Sentinel R1 to be scrapped next year due to ‘obsolescence’ say MoD
Bloody thing! It is exactly what we needed in the late 70's for BAOR. The concept of a broad area radar ONLY asset is so dated.
It could be used to cue other assets onto a possible target for detailed analysis.
(If Sentinel & Watchkeeper could be made to work). But on its own it was always limited in it's ability.
It was kept alive by an effective Int Corps publicity machine and the mantra of 'Jointery'.
Did they ever find those missing Algerian Schoolgirls with it?
It would have been interesting to see the jet fitted with the ex Canberra RADIOS sensor.
But that was never going to happen. The weight issue alone was always a limiting factor with the Sentinel too. .. ...
We will be better off with Wedgtail.
It could be used to cue other assets onto a possible target for detailed analysis.
(If Sentinel & Watchkeeper could be made to work). But on its own it was always limited in it's ability.
It was kept alive by an effective Int Corps publicity machine and the mantra of 'Jointery'.
Did they ever find those missing Algerian Schoolgirls with it?
It would have been interesting to see the jet fitted with the ex Canberra RADIOS sensor.
But that was never going to happen. The weight issue alone was always a limiting factor with the Sentinel too. .. ...
We will be better off with Wedgtail.
A single use SAR MTI asset nowadays is slightly outdated but Sentinel has done exactly what was required of it, in multiple theatres, both as an asset in its own right and as a force multiplier.
On several occasions it was the asset of choice. In Nigeria for example.
Yes, having a persistent asset such as Protector with multiple sensors with the latest technology, in addition to being able to be upgraded, makes Sentinel less of a priority.
Evalu8ter,
Not an odd comment at all, it is a standard Tory practice, witness the premature retirement of the Vulcan ahead of the Tornado introduction, the early disbandment of the Canberra PR squadrons ahead of the introduction of the Tornado GR1A, the halving of 8 Squadrons complement well ahead of the E-3 introduction, and the supreme example of the art in Cameron's retirement of the Harrier and the carriers a decade ahead of the introduction of their replacements, all announced as deliberate 'capability windows'.
I agree with you re the 737 commonality of the P-8 and E-7, perhaps they could take it a stage further and buy/lease BBJ as a replacement for the 146's?
As to austerity, I think we are going to have to agree to disagree about that now much maligned policy!
HAS59,
I do agree with you about use of money and resources, but ELINT? Surely that is the role of 51 Sqn and their highly specialised assets, with some help from 14 Squadron and the Defender R2's now that they are RAF. The E-7 is a direct E-3D Sentry AEW1 replacement in SAEW, or AWACS or ASACS as the role now seems to be called.
The Reaper/Protector may well go a long way to providing a replacement capability, just as long as the RAF makes sure that it also buys the sensors, they do have history here!
Not an odd comment at all, it is a standard Tory practice, witness the premature retirement of the Vulcan ahead of the Tornado introduction, the early disbandment of the Canberra PR squadrons ahead of the introduction of the Tornado GR1A, the halving of 8 Squadrons complement well ahead of the E-3 introduction, and the supreme example of the art in Cameron's retirement of the Harrier and the carriers a decade ahead of the introduction of their replacements, all announced as deliberate 'capability windows'.
I agree with you re the 737 commonality of the P-8 and E-7, perhaps they could take it a stage further and buy/lease BBJ as a replacement for the 146's?
As to austerity, I think we are going to have to agree to disagree about that now much maligned policy!
HAS59,
I do agree with you about use of money and resources, but ELINT? Surely that is the role of 51 Sqn and their highly specialised assets, with some help from 14 Squadron and the Defender R2's now that they are RAF. The E-7 is a direct E-3D Sentry AEW1 replacement in SAEW, or AWACS or ASACS as the role now seems to be called.
The Reaper/Protector may well go a long way to providing a replacement capability, just as long as the RAF makes sure that it also buys the sensors, they do have history here!
