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

RAF Poseidon - Not too long to wait?

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.

RAF Poseidon - Not too long to wait?

Old 4th Nov 2019, 17:11
  #181 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 152
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Once upon a time all maritime patrol aircraft had a MAD boom. Now the main players dont seem to think its a requirement. Have other sensors improved sufficiently that specifying an aircraft that can fly low enough to use a MAD is superflous or is it just down to cash ( or plastic submarines :-) )
ASRAAMTOO is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2019, 17:26
  #182 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,172
Received 8 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by ASRAAMTOO
Once upon a time all maritime patrol aircraft had a MAD boom. Now the main players dont seem to think its a requirement. Have other sensors improved sufficiently that specifying an aircraft that can fly low enough to use a MAD is superflous or is it just down to cash ( or plastic submarines :-) )
Maybe there's a clue in the fact that Autolycus is no longer fitted either.

YS
Yellow Sun is online now  
Old 4th Nov 2019, 22:35
  #183 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Here
Posts: 1,595
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
Originally Posted by pr00ne
Davef68,

Neptune?
The Indians call the P-8I Neptune
Davef68 is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2019, 05:22
  #184 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: London
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Once upon a time all maritime patrol aircraft had a MAD boom. Now the main players dont seem to think its a requirement.
I'd suggest it's the main player (singular) that doesn't think it's a requirement (or at least didn't when the requirement was drawn up). The rest (UK included) have just had to go along with it as they are buying US kit off the shelf. We certainly saw it as a requirement when we developed the MRA4.
Mil-26Man is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2019, 06:20
  #185 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Over the hills and far away
Posts: 87
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
MIL26-MAN, I think you need to read between the lines of previous posts for your answer.
Radley is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2019, 06:41
  #186 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Hyderabad
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I've seen operational Indian Navy P-8s with Harpoon missiles on underwing pylons.
Are the RAF aircraft similarly equipped?
Nomad2 is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2019, 12:42
  #187 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Nomad2
I've seen operational Indian Navy P-8s with Harpoon missiles on underwing pylons.
Are the RAF aircraft similarly equipped?
with 1553 and some development cash, it could probably do stormshadow too. Not much chance of that with the 1 Gp mafia though!

Imagine Libya without a single AAR bracket and the ability to make yourself a brew and take a p1ss in a toilet on the way home?
VinRouge is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2019, 14:17
  #188 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 152
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Yellow Sun
Maybe there's a clue in the fact that Autolycus is no longer fitted either.

YS
Not really, I know subs can run deeper now but lots of folks still use diesel subs.
ASRAAMTOO is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2019, 16:03
  #189 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: London
Posts: 557
Received 40 Likes on 16 Posts
Originally Posted by ASRAAMTOO
Not really, I know subs can run deeper now but lots of folks still use diesel subs.
Bit of a guess (I have no professional expertise in this area) but how important would MAD be to you if some of your targets weren't made of steel?
pasta is online now  
Old 5th Nov 2019, 19:16
  #190 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Here
Posts: 1,595
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
Originally Posted by VinRouge

with 1553 and some development cash, it could probably do stormshadow too. Not much chance of that with the 1 Gp mafia though!

Imagine Libya without a single AAR bracket and the ability to make yourself a brew and take a p1ss in a toilet on the way home?
Like this but replace with Poseidon?

Davef68 is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2019, 08:09
  #191 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NSW
Posts: 4,198
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
RAAF will acquire 15 P-8A's plus Harpoon and new generation weapons with 11 external hardpoints under fuselage and wings plus a weapons bay. It has in-flight refuelling capability.
FRom RAAF website:
The P-8A is built specifically as a military aircraft. It is based on the proven commercial designs of Boeing's 737-800 fuselage, but has been substantially modified to include:
  • a weapons bay
  • under wing and under fuselage hard points for weapons, and
  • increased strengthening for low level (down to 200ft) operations and high angle turns.
The P-8A aircraft has an extensive communications system including radios and data links across VHF, UHF, HF and SATCOM.

An internal fuel capacity of almost 34 tonnes allows the P-8A to conduct low level anti-submarine warfare missions at a distance of greater than 2,000 kilometres from base. The P-8A will be compatible for air-to-air refuelling with the KC-30A MRTT.

