Nirmrod Decision coming back to haunt the Government?
Discussion
Purely speculation, but there is talk of the MOD spending several hundred million bridging the capability gap caused by scrapping the Nimrod..
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/nimro...
Thread on pprune here http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/453611-mod-...
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/nimro...
Thread on pprune here http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/453611-mod-...
Edited by thatone1967 on Monday 6th June 19:45
It's what everyone said all along. They'll kill off the Nimrod for the sake of £200 million and then in a year or so's time buy an inferior product for another £500 million-£1 billion.
The P8 has abysmal range aswell, making it a rather s
te aircraft for long range overseas operations.
The waste and incompetence at the heart of the Government & MOD continues.
The P8 has abysmal range aswell, making it a rather s
te aircraft for long range overseas operations.The waste and incompetence at the heart of the Government & MOD continues.
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 6th June 20:23
anonymous said:
[redacted]
It may well be that we operate these P-8s on the same scheme we're going for with the "Rivet Joint" planes we're getting - They remain part of the USAF maintenance schedule, so we get to use their reserve planes while ours are being fixed. Series production makes them much cheaper anyway, and it's likely there will be over 200 of them around the world eventually.
Nimrod was always the wrong decision, it's just a pity it took so long, and so much money, to realise.
Same will come around shortly for Ark Royal decision too I should think. If we're going down the P8 route then we may as well speak to Ryanair rent a jet and stuff some kit in!
The letter will probably start,
Dear Mr Chirac,
Once upon a time our countries where constantly at war, legends of Napoleon and Wellington were born.
I don't want to think back to those times, but back to 1066 when you came to visit for a while and then 1918 to 1944 where you welcomed us to your shores for a little assistance.
Anyway, enough about history, we need your help. In order to continue in our role as 'world police' we have a shortage of aircraft and aircraft carriers to land them on. If possible, could we borrow one of your carriers and a couple of Rafales?
PS. In the current economic climate we'd like you to think of 'GRAND SOCIÉTÉ' and let us have these for free. In return we can probably look to offer you a discount on the Dover Commercial Harbour Fees.
Look forward to hearing from you,
George Osbourne
The letter will probably start,
Dear Mr Chirac,
Once upon a time our countries where constantly at war, legends of Napoleon and Wellington were born.
I don't want to think back to those times, but back to 1066 when you came to visit for a while and then 1918 to 1944 where you welcomed us to your shores for a little assistance.
Anyway, enough about history, we need your help. In order to continue in our role as 'world police' we have a shortage of aircraft and aircraft carriers to land them on. If possible, could we borrow one of your carriers and a couple of Rafales?
PS. In the current economic climate we'd like you to think of 'GRAND SOCIÉTÉ' and let us have these for free. In return we can probably look to offer you a discount on the Dover Commercial Harbour Fees.
Look forward to hearing from you,
George Osbourne
P8 won't work. Aside from its limited sensor fit, it can not operate at low level - something that is already causing concern within the USN.
To reiterate, LRMPA must be able to operate at low level, both during the prosecution of attack phase (since you can't lob an airdrop torpedo in from 10,000ft and, more importantly, during the search phase ie dropping sonobuoys (and fixing their position).
The Spams are trying to develop a high level sonobuoy dropping system but that is a blind alley because you automatically build in errors between where the sonobouys actually are and where the a/c systems think they are. Hardly ideal for targetting an elusive enemy!
I'd agree that Nimrod MRA4 was possibly flawed from the outset but the only other viable alternative was the P7 upon which the Spams pulled the plug. P7 wasn't ideal because it was a turboprop and an ideal LRMPA is a jet.
Unfortunately there is no available commercial jet airframe that can withstand the rigours of extended low level over the sea ops.
Oh, and only having 2 engines is a distinct disadvantage even if the a/c is ETOPS cleared.
What killed MRA4 was political manoeuvring, initially the reduction in fleet buy and secondly the stupid x-factor-dancing-in-the jungle-on-ice-reality-TV-watching idiocy that linked the name 'Nimrod' with an unsafe a/c post the demise of XV230.
To reiterate, LRMPA must be able to operate at low level, both during the prosecution of attack phase (since you can't lob an airdrop torpedo in from 10,000ft and, more importantly, during the search phase ie dropping sonobuoys (and fixing their position).
The Spams are trying to develop a high level sonobuoy dropping system but that is a blind alley because you automatically build in errors between where the sonobouys actually are and where the a/c systems think they are. Hardly ideal for targetting an elusive enemy!
