This series on Future Maritime Patrol was unplanned but hope you have enjoyed reading what, I think, are the various options should the UK wish to reconstitute the capability lost with the withdrawal of Nimrod MR2 and cancellation of the Nimrod MRA4 in the 2010 Strategic Defence and Security Review.
In Part 1 we discussed the various requirements and challenges. The single most difficult challenge to the MoD is getting over Nimrod MRA4, if the taxpayer is expected to cough up a billion here or a billion there for a maritime patrol aircraft it must first overcome the very real issue of the shadow of Nimrod. Whilst we might understand the sunk cost fallacy, money having already been spent having no relation to money we would like to spend, politics does not quite work that way. Mr and Mrs Taxpayer has already spent just under £4b on a replacement for MR2 and now the MoD wants to spend more!
Anyone thinking that the money already spent is not a big issue is not living on the same planet I live on.
Another long shadow cast by Nimrod is that of air safety management, any suggestion that uses old airframes with a less than contiguous chain of safety evidence is going to cause problems in the post Haddon Cave safety environment. These problems, whilst not insurmountable, will inevitably result in a great deal of risk costs being fed into the resource build, what might seem on face value to be a bargain might not be.
The next significant challenge is making a case and defining the requirement. By the time the decision is made in SDSR 2015 (we think) there will have already been nearly a decade long gap, once a gap has been established and coped with, the case for closing it will inevitably be difficult, especially when there are so many other priorities for defence expenditure. I don’t for one minute think the UK armed forces can sit back after decade and a half of campaigning in the Middle East and East Asia for a nice rest, next stop, Africa or who knows where.
Against this backdrop is the trend to civilianisation of traditional military capabilities like Search and Rescue, trying to justify a maritime patrol aircraft off the back of the Fastnet Race or other high profile but very rare long-distance SAR is unlikely to convince anyone, unfortunately. In the overland ISTAR role things have moved on significantly since the early 2000s where Nimrod was the only platform that could loft an EO turret, ISTAR has improved immeasurably, unmanned systems and other aircraft now provide the Joint Force Commander with a wide variety of capabilities.
The maritime patrol gap is therefore simply not compelling enough to be automatically put to the top of the MoD’s shopping list, it has to justify its place like every other capability.
And yet despite this, despite the availability of numerous flavours of manned and unmanned ISTAR, maritime patrol aircraft continue to demonstrate their value. Libya, where Canadian Auroras enabled and supported naval gunfire, intelligence gathering and coordination, or Mali, where French ATL’s even got into dropping laser guided bombs show the utility of high endurance multipurpose maritime patrol aircraft.
These might still be considered secondary roles though, their true value will only be realised against a competent enemy equipped with submarines, and it here that the MoD must focus, everything else is secondary.
Submarines are the true killers of the deep with even the whiff of the very idea of one operating can have a significant strategic and operational impact. It is a fair observation that the UK has, and continues to spend huge sums of money on anti-submarine warfare, frigates, ASW helicopters and SSN’s weigh heavily on the defence budget and focussed on a submarine threat that is at best, unlikely. However, the problem with looking only at likelihood is that it ignores impact. An effective enemy submarine force, whether that be a resurgent Russia, an increasingly capable Iran or some other future force, could have a catastrophic impact on UK maritime operations. We could discuss the importance of maritime operations in the context of air deployability or general value, but the point remains, submarines are deadly.
If the impact/likelihood evaluation points to maritime patrol aircraft (with ASW) being something of value in a layered defence arrangement the details of the requirements, range, endurance, payloads and other factors can be examined.
Although it is a complex requirement, it can be readily distilled into a few key decision points.
If we accept the outside edge of range and endurance sits in the 3–5 hours at 200-400 nautical miles then systems like the C295 become the obvious choice. However, if we want to conduct top end anti-submarine warfare at range (i.e. deep water ASW) then the likely key performance parameters are 3-5 hour endurance at 800-1000 nautical miles, this puts us into the P8, P3 and P1 bracket.
If we cannot compromise on range and endurance but can on payload, a couple of lightweight torpedoes and 50 odd sonobuoys then a business jet solution might be possible.
Unmanned systems remain an outside possibility but only supporting a conventional manned aircraft and the large transport aircraft solutions based on either the Hercules or A400M Atlas remain interesting but still a conceptual and developmental hurdle.
A key aspect of our discussions has been to look beyond the narrow definition of maritime patrol and examine how the platform choice could influence, enhance capability or save money across the wider defence sphere. The point has been made that concentrating on airframe commonality is only part of the picture is well-made, system and sub system/component commonality can deliver significant through life savings. The MoD does not pay enough attention to long-term commonality and this results in increasingly small boutique fleets representing a vanishing tooth saddled with a disproportionately large tail.
Commonality also provides tactical opportunities that would not normally present themselves
The solutions were discussed over 6 posts;
Option 1; P-8A the obvious solution and likely front-runner if we want an MRA4 replacement and have deep pockets. There is still some residual risk in the programme but the key thing to consider here is we wouldn’t be on the hook for any fixes. It is, however, far from an off the shelf purchase and an expensive option although if purchased we would be in a large user community and able to take advantage of all that this provides. It might also in the medium term allow the Sentinel fleet to be withdrawn or re-used for other roles.
Option 2; A handful of P-8A alternatives such as refurbishing P3 Orion’s, the Japanese Kawasaki P1 and a development project that might bring the long talked about Airbus A319/320 MPA to fruition. The P3 refurbishment might provide an excellent capability, but we would be buying into an old design that is going out of service in many nations armed forces. The refurbishment option would also have many times and cost risks in the airworthiness certification space and politically, probably not the best idea to bring into service an aircraft that was previously rejected. The Kawasaki P1 looks on face value to be a fine option, a dedicated design with some very advanced features, but there is no certainty that we would be able to buy them and like the P8, is not quite the finished article. An Airbus A319/320 MPA would be a new design, although it must be said that the components are all known and available. From an industrial and sovereign design perspective probably the best option, but the price tag would be a big question mark.
Option 3; If we accept the range/endurance and payload compromise the C295 looks like an attractive and comparatively cheap option that opens up a number of commonality avenues, the communications fleet and tactical transport underneath the A400M spring to mind. The Q400 and ATR72 are equally capable but have less flexibility and adaptability than the C295 family.
Option 4; A business jet derived such as the Bombardier Global Express would provide some commonality advantages and could evolve into a multirole ISTAR system but although the range and endurance would probably be on a par with those in options 1 and 2, it would be payload constrained. That payload constraint might be an acceptable trade-off but in a serious conflict, at the low probability high-impact end of the ASW scale, that might compromise by prove telling.
Option 5; Finally, reusing a large 4 engine transport aircraft like the Hercules or even the A400M Atlas would address (in spades) the range/endurance payload issue (assuming the technicals of release and carriage can be solved) But Hercules is going out of the service and the A400M is expensive to start with, and the airframe design would produce a high fuel cost. Both options would allow maximum re-use of in-service equipment and the A400M especially, could evolve into a high endurance multirole ISTAR and ground attack platform.
To summarise;
If we are serious about countering Russian and other nations increasingly dangerous submarines, and we bloody well should be, the obvious answer is the Boeing P-8A. It represents the lowest risk and most capable solution, even though it is an expensive option. If the Japanese are willing to sell, the Kawasaki P1 could be a very real competitor to the P-8A. To those that moan about the cost, try counting the cost of a compromised V Force. Both would also provide a stepping stone to future capabilities that would ultimately, drive the commonality we should be trying to achieve over time.
I think if we focus on multi-mission effects, it diffuses the effect, this should be an Anti-Submarine capability to protect the deterrent and deployed naval task forces, everything else is secondary.
If we can accept compromise on range and endurance, and I make no claim either way, the other options such as C295 or business jet platform look increasingly attractive just because they are cheap.
If we were really mental and fancied blazing a multirole trail, the A400M Atlas would be an outside bet worth at least a serious study.
Gentlemen, place your bets now.
Or perhaps more importantly, what do you think should be placed second on the MoD’s wish list to pay for it?
@ party0929
I was of the same opinion until I saw just how we could turn the A400M into a MPA without cutting holes. The only mdifications needed would be to a side door and maybe extra hardpoints on the wings.
