing my views about Nimrod 2000 ("This project will end in tears") and I was not the only one.
The wheel turneth.
This was reflected afterwards by Liam Fox in his frequently conflicting statements. He said on a number of occasions the capability was not needed (or could be covered by other assets). He called it a "cold war" capability in one article. But he also said the MRA4 was fatally flawed and blamed that too, when it suited him.
Since that day I have expected a P-8 order post-2015 election
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Croqueteer, in which case you will remember the Dutch Atlantic that ditched and how the 4-engine lobby said it justified 4 engines rather than 2.
The Atlantic was a purpose designed airframe which, as you say, will have another 20 years life. The P3 at least has proven a successful long-life airframe where as turning an outdated 50s passenger jet into an MPA and then reusing the same bits through 3 generations of the same aircraft had to be questionable.
Taking a P3 and refitting it may be one thing, doing a cut and shut on Nimrod something else again.
The Atlantic was a purpose designed airframe which, as you say, will have another 20 years life. The P3 at least has proven a successful long-life airframe where as turning an outdated 50s passenger jet into an MPA and then reusing the same bits through 3 generations of the same aircraft had to be questionable.
Taking a P3 and refitting it may be one thing, doing a cut and shut on Nimrod something else again.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: England
Age: 65
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Dutch atlantique that ditched had control problems due to a broken control rod on the horizontal stabiliser.
Damn fine job by the pilot to get it down so that all survived the ditching, unfortunately 3 lost transferring to liferafts.
Point is, the number of engines was irrelevant to this incident.
Damn fine job by the pilot to get it down so that all survived the ditching, unfortunately 3 lost transferring to liferafts.
Point is, the number of engines was irrelevant to this incident.
Cloggie ditching...
......#Momoe
There were two ditchings. One as you say was a single point failure in the elevator system.
The other was failure of one engine which blew open the clamshell nacelle covers which were hinged near the leading edge of the wing and opened out like the petals of a flower creating huge drag shortly after take which rendered it uncontrollable. Hence the reference to the twoVfour engine discussion.
As an aside they had an RAF airman with them on his first ever flight in a military aircraft! I wonder what he does now? It was rather a long time ago.
The Ancient Mariner
There were two ditchings. One as you say was a single point failure in the elevator system.
The other was failure of one engine which blew open the clamshell nacelle covers which were hinged near the leading edge of the wing and opened out like the petals of a flower creating huge drag shortly after take which rendered it uncontrollable. Hence the reference to the twoVfour engine discussion.
As an aside they had an RAF airman with them on his first ever flight in a military aircraft! I wonder what he does now? It was rather a long time ago.
The Ancient Mariner
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: SWAPS Inner
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interestingly (to me, anyway), when touring the boneyard a couple of weeks ago, several (6?) P3s are in the process of being regenerated for a refurb program for an 'Asian country'. The ex-USAF tour guide, having pointed out several types (A4,A6,A7,F105 etc) that had provided solid service in a certain adventure in SEA, couldn't quite bring himself to say the P3s were going to Vietnam.... (I believe, after some googling). My how we laughed and then thought b****r! Everyones got MPA now except us! 
The USN, back in the fat years, sent a whole lot of low-time P-3A/Bs to the boneyard and replaced them with new P-3Cs (some of which IIRC were Congressional plus-ups). Many of those stored airframes now have much less time than most operational P-3Cs and (as in Brazil and this other case, possibly Taiwan) can last long enough to justify a complete avionics refit.
In 1997 I was banned by the then Stn Cdr from speaking to anybody about expressing my views about Nimrod 2000 ("This project will end in tears") and I was not the only one.
However, as a taxpayer I beg to differ that this point is moot now. The notion that it was an SDSR decision conveniently diverts attention from the fact MoD p##### upwards of £4Bn down the drain and those responsible were rewarded with gongs and advancement. It has to be made very clear that the decision was inevitable, and had been predicted by very many, for many years. As that dreadful woman Cooper would say "SDSR was a good way of burying bad news".
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, perhaps not moot in the overall picture, but moot as in "will we score an MPA this year, and if not is it the end?"
Asking nicely I am...as there are plenty of other threads devoted just to the good ol MRA4 cluster****
PS...and I've already self-flagellated for taking it off piste, hypocrite that I am.
Asking nicely I am...as there are plenty of other threads devoted just to the good ol MRA4 cluster****
PS...and I've already self-flagellated for taking it off piste, hypocrite that I am.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
I think the French called it by the anglicised name to make it more acceptable to UK amongst others and changed the name to Atlantique for the Mk 2 when unable to sell it others.
PS,
I see the Dutch actually lost 3 or 33% of the fleet in 10 years.
At Kinloss in 1970 I was banned from speaking to visiting VIPs for expressing my opinion that instead of the Nimrod, we could have had twice as many purpose built Atlantiques to replace the Shack.
In 1997 I was banned by the then Stn Cdr from speaking to anybody about expressing my views about Nimrod 2000 ("This project will end in tears") and I was not the only one.
Whilst we castigate Cameron and Fox for finally wielding the axe I believe that, in the interests of fairness
, one should give Gordon Brown full credit for his part in the debacle. The reduction of the order from 16 to 9 airframes sounded the death knell. From any standpoint, the cost of supporting such a small, unique fleet was unsustainable. The unpalatable decision was moved to the right, wouldn't have been good to cancel before an election, and the incoming government was left with an impossible situation when committed to continue with the job creation project represented by the two carriers.To be devoid of a maritime air capability is almost suicidally dangerous. Let's hope that this message gets across.
YS
the job creation project represented by the two carriers.
To be devoid of a maritime air capability is almost suicidally dangerous
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SALISBURY
Age: 76
Posts: 706
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been reading this thread for quite a while & finally feel it is time to say my few words.
There is more chance of my growing a pair of breasts than of any incoming government purchasing any form of MPA, end of!
There is more chance of my growing a pair of breasts than of any incoming government purchasing any form of MPA, end of!
This story is currently doing the rounds:
MoD 'looking at cutting Army to 60,000' says former minister - Telegraph
I'm not sure that the story itself has merit. I appreciate that people are tasked to look at various options, such as what "would happen if the RN scrapped all its submarines", or "what would be the effect of getting rid of all the Army main battle tanks". It doesn't mean that these would actually happen, it just means that when such an option is considered then the answers are readily to hand. Lots of "what ifs" are considered, few if any actually occur.
However, if the story is true, what it indicates to me is not that the Army will necessarily be reduced, but rather that MOD expects (knows?) that the next SDSR will be another budget cutting exercise. If this turns out to be the case, the reintroduction of an MPA/MMA fleet looks highly unlikely....
MoD 'looking at cutting Army to 60,000' says former minister - Telegraph
I'm not sure that the story itself has merit. I appreciate that people are tasked to look at various options, such as what "would happen if the RN scrapped all its submarines", or "what would be the effect of getting rid of all the Army main battle tanks". It doesn't mean that these would actually happen, it just means that when such an option is considered then the answers are readily to hand. Lots of "what ifs" are considered, few if any actually occur.
However, if the story is true, what it indicates to me is not that the Army will necessarily be reduced, but rather that MOD expects (knows?) that the next SDSR will be another budget cutting exercise. If this turns out to be the case, the reintroduction of an MPA/MMA fleet looks highly unlikely....