​​​​​​​
TBM-Legend is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2019, 13:51
  #192 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Stamford
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ASRAAMTOO
Once upon a time all maritime patrol aircraft had a MAD boom. Now the main players dont seem to think its a requirement. Have other sensors improved sufficiently that specifying an aircraft that can fly low enough to use a MAD is superflous or is it just down to cash ( or plastic submarines :-) )
Only ever saw one Shackleton with a MAD boom and that belonged to ASWADU
scorpion63 is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2019, 00:33
  #193 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: australia
Posts: 324
Received 15 Likes on 12 Posts
You may find that both MAD and a sniffer isn't needed on the P-8A There are said to be sound reasons for this. I guess one of which is that the P-8A standoff sonar system and weapons. As well as working with the MQ-4 etc. Those that know why there isn't a MAD, are comfortable with the idea.

Last edited by golder; 9th Nov 2019 at 01:09.
golder is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2019, 00:12
  #194 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Wildest Surrey
Age: 74
Posts: 10,181
Received 34 Likes on 25 Posts
Temp Danger Areas in the Dover Straits for drones carrying out 'Maritime Surveillance' until Mar 2020; is that when the task will be taken over by Posiedons?
chevvron is online now  
Old 5th Dec 2019, 10:10
  #195 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Scotland
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
^^ I don't mean to sound patronising Chev, but I think it is pretty obvious what type of "maritime surveillance" is being conducted by drones in the channel, and I doubt the Poseidon would be the optimum platform (cost etc) for that type of close inshore role in the future. I would imagine/conjecture that a number of the roles us old jack of all trades Nimrod chaps/chapesses used to do, will now be conducted by other platforms - including drones - going forwards and thank **** for that frankly as some of those jobs were as boring as ****.

Given the number of aircraft/crews, I would again speculate that the P8 will stick to its core LRMP roles and training for them.
Richard Dangle is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2019, 10:47
  #196 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 641
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
With the original heading of RAF Poseidon - not too long to wait, I am delighted to see that the first flight of the first RAF P8, exclusively by an RAF crew took place yesterday as part of the aircraft acceptance programme. All looking good at this stage for arrival at Kinloss (Lossiemouth bolthole) in Feb 20.
Party Animal is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2019, 12:31
  #197 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: cardboard box in't middle of t'road
Posts: 744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs up

MAD on the P8, why have the Indians got it? Have they got less of an 'acoustics suite', do they not have the 'hush-hush' non acoustic sensors that make it obsolete? Don't they have Multi Statics or are they 'just not as good as us?' Was it a political/cost decision to exclude it from our aircraft? I'm not going to give away my background, but the step from the Mk1 Nimrod to the Mk2 ON DAY ONE was an improvement (apart from the CAMBS!). The step from my last platform to the P8 was several decades back. Nothing to do with politics or company spiel, just an operator. Stand off sonar? Are we talking Littoral or 'Blue water', cos I'd love to see your clear RF channels in the Littoral environment at altitude!(even if they occupy 50% of the original bandwidth.) Please forgive me if you think that I'm not glad we're getting the P8, at least this is a foot in the door and the seedcorn guys have got something to go back to. As for the Sarbe/Autolocus switch argument... grow up.. I doubt many of you were around on the MK1 days to have even seen it! And if you were
Surplus is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2019, 12:59
  #198 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Manchester UK
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lots of interesting public domain info out there:

https://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...ne-sonar-soks/
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/0...ubmarines.html
bigsmelly is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2019, 13:00
  #199 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: cardboard box in't middle of t'road
Posts: 744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by golder
You may find that both MAD and a sniffer isn't needed on the P-8A There are said to be sound reasons for this. I guess one of which is that the P-8A standoff sonar system and weapons. As well as working with the MQ-4 etc. Those that know why there isn't a MAD, are comfortable with the idea.
Sorry, 37 years in ASW and I can't think of a single 'comfortable' idea! Autolocus, yes, that was a suspicious premise on day one of my first OCU. The Indians have deemed that MAD is necessary, 'Those that know'. what a wonderful phrase that is, it assumes that any contrary view is null and void, not worth looking at. I can't go into my background, but I'm really getting hacked off with people who should know better. I can understand if you've taken 'the company $', but please, leave the rest of the Kipper Fleet out of your justifications.
Surplus is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2019, 13:05
  #200 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 6,327
Received 117 Likes on 69 Posts
"MAD on the P8, why have the Indians got it?"

Perhaps because they have different challenges to the RAF in the N Atlantic - their "targets" are (maybe) afew, noisy, Chinese SSN's and whatever Pakistan, Iran and Burma have as submarines.

Slightly different from the challenge faced by the UK I'd have thought
Asturias56 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.