The idea of buying C295 with the distance of our SAR area is insane we have to buy something that has the range to do all the tasks MR2 did so we’re looking at
A- A-319 MPA but unless other countries join in the development costs would make it a bit of a long shot
B- P 1 would make an excellent choice with uk companies able to get a work share but to be honest its a long shot
C-P-8 an initial order of 8-10 aircraft would make sense but only if we didn’t start trying to redesign the aircraft at great costs if we’re going to have a decent MPA with range and payload that alloe it to prosecute target’s at range then the P-8 is the most logical
The A-400M is a big risk due to cutting holes in aircraft and having to get an airworthiness certificate could atop it in its tracks
We have to get the order in past the treasury andPAC before there’s any mudslinging
@x – I do hope that’s why we are building a stronger relationship with Japan in respect of military procurement…
GNB
@ GNB
http://img1.liczniki.org/20111229/Space_Battleship_Yamato___Uch__251__senkan_Yamato___2010-1325182133.jpg
I am now imagining a sleek grey (flying) battleship cruising at a safe distance from an enemy coastline acquiring target information, then turning away for safety and releasing a salvo of TLAM from the tailgate, before accelerating away to safety, some considerable time before Her Majesty’s enemies understand just exactly how irritated we are…a point they will more fully appreciate when a number of key installations and the Presidential Palace are reduced to smoking rubble…
A cheerful if slightly psychotic Gloomy
@ TD
‘High Capacity Sonar bouy Magazine’
Pallets, stacked with them, can’t get much cheaper and then a guy to manually load one each time.
@ Alex
Doesn’t an aircraft’s range increase the lighter the payload, but you could also have some form of hold tank as well, though if I were crew member this wouldn’t excite me.
The problem with atlas is that it has a massive hold which in the MPA role would only be filled by a few operators and consoles. And that excess hold is excess weight.
In the MPA role, that’s not excess hold, that’s space for more fuel and of course sonobuoys. And pies.
“A400M Atlas. The aircraft with the big shoulders”?
I’m still unconvinced that there is the emergent threat nor political will to fund MPA in 2015, but leaving that aside….
Was there discussion of the threat area where MPA might be useful? GIUK / North Atlantic of course, but I’m pushed to think of anywhere else in the world where we’d want something very long ranged.
If so, why not contract the job to a largish mothership with some embarked Merlins, or even run on Ocean in that role with an RFA crew? Rotate the RAF / RN aircrew every 2 weeks via civilian flight to Keflavik, bring the boat into port once a month or so. Any number of ports with close by civilian airports in Norway, Iceland, Aberdeen, Faroes etc.
One thing I like about the Sea Atlas and Sea Hercules ideas are maxing out on payload
If you look at Nimrod and P3, they have big stocks of releaseables
These numbers go down in the modern concepts like the P8 and 319MPA
They go even lower in the business jet and C295 aircraft
All well and good, no doubt there is a quality improvement in modern torpedoes and sonobuoys but consider this.
Let me ask this
If there is a real threat in a real shooting war, are we going to be dropping stuff into the water like money was no object.
To reduce the risk of submarine attack even fleeting contacts and marginal targets are going to be on the receiving end
So….
Payload, in a high threat environment, becomes ultra important.
Where the Atlas or Hercules really score is in this scenario. If you could perfect a ramp launched system for torpedoes and a high capacity sonobuoy magazine you could carry, as the saying goes, shitloads.
That translates into a real tactical advantage in my eyes
Payload overload, imagine how many Stingrays you could carry in an A400M
@ WF
Got to say I agree with you.
I would like to see us buy the Kwackers, or the A319MPA (mainly because it has british manufacturing input), but reality says the P8, which, really, won’t be such a bad thing.
Although I still wonder why we have signed a defence and industrial agreement with Japan, is there something else they’ve got that we want? Or, indeed vice-versa?
@ Ted
Can you imagine the Atlas with a discy, radome thing on the top?
@GNB, @WiseApe etc: I really don’t know why we’re discussing various pie in the sky options. Even if money was no object, we’d be buying no more than 25 aircraft, and is more likely to be half that. With those sorts of numbers the expense and risk of a development of Atlas, Hercules or a biz jet is just insane: we have to buy off the shelf. That means 295, P1 or P8, and given the 295’s limited range, that says P1 or P8. Since other countries seem to have no issue already ordering P8 in quantity, I think the decision is already made.
The armed forces have got themselves into stratfied fleets by their chronic incapability of taking a long term decision and sticking to it. No temporary solutions, no “it will last for the next 10 years and then we’ll get the money to buy the proper solution”. Just f**king buy it and move on.
@ Shane Armfield
I read that to mean that Bill Sweetman is speculating that the UK is looking at the P8. I don’t think Boeing specifically mentioned us.
That being said, I would find it difficult to believe that the UK isn’t looking at the ‘plane, with some of the things that have been said, by the MOD, about MPA studies.
The problem with atlas is that it has a massive hold which in the MPA role would only be filled by a few operators and consoles. And that excess hold is excess weight.
In an ISTAR role it would be more compelling because you could hang a lot or radars, sensors and cameras off of it as well as bombs and missiles. That is quite a nice battlefield control aircraft! Then again any flying battleship idea sounds good to me.
