RAF Poseidon - Not too long to wait?

[Rhino power]

Originally Posted by Mil-26Man

A C-17 with a probe? That's news to me - you have a link or an image of that?

I suspect Davef68 is referring to the fact that the RAF's E-3s have both a probe and receptacle, not that any of the C-17s had a probe...

-RP

[cashash]

Originally Posted by pr00ne

cessnapete,

The RAF Nimrod MR force managed perfectly well with no AAR capability up until 1982 when it had to go a little further south. How often does a MR aircraft need to refuel in mid air?

Yes, but we had around 35 MR2 airframes in 5 Squadrons compared with just the 9 airframes of the Poseidon. So if you want to keep a permanent watch on station during a heightened alert then you are quickly going to run out of aircraft if you cannot do AAR. Out of 9 airframes you will probably lose at least 3 to serviceability issues and scheduled maintenance.

[aw ditor]

This is a 737-800 ish' Airframe and Engines combo. As long as the engineers don't keep pulling it apart to see if it is working' OK , should attain almost airline servicebility'.

[Lonewolf_50]

Originally Posted by Lyneham Lad

On Flight Global.

US Navy plans to arm P-8A with cruise missiles, bombs, sea mines and decoys

Article intro:-

They decided to hang Harpoons on P-3s in the 80's, so why not hang a missile or two on the next MPA aircraft?
Seems a rational option to want to have.

NAVAIR is also interested in outfitting the maritime patrol aircraft with 500lb to 2,000lb-class bombs fitted with Joint Direct Attack Munition guidance kits, Mk62/63/65 Quickstrike sea mines, Raytheon’s gliding Small Diameter Bomb, as well as Miniature Air Launched Decoys, according to a notice posted online 28 January.

And why not? It is a war plane.

[SASless]

Russian Sub activity in the Atlantic on the increase?

East Coast USA no longer a safe haven for US Ships and Subs due to new Russian capabilities?

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...o-russian-subs

[Asturias56]

How many active Subs do the Russians have?

The last numbers I saw were 12 SSBN's - but only 3 of those are post 1985 & around 16 SSN/SSGN - only 1 of which is post 1986 & 21 SSK only one of which is a post 1981 boat

They have 4 SSBN & 4 SSN on order - these are delivered spasmodically and spend a long time working up

They are spread across the Atlantic and the Pacific navies

Hardly a vast fleet knocking on the door TBH

[golder]

Originally Posted by cessnapete

So the RAF Voyager cannot refuel an RAF P8? So who refuels it on a mission if required?

They would contract it out. Anyway, even if it could. You only have Voyager every other Tuesday, as it off doing private work. Your decision makers are so clever.

[golder]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

How many active Subs do the Russians have?

The last numbers I saw were 12 SSBN's - but only 3 of those are post 1985 & around 16 SSN/SSGN - only 1 of which is post 1986 & 21 SSK only one of which is a post 1981 boat

They have 4 SSBN & 4 SSN on order - these are delivered spasmodically and spend a long time working up

They are spread across the Atlantic and the Pacific navies

Hardly a vast fleet knocking on the door TBH

A few nations aren't Russian centric. They have the economy of Italy. What they do have is the corrupt practice with western corps and politicians. That magnifies their power.. Trump isn't the only one they own.

[Timelord]

Originally Posted by golder

They would contract it out. Anyway, even if it could. You only have Voyager every other Tuesday, as it off doing private work. Your decision makers are so clever.

I am no great fan of the PFI model either, but that is not quite how it works!

[golder]

Originally Posted by Timelord

I am no great fan of the PFI model either, but that is not quite how it works!

Aussies are clever too. We sold Omega our B707's, contracting them to refuel us.

[Capt Kremmen]

Does this 'new' Boeing machine have to be MCAS enabled ?

[AnglianAV8R]

Originally Posted by Capt Kremmen

Does this 'new' Boeing machine have to be MCAS enabled ?

No MCAS in this model, according to earlier discussions here.

[Capt Kremmen]

Anglian. Thank you.

[Captain Radar....]

Great to see our MPRA capability coming back to life. Bit ironic but fitting that Kinloss welcomed it home. Best wishes CXX, I'm sure AAR is fairly low on your list of priorities!

[Mil-26Man]

I'm sure AAR is fairly low on your list of priorities!

Indeed, because they don't have it. If they had it, imagine it would be a bit further up the list.

[Timelord]

Originally Posted by Mil-26Man

Indeed, because they don't have it. If they had it, imagine it would be a bit further up the list.

Good question actually. Are the crews trained in boom AAR?

[flighthappens]

Originally Posted by golder

Aussies are clever too. We sold Omega our B707's, contracting them to refuel us.

FWIU a lot was paid for in penalty clauses by EADS because of late MRTT delivery.

[Davef68]

Originally Posted by Rhino power

I suspect Davef68 is referring to the fact that the RAF's E-3s have both a probe and receptacle, not that any of the C-17s had a probe...

-RP

Indeed, all for a lack of a parenthesis!!

[Door Slider]

They would contract it out. Anyway, even if it could. You only have Voyager every other Tuesday, as it off doing private work. Your decision makers are so clever.

you clearly have absolutely no idea about the RAF AAR capability/tasking/availability and actually how the PFI works

[cashash]

Originally Posted by aw ditor

This is a 737-800 ish' Airframe and Engines combo. As long as the engineers don't keep pulling it apart to see if it is working' OK , should attain almost airline servicebility'.

To get airline levels of serviceability would require airline levels of spares availability - in my experience (9 years) the RAF that we all know and love is never going to have this. Only having 9 airframes also leads to another related issue, you will not have any spare airframes. to rob for spares.

Of course this is all moot if there is never a requirement for long-term remaining on station, so hopefully we will be OK or at least be in a situation where the Yanks could assist.