I'd agree that Nimrod MRA4 was possibly flawed from the outset but the only other viable alternative was the P7 upon which the Spams pulled the plug. P7 wasn't ideal because it was a turboprop and an ideal LRMPA is a jet.
Unfortunately there is no available commercial jet airframe that can withstand the rigours of extended low level over the sea ops.
Oh, and only having 2 engines is a distinct disadvantage even if the a/c is ETOPS cleared.
What killed MRA4 was political manoeuvring, initially the reduction in fleet buy and secondly the stupid x-factor-dancing-in-the jungle-on-ice-reality-TV-watching idiocy that linked the name 'Nimrod' with an unsafe a/c post the demise of XV230.
The Boy Lard said:
If possible, could we borrow one of your carriers and a couple of Rafales?
They'll never agree to help Le Rosbifs.We'll have to steal them. Or threaten Oran 2 (with some help from Hoseasons). I reckon I could get a few troops in mine, if Motorvator promises to navigate and push off
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
P8 won't work. Aside from its limited sensor fit, it can not operate at low level - something that is already causing concern within the USN.
To reiterate, LRMPA must be able to operate at low level, both during the prosecution of attack phase (since you can't lob an airdrop torpedo in from 10,000ft and, more importantly, during the search phase ie dropping sonobuoys (and fixing their position).
The Spams are trying to develop a high level sonobuoy dropping system but that is a blind alley because you automatically build in errors between where the sonobouys actually are and where the a/c systems think they are. Hardly ideal for targetting an elusive enemy!
I'd agree that Nimrod MRA4 was possibly flawed from the outset but the only other viable alternative was the P7 upon which the Spams pulled the plug. P7 wasn't ideal because it was a turboprop and an ideal LRMPA is a jet.
Unfortunately there is no available commercial jet airframe that can withstand the rigours of extended low level over the sea ops.
Oh, and only having 2 engines is a distinct disadvantage even if the a/c is ETOPS cleared.
What killed MRA4 was political manoeuvring, initially the reduction in fleet buy and secondly the stupid x-factor-dancing-in-the jungle-on-ice-reality-TV-watching idiocy that linked the name 'Nimrod' with an unsafe a/c post the demise of XV230.
What else is there though? It looks to me like the P-8 is the only game in town now, unless we buy from the Russians. And even then their crazy amphibious thing only has two engines. Although I guess since it floats that isn't so much of a hinderance. To reiterate, LRMPA must be able to operate at low level, both during the prosecution of attack phase (since you can't lob an airdrop torpedo in from 10,000ft and, more importantly, during the search phase ie dropping sonobuoys (and fixing their position).
The Spams are trying to develop a high level sonobuoy dropping system but that is a blind alley because you automatically build in errors between where the sonobouys actually are and where the a/c systems think they are. Hardly ideal for targetting an elusive enemy!
I'd agree that Nimrod MRA4 was possibly flawed from the outset but the only other viable alternative was the P7 upon which the Spams pulled the plug. P7 wasn't ideal because it was a turboprop and an ideal LRMPA is a jet.
Unfortunately there is no available commercial jet airframe that can withstand the rigours of extended low level over the sea ops.
Oh, and only having 2 engines is a distinct disadvantage even if the a/c is ETOPS cleared.
What killed MRA4 was political manoeuvring, initially the reduction in fleet buy and secondly the stupid x-factor-dancing-in-the jungle-on-ice-reality-TV-watching idiocy that linked the name 'Nimrod' with an unsafe a/c post the demise of XV230.
It's a real shame we don't have the capability any more, mainly due to mismanagement and posturing. "Lions led by donkeys" has never been quite so apt.
davepoth said:
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
P8 won't work. Aside from its limited sensor fit, it can not operate at low level - something that is already causing concern within the USN.
To reiterate, LRMPA must be able to operate at low level, both during the prosecution of attack phase (since you can't lob an airdrop torpedo in from 10,000ft and, more importantly, during the search phase ie dropping sonobuoys (and fixing their position).
The Spams are trying to develop a high level sonobuoy dropping system but that is a blind alley because you automatically build in errors between where the sonobouys actually are and where the a/c systems think they are. Hardly ideal for targetting an elusive enemy!
I'd agree that Nimrod MRA4 was possibly flawed from the outset but the only other viable alternative was the P7 upon which the Spams pulled the plug. P7 wasn't ideal because it was a turboprop and an ideal LRMPA is a jet.
