9 P8s for the RAF
Author
Discussion

Elroy Blue

Original Poster:

8,838 posts

221 months

Friday 25th March 2016
quotequote all
Confirmed that the UK have ordered nine Boeing P-8s
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2016/03/raf-p-8a-pat...

Still think the Japanese alternative would have been a better choice.

Elroy Blue

Original Poster:

8,838 posts

221 months

Friday 25th March 2016
quotequote all
If you add the £3.8 billion we spent on Nimrod MR4, that makes £6 billion for nine aircraft.

Evanivitch

26,296 posts

151 months

Friday 25th March 2016
quotequote all
This is a much needed solution to a huge gap in UK capability.

The fact we also have dozens of personnel already training on the type is also hugely beneficial.

What is interesting is what if any plans we have for weapons integration.

eharding

14,648 posts

313 months

Friday 25th March 2016
quotequote all
Elroy Blue said:
If you add the £3.8 billion we spent on Nimrod MR4, that makes £6 billion for nine aircraft.
Get over it.

The MR4 was never going to work as an operational platform, BAe didn't have a plan other than to keep pissing our money away in a monumental act of denial of the manifest truth of the matter, and for some reason you think that this was a good idea.

mph1977

12,467 posts

197 months

Friday 25th March 2016
quotequote all
eharding said:
Elroy Blue said:
If you add the £3.8 billion we spent on Nimrod MR4, that makes £6 billion for nine aircraft.
Get over it.

The MR4 was never going to work as an operational platform, BAe didn't have a plan other than to keep pissing our money away in a monumental act of denial of the manifest truth of the matter, and for some reason you think that this was a good idea.
the only way the MRA4 would have worked was not to try and rework any of the existing Nimrods into them

Sylvaforever

2,212 posts

127 months

Friday 25th March 2016
quotequote all
That's a pretty small fleet. Will they be returningtto LRSAR search and coordination out over the Atlantic?

hidetheelephants

35,702 posts

222 months

Saturday 26th March 2016
quotequote all
The wrong aircraft in too small a quantity; what could possibly go wrong?

Elroy Blue

Original Poster:

8,838 posts

221 months

Saturday 26th March 2016
quotequote all
eharding said:
Get over it.

The MR4 was never going to work as an operational platform, BAe didn't have a plan other than to keep pissing our money away in a monumental act of denial of the manifest truth of the matter, and for some reason you think that this was a good idea.
Somebody got out of bed the wrong side. If you can point out where I have or haven't given support to Nimrod, I'd be grateful.

The point was, as is depressingly usual for the MOD, we end up with a tiny fleet of very expensive assets. If they'd have taken the sensible option at the start, we might just have a couple of squadrons worth of aircraft.

ecsrobin

18,642 posts

194 months

Saturday 26th March 2016
quotequote all
hidetheelephants said:
The wrong aircraft in too small a quantity; what could possibly go wrong?
Care to elaborate. Certainly all the RAF guys I know are excited about P8 coming into service.

hidetheelephants

35,702 posts

222 months

Saturday 26th March 2016
quotequote all
Why wouldn't they be; the latent kipper fleet has been kept alive by seconding them to other air forces who already operate or are about to operate P8s and as it's based on the 737 it will be easy and comfortable for Biggles to fly between airfields adjacent to 5* hotels.

That doesn't address the issue that 8 is about half as many as we actually need given the work they'll be loaded with once SO3-Navelgazing realises that there's a sensor platform available that can loiter a bit and has snack facilities, or that the P1 appears objectively better at the primary role, sweeping any sneaky russians out of the western approaches before Trident comes out for a trip around the North Atlantic. It's got more sonobouy capacity, can do the low altitude thing without voiding the manufacturers warranty, has a MAD tail, has the right number of engines for whazzing around at 500 feet 1000 miles from the nearest dry land and appears to be cheaper, although given the fibs plane makers tell about such things that might not be so. I'd lay a bet Kawasaki would charge a lot less than Boeing will for fitting a refueling probe.

Eric Mc

125,606 posts

294 months

Saturday 26th March 2016
quotequote all
As ever - no matter what the MoD decides on, some will think it is stupid or wrong.

anonymous-user

83 months

Saturday 26th March 2016
quotequote all
ecsrobin said:
hidetheelephants said:
The wrong aircraft in too small a quantity; what could possibly go wrong?
Care to elaborate. Certainly all the RAF guys I know are excited about P8 coming into service.


That's because it makes it easier when they leave to get a job with BA or Ryanair. hehe

Eric Mc

125,606 posts

294 months

Saturday 26th March 2016
quotequote all
Yay - I can see Ryan Air dropping torpedoes and depth charges on car ferries etc.

eharding

14,648 posts

313 months

Saturday 26th March 2016
quotequote all
Elroy Blue said:
If you can point out where I have or haven't given support to Nimrod, I'd be grateful.
...for example...

Elroy Blue said:
Now utterly devoid of MPA, Cameron's idiots have finally realised that we actually need one. So we'll have to spend a lot more reaquiring the aircraft and skills needed to operate them. I as a mad decision made by clueless idiots.

Elroy Blue

Original Poster:

8,838 posts

221 months

Saturday 26th March 2016
quotequote all
And again, it's talking about the decisions made at the MOD and the loss of capability, not about Nimrod itself. Who knows if Nimrod could've worked. We'll never find out.

Only on PH can a thread about aircraft turn into yet another argument.

Evanivitch

26,296 posts

151 months

Saturday 26th March 2016
quotequote all
Whilst the P1 is an exceptional aircraft, it's a bespoke airframe, with bespoke engines.

The Japanese would probably be a tad cheaper to integrate systems with, but there's the huge hump of security to get over first.

davepoth

29,395 posts

228 months

Saturday 26th March 2016
quotequote all
It may not be enough, but it's a start. I'm going to hope that since this is very similar to the plane that Ryanair use to take stag dos to Bratislava that it'll be reasonably cheap to fly and have high availability. We can always buy some more later if we need them.

///ajd

8,964 posts

235 months

Saturday 26th March 2016
quotequote all
i read on flightglobal that martin baker are a top tier supplier on p-8.

i assume this is not ejection seats, so what bits do they make? .... edit "crew planning seats"

ps despite some of the technical issues with mra4, saving money was the prime reason it was canned. in hindsight that decision was perhaps questionable, and was known to be at the time.



Edited by ///ajd on Saturday 26th March 11:31

mph1977

12,467 posts

197 months

Saturday 26th March 2016
quotequote all
ecsrobin said:
Care to elaborate. Certainly all the RAF guys I know are excited about P8 coming into service.
thge numbers will be based on what we had in the cold war - most of the 'not enough' complaining is from armchAir Chief Marshals who simply don;t understand the capability improvements since the 1960s , as for wrong aircraft that depends who they've been listening to...

there are a number of commentators on military air operations who have very fixed views ...

FourWheelDrift

92,236 posts

313 months

Saturday 26th March 2016
quotequote all
///ajd said:
i read on flightglobal that martin baker are a top tier supplier on p-8.

i assume this is not ejection seats, so what bits do they make?
Crew Planning Seats on this list (down the page) - http://www.aviationtoday.com/av/military/Poseidon-...

Probably these - http://www.martin-baker.com/products#products-cras...