The P-1 has a 360-degree fixed AESA, I believe. And yes, there are rotating AESAs. The P-8 radar's an interesting, unique solution.

As for AAS and ASuW: 19 feet of fuselage and c. 3,000 lb wing pylons are not going to help with the OEW.

Name a non-mechanically scanned effective MPA ASUW/ASW radar? Some have AESA but still spin, AFAIK there are enough disadvantages to make mechanically scanning still the best option.

Hi LO, very good point on the HPS-106, I still wonder what the 360 deg ASW performance is like. I do accept as T/Rs get smaller/lighter/cheaper/power efficient/etc. that electronic scan will become the norm, but think it will be 15 to 20 years before they are as effective as mechanically scanned systems.

I consider the AAS (and extra cabin space) and ASuW kit on the P-8 to be a massive advantage given the capability it gives the platform, well worth the airframe compromise. The P-1 has 8 external hardpoints, a fixed 30 buoy launcher in the fuselage and a unproven design without a global support network (for most parts). I'm not trying to play MPA Top Trumps, just trying to demonstrate that they all make compromises.

TOFO we will have to see what the DQI is on Seedcorn, however individuals are often the last to discover their fate!

Non Monsieur, deficit is the differential between revenue and outgoings, which can include money used for servicing debt when government bonds reach maturity.

"I think you'll find that seedcorn story has been largely discredited (by the people that are on it)."


I think you will find everyone on Seedcorn think you are talking Bollocks - Again

Nice. So please tell us what those on seedcorn are saying. Is it something like "brilliant, I can now do until my 55 point in the states". I think TOFO didn't deserve that remark.

I think you will find that everyone on Seedcorn are just as much in the dark about the future post SDSR 2015 as everyone else. What is certain is that if a big fat custard pie is announced then your comment " "brilliant, I can now do until my 55 point in the states" is worthy of a talking bollocks accusation also. They are examining their options. Most probably they all involve 7 clicks on a PC.

The seedcorn story TOFO claims is discredited is totally accurate by the way.

This discussion becomes academic next week though........

Bannock, I think the article refers to the extension given last year to certain seedcorn members (you might know them!) and not the new extension that everyone is expecting. Perhaps this is simply a case of 'old news' taking a while to come to the fore. As you know, any decision regarding a future extension has yet to be formally announced!

Admitting that I know FA about MPA, my question to those who know better is: What about the Kawasaki P1. Japan is in a similar geographic situation to UK, so would their solution not be relevant to us?

Bannock,

My "bollocks" come from a FB thread on 11 Feb, mostly contributed by guys on Seedcorn, most of whom seem to think, it nothing much more than something which agreed yonks ago and is now being rubber stamped (ie an extension to 2018, which was originally mooted as being likely in 2013). It originates from an P&J article

If it's "bollocks", it's their "bollocks" I'm merely sharing it (and as it is all on Facebook in great detail in any event). Quite likely they (the seedcorners) are in the dark...

"We'll be the last to know" (that be a quote, in case you haven't pegged it)

And yes, most of what I say can be considered "bollocks" by people who have issues with reality. It was ever thus.

PS

The use of the word "discredited" was deliberate as it appears to me the P&J article is related to Angus Robertson repacking old news for political gain. In his case, 100% for the purposes of getting his name in the papers prior to an election. I don't like that.

Royalist

"On 8 August 2011, the Japanese Ministry of Defense announced that two aircraft used for ground testing had developed tears in various parts of the craft, including the fuel tank and central part of the fuselage.

Repairs were planned to reinforce the affected areas.

Japan's Maritime Self-Defense Force took delivery of its first two P-1s on 26 March 2013, ahead of a planned two years of test flights. However, the planes were grounded on 14 May 2013, after one developed unstable combustion in some of its engines in flight."


What you'd expect of an unproven design - why take the risk??? And the cost sseem similar or higher than a P-8

I suspect not P-3s....

Given Russia's rearmament and blatant expansionism, is panic quietly beginning to settle in at Downing St?

Catalina's?

I suspect they'd be more than happy to lease us some too, so that we can pay for them twice over.

So how exactly, outside of an accountants money saving head, is this "weapon sharing" supposed to work?

One of the examples quoted was giving NATO access to our Challenger 2 tanks. No other NATO nation uses Challenger 2s (indeed the only people apart from the Brits are the Omanis). So what use is a presumably fairly complex bit of kit like a Challenger 2 to a country that has nobody trained, or experienced, in operating it? Yes, no doubt there could be a training package (how long/cost) but the foreign country would still end up with inexperienced crews in a weapon system they have no history of operating, let alone spares, logistics support, etc, etc.....

Lets just drop of a load of F-15s at Coningsby and ask Typhoon pilots to operate them shall we? :ugh:


If the idea in future is that all of NATO buys the same kit, same rifles, tanks, artillery, aircraft, all to the same mod state, then the idea might have a chance. However, NATO has been trying this for years (they couldn't even agree ultimately on a standard size rifle round!), without success, and how many nations will object to "buying American" in terms of protecting their armament industries, especially as America won't buy non American kit.

High is, be realistic, any two RAF Officers in the same uniform?

What happens when there's a "proper" war?
 

Have I missed something on reading this? Where this concept may work to really sweat training aircraft etc how on earth could it be used in times of a large scale war? Country A,B and C decide to buy between them three regiments worth of the latest Leopard MBT; with each country's three regiments sharing them for training and exercises etc. suddenly there's a major conflict and so we find the notional nine tank regiments only have three regiments of equipment to go to war with! Or is the cunning plan never to have to fight but just pretend we are able to?

experts believe that a deal will be struck for the UK to borrow a fleet of specialist US planes.

That means that the Mail reads PPrune.

And can't add up, LO.

Perhaps the idea in this is for the USN to supply the hardware and ground support,(P8's), and for the UK to supply/fund the infrastructure?. Then the a/c could be operated by joint crews etc. This way the U.S. is not shelling out $$$$ on an overseas base and the UK can say it now has a permanent MPA capability,without having to buy/lease it.......just a thought!

You've all missed the point "And as Britain is without any sea patrol aircraft to protect its airspace from incursions by Russian jets, experts believe that a deal will be struck for the UK to borrow a fleet of specialist US planes.... "

It's obvious innit, they are referring to a replacement for the Nimrod/AIM-9 heavy interceptor.

The good times are comin :cool: