LONG RANGE SAR
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Runway upgrades have been planned for YPEA and initial work has started already, they were put on hold when the SAR started. There are plans in place to upgrade RAAF Edinburgh facilities however the runways are capable of landing a P8 at the moment.
In regards to YPEA it's not AUW that is the issue, it's tyre pressures. The P8 run the same pressures as a 737-800 which is above the limits for YPEA for 18R/36L but can land on 18L/36R as seen below-
https://www.airservicesaustralia.com...6-Mar-2014.pdf
To be honest it seems like the tyre pressure story a bit if a poor excuse. I honestly think it's because a) There isn't much room on the ramp for the P8 and b) the crew didn't want to stay in the crap accommodation that is RAAF Pearce.
In regards to YPEA it's not AUW that is the issue, it's tyre pressures. The P8 run the same pressures as a 737-800 which is above the limits for YPEA for 18R/36L but can land on 18L/36R as seen below-
https://www.airservicesaustralia.com...6-Mar-2014.pdf
To be honest it seems like the tyre pressure story a bit if a poor excuse. I honestly think it's because a) There isn't much room on the ramp for the P8 and b) the crew didn't want to stay in the crap accommodation that is RAAF Pearce.
Well the airborne Search hasn't gone so well in this tragedy has it? Hundreds of tons of kerosene burned and not a single piece of tangible evidence. However, a Chinese ship with a cheap hydrophone and an Australian ship with a very expensive hydrophone have found the most likely resting place.
No wonder the RN haven't crowed from their nests over the loss of LR MPA. I expect that if any money is to be had in SDSR15 that they would sooner see it spent on ships. How many nice little boats could they have bought with the money wasted on the N-word Mk4!!?
Here's hoping that HMS ECHO can add to the mix and find some large bits for the ROV to go find. Meanwhile the LR MPA can do something useful and drop the mail!
LJ
No wonder the RN haven't crowed from their nests over the loss of LR MPA. I expect that if any money is to be had in SDSR15 that they would sooner see it spent on ships. How many nice little boats could they have bought with the money wasted on the N-word Mk4!!?
Here's hoping that HMS ECHO can add to the mix and find some large bits for the ROV to go find. Meanwhile the LR MPA can do something useful and drop the mail!
LJ
Betty
Reading other posts on this, it seems that MPAs are incapable of detecting 37.5khz pingers - it's not exactly rocket science to give them this capability, is it? So all of this crowing over a lack of airborne LRSAR and there is no capability to detect one of the aircraft's primary location aids following an accident suggests that there are others with "skewed universes".
I agree with Leon, the MPAs have not contributed much in this search at all. It has been 'overhead' satellites and ships with hydraphones that have proved their worth. It's hard to argue otherwise in this particular tragedy.
The B Word
Reading other posts on this, it seems that MPAs are incapable of detecting 37.5khz pingers - it's not exactly rocket science to give them this capability, is it? So all of this crowing over a lack of airborne LRSAR and there is no capability to detect one of the aircraft's primary location aids following an accident suggests that there are others with "skewed universes".
I agree with Leon, the MPAs have not contributed much in this search at all. It has been 'overhead' satellites and ships with hydraphones that have proved their worth. It's hard to argue otherwise in this particular tragedy.
The B Word
LJ,
Have you ever met anyone in the RN above the rank of stoker? Those with knowledge and wisdom (and power) within the RN are fully aware of the gaping hole in our maritime defences left by the removal of a UK MPA. The mitigation factor is to ask allies to do the job for us.
Far stronger support to regain the capability is coming from the RN rather than the RAF. Had the MRA4 been a FAA asset, it would not have been scrapped.
Have you ever met anyone in the RN above the rank of stoker? Those with knowledge and wisdom (and power) within the RN are fully aware of the gaping hole in our maritime defences left by the removal of a UK MPA. The mitigation factor is to ask allies to do the job for us.
Far stronger support to regain the capability is coming from the RN rather than the RAF. Had the MRA4 been a FAA asset, it would not have been scrapped.
Sun
It would appear that without the capability to detect the ADR's pinger then maybe they were just boring holes in the sky? After working out they were no survivors and no dsicernable wreckage to be seen after the couple of days of search then what was the point if they couldn't detect the pinger?
Either get a sonobuoy capability for MPAs to detect this type of thing or stop going on about their greatness for this type of task. I believe that in Air France 447 it was the satellite tracking that pinpointed the search area and then it took a Brazilian Navy corvette to find anything of use to confirm its loss?
The B Word
It would appear that without the capability to detect the ADR's pinger then maybe they were just boring holes in the sky? After working out they were no survivors and no dsicernable wreckage to be seen after the couple of days of search then what was the point if they couldn't detect the pinger?