Proon,
Re the Vulcan. As many of the pilots/navs were going to transfer to the GR1, perhaps they had to reduce the Vulcan fleet to free up crews? Other examples are perhaps minor compared to Labour’s gross fiscal / industrial incompetence in the mid 60s which forced the ‘nothing East of Suez’ mantra, mass cancellations and a whole raft of capability gaps/holidays which left the UK barely able to fight OOA in 1982. The Harrier / carrier decision in SDR10 was an ‘enforced’ gap caused by? Oh yes, more fiscal incompetence and political cowardice from Labour - the original plan was to run on both till QEC IOC to maintain skills. SDSR10 had to make tough and unpopular decisions due to the mess the EP and SP were in as Labour simply kept spending money they didn’t have between 2008-10. The Tories happily carved out a Peace Dividend in the early 90s, but I’m sure you would have supported that? We’ll agree to disagree over the merits or otherwise of Austerity; but I’m convinced it provided more headroom to cope with the current crisis than we would have had if we’d had another decade of Labour profligacy.....anyway, G&T anyone?
Re the Vulcan. As many of the pilots/navs were going to transfer to the GR1, perhaps they had to reduce the Vulcan fleet to free up crews? Other examples are perhaps minor compared to Labour’s gross fiscal / industrial incompetence in the mid 60s which forced the ‘nothing East of Suez’ mantra, mass cancellations and a whole raft of capability gaps/holidays which left the UK barely able to fight OOA in 1982. The Harrier / carrier decision in SDR10 was an ‘enforced’ gap caused by? Oh yes, more fiscal incompetence and political cowardice from Labour - the original plan was to run on both till QEC IOC to maintain skills. SDSR10 had to make tough and unpopular decisions due to the mess the EP and SP were in as Labour simply kept spending money they didn’t have between 2008-10. The Tories happily carved out a Peace Dividend in the early 90s, but I’m sure you would have supported that? We’ll agree to disagree over the merits or otherwise of Austerity; but I’m convinced it provided more headroom to cope with the current crisis than we would have had if we’d had another decade of Labour profligacy.....anyway, G&T anyone?
Not a hope. Much cheaper to buy a second hand Global Express.
On capability gaps, the MQ-9 Reaper and the MQ-9B Protector can offer both Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) and Ground Moving Target Indication (GMTI) with its Lynx multimode radar. Here is some info: https://www.ga-asi.com/lynx-multi-mode-radar
Now the Lynx is not as powerful as the Sentinel’s radar, but there are many more Protectors on order than we have Sentinels - so in this case quantity gives a quality better than before. Further the fidelity of the data from Protector is superior as it is closer to the area being surveilled. It can also deliver product beyond line of sight - indeed from anywhere on the planet with the right satellite coverage and bandwidth (which there is).
So the RAF retains a SAR/GMTI capability with the 20+ Protectors on order. So all is not lost when it comes to capability - the Reapers already being flown offer that capability now, but in smaller numbers.
Now the Lynx is not as powerful as the Sentinel’s radar, but there are many more Protectors on order than we have Sentinels - so in this case quantity gives a quality better than before. Further the fidelity of the data from Protector is superior as it is closer to the area being surveilled. It can also deliver product beyond line of sight - indeed from anywhere on the planet with the right satellite coverage and bandwidth (which there is).
So the RAF retains a SAR/GMTI capability with the 20+ Protectors on order. So all is not lost when it comes to capability - the Reapers already being flown offer that capability now, but in smaller numbers.
What Protector lacks is the ability to look at large areas in the same way as Sentinel - even with 20 of them! I note in the manufacturers blurb, it quotes a 'long range' of 80km.....thats almost 'on top'!
I enjoyed teasing the IPT during the development phase on their traffic lights for, amongst other things, hitting ISD. It was 'green', of course. I asked what the confidence level was: "50%" came the reply. "So, it's actually red" says I. IPTL: "No, it's green!" Me: "That's red." Him: "No, it's green!" Me: "But at 50% it could be green or red, both would be right." Him: "Errrr…" Me: "Shall we call it Amber?" Him: "OK..."