Unfortunately there is no available commercial jet airframe that can withstand the rigours of extended low level over the sea ops.
Oh, and only having 2 engines is a distinct disadvantage even if the a/c is ETOPS cleared.
What killed MRA4 was political manoeuvring, initially the reduction in fleet buy and secondly the stupid x-factor-dancing-in-the jungle-on-ice-reality-TV-watching idiocy that linked the name 'Nimrod' with an unsafe a/c post the demise of XV230.
What else is there though? It looks to me like the P-8 is the only game in town now, unless we buy from the Russians. To reiterate, LRMPA must be able to operate at low level, both during the prosecution of attack phase (since you can't lob an airdrop torpedo in from 10,000ft and, more importantly, during the search phase ie dropping sonobuoys (and fixing their position).
The Spams are trying to develop a high level sonobuoy dropping system but that is a blind alley because you automatically build in errors between where the sonobouys actually are and where the a/c systems think they are. Hardly ideal for targetting an elusive enemy!
I'd agree that Nimrod MRA4 was possibly flawed from the outset but the only other viable alternative was the P7 upon which the Spams pulled the plug. P7 wasn't ideal because it was a turboprop and an ideal LRMPA is a jet.
Unfortunately there is no available commercial jet airframe that can withstand the rigours of extended low level over the sea ops.
Oh, and only having 2 engines is a distinct disadvantage even if the a/c is ETOPS cleared.
What killed MRA4 was political manoeuvring, initially the reduction in fleet buy and secondly the stupid x-factor-dancing-in-the jungle-on-ice-reality-TV-watching idiocy that linked the name 'Nimrod' with an unsafe a/c post the demise of XV230.
And there's the rub!
Designing a bespoke a/c from scratch would, I guess, cost far more than MRA4 yet CMD decided not only to bin MRA4, but to have them cut up (so they couldn't be resurrected) all down to political expediency.
THEN he commits us to a second front in Libya.
The man is a Muppet of the first order!
Designing a bespoke a/c from scratch would, I guess, cost far more than MRA4 yet CMD decided not only to bin MRA4, but to have them cut up (so they couldn't be resurrected) all down to political expediency.
THEN he commits us to a second front in Libya.
The man is a Muppet of the first order!
I watched him when he announced the slash and burn SDSR. I watched him when he said he would freeze Military pay and slash Military allowances.
THEN I watched him again when he decided we would intervene in Libya, and the spark in his eyes when he thought he would become a World Statesman off the back of the UK Military sickened me to my core.
I've seen that before.... It was called Mr B LIAR!
I'll go further, CMD is a of the first order!
I'm sick of 'spin' and self-serving politicos, personally I'd cluster bomb the lot of them.
THEN I watched him again when he decided we would intervene in Libya, and the spark in his eyes when he thought he would become a World Statesman off the back of the UK Military sickened me to my core.
I've seen that before.... It was called Mr B LIAR!
I'll go further, CMD is a
of the first order!I'm sick of 'spin' and self-serving politicos, personally I'd cluster bomb the lot of them.
aeropilot said:
Japan have gone it alone with a replacement for the P-3, the four jet Kawasaki P-1.
$3 billion and counting according to wikipedia, not exactly cheap if it's true.The sad thing about Nimrod was that they would have been cheaper as new builds. BAE thought the airframes would be OK but it turned out that they were all not to spec and needed a lot of extra work.
Simpo Two said:
They'll never agree to help Le Rosbifs.
We'll have to steal them. Or threaten Oran 2 (with some help from Hoseasons). I reckon I could get a few troops in mine, if Motorvator promises to navigate and push off
When do we leave and do I need to bring a pitchfork or anything? We'll have to steal them. Or threaten Oran 2 (with some help from Hoseasons). I reckon I could get a few troops in mine, if Motorvator promises to navigate and push off
davepoth said:
$3 billion and counting according to wikipedia, not exactly cheap if it's true.
The sad thing about Nimrod was that they would have been cheaper as new builds. BAE thought the airframes would be OK but it turned out that they were all not to spec and needed a lot of extra work.
I think you will find that is Daily Wail spin. The fuselages were all built on jigs, so how (30 years later) they could be several inches out is beyond real belief.The sad thing about Nimrod was that they would have been cheaper as new builds. BAE thought the airframes would be OK but it turned out that they were all not to spec and needed a lot of extra work.
