MPA announced 2015?
 

I realise the whole MPA thing has been overdosed on here but after the recent Defence Committee report on 5th Sep 12 does anyone think we can go much longer without one?

Refurbished P-3's? The impressive P-8? CN-295? or even Saab's venture into MPA land?

All hypothetical I know but surely something has to happen...One thing is for sure, it will be all about the money!

Buy a job lot of 737 from different airlines and companies and mod them up?

We could have a Mk 1, Mk 2 and a Mk 4 all in one go. Some could be in full MPA rig, some could be part MPA/Pax and some could be Freight. After all the Mk 1 Nimrod was originally an MPA/AT, 46 pax wasn't it?

Impressive P8? Really? I've seen the console demonstrators and it's a big step backwards from current platforms.

Can just imagine the line at Waddo or wherever with the crews fighting for the 737-800 over the old Britannia 737-300...."you had the 800 last time, that's not fair"!

In what way is the P-8 a step back? genuine question

It is a step back from all of those current MPA options in service for the UK:E

That O'Leary fellow might be interested in a buy and lease back option.

FLYGA

1. The RADAR. (Similar to the old death ray)

2. Operating altitude: Yes, it can go low level, but a lot of mention is being made of High Level ASUW and ASW with all the baggage that brings.

3. A different variant, the P8 AGS will be needed to do overland ISR.

4. No MAD

quote from AOL Defence:

The crews that saw it were unimpressed.

FINNPOG

I never said MPA options in service for the UK, I said current platforms.

The problem is always going to be money.
Having seen the house of commons fighting over Europe/aid/ and all things financial, defence will be the last thought on their minds.

MPA is important but unless the UK looks at other options they can afford, nothing will happen. The RAF needs to be able to justify 'bang for buck' and with the inter service infighting (to protect pet projects) which always happens when the purse strings are tightened their request must demonstrate cost against capability to stand out from the crowd.

The RAF could have a capable MPA, (maybe not the best) able to perform the role that is required and deal with current or potential threats whilst possessing the ability to expand its capabilities at a future date.

The UK already owns C130J aircraft,Lockeed have produced a good quality roll on roll off MPA package.This option could get the UK back in the air and provide a credible MPA capability at low cost. 4 kits would be cheaper than a P8 and readily available.

Everyone would like P8s, they are an outstanding aircraft but right now in the current political climate, they're too expensive to justify.

Well, how about Nimrod MRA4 - already paid for, and with only annual running costs to come, Oh, sorry....

From this weeks Northern Scot:

Sir,

I refer to the recently published report by the House of Commons Defence Committee on Future Maritime Surveillance.

It is a great pity that more attention was not paid to my letter, written to the Prime Minister at the time of SDSR, and before the Nimrod force was disbanded and Nimrod MRA4 destroyed at huge cost to the tax payer.

The lack of foresight and support from the upper echelons of the Royal Air Force was, and is also highly regrettable. The re-introduction of a manned Maritime Patrol Aircraft to protect our national interests should now be our number one defence priority.

and sent post SDSR:

Dear Mr Cameron,

I apologise for the open nature of this letter, but time is of the essence and the subject too important to allow for the luxury of private correspondence.

I refer to the cancellation of Nimrod MRA4 and the closure of Royal Air Force Kinloss to flying operations. The effect of this decision on local jobs, businesses and on the economy of Moray has been well aired, and rightly so. Of even greater concern to me and my family (despite the probable loss of my own job) is the effect this decision will have on the security and well being of the United Kingdom.

We are an island nation with the sea lanes still our main source of supply and trade. We are a nation active in world politics with ambitions for the future and a long history which has not endeared us to all members of a very mobile world population. In these days of international terrorism, drug running and our reliance on an underwater nuclear deterrent, it is utter folly to end our maritime patrol aircraft (MPA) capability.

We must have an airborne capability, even in these times of financial restraint. The need for long range reconnaissance, anti-submarine operations and a search and rescue capability has barely diminished, and the need for electronic and optical surveillance and intelligence gathering has increased to meet modern threats.

Why on earth then, have we cancelled Nimrod MRA4? Being late and over budget does not equate to being no good, and to summarily cancel without reference to current capability and future potential is unacceptable. MRA4 is a platform with 15 hours unrefueled flight duration, a 2,000 plus mile radius of action, 13 weapon hard points, radar range of 250 miles, is search and rescue capable, has advanced communications, superior electro optics for surface intelligence gathering and has very capable underwater detection systems. All integrated, working and demonstrated – AND ALREADY PAID FOR. At Royal Air Force Kinloss the training and support infrastructure is already in place and to disband such established facilities that support a very capable MPA is unforgiveable.

