Maritime Patrol Capability: The SDSR’s Wolf Whistle
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: aus
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gr, change that to, Gr quoted. 
you could have quoted this from the article
"Joint Forces Command, supported by DSTL, has been undertaking an Air ISR Optimisation Study since 2012. This analysis attempts to understand the broader requirements for surveillance by air platforms out to 2030, including those for Persistent Wide Area Surveillance in the maritime domain. It is due to report before the end of 2015, providing evidence for a balanced set of requirements that might expand the remit of an MPA into a multi-mission set of tasks rather than just the simplistic like-for-like replacement that an off-the-shelf purchase might indicate. "
you could have quoted this from the article
"Joint Forces Command, supported by DSTL, has been undertaking an Air ISR Optimisation Study since 2012. This analysis attempts to understand the broader requirements for surveillance by air platforms out to 2030, including those for Persistent Wide Area Surveillance in the maritime domain. It is due to report before the end of 2015, providing evidence for a balanced set of requirements that might expand the remit of an MPA into a multi-mission set of tasks rather than just the simplistic like-for-like replacement that an off-the-shelf purchase might indicate. "
Hacking at people's service careers or focusing on a one-word error seems to be a way of distracting people from the point. If you think that Seedcorn, commonality, time and risk - backed up by the unspoken assumption that any competition or R&D program wlll inevitably be a shambles - dictate an off-the-shelf buy of a USN-spec P-8, say so.
Otherwise, it would make a lot of sense to sit down, define the post-2020 requirements for ISR, and work out a way of meeting them that represents a balance of operational and industrial/economic considerations. And be aware that the P-8 is an expensive aircraft to buy and to operate and is chock-full of costly US kit that European industry can make as well or better.
Otherwise, it would make a lot of sense to sit down, define the post-2020 requirements for ISR, and work out a way of meeting them that represents a balance of operational and industrial/economic considerations. And be aware that the P-8 is an expensive aircraft to buy and to operate and is chock-full of costly US kit that European industry can make as well or better.
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: aus
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
about the P-8, which is said to be the prefered option. I think the UK, like Aust. have done an initial evaluation on what is available and there needs. The japanese MMA wasn't in the UK for fun.
If anything could fulfill the UK needs. There may be a proper evaluation. Those that have been involved in such programs knows the amount of manhours involved. At this stage I think it's like 5th gen and 4th gen in fighters
If anything could fulfill the UK needs. There may be a proper evaluation. Those that have been involved in such programs knows the amount of manhours involved. At this stage I think it's like 5th gen and 4th gen in fighters
Last edited by a1bill; 14th Sep 2015 at 10:47.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm an ex Herc mate and will defend that aircraft to the hilt, however it would make a fairly mediocre MPA for the UK, given the size of the sea space that must be patrolled.
I was in a headquarters role on Joint Warrior a while back and got chatting to a Danish submariner with a lot of time on their diesel-electric boats. The only MPA that they feared was the Nimrod as it was the only platform that had both the radar and speed combo to get a hit off their mast and dash into their location and put out an effective sonobouy pattern to lock them down before they went deep and silent and poked off on a random track. Atlantiques and P3s just didn't have the smash.
I flabbered his gasp when I told him that we'd scrapped them and their replacement.
The UK needs a 21st century jet MPA. That'll be a straight competition between the P8 and P1 (which I'm rather partial to).
I was in a headquarters role on Joint Warrior a while back and got chatting to a Danish submariner with a lot of time on their diesel-electric boats. The only MPA that they feared was the Nimrod as it was the only platform that had both the radar and speed combo to get a hit off their mast and dash into their location and put out an effective sonobouy pattern to lock them down before they went deep and silent and poked off on a random track. Atlantiques and P3s just didn't have the smash.
I flabbered his gasp when I told him that we'd scrapped them and their replacement.
The UK needs a 21st century jet MPA. That'll be a straight competition between the P8 and P1 (which I'm rather partial to).
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hacking at people's service careers or focusing on a one-word error seems to be a way of distracting people from the point.
Good job some of us read the whole confused "paper" and pointed out it lacked balance, as in we are 40 knots behind the drag curve...perhaps worth a mention, no?
I could nae give a **** where we get an a capable MPA from, just so long as it is flying ops within 3 years.
I could nae give a **** where we get an a capable MPA from, just so long as it is flying ops within 3 years.
Translated: the great and wise can pick any MPA they want as long as it's a vanilla P-8A sustained by Mr Boeing and the USN.
Translated: the great and wise can pick any MPA they want as long as it's a vanilla P-8A sustained by Mr Boeing and the USN.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Translated: the great and wise can pick any MPA they want as long as it's a vanilla P-8A sustained by Mr Boeing and the USN.
The last MPA I flew in (5500 hours) was a Nimrod MR2 - a mighty fine MPA, flown by mighty fine crews. I left in 2003 - I know FA about the P8/P1 other than what I read on here. In my experience, the kit is less important than the crew that flies it anyway.
I make one sole point on this thread, which I believe I've made with absolute clarity...if we are re-establishing this capability we need to do so now. We cannot afford to delay one moment and the absolute priority for urgency is understated or omitted from that paper.
My personal, ex-professional opinion. That is all.
Start writing now
15 September 2015
For Immediate Release:
STRATEGIC DEFENCE AND SECURITY REVIEW
On 8 September, the Committee wrote to the Government expressing its concern about the imposition of a word limit of only 1,500 characters for online consultation responses to the Strategic Defence Review.
The Government has now confirmed that following feedback from interested parties, the online word limit has now been removed and that any length of response can be received (up to the maximum allowed by the software).
For Immediate Release:
STRATEGIC DEFENCE AND SECURITY REVIEW
On 8 September, the Committee wrote to the Government expressing its concern about the imposition of a word limit of only 1,500 characters for online consultation responses to the Strategic Defence Review.
The Government has now confirmed that following feedback from interested parties, the online word limit has now been removed and that any length of response can be received (up to the maximum allowed by the software).
Anything that can be flying ops with the RAF in three years is by default a vanilla P-8A &c. There is nothing else that can meet that schedule. If that is crass I stand convicted, but it's also the objective truth.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anything that can be flying ops with the RAF in three years is by default a vanilla P-8A &c. There is nothing else that can meet that schedule.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love the way that the suggestion of an open competition gets lip service right up to the point when the possibility of procuring the thing rears its head. Then it's:
It will take too long
It will be over-specified
The bean counters will get involved
It'll be excessively expensive
and then the cream of the crop: We shouldn't bother to examine the requirement; we should just buy something now.
If you don't get the spec right in the first place - all the above will happen, and the MoD will blame the contractor.
It will take too long
It will be over-specified
The bean counters will get involved
It'll be excessively expensive
and then the cream of the crop: We shouldn't bother to examine the requirement; we should just buy something now.
If you don't get the spec right in the first place - all the above will happen, and the MoD will blame the contractor.
KenV wrote:
Not to mention BWoS - who would scour the world's scrapyards for some old wreckage which 't Bungling Baron would lobby 't MoD to convert into an MPA saving 't taxpayerrs' brass and lining his pockets.....
I suspect Airbus, Kawasaki, Alenia, and Lockheed at a minimum could make powerful arguments against the above notion.
