Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Maritime Patrol Capability: The SDSR’s Wolf Whistle

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.

Maritime Patrol Capability: The SDSR’s Wolf Whistle

Old 23rd Nov 2015, 17:44
  #261 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: England
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Facking Hell. Reading the above posts, its hard not to imagine I'm now interrupting a 4.pm. Saturday afternoon jelly and cake party for ten year old boys.
A awful lot of hard earned UK taxpayers cash has now got to stumped up for these important aircraft and pay for the people who are involved....as the Irish say I wouldn't start from here, but in this whole cock eyed period of our defence history, we are. Well done.
A lot of British people are going to have to dip out somewhere along the line to fund this. Hope you make it all worth it.
I'm pleased for you, but dismayed by you as well.


And try not to be too triumphant, arms dealers. You're on a roll at the moment, we all know.
My tin hat chucked away, DILLIGAF?
Hangarshuffle is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 17:49
  #262 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 18,099
Received 2,150 Likes on 977 Posts
As with most Govts, money already spent is of no issue to them
How the Sunk Cost Fallacy Makes You Act Stupid
ORAC is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 17:49
  #263 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Possibility of second buy??

An aweful lot of sea out there for 9.....

...Japan is procuring 90 yes, 90 P1, for her shores...
glad rag is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 17:51
  #264 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Just behind the back of beyond....
Posts: 4,207
Received 63 Likes on 13 Posts
How much extra, per buoy, might that cost, I wonder….?
Jackonicko is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 17:52
  #265 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Oh, a whole ***t load in all probability.
Willard Whyte is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 17:55
  #266 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And Australia, another island nation, has 8 P-8 on order.

But yes, more would be better!
Willard Whyte is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 17:57
  #267 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Sunny Side
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Seeing as the USN do not routinely utilise AAR for the P-8 fleet, their P-3 fleet is not AAR equipped, I think my point is perfectly valid and the USN answer would be rather obvious!
Do they not have the Internet in London, Oxford or New York? We do in Cambridge.

US Navy completes AAR ground test of P-8A Poseidon aircraft - Naval Technology

Don't hold off on that letter to the USN just yet.

S-D
salad-dodger is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 18:02
  #268 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Yes, about time this gaping hole in UK capability was filled. The product of BAe salesmen and drunk politicians that saw a future in a 1940's based airframe! Good luck to the P8. If future economics allow, it must lead on to future squadrons, Lossie and Waddo!

OAP
Onceapilot is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 18:03
  #269 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere Sunny
Posts: 1,602
Received 14 Likes on 8 Posts
5 Squadron RNZAF has operated P3 Orions sucessfully for almost 50 years - with only 5 airframes fro the first 20 - odd years, acquiring a sixth airframe in the early 1980s. Operational conversion was and is sucessfully carried out by an embedded training flight.


Edited to add: here on Pprune we often deride the Army and its fixation on cap badges and Regiments. The debate here about squadron badges is rapidly descending into a similar diatribe.��
Whenurhappy is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 18:09
  #270 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: In the Radio Bay
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I hesitate to wake from the dream...... but will there be Lindholme gear?
DunWinching is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 18:34
  #271 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wherever it is this month
Posts: 1,819
Received 116 Likes on 49 Posts
There's a nice little line tucked away in the SDSR that our forces will be "international by design". That's one way of describing the idea of having a boom-only receiver but no boom tanker! Joking aside, I don't see it as a problem. Given the likely prevalence of coalition operations on anything other than a sovereign self-defence task, there is almost certain to be enough boom tanker capacity for us to muscle in upon if we take enough of the probe-and-drogue strain with our Voyagers (which, let's face it, we are quite well-supplied with). I can't see much of a need for AAR on sovereign tasks given that P-8 can make the hop from ASI to MPN unsupported. And there is zero likelihood of AirTanker agreeing to cut metal to install booms on Voyager, as doing so would lose them their civil certification.

As to the lack of a competition, it would take some serious chutzpah for L-M or Airbus to get sniffy about their offers of, shall we say 'unproven' capability being rejected when the whole reason for gap was the failure of a previous 'unproven' capability to mature. Sometimes you just need to get on with it.
Easy Street is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 18:34
  #272 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,866
Received 156 Likes on 72 Posts
RAF P-8 - USN Grey or RAF Hemp?

OK, I'm stirring, but as there are now FOUR threads running on the P-8 buy I thought I might start one as well.

Mods ... would you please consider merging the following Threads?
Seedcorn ...
Oops! MPA ...
MPA - Wolf Whitle [perhaps the best home for them all]
P-8 UK Maritime Air Power Again
I shall now report my bad post, using the RBP button

[EDIT to say "Thanks, Boss"]

Last edited by MPN11; 24th Nov 2015 at 09:07. Reason: Thank you!
MPN11 is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 18:35
  #273 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Noting that Australia's 8 x P-8 will be augmented by "up to seven" MQ-7C Triton HALE UAV/RPA.

MQ-4C Triton Unmanned Aircraft System - Royal Australian Air Force - Royal Australian Air Force
2805662 is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 18:45
  #274 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Old Hampshire
Age: 68
Posts: 631
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by DunWinching
I hesitate to wake from the dream...... but will there be Lindholme gear?
Oh come on this thing will never fly low enough to see any survivors let alone be able to drop ASRA close enough to them.
VX275 is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 19:06
  #275 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The US of A, and sometimes Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Jackonicko

You really don't know what you're talking about. You wanna let it go mate.
betty swallox is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 19:07
  #276 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 26,903
Received 351 Likes on 124 Posts
Yes - please do!

One wonders why Kipper Fleet people don't have the skills to check other threads before posting....
BEagle is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 19:16
  #277 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,866
Received 156 Likes on 72 Posts
Anyway, while I'm here [before the Mods hopefully delete my thread ...

I could envisage MoD paying extra to have the P-8's in Hemp for tradition's sake
MPN11 is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 19:18
  #278 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,640
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Good one, MPN. Nearly did it myself.

Maybe we should start a thread to monitor all the MPA threads.
LowObservable is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 19:23
  #279 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,866
Received 156 Likes on 72 Posts
hahahahaha

Must stop when we get to .... nine.
MPN11 is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 19:25
  #280 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,931
Received 141 Likes on 66 Posts
Salad-Dodger,

Yup, super duper fast in all 3 places! In fact so fast that I can instantly see that the USN shares with the RAF a complete lack of boom equipped tankers, so the USN AND the RAF will retain the ability to refuel from a USAF or RAAF boom equipped tanker, but not as routine.
Of course the launch customer will test the ability, what else would you expect?

Shame the ability to conduct a decent and reasonable conversation so totally eludes you...
pr00ne is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.