50% confidence was indeed hopelessly wide of the mark, and the main processors had been specified using a standard that was obsolete before the printer ink had dried, which caused further delays. Still, it will be a shame to see it go. And trying to turn the 5 Sqn hangar back into something the Reds can use will probably cost enough to have funded the upgrade in the first place.
50% confidence was indeed hopelessly wide of the mark, and the main processors had been specified using a standard that was obsolete before the printer ink had dried, which caused further delays. Still, it will be a shame to see it go. And trying to turn the 5 Sqn hangar back into something the Reds can use will probably cost enough to have funded the upgrade in the first place.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: uk
Age: 50
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I enjoyed teasing the IPT during the development phase on their traffic lights for, amongst other things, hitting ISD. It was 'green', of course. I asked what the confidence level was: "50%" came the reply. "So, it's actually red" says I. IPTL: "No, it's green!" Me: "That's red." Him: "No, it's green!" Me: "But at 50% it could be green or red, both would be right." Him: "Errrr…" Me: "Shall we call it Amber?" Him: "OK..."
50% confidence was indeed hopelessly wide of the mark, and the main processors had been specified using a standard that was obsolete before the printer ink had dried, which caused further delays. Still, it will be a shame to see it go. And trying to turn the 5 Sqn hangar back into something the Reds can use will probably cost enough to have funded the upgrade in the first place.
50% confidence was indeed hopelessly wide of the mark, and the main processors had been specified using a standard that was obsolete before the printer ink had dried, which caused further delays. Still, it will be a shame to see it go. And trying to turn the 5 Sqn hangar back into something the Reds can use will probably cost enough to have funded the upgrade in the first place.
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Lincs
Age: 55
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One these up today and having flown a hexagon pattern around East Anglia then moved onto a race track pattern over Manchester producing a slightly phallic result!
Is the intention still to retire the Beechcraft Shadow aircraft next year as well?
Is the intention still to retire the Beechcraft Shadow aircraft next year as well?
As a Raytheon employee at Waddington this will result in my redundancy and around 100 of my colleagues. Whilst I am sad this is the case I think most of us are not shocked! The Sentinel has been constantly deployed on Ops for the last 12 years and over that time has been underfunded hence the obsolescence . The Airframes are good for another 15 years so I wouldn't be surprised if they get sold on, upgraded and carry on flying. Oh well time to dust off that CV
Brewster Buffalo,
"Is the intention still to retire the Beechcraft Shadow aircraft next year as well?"
Nope. They are being upgraded to R2 standard, and the fleet is being expanded by turning the trainer a/c into an operational machine and acquiring two more.
"Is the intention still to retire the Beechcraft Shadow aircraft next year as well?"
Nope. They are being upgraded to R2 standard, and the fleet is being expanded by turning the trainer a/c into an operational machine and acquiring two more.
Proon,
Re the Vulcan. As many of the pilots/navs were going to transfer to the GR1, perhaps they had to reduce the Vulcan fleet to free up crews? Other examples are perhaps minor compared to Labour’s gross fiscal / industrial incompetence in the mid 60s which forced the ‘nothing East of Suez’ mantra, mass cancellations and a whole raft of capability gaps/holidays which left the UK barely able to fight OOA in 1982. The Harrier / carrier decision in SDR10 was an ‘enforced’ gap caused by? Oh yes, more fiscal incompetence and political cowardice from Labour - the original plan was to run on both till QEC IOC to maintain skills. SDSR10 had to make tough and unpopular decisions due to the mess the EP and SP were in as Labour simply kept spending money they didn’t have between 2008-10. The Tories happily carved out a Peace Dividend in the early 90s, but I’m sure you would have supported that? We’ll agree to disagree over the merits or otherwise of Austerity; but I’m convinced it provided more headroom to cope with the current crisis than we would have had if we’d had another decade of Labour profligacy.....anyway, G&T anyone?
