About Think Defence

Think Defence hopes to start sensible conversations about UK defence issues, no agenda or no campaign but there might be one or two posts on containers, bridges and mexeflotes!

5 thoughts on “Around the Interweb 1

  1. Aussie Johnno

    TD, you can add another interesting thing from the web, the following MOD press release:

    (Source: UK Ministry of Defence; issued April 18, 2012)

    The Daily Mail today claims that the MOD is considering buying a replacement for the Nimrod MRA4. This is not true. The paper has inaccurately reported the comments made by Air Vice-Marshal Mark Green at a House of Commons Defence Committee meeting yesterday. He was answering a hypothetical question asked by the Committee about which aircraft the MOD would look to buy if it was felt a replacement was required.

    We assessed the implications of removing Nimrod from service and are confident the threat can be managed without the need for a replacement maritime patrol aircraft. We constantly monitor the threat but there is no evidence to suggest our assessment will change in the short term.

    We are buying a number of Rivet Joint aircraft, known as Airseeker, which will provide the UK’s airborne signals intelligence capability until 2025. This is not because of a gap left by the MRA4, as the Daily Mail suggests, as it will replace the Nimrod R1 which is not a maritime surveillance aircraft.

    The RAF is deploying maritime-experienced aircrew to operate alongside international partners on a range of aircraft where our reconnaissance and surveillance skills are being exploited. We are also using other military assets for maritime patrol, including frigates, Merlin helicopters and Hercules aircraft.

    The decision in the Strategic Defence and Security Review not to bring the Nimrod MRA4 into service was difficult but our ability to operate maritime patrol aircraft is being maintained. Only one Nimrod MRA4 had been delivered to the RAF and it had not passed air worthiness tests, the project was hundreds of millions of pounds over budget, years late, and needed considerable extra funding to rectify long-running technical problems.

    I can only hope that the author had a gun to his head at the time he said you can cover your MPA gap!

  2. Gareth Jones

    The more I see the Sea Hercules the I like; looking at the picture they have extended the wheel flarings to incorparate weapon bays, a FLIR ball upfront, radar underneath and weapon points/long range fuel tanks under the wings… and as the internal equipment is modular on pallets it can be removed for cargo, etc.

  3. Angus McLellan

    @Gareth Jones: So pretty much an armed USCG HC-130J? (Or a bigger, faster Airbus C-295 MPA?) I think I fancy Marshall’s chances of selling their rebuilt Hercules MPA idea better than L-M’s chances of selling new-builds at current prices.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>