The thing was (as Ginetta Girl said) that the Nimrod was the only alternative. After spending all of the money, getting the planes months from service to then scrap them, when there is nothing that could touch it, is down right stupid and dangerous of Cameron & the Government. It has been rumoured that it was his decision to cancel it. Even at the last minute top brass were meeting with Cameron to ask him to change his mind, but in his wisdom he chose to override those in the military and scrap it. Don't forget all of the simulators, and relevant equipment was there ready for the planes to go.
Now the only other plane available is the P8, which will not be suited to low level operations, not got the equipment fit, has only twin engine survivability, IIRC less than half the range, and less payload than the MRA4.
Considering the MRA4 was so close to service and virtually paid for, what the hell was Cameron doing overriding the RAF & Navy, destroying the years of world leading experience in the maritime role, dumping experienced crews, leaving a huge capability chasm, without there being any viable alternative?
It doesn't make any logical sense, especially if they are going to now U-Turn and buy off the shelf American kit in 3-5 years time, when we could have had what we'd paid for now. Unfortunately what we have paid for is probably now holding baked beans on the shelf at Sainsbury's!!
This to save a few million bringing it into service and operating, when we are spending what, £1 billion by September in Libya?
Running costs for the fleet were rumoured to be £200 million a year. From what I have read that would have included operating from Kinloss, so you could have saved from that by relocating to Waddington or another base. Again I can't confirm, but BAe Systems support costs were rumoured to be in the region of £70million - £80million a year. Less than the cost of a new Typhoon each year.
Liam Fox was defending Nimrod quite openly before the SDSR, but months after his leaked letter, he changed his tune (toeing the party line??) trashing the project as being unsafe and not ready.
I still believe that Cameron needed a high profile example of Labour waste (when in fact it was a Tory decision to proceed with the MRA4 in the 1990s) to kill off something in his review. I have no doubt he would have also killed off our new carriers aswell, citing them as an example of waste. Being a PR man more than a man of any substance, I am sure he wanted to bin the "toxic" Nimrod name who in the mindset of the general public was a dangerous aircraft.
Also another aircraft that is to be scrapped in a couple of years is the Sentinel R1. Currently being used in Afghanistan (considered by some to be a one trick pony for that conflict only), they were to be retired after they return in 2014. They have currently been in service for less than 6 years.
We then go bundling into Libya and some of the first planes down there were two Sentinels, spying on enemy positions. I'm sure the RAF and Army will be fighting long & hard to retain these aircraft in a few years time.
I personally have no confidence in the current Government's Defence policy, however it seems like Liam Fox seems to have his finger on the pulse more than Cameron.
I somehow think the Libya mission (apart from the oil) is also a partial "willy waving" excercise, by Cameron and Sarkozy to show that our depleted force can work as an effective "Euro" fighting force together with the French. The trouble is they have "ballsed up" that conflict, as we don't have the sufficient money of equipment to deal Gadaffi the knock out blow, we are just giving him the equivalent of a "dead arm" at the moment. This is why we have sent 4 of our Apache force off to operate off the only Aircraft Carrying platform we have, over the last few weeks. The "Euro Force" seems a bit "half arsed" and we are having to put the bulk of the effort in with a depleted airforce in a post SDSR world.
It was reported in the papers recently that the US Navy P3 Orions were providing top cover and protection for our ships.
I'm beginning to think it is dawning on the Government that, (as those in the real world were saying from day one), it is going to be a long haul there.
It is a shame that on one hand there are indesciriminate cuts to defence of our country, such as aircraft patrolling our own waters around the UK, yet on the other hand we find money to go piling into Libya or increase International Aid handouts.
If this is true about a purchase of 5x P8's then this is mind boggling, as surely 9 paid for Nimrods are going to be more effective than spending out more money buying hardly enough "inferior" P8's.
Am I the only one thinking something is really up here?
Now the only other plane available is the P8, which will not be suited to low level operations, not got the equipment fit, has only twin engine survivability, IIRC less than half the range, and less payload than the MRA4.
Considering the MRA4 was so close to service and virtually paid for, what the hell was Cameron doing overriding the RAF & Navy, destroying the years of world leading experience in the maritime role, dumping experienced crews, leaving a huge capability chasm, without there being any viable alternative?
It doesn't make any logical sense, especially if they are going to now U-Turn and buy off the shelf American kit in 3-5 years time, when we could have had what we'd paid for now. Unfortunately what we have paid for is probably now holding baked beans on the shelf at Sainsbury's!!