Either get a sonobuoy capability for MPAs to detect this type of thing or stop going on about their greatness for this type of task. I believe that in Air France 447 it was the satellite tracking that pinpointed the search area and then it took a Brazilian Navy corvette to find anything of use to confirm its loss?
The B Word
Had the MRA4 been a FAA asset, it would not have been scrapped.
No one doubts that the MPA protection of the IND is a loss of capability, but there are plenty above the equivalent rank of stoker (which I believe went out with steam ships?) that thnk that DDs, FFs, ASW helos and other capabilities can cover it.
The Navy needs ships - as has been so recently pointed out in the press. Not a bunch of £4Bn white elephants to fly about in!
Just my opinion, though...
The B Word
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: S of 55N
Posts: 360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there are plenty above the equivalent rank of stoker (which I believe went out with steam ships?) that thnk that DDs, FFs, ASW helos and other capabilities can cover it.
Sun.
No one doubts that the MPA protection of the IND is a loss of capability, but there are plenty above the equivalent rank of stoker (which I believe went out with steam ships?) that thnk that DDs, FFs, ASW helos and other capabilities can cover it.
Oh and the in vogue term is CASD.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The US of A, and sometimes Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The B Word.
I think you need to have a word with yourself. B word or otherwise.
I'm sure all the crews who are knackered by now, visually searching for wreckage, will be super happy about your postulation that they've just been "boring holes in the sky".
Well done you.
I think you need to have a word with yourself. B word or otherwise.
I'm sure all the crews who are knackered by now, visually searching for wreckage, will be super happy about your postulation that they've just been "boring holes in the sky".
Well done you.
Had the MRA4 been a FAA asset, it would not have been scrapped.
To repeat previous posts on the subject, during an exchange with Mr Kevan Jones (Lab) on 3rd February, Mr Hammond (SofS) replied;
"It is a bit rich for him to say that the gap in maritime patrol cover was created by this Government. What this Government did was to recognise the reality that his Government had been investing in aircraft that would never fly, would never be certified and would never be able to deliver a capability."
The local MP for AbbeyWood asked the Minister to expand upon this. Mr Dunne (Min DE&S) replied last month confirming that "numerous design and manufacturing flaws" had been discovered. He pointed out that this had been announced by former SofS Dr Fox in a Daily Telegraph article dated 28th January 2011 in which he stated "in unambiguous terms that the aircraft was unsafe". And, that the following month the then Min(AF) Mr Harvey had stated in the House that "technical issues had been discovered in the MRA4 and that these included concerns with the design of the fuel system".
In other words, not airworthy and no RTS possible; as advised in the early 90s when the recommended (and indeed mandated) Risk Reduction work to attempt mitigation was rejected.
Of course, MoD lets itself down by lying in the Ministerial brief stating that fuel system problems were unknown before 2010.
"It is a bit rich for him to say that the gap in maritime patrol cover was created by this Government. What this Government did was to recognise the reality that his Government had been investing in aircraft that would never fly, would never be certified and would never be able to deliver a capability."
The local MP for AbbeyWood asked the Minister to expand upon this. Mr Dunne (Min DE&S) replied last month confirming that "numerous design and manufacturing flaws" had been discovered. He pointed out that this had been announced by former SofS Dr Fox in a Daily Telegraph article dated 28th January 2011 in which he stated "in unambiguous terms that the aircraft was unsafe". And, that the following month the then Min(AF) Mr Harvey had stated in the House that "technical issues had been discovered in the MRA4 and that these included concerns with the design of the fuel system".
In other words, not airworthy and no RTS possible; as advised in the early 90s when the recommended (and indeed mandated) Risk Reduction work to attempt mitigation was rejected.
Of course, MoD lets itself down by lying in the Ministerial brief stating that fuel system problems were unknown before 2010.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: London
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure all the crews who are knackered by now, visually searching for wreckage, will be super happy about your postulation that they've just been "boring holes in the sky".
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: cardboard box in't middle of t'road
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
that MPAs are incapable of detecting 37.5khz pingers
Either get a sonobuoy capability for MPAs to detect this type of thing or stop going on about their greatness for this type of task.
After working out they were no survivors and no dsicernable wreckage to be seen after the couple of days of search
The area was sanitised before any of the ships got there, for prudence sake, the ships were tasked with retrieving the flotsam found by the MPAs. The Australian government weren't taking any chances after the performance put in by the Malaysian Press liaison.Then the area got moved several more times, due to satellites spotting more unrelated rubbish in the water, MPA despatched to the new areas, whilst the ships repositioned and again the MPA spots stuff in the water, ship go and retrieve it.
Sad to say, the RN contributed nothing of any use, hope they don't run aground on the way home.