Unless this decision is reversed, people will die – as a result of unresolved search and rescue incidents, undetected drug and terrorist imports and missed intelligence. Our nuclear deterrent will be less secure and possibly rendered useless putting our whole nation at risk.

Mr Cameron, please hear these points from someone who has over 30 years military experience both within industry and the RAF. I have 5,000 flying hours as both Navigator and Pilot plus 5,000 hours of instructional experience in the Nimrod flight simulator. Approaching retirement, I have no axe to grind other than the well being of future generations, and of my country.

You say we cannot afford a maritime patrol aircraft capability. Prime Minister, the Nation cannot afford to be without.

Yours sincerely,


Hanfimar.

Has that letter been sitting in the in-tray for months awaiting a quiet news day?

It is in the present tense or near past when we all know that the dust has settled and the scrap merchants made a killing.

I doubt anyone in a position of power is thinking of replacing half the supposed capabilities of the never delivered MR4

Given that the Russian Navy is a shadow of its former self that is understandable - we really don't require the capacity to chase SSBN's any more

A cheapish replacement for patrolling the country's Marine Economic Zone is what is required - off the shelf (i.e keep BAe away from it at all costs), cheap to run - some refurbed P-3's would be ideal but I suspect it'll be a small buy of P-8's with the maintenance outsourced to a UK commercial operator

There s a very good reason why P8 doesn't have a Magnetic Anomaly Detector (MAD) Boom - they don't need one! There are lots of more modern detction and remote sensing techniques that have been developed since MAD (I could tell you but then I'd have to kill you).

The outdated, overpriced and overdue MRA4 is dead - get over it.

Now, the idea of using the C130Js when the also overdue and overpriced A400M comes into service - now that is a cracking idea. In fact with more defence cuts looming in 2015's SDSR it might be the only 'good news' story that can be spun for the RAF.

LJ

Harry, much of your post is wrong. I'm affraid you will just have to take my word on that.

What LJ said ^^^^ :D:D

Plus, whilst we're at it. Don't put any new MPA up in the back end of beyond in Moray. If the quote from Hanfimar that people will die from lack of SAR and drug/firearms running - then put the new aircraft in the middle of the UK so they can reach all of our sea borders with equal reaction time.

Also, using the C130J we could set up the use of Reservist aircrew to man the capability - never deployed but just looking after home interests. That would save a load of money.

CPL Clott

Ivan, you said it more eloquently that I.

Chaps, the C130J and A400 ideas are nothing more than concepts. Every future project I have seen promises the earth within budget, in reality they rarely, if ever produce the promised capabilities on time or in budget.

The cost isn't just in the airframes; you need a huge support train for a multi-sensor aircraft on top of the existing airframe support contracts. For C130J that would be, maintaining an ageing airframe (with probable legacy issues already) to operate in a low level maritime environment (fatigue and corrosion?), plus this miracle plug in pallet solution which will be massively harder to develop and maintain than the picture of a box on the concept drawing. Don't forget the crews need training and practice so you need mission simulators, as the airframes will hardly ever be available. All for a hugely compromised capabilities which would hardly ever be available, and not at the same time you require AT (like in a conflict perhaps?)

Haven't we learnt the false economy of recycling our airframes, and the massive issues it causes? Swiss army knife solutions normally end up as declared capabilities sat in the corner of a hangar that the engineers and aircrew know don’t work properly if at all.

Off the shelf developed hardware with future potential that is already being operated by others is the only sensible option, the only question is what is our requirement? If it remains high end ASW then P-3 or P-8 are the only sensible solutions.

We will be able to fit 8 – 10 at Waddington when the E-3D is cancelled next year and we join the NATO E-3 pool and forward base them :} (now that would save money, where is that GEMS form!)

PN, thanks. That's the first time anyone has accused me of being eloquent ;)

Have to agree with all in the letter and understandable why people are still annoyed and even in shock regarding such a folly decision by those in power.

But time has moved on hence the debate about what comes next. From has been documented and reading between the lines of the DC report an MPA must happen; it is a case of what do we need it to do?, how much? and when do we need it (now!)? P-8 seems logical with the UK input stateside but could we ever sustain such costs? C130J seems logical but they suffer massively from reliability issues, which leaves ;off-the-shelf alternatives. CN-295, SAAB 2000 may be more realistic??? So many more questions than answers but I think everyone agrees the need...

We can afford P-8 if we loose a platform. Therefore Tornado with an out of service date of 2019 would seem a good candidate for early retirement post Afghanistan.

Base in the centre(ish) of the UK? ISTR the Neptunes (P2s') were based at Topcliffe.>