This to save a few million bringing it into service and operating, when we are spending what, £1 billion by September in Libya?
Running costs for the fleet were rumoured to be £200 million a year. From what I have read that would have included operating from Kinloss, so you could have saved from that by relocating to Waddington or another base. Again I can't confirm, but BAe Systems support costs were rumoured to be in the region of £70million - £80million a year. Less than the cost of a new Typhoon each year.
Liam Fox was defending Nimrod quite openly before the SDSR, but months after his leaked letter, he changed his tune (toeing the party line??) trashing the project as being unsafe and not ready.
I still believe that Cameron needed a high profile example of Labour waste (when in fact it was a Tory decision to proceed with the MRA4 in the 1990s) to kill off something in his review. I have no doubt he would have also killed off our new carriers aswell, citing them as an example of waste. Being a PR man more than a man of any substance, I am sure he wanted to bin the "toxic" Nimrod name who in the mindset of the general public was a dangerous aircraft.
Also another aircraft that is to be scrapped in a couple of years is the Sentinel R1. Currently being used in Afghanistan (considered by some to be a one trick pony for that conflict only), they were to be retired after they return in 2014. They have currently been in service for less than 6 years.
We then go bundling into Libya and some of the first planes down there were two Sentinels, spying on enemy positions. I'm sure the RAF and Army will be fighting long & hard to retain these aircraft in a few years time.
I personally have no confidence in the current Government's Defence policy, however it seems like Liam Fox seems to have his finger on the pulse more than Cameron.
I somehow think the Libya mission (apart from the oil) is also a partial "willy waving" excercise, by Cameron and Sarkozy to show that our depleted force can work as an effective "Euro" fighting force together with the French. The trouble is they have "ballsed up" that conflict, as we don't have the sufficient money of equipment to deal Gadaffi the knock out blow, we are just giving him the equivalent of a "dead arm" at the moment. This is why we have sent 4 of our Apache force off to operate off the only Aircraft Carrying platform we have, over the last few weeks. The "Euro Force" seems a bit "half arsed" and we are having to put the bulk of the effort in with a depleted airforce in a post SDSR world.
It was reported in the papers recently that the US Navy P3 Orions were providing top cover and protection for our ships.
I'm beginning to think it is dawning on the Government that, (as those in the real world were saying from day one), it is going to be a long haul there.
It is a shame that on one hand there are indesciriminate cuts to defence of our country, such as aircraft patrolling our own waters around the UK, yet on the other hand we find money to go piling into Libya or increase International Aid handouts.
If this is true about a purchase of 5x P8's then this is mind boggling, as surely 9 paid for Nimrods are going to be more effective than spending out more money buying hardly enough "inferior" P8's.
Am I the only one thinking something is really
up here?Ginetta G15 Girl said:
I think you will find that is Daily Wail spin. The fuselages were all built on jigs, so how (30 years later) they could be several inches out is beyond real belief.
I'm not going to suggest I know much about this at all, but a google for "Airframe Shims" suggests that there is a healthy industry, and by that a fair bit of variability in even rather modern aircraft. Here's a service bulletin for Bell Helicopters. From this it would seem that they build shims into the design of their craft to make sure they can make everything run true.
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&am...
Not big shims at all, but it only takes a few thousandths of an inch in inportant places for the differences to build up.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Oh, FFS.It was paid for 20 times over, and was still a piece of crap.
BAe humped the taxpayer dry, and was looking for more, but didn't have a clue if they could make it work.
It was a happy gravy-train-till-retirement for a hell of a lot of people, but sadly we can't afford that sort of feckwittery now.
You really think any examples would have had a bearing on the Libya campaign?
Dream on.
eharding said:
sadly we can't afford that sort of feckwittery now.
Quote of the day, and it's only 1am. 
We were screwed by the MOD and BAE. Look at France, and see how much stuff they have for a lower per-capita military expenditure, with twice the number of active troops that we have. They still make their own fighter planes too. Sweden still makes its own fighter planes for goodness' sake. We spend more on our military than Russia. How does that work?
Quite how so many can do so little with so much in this country is beyond my comprehension.
eharding said:
It was paid for 20 times over, and was still a piece of crap.
No it wasn't and I'm sure the RAF Maritime bods would be happy to tell you why.Cameron has proved that he has come from the Blair mould of Politics. They are both incompetent knobs of the highest order.
Still, I'm sure all those overseas despots are busy looking at what holiday home they are going to be buying with all that extra 'aid' they'll be getting.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff