Not sure why an MPA also needs to be AT/AAR.

Duncs:ok:

Take it this is about all we have now.

http://i536.photobucket.com/albums/f...lortony/r5.jpg

e.g. expand range for SAR operations, move fuel between MPA, support e.g. strike aircraft.

It's a big machine with big fuel tanks. The days of a tanker is a tanker, a transport a transport and a MPA a MPA are probably gone.

http://www.verticalmag.com/control/n...les/6954-2.jpg

If the dutch MPA's would have had the above capabilities, being smalller /cheaper, having operational flexibility instead of stubborn sticking to cold war ASW, the squadron probably would have still existed.

Italian Navy moving to ATR platform for coastal and Med ASW/patrol work as is Turkey.

well if plans for RAF come to fruition there will be a load of C130J airframes surplus to requirement when A400M comes in could they be converted?
Or Some Surplus P3 Orions?

You mean like these?

keesje,

Showing a picture of a C130 tanking a Merlin still doesn't explain to me why an MPA should be AT/AAR.

As for using the ISTAR asset to refuel to attack package, I think that you may have forgotten what ASuW (or tanking for that matter) involves.

Duncs:ok:

Duncan,

I think the past 10 years showed that sticking to old assumptions, mission profiles and capabilities, as the RAF and MLD did for their fixed wing aircraft, proved the wrong idea. We should learn from our mistakes.

I think the RAF has to open up, start with a blank sheet of paper and draw up & check the requirements for the next 40 years. And they probably don't look like the past 40 years.

Flexibility is the answer in a global environment that proves unstable, ask our ally, Tu-16 pilot Mubarak who had it all sorted out.

keesje,

I agree: flexibility is the key to airpower. I'm just not convinced that a 'jack of all trades; master of none' aircraft is the answer.

Duncs:ok:

All this speculation about what we ough to have as a dedicated MPA platform is pointless. Given the way the whole RAF is being sliced up there won't be anything left in 10 years' time.:yuk::yuk:

All the best lessons of history are being lost and we'll never be able to afford to get back even a fraction of the capabilities we once had. Crass decision-making by our lords and masters have left this country woefully exposed at a time of increasing international instability, in places which we ignore at our peril.

Bases we once had will never re-open and the rhetoric of "cutting the tail, to sharpen the teeth" has been pretty hollow for years. :ugh:

I dispair.......


MB

NURSE,

I seem to remember one of the original bids for the MR2 replacement was based on the re-use of "surplus" P-3 Orions. That bid didn't win, so presumably it wasn't the cheapest.

If you take a "surplus" P-3 then you are probably going to have to re-engine it, gut the interior, put in new avionics, etc. Didn't we try to re-use an old airframe for the maritime role recently? How did that work out again?




Thunderbird 7,

You need to be careful posting a link like that. Before you know it some armchair pprune CAS/CDS/procurer will be talking about getting some "cheap", "surplus" F-4 airframes, shoving some "cheap" modern avionics in them and using them to replace Tornado/Typhoon/F-35/etc as a money saving measure. Thankfully that will be on a different thread to this one though!



Edited to add:

NURSE,

I forgot to reply to your comment regarding the use of "spare" C-130J frames once A400M arrives. If you read the comments made by the AT guys regarding the C-130J you will see that it is eating up fatigue at a rapid rate of knots on Ops (wind centre boxes are I believe the area suffering most) and they will generally be as knackered as a knackered thing when the A400M eventually arrives (later than the planning date currently being used no doubt!).

I think the time of the flying battle ships Orions, Atlantics Nimrods is gone.

Lean & mean is the future.

I remember looking at the internal navigation package of P3C, with all the gyro's etc. In the cockpit there was also a little handheld GPS device. Comparing the costs was useless, guess which one was by far more accurate and reliable (everything was still connected to the big one though) . Same for the big central processing units.

Future processing and interpretation will be automated further and done by specialists in well equipped ground stations (or at home, or wherever they are...), looking over the shoulder of the crew & giving / discussing their inputs). Merging it with all other info from many other sources.

"I think the time of the flying battle ships Orions, Atlantics Nimrods is gone."

I think not.

Boeing: P-8A Poseidon Home

Duncs:ok:

Don't know what to make of this. Possibly a bit of out of the box thinking might get an MPA for the future.

RN MPA. A New Dawn In Defence Procurement? | Dan Entwisle's Blog

What we really needed was the Export Version


http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/e...g?t=1299689140

“The Royal Navy is looking to buy a fleet of maritime patrol aircraft for up to £1 billion just weeks after the MoD scrapped the new Nimrod aircraft at a cost of £3.6 billion”.

Well, that is an interesting and novel idea! The Navy taking over the task of patrolling the oceans from the air! Dare I suggest that there is more than a smidgen of logic and practical common sense in the proposal? For that reason alone it is probably doomed and we can look forward to the next suggestion that the RAF should take over operation of the aircraft carriers.

Bets on the P8 anyone?

That's the funniest thing I've seen in years :D:D:D:D

Like the A330 MRTT, A400M, F22 and F16?