Re the Vulcan. As many of the pilots/navs were going to transfer to the GR1, perhaps they had to reduce the Vulcan fleet to free up crews? Other examples are perhaps minor compared to Labour’s gross fiscal / industrial incompetence in the mid 60s which forced the ‘nothing East of Suez’ mantra, mass cancellations and a whole raft of capability gaps/holidays which left the UK barely able to fight OOA in 1982. The Harrier / carrier decision in SDR10 was an ‘enforced’ gap caused by? Oh yes, more fiscal incompetence and political cowardice from Labour - the original plan was to run on both till QEC IOC to maintain skills. SDSR10 had to make tough and unpopular decisions due to the mess the EP and SP were in as Labour simply kept spending money they didn’t have between 2008-10. The Tories happily carved out a Peace Dividend in the early 90s, but I’m sure you would have supported that? We’ll agree to disagree over the merits or otherwise of Austerity; but I’m convinced it provided more headroom to cope with the current crisis than we would have had if we’d had another decade of Labour profligacy.....anyway, G&T anyone?
Prefer a nice glass of crisp sparkling white if you have it?
That may have been a consequence of the early Vulcan and Canberra withdrawals but it certainly was not the reason, that was purely financial. I knew some of the aircrew of the time and they were all rather long in the tooth to be heading towards Tornado, though some of course will have gone that way. Totally disagree about the other examples being minor in comparison, and TOTALLY disagree with your weird recollection of the mid 60's! The 1964 Labour Govt inherited a broken and devastated economy from the Tories, it was the origin of the "there's no money" note left for the incoming Chancellor. Wilson and Healey both wanted to retain a presence in the Far East but subsequent devaluation and runs on the £ led to the decision to withdraw, and as for the cancellations of 64/65 they would have happened which ever Govt was in power. TSR2 was unaffordable, didn't work and was an outdated concept, and P1154 and HS681 simply would not have worked! I may surprise you but I most certainly would NOT have supported the Tory Peace dividend as it was obvious that the UK armed forces were going to be used a lot, an awful lot, and we needed the numbers and capabilities squandered by Rifkind in 1992 as a financial saving. Oh, and the 2008 financial crisis was caused by US sub prime mortgages and complicated debt packages in the financial sector world wide, NOT the Labour Government, in fact to the contrary it was the leadership and innovative and rapid moves by Gordon Brown which showed the rest of the world the way out of the crisis. I thought he was a lousy PM and a bad leader, but he DID get that right.
If [go on, laugh] capability gaps were allowed after intelligence-based risk assessments [more laughter] then we might have to admit that no great harm came from the decisions.
Can't argue with that langleybaston, and Cameron could well make that exact same claim re the Harrier and CVS retirement of 2010. BUT we know that they were financial decisions and NOT intelligence risk based decisions.
I pay a lot of tax each year to be protected, if it is just luck then I want a rebate.
Evalu8ter,
Oh, and the 2008 financial crisis was caused by US sub prime mortgages and complicated debt packages in the financial sector world wide, NOT the Labour Government, in fact to the contrary it was the leadership and innovative and rapid moves by Gordon Brown which showed the rest of the world the way out of the crisis. I thought he was a lousy PM and a bad leader, but he DID get that right.
Oh, and the 2008 financial crisis was caused by US sub prime mortgages and complicated debt packages in the financial sector world wide, NOT the Labour Government, in fact to the contrary it was the leadership and innovative and rapid moves by Gordon Brown which showed the rest of the world the way out of the crisis. I thought he was a lousy PM and a bad leader, but he DID get that right.
Bloody thing! It is exactly what we needed in the late 70's for BAOR. The concept of a broad area radar ONLY asset is so dated.
It could be used to cue other assets onto a possible target for detailed analysis.