Both C295 and A400 would be ideal form my point of view as it would increase our pool of transport aircraft.
Having been an early adopter of the Sea Atlas Flying Battleship proposal, I must say @Sea_Eagle makes a very strong case for the Sea Hercules, at least for the next ten years…however @Engineer Tom’s staged plan to build up the modules for the Sea Atlas over time has great merit as well…perhaps we could justify doing both, and also working up the Gunship Atlas, Atlas Bomber/Missile Launcher and any other variants that might be useful in the same way?
My thinking is that the Atlas is a large air-frame that will be with us and others for a long time, and with the widespread need to keep costs down by getting as much value as possible out of every type, perhaps this might be the way of the future for most of us in the West, with the possible exception of the Cousins?
Here’s to a shift to the Multi-Purpose Flying Battleship…made in Great Britain!
A thoughtful Gloomy
Is TD doing fluffing for Bill Sweetman these days, or is it for Boeing? (Is that a container in your pocket or are you just pleased to see me, Ooooh Madam!) Smiley pirate face…. only joking….. don’t pi$$ off the website owner…. oh bugger that’s torn it emoticon thingy.
“Boeing Eyes P-8 Exports
By Bill Sweetman william.sweetman@aviationweek.com
Source: AWIN First
February 11, 2014
“Four or five nations” are showing strong interest in the Boeing P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol and antisubmarine warfare (ASW) aircraft, according to Chris Raymond, Boeing Defense, Space & Security vice president for business development and strategy.
“These are down to a technical level, not a cursory what-is-it level,” Raymond said on the eve of the Singapore air show. “They are doing analysis of range and coverage, how it would fit in their fleets, life-cycle costs.”
Two or three of the potential candidates are in the Asia-Pacific area, Raymond says. (One of the others is most likely the United Kingdom.) Not all of them currently operate fixed-wing ASW aircraft. “These are new requirements, not just replacements,” Raymond says.
In some cases, Boeing sees its new Maritime Surveillance Aircraft, based on a Bombardier Challenger 605 airframe, as being complementary to the P-8 or other ASW platforms. The company is moving towards the idea of a family of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance systems ranging from the P-8 through the MSA and the King Air-based Ramis (reconfigurable airborne multi-sensor system) to the Insitu ScanEagle and Integrator unmanned air systems.”
Sorry for pasting all.
Interesting that the U.K. Is specifically mentioned
A really excellent series; he doesn’t just throw them together you know. I can even forgive the glaring omission of airships.
So where to put my two pence bet?
If money were no object….well, if money were no object we wouldn’t be here would we, we’d have two dozen MRA4, job’s a good ‘un. Failing that, how about a baker’s dozen P8….hang on, phones ringing, it’ll be that damn Beckinsale woman again! Can’t see the Kawasaki being any cheaper, either.
I was very wary of an A400 MPA but, even though I haven’t finished wading through all the links in part 6, I’m warming to the idea. The attractions of the C130 are also undeniable.
C295 just doesn’t have the legs or the lifting power. APATS, who let’s face it is the only one of us who actually knows what he’s talking about, says it’s a nonstarter. As for business jets – seriously, can anyone see us going it alone on a project like that? Might as well suggest reusing the old Tristar/VC-10 airframes ;-)
So a penny each way on the Herc and Atlas it is then. Or, given the weather, how about a seaplane?
Apas
I don’t know the answer to that but the Australians and Turkey have you would hope ironed out the problems by now.
I mentioned in one of the other TD threads on sdsr15 that reviewing the whole istar fleet and what should happen to it would be what I’d like to see come out of that review. As you say e3 needs a upgrade and we don’t need airframes the size or with the large operating costs of either e3 or rivet joint to do there roles so at some point thru life economics will start to favor replacement to smaller more efficient aircraft. Would A strategic 10-15 year replacement plan with a family of systems be to much to hope for in a potentially high priority funding area.
TD thanks for putting together this excellent series.
It reads like a Poirot or Agatha Christie novel as each new character (aircraft) is introduced we were trying to spot the clues as to the eventual murderer (winner). Then it progressed to a Goldilocks and the3 bears fairy tale..ohh which will I choose this is too old (P3), this one is too new (P1) and this one is too large (A400M) and that one is too small (C295).
For once the lack of capability cannot be blamed on political interference as with the Astute, T45, QEC or mad PFI deals – Voyager. Taxpayers, via the Treasury, provided more than adequate funds to provide a full MPA capability.
What is the requirement for numbers? Originally Nimrod MRA4 was to upgrade 25 aircraft reduced to 18 and finally 12. For each prospective plane how many are needed to provide the required capability is not clear.
I do not know how much shagging has been going on with the Hercules! My preference would be to retain the 14 C5 (stretched) Hercules to equip the MPA and Special Forces requirements. The 10 remaining C4 type can be retired. I understand that the older C-130K retained for SF have just been retired although the required upgrade to the C-130J fleet to Block 7/8.1 is still a work in progress.
As Ace Rimmer noted all of the logistics and training are in place. There is no cost to buy compared to the ‘cheap’ £50m for a C295 let alone compared to a P8. If the planes need new wings sometime in the future the work can be done in the UK at Marshalls for much less than £50m per aircraft.
TD pointed out that the Sea Herc has the range, endurance and payload required. Allocating 10 to the MPA role and up to 4 for SF (with the hardware and sensors migrated from the C-130K) would provide a reasonable capability for the next 10 years at minimum cost. This is a realistic and practical solution.
@ Joe B
A400m is replacing C130, the C295 is being talked about filling a gap between A400M and the Chinook’s.
The only options available are those that provide both commonality of airframe types as well as those that can do more than one task. Eg. P8 and business jets out, leaving just A400M, Herc and possibly C295 if it is decide that they will eventually replace the Hercs.
@Fedaykin My point exactly if its finite and costs a lot of money this suggests some sort of commitment to MPA does it not?
The P-8I’s systems operator console being shown off at DefExpo 2014:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJF72zyZXwk
Excellent series TD, well thought out
I’m still firmly in the SC-130J Hercules camp, if offers a heritage the others can’t match, we have the infrastructure and experience ready to go, as well as pilots and ground crew, and if need be it can operate from austere locations the others don’t stand a chance in. So it would be suitable for quick deployments in an emergency. Accepted the airframe has its limitations, but the benefits definitely outway the drawbacks in my book.
@Colonial, re: the C-27J, I think its to similar to the C-295 to make a big difference.
@ Mark,
Maybe, how good is wedgetail? We do need to upgrade our E3 Fleet was very annoying that the E3A sI worked with could do live AIS, live secret chat and live SATCOM at the same time and ours couldn’t.
Great series TD – thanks.
For my 2d’worth:
1) Ideal solution – 8- 10 Kwaka P-‘s1 – it is a proper “built for” MPA. We could use the existing weapons stocks too
2) Practical solution – A400 Flying Battleship with the bolt ons. It’s a common in service platform that means in life costs will be low. If we could pick up say, 15 nearly new from the Germans/Spanish, we could have a nice little tactical tanker force and patrol aircraft
@ Dabews
“When discussing picking up German/ Spanish A400s cheap, how cheap is cheap?”
Its hard to say. The Germans and the Spanish have made agreements with Airbus to buy numbers beyond what they want. However both governments own Airbus and have a history of backing out on deals. I might suggest being able to pick up their spare aircraft for something between 50 – 75% of the marginal cost. Much will also depend on weather or not they can find other buyers and their seems to be few available.
In terms of extra infrastructure I don’t think we would need much only really training facilities for MPA missions specialists. Flight crews and maintenance could all be done by existing personnel. If the podded system can be made to work it could well be a cheap and capable solution to our immediate problem that could eventually go on to generate a high end MPA capability. It also gives us major flexibility given a decent sized A400M fleet of close to 30 aircraft.
Excellent series and gd debate.
Maybe we’ll take strategic review of istar and decide a Boeing family is what’s needed and replace everything.
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_02_11_2014_p0-662119.xml
Problem is project seed-corn has a finite life, the personnel deployed around the world with other airforce do have a career path and won’t want to be in limbo for too long. Unless there is some form of decision in 2015 seed-corn will start to naturally wind up as personnel move onto other things, unless we decide to start feeding new people into training streams for foreign MPA. The current Seed-corn personnel come out of the Nimrod community, they were probably highly welcome with the P-8 induction considering their experience with a jet MPA and ironically the mission system considering it is derived from that fitted to the MRA4.
Seed-corn can only be a temporary solution as the current people will want to move on. Extending it by feeding new people into foreign training streams is a way of extending but there is no point if there is no firm commitment to reintroducing the capability within the next five years.
Great series TD, thanks.
I agree that the “gap” and the “shadow of Nimrod” are the main hurdles to get over. I have this sneaky feeling the podded MPA is the way to go so that we can rapidly retro-fit it to A400M, etc, when/if needed. We then only need to keep the skill alive with a cheaper off-the-shelf purchase of something like C295 or even Merlin assuming that fixed wing ASW is a subset of rotary wing ASW.
Great series TD, thanks.
I agree that the “gap” and the “shadow of Nimrod” are the main hurdles to get over. I have this sneaky feeling the podded MPA is the way to go so that we can rapidly retro-fit it to A400M, etc, when/if needed. We then only need to keep the skill alive with a cheaper off-the-shelf purchase of something like C295 or even Merlin assuming that fixed wing ASW is a subset of rotary wing ASW.
Excellent series TD,
A very enjoyable read.
I do have one question of anyone who may be able to make an educated guess (im assuming hard numbers don’t exist). When discussing picking up German/ Spanish A400s cheap, how cheap is cheap? And how much extra (if any) would need to be spent on upgrading facilities to accommodate the extra aircraft?
There are two sides to this:
1) On the one hand we have our current lack of an MPA, the MoDs denial that it is essential and the lack of money put aside until at least 2020. This all points at no MPA unless things change sigfnificantly.
2) On the other hand you have the seedcorn initiative which is spending a lot of money on keeping our crews in the game and of lesser significance the enquiries into MPAs commisioned by the government that point at the capability gap.
SAR would likely be privatised or covered by A400m as the J herc currently has to do.
We lack a platform that has significant range and speed to detect submerged submarines.
Personally I believe that if anything happens it will likely be a C295 so that we have a fleet of multi role aircraft which could if nessecary cover SAR and they can do shorter range MPA duties. This keeps our crews in check hopefully at lower expense and we have a MPA capability. The MoD also wins as it had an asset that can do ISTAR and tactical lift (meaning that all the J hercs can be retired) which the MoD probably currently regard as more essential capabilities.
But which is more important, 1) or 2)?
Great series TD. Given that it was unplanned you managed to bring to together very quickly.
My 2p:
We should be looking at a Deep Water ASW capability, which means a long range platform with a decent ability to carry sonobuoys and weapons. We don’t need a huge fleet, but it should be something that we could expand if the threat changes. I advocate this for two reasons:
1) A short range platform doesn’t really add anything useful for the UK IMO, no matter how cheap. If we are worried about the Russians then we need something that can reach the GIUK gap and stay there for a while. If we are deploying abroad than we need something that can fly from a secure base and still reach the operations zone.
2) What ever we buy we need to think long term. It needs to be something that is either already in service elsewhere (and will continue to be for the expected service life of any UK MPA) or that is based on another platform that is/will be in UK service (and will continue to be for the expected service life of any UK MPA. A UK only solution like we had with Nimrod is just asking for trouble.
Therefore I see the only two options as being:
LOW RISK: A force of at 6 x [b]P-8s[/b] with only minimal mods from USN standard (including adopting some USN weapons not currently in UK inventory).
Combine this with a civilian fixed wing platform to perform the majority of the long range fixed wing SAR and surveillance, and I think you have a very decent overall capability, that has the advantage of being able to fit in easily to USN ops when we undertake joint operations.
HIGH RISK: Develop a MPA/ASW bolt-on capability for the [b]Atlas[/b] and buy approx 3-6 additional ac.
This I think real potential here, albeit one that could/would cost more than buying half a dozen P-8s. Developing a MPA kit for the Atlas could be a real seller in the European market where it could leverage existing Atlas fleets, and could stand an reasonable chance of replacing P-3s in few nations that might also be interested in the A400 as a transport. It would give Airbus a long range MPA/ASW platform to complement the C-295.
———————-
What would I sacrifice to pay for it? Honestly not sure, but I think a more positive way to look at it is in terms of what other costs we would be saving by having a MPA. Could we save on the costs having to deploy a frigate for several days to protect the SSBN force if we could deploy a MPA for half a day instead?
Can the A400M deal with the low level flying required to drop a torpedo easily and if so no pressurised crew area is needed, though I would go for a sound proofed one, just to make the long work hours easier.
The way I would approach this would be to go down the route of creating a set of equipment to test the theory that the A400M can work in the MPA role before we even think about extra airframes.
Step one get the sensors on board, if this can done with a pod on each wing, able to be mounted with zero to minimal modification to the airframe, and then if we could put together a removable crew work area, I’m thinking a module that is soundproofed with the required workstations inside, in theory we would then have a maritime surveillance aircraft. If a sonar buoy launcher could be added by modifying a side door with the launcher, and then sonar buoys themselves stored internally on simple pallets, all that then would have to be thought about is launching torpedoes off of the ramp, which to me would require a rack and drogue chute system, when launched at low levels. All these systems I believe exist in one form or another, so how much would it cost to modify them to fit the A400M?
