MPA and Japan
 

Can remember taking a Nimrod Mr1 to the Tokyo airshow in 1973 when BAe were trying to sell the Nimrod to the Japanese.

Sad to note during the recent Air Asia search, that even Indonesia has a couple of well equipped MPA, while we have zero and reduced to begging from allies :-(

Indonesian Navy receives first CN-235 maritime patrol aircraft from PTDI - Naval Technology

The Borrowers in action again. When will this farce never end.

Ministry of Defence forced to ask American for help in search for Russian submarine | Daily Mail Online

middlesbrough - that was also the reason for our visit in '99. This time it was an attempt to flog them the MR2. How the worm has turned.

KenV - I'm not talking about A-kit. I'm talking about the 19-foot-longer body and having to cut a hole in the rear fuselage for the weapon bay, rather than the front. When the design switched (pre-source-selection) from the 700 to the 800, Boeing stated that it was in order to meet a then-classified Navy requirement, which was AAS.

Speaking of worms turning, a former colleague of mine had a promo model of an MRA4 in USN markings on his shelf. As Ian Dury put it, "the hope that springs eternal/springs right up your behind".

I remember that when the Nimrod in Japan broke, that the duty crew on 201 took another over there to replace it, and got lost over the Aleutians, landing at Shemya, much to everyone's' embarrassment.

MPA and Japan
 

AM - In fact it was a 120 Sqn crew, captain Gordon Acklam with myself as third (relief) pilot that flew the replacement MR1 over the N.pole (just when you need an underfloor warning!). The landing at Shemya was necessary due to minor nav. difficulties and stronger than forecast headwinds. The guy giving the radar talk-down couldn't have been more welcoming, but we were met by the base commander who less than politely requested we would remove ourselves from his airfield within 30 minutes... We nearly made it.

Aaaah. Yes, the bomb bay was moved aft. And yes, the basic fuselage changed from a -700 to -800. But both were not due exclusively to the AAS. There were LOTS of changes to the aircraft during the pre-proposal and proposal stages. Some of it was due to Navy desires not expressly stated in the RFI and later RFP, and some of it was to counter Lockheed's Orion 21 proposal which was WAY more capable than the P-3.

IIRC the navigation difficulties related to the cheap IN grid navigation over the top.

You may remember PN that we were doing grid nav (including 15 min interval sun shots) in the early 60s waaaaaaay up North, and not in straight lines either! That was in Valiants with 5xx sqn and we never got lost - well, only slightly just once. By the way IN hadn't been invented then.

hanfimar
 

Thank you for correcting Alan Mills post, have sent you an email.

Cancel Trident
 

I think that will be a more likely solution because the Govt. will kill 2 birds with one stone. No requirement to pay for Trident any more (and source a replacement) and (b) no requirement to pay for the protection of Trident such as MPA and other escort submarines.
You can laugh but I actually think its more likely than the RAF ever getting what it wants or needs.
We have declined and will continue to within this century. Other nations are on the rise, we are being forced to accept it.

It appears the press are finally catching up with things

MoD forced to ask US for help in tracking 'Russian submarine' - Telegraph

The Government aren't embarrassed about it though, are they? That's the point, they don't care, probably upon the basis that not enough voting people do either.
The hot UK story is the state of the National Health Service, another institute that is under pressure and possible privatisation. Election issue, verily.
The hot international story is the on-going terror situation in France (which will link into police and security service spending/budgets. Election issue less likely but possible.
Many people who probably do care about this MPA story, like me, probably think its time to call it a day with our nuclear defence capability, on the basis we are no longer a world power and we should reflect upon this.
And we are stoney broke.

On what basis could possibly conceive this? What is your justification for saying this? Is it based on our economic power? Our position as a nuclear power? Our position on the UNSC? Our position as one of the largest net contributors to the EU? Our position as one of the main players in NATO? Our ability to commit our Armed Forces for military and humanitarian tasks - globally? I'm intrigued!!:ugh:

"Our ability to commit our Armed Forces for military and humanitarian tasks - globally?"

really????? in what numbers????

we WERE a Great Power up to around 1945 - since then its been a steady slide

To be blunt we don't work hard enough

the workers & the unions wanted as much as possible with the minimal amount of work or change

the bosses worked a 4 day week max and if they were successful sold out as soon as possible to buy a place in the country

You've missed Afghanistan, Philippines, Mali, Libya, UAE, Oman, Sudan, Iraq etc etc then? :rolleyes:

Pontiflex, aye but you were trained. I was pax on the VC 10 that became temporarily uncertain of its position as the single nav practised his grid techniques.

Please stop the thread !
 

The govenment now knows that it it has been painted into a corner by the changing international situation and the only answer to the problem...... It is built by Boeing.

I am sure that the U.S. navy would give up a few positions on the production line.

So all we need is those in Westminster to sign the cheque............ And the UK would no longer have to go begging to NATO when it's sub's are being tracked by the Russians.

The deriliction of the government's duty on the MPA issue is what I would have expected from the Labour Party not the Tory's.

The USN would be glad to slip a few of its deliveries to the right and add a few new stencils for the paint-shop.

"There is no workable alternative" is not a place where you want to be, in the decision-making process. Although you could hope for the best - it turned out OK with the C-130K.