(If Sentinel & Watchkeeper could be made to work). But on its own it was always limited in it's ability.
It was kept alive by an effective Int Corps publicity machine and the mantra of 'Jointery'.
Did they ever find those missing Algerian Schoolgirls with it?
It would have been interesting to see the jet fitted with the ex Canberra RADIOS sensor.
But that was never going to happen. The weight issue alone was always a limiting factor with the Sentinel too. .. ...
We will be better off with Wedgtail.
It could be used to cue other assets onto a possible target for detailed analysis.
(If Sentinel & Watchkeeper could be made to work). But on its own it was always limited in it's ability.
It was kept alive by an effective Int Corps publicity machine and the mantra of 'Jointery'.
Did they ever find those missing Algerian Schoolgirls with it?
It would have been interesting to see the jet fitted with the ex Canberra RADIOS sensor.
But that was never going to happen. The weight issue alone was always a limiting factor with the Sentinel too. .. ...
We will be better off with Wedgtail.
Anyhow your ASTOR statement begs the question, during the Cold War, why ddI we have not a small fleet say handful of fixed wing SIGINT / ELiNT for 1 BR Corps keeping an eye on our end of the IGB. USAREUR V and VII Corps had OV-1D Mohawks with SLAR from 60s ,onwards, RU-21 Ute, RC-12D .
Cheers
Hello chopper, yes thank's for the correction, I thought that the Boko Harem kidnapping was further north.
The point I was making was that even with MTI the Sentinel was never going to find them.
Neither, it has to be said did any other air asset. Thankfully some of them survived.
As for ASTOR, I have had a long involvement with it over the decades! I was part of the evaluation team in the late 1970's which looked into the problem and the various types of solution.
The problem was the size of aircraft needed and who would fly it.
The government of the day ruled-out a foreign purchase, so we were left with either the Army solution based on the Islander/Defender,
Or, I am sad to say, the RAF solution which was to be based on the Canberra, but never actually existed.
We did fly some sensors on the RAE Viscount but all the RAF did for years was to hinder progress.
The OV-1D Mohawk would have been the perfect fit - we were banned form looking at it.
Eventually by the mid 80's the US Government made a proposal to sell the RAF the U-2 system with two ground stations, one for 1 BR Corps and the other for RAFG or Strike Command.
The offer was declined on the basis that 'we would go it alone'.
It never happened ... we ended up with the Westinghouse owned kit in an aeroplane which was too small to carry it.
As with all this sort of thing, there is a lot which is sensitive, and personalities played a major part in making things difficult.
It's history - the past - it can't be change and ... the older I get the more often I see the same mistakes being made by successive generations.
Oh well ...
The point I was making was that even with MTI the Sentinel was never going to find them.
Neither, it has to be said did any other air asset. Thankfully some of them survived.
As for ASTOR, I have had a long involvement with it over the decades! I was part of the evaluation team in the late 1970's which looked into the problem and the various types of solution.
The problem was the size of aircraft needed and who would fly it.
The government of the day ruled-out a foreign purchase, so we were left with either the Army solution based on the Islander/Defender,
Or, I am sad to say, the RAF solution which was to be based on the Canberra, but never actually existed.
We did fly some sensors on the RAE Viscount but all the RAF did for years was to hinder progress.
The OV-1D Mohawk would have been the perfect fit - we were banned form looking at it.
Eventually by the mid 80's the US Government made a proposal to sell the RAF the U-2 system with two ground stations, one for 1 BR Corps and the other for RAFG or Strike Command.
The offer was declined on the basis that 'we would go it alone'.
It never happened ... we ended up with the Westinghouse owned kit in an aeroplane which was too small to carry it.
As with all this sort of thing, there is a lot which is sensitive, and personalities played a major part in making things difficult.
It's history - the past - it can't be change and ... the older I get the more often I see the same mistakes being made by successive generations.
Oh well ...