If this could be done step by step, working closely with industry, we could have a setup of equipment and know exactly how much one aircrafts worth of systems will cost, then we could think about how many sets would be needed, and maybe partial sets could be bought, i.e. more of the surveillance kits than the weapons kits, and if there was decent project management who understand the need to drive down costs as much as possible and reuse existing systems with as little modification as possible, they might be able to get a cost effective solution. Once the solution has been found, then we could look at whether we need more airframes.
There are a lot of ifs and maybes in this concept, but if the MOD approached it as a concept and prototyped it before they committed it could well help to spread the costs and also with a minimal initial cost for airframes, it could also end up being a cheap alternative.
Martin – ref torpedo deployment (sorry a long way back up the comment list) – Don’t bother with a pressurized crew pod just for this. I would be amazed if anyone thought to drop a torpedo on a drogue from 15000ft; even more amazed if it hit the water within a mile of the intended splashpoint… On the other hand, if one of the slide-in palletized modules was a Searchwater type radar with bag, then humming around at 15000ft with the back door open might be a rational choice.
Or invest in one of these so one half stays pressurized for comfort and the other depressurized for deployment of tactical stuff: http://hayate.ru/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/model-1875-anp-logistic-carrier-twin-fuselage.gif – a bit fanciful? In 1964 Vickers went one better: http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a94/WtMiller/scan0019.jpg and in 1943 this was a flyer: http://www.wwiivehicles.com/germany/aircraft/bomber/heinkel-he-111-bomber/heinkel-he-111-z-bomber-02.png http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/uploads//monthly_02_2013/post-855-0-19166200-1361230580.jpg
I’ll include this link just because its such a barking mad ugly pug… http://vert-mi8.ru/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%83%D0%BB%D0%BA%D0%B0.jpg
The Sea Herc looks a good medium term solution, modifying some of the existing ones, and keeping a small number for SF operations until the mid 2020s. Long term work, with France on a joint replacement for the Sea Herc and ATL, which could be the A400.
Alone? Not likely that they’ll survive, but remember, our doctrine was inherited from the Israelis who had such a fun time in situations like the Yom Kippur 3 way orgy. Not likely in the current day of course, but in the 80s-90s, many wanted a Pan-Islamic region and we happen to be the one little bloody mote in their eye. Take us out and the map becomes a sea of green (Islam’s holy colour), which looks so pretty.
Of course that is very simplified, but people can be simple. Brunei hates Indonesia for trying a coup in the old days, Indonesia was paranoid of Malaysia and its Western backing, Malaysia was (and still is) worried about the Philippines and its Sabah claim and Thailand was worried that the Communists from Vietnam would push the borders into Thailand itself. Those were interesting times.
Not to mention FJs are so sexy and don’t you just love spiffy jet black high polish boots? *cue Hell March*
@ Observer
Yeah can’t see it getting through the new flight safety regime.
I think the establishment in Singapore tends to milk the security situation in the region to justify the vast vast expenditure on the military. Singapore spends the same % of GDP on defence as the UK spends on universal healthcare. I think Israel is the only other democracy spending a similar amount.
I doubt if Malaysia or Indonesia would last more than a few days against the Singapore Airforce on its own.
martin, that’s because the increased defence spending is only limited to specific countries and for specific fields. Primarily Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore, the 3 standard culprits. And the fields are MBTs, subs and ships, with some planes for Indonesia to modernise their airforce, but Malaysia and Indonesia tend to buy Russian with those, Congress has a tendency to jam sales to Muslim countries, something Indonesia ran afoul of in the 80s, so they learned. On the other hand, it helps us in Singapore to play off their phobia of Muslim countries by making it easier to get them to sell stuff to us when we mention that we are surrounded by them. And the China card helps too sometimes.
As for plutonium plated MPAs, well, it’s not that bad :) It’s a militarised A330 variant in a way, something like a modern day 737. And I like the idea of plutonium plated MPAs, it tells others that we have nukes in a subtle way without rubbing their faces in it. :P Doubt it’ll pass health and safety inspections though.
@ Bill Smiley
We don’t operate any Bombardier Challengers….
@ Observer
I think Airbus is giving up on the notion of selling any A400M or any other defence product in Asia. For all the talk of rising defence spending in Asia very little seems to have materialised and what has such as the Philippines purchase of fighter jets has gone down the bargain basement route. The A400M is certainly not cheap and probably has very limited scope for sales in Asia where as the A350 could be massive. I think an A350 MPA would be the plutonium plated solution to our MPA problem and I doubt we could get a production slot for a decade.
Unfortunately as with the Philippines Typhoon too many governments in Asia are prepared to rely on foreign assistance to provide basic requirements like transport aircraft for their to be much scope for sales.
Is there a reason the C-27J Spartan doesn’t get a look in?
I personally think its between , the Hercules and the Bombardier Challenger . Both of which we have models in RAF inventory.
Personally, if I had to choose, no industrial strings attached, I would go Kawasaki for a low/medium level capability or the P-8 if I had to do high end.
On an observational note, Airbus strangely enough does not seem to be pushing their A400 very hard at the Singapore Airshow, most of their ads in the papers and leaflets seem to be pushing the A350 instead, so it might make more sense to MPA a 350 instead of a 400, especially in light of the huge number of orders for the 350. Easier to keep the production lines moving than to make a totally new line.
Great Series TD and one with some interesting ideas and hard to get information.
@ GNB
” I’m placing no bets, but I do wonder if purchasing a number of additional A400M air-frames and then building up a suite of top notch equipment modules of various sorts might be a suitably sneaky way of avoiding the the post-Nimrod fall-out…”
I am starting to lean towards this view. I think APATS in particular has made some good points about the limitation of the C295. It’s also unlikely that any government is going to want to purchase anything as expensive as a P8 fleet in 2015.
Weapons integration on the P8 will also be an issue. As was pointed out on a previous thread the UK is paying 100 million to integrate Paveway IV on F35 and that sounds pretty simple compared to getting Stingray to Fly.
A number of modules already exist that could bring the A400M up to a decent configuration for at least maritime security operations with some ability to at least monitor submarine’s. Over time this capability could be refined to eventually gives us a very capable MPA solution with far greater range and carrying capacity than the P8. While the A400M is not cheap we will be buying 22 of them anyway and with the pressure of operations in Afghanistan being removed possibly at least some of them can be used in the MPA role.
As TD has pointed out many of the solutions for turning the A400M into a highly capable MPA are not rocket science and many have already been worked into the C130 such as drogue shoot release of torpedo’s from the back ramp and replacing the para shoot door with a sonar buoy launcher.
In terms of torpedo launch I don’t see sliding off the back cargo ramp as a major issue. Yes the cabin will have to be de-pressurised but if the operators can be housed in a pressurised cabin this should not be a major issue. Granted its a bit of a pain in the arse if you have to do it all the time but in all likely hood its a capability that would never be used in anger.
So I am starting to see the A400M as the lower risk and cheaper option simply because the aircraft will already be there and all we are talking about is buying Vigilant pods and integrating them with a palatalised FITS system contained in a pressurised trailer than can be rolled of and on and then maybe a sonar buoy ejection system put into the door. Its sounds very doable over enough time. Sure we would need to purchase more A400M’s but this could be done gradually over time and with the possibility of getting them cheap from other EU nations trying to offload their’s. The program could also lead to the A400M becoming a much more capable ISTAR asset able to provide EW, ELINT other capabilities. All of which would be welcome.
Fascinating series TD, thanks for the all the info.
Very much like the idea of a smaller/ad hoc solution, because it strikes me as being romantic and a bit plucky. C295 nice, Embraer business jet also looks fun, and I was close to being sold on the SC130-J thing. However, if you’re going to do ASuW and maritime patrol properly then surely you need the biggest bang with the longest duration.
P8 or the Kwak. Accept no substitutes.
I’m placing no bets, but I do wonder if purchasing a number of additional A400M air-frames and then building up a suite of top notch equipment modules of various sorts might be a suitably sneaky way of avoiding the the post-Nimrod fall-out…”These are not yet more expensive MPAs – they are bog-standard military transports with a (bit?) of extra kit bolted on”.
The multi-purpose flying battleship might be the way of the future.
GNB
If I were planning for an MPA for a country that had no pretensions to being a global power, the choice would be relatively simple: the C295. The advantage of the same airframe being useable for cargo, MPA, AEW, and gunship by changing modules makes it’s versatility the deciding factor. The question remains, is the UK going to remain a global power?
How about a bet that nothing happens?
Or that something may start to happen, but will take a long and possibly costly road to get here… and something being scarified in order to pay for it?
A pessimistic mood :( But an awesome series :)
Well done TD, brilliant job here, compiling ideas and previous posts since 2010.