Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Contains threads on Royal Air Force equipment of the past, present and future.
marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by marktigger »

downsizer wrote:There is a reason why the Shadow's capability isn't largely in the public domain FFS.
have seen pictures of 1 of its capabilities whilst under development and its impressive.........very impressive.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Didn't the 2010 "SDSR" put it on the kill list? One of those capabilities that are on the confluence of two services, and therefore, in a tight spot, find least defenders because eveyone is too busy trying to justify their core capabilities
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1371
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by RichardIC »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Didn't the 2010 "SDSR" put it on the kill list? One of those capabilities that are on the confluence of two services, and therefore, in a tight spot, find least defenders because eveyone is too busy trying to justify their core capabilities
That's right, the 2010 bloodbath had is as a post-Afghanistan sacrificial lamb.

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by marktigger »

I find it hilarious different countries France and the US in particular were screaming out for us to lend them sentinel for operations in various laces and yet the MoD were looking for savings and the RAF heirarchy offered it up to be scrapped! maybe the RAF need a new and reducated senior officers not time expired Tornado crew.

I saw some pictures of imagery produced during development when I was on a course 10 years ago and it was bloody impressive and I'm sure its vastly improved since then.

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2677
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by bobp »

The RAF are looking to keep all five Sentinels in service.......

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/bri ... inel-fleet

S M H
Member
Posts: 433
Joined: 03 May 2015, 12:59
United Kingdom

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by S M H »

The treasury driven S.S.D.R.10 had some ill thought parts Sentinel is one capability that should never have been considered its usefulness was madness to give up post Afghanistan. The use post Afghanistan has highlighted its usefulness. It should be retained in service especially if the Lockheed J.S.T.A.R. replacement is adopted by the U.S.A.F. Then only given up if we get the overland R,A.D.A.R. for the P8 with a few additional airframes.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by shark bait »

Even with the P8 the Sentinel may look attractive, the system is paid for, and is much smaller so presumably cheaper to operate. There is not much point carrying a sonobuoy launcher over Afghanistan for example.

Isn't one of the limiting factors with Sentinel the payload growth?
@LandSharkUK

S M H
Member
Posts: 433
Joined: 03 May 2015, 12:59
United Kingdom

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by S M H »

shark bait wrote:Isn't one of the limiting factors with Sentinel the payload growth?
The lack of payload growth caused the removal of the in flight refuelling probe as the airframe was close to the do not exceed weight
.

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2677
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by bobp »

Raytheon awarded a 5 year maintenance contract for the Sentinel fleet. Including modifications to the Radar.
http://www.defensenews.com/articles/ray ... -135m-deal

MRCA
Member
Posts: 186
Joined: 29 Apr 2017, 22:47
United Kingdom

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by MRCA »

Sentinel was conceived to operate in pairs the 5th aircraft to be a spare. The concept of operations was changed when it entered service and they been used as singletons infact it is and remains one of the most heavily tasked air assets we have. There is no other asset like it in any western airforce outside of the US and that is something that can be said about few other UK assets.

The a/c received a number of classified and unpublished upgrades for use in Afghan war so some of the capabilities discussed above maybe already be available to the aircraft. With the us moving jstars and compass call to a biz jet platform and aew, sigint optics and even mpa moving that way we would be incredibly stupid to bin this fleet when it really should be expanded and used in other roles

IFR probs were not deleted because of payload issues. It was primarily cost, significant things would of needed striped out and rebuilt another system on the aircraft may of had to of been removed or moved elsewhere late in the day so it was dropped. What fitting a prob would of done is change the aircrafts operating envelope, the sentinel flys much higher that 737 or other jstars like jets which gives it a very long stare this was the reason for selecting such an airframe and would of been compromised had the probe been fitted, in the end the a/c stays up for 11 hours anyway how long is it really practical to keep people in the air and still be useful over repeated missions.

There has been a huge leap in system miniaturisation since sentinel entered service and a mid life upgrade and replacement of the system on board will open up huge opportunities on the platform.

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by RetroSicotte »

And here we go again...

RAF to lose Sentinel ASTOR aircraft

http://www.janes.com/article/71471/raf- ... r-aircraft

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1998
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Contact:
Italy

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by Gabriele »

The cut from 5 to 4 is going ahead pronto. I'm not getting the part about the life extension. What got turned down, the post 2021 extension idea, or the SDSR 2015 extension to 2021? Huge difference between the two things.

Still, immensely stupid. Sentinel being also a literal unique capability in Europe.
It is going to be fun to bring up the armed forces at Brexit talks after cutting the precious pieces. They are going to be called idiots, and they will have deserved it.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

Little J
Member
Posts: 970
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
United Kingdom

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by Little J »

Can they not "rent out" the capacity to help pay?
There must be other nation's who would like to use it but can't afford their own.

Dahedd
Member
Posts: 659
Joined: 06 May 2015, 11:18

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by Dahedd »

Is the plan I wonder, not too get the same module for the P8 that the USN is working on?
That would mean getting more P8s ideally though.

muttbutt
Member
Posts: 109
Joined: 07 May 2015, 22:07

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by muttbutt »

Little J wrote:Can they not "rent out" the capacity to help pay?
There must be other nation's who would like to use it but can't afford their own.
There was a seed of a plan years ago for France and the UK to operate them as some sort of joint SQN...never went anywhere. :(

jimthelad
Member
Posts: 507
Joined: 14 May 2015, 20:16
United Kingdom

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by jimthelad »

DS would know better but I was under the impression that the 5th airframe was stripped for use as an MPA testbed and was going to cost a fortune to revert to sqn service.

User avatar
whitelancer
Member
Posts: 619
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:19
United Kingdom

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by whitelancer »

Another ridiculous decision that will save very little money. it makes me :twisted:
They would be better off streamlining a top heavy "head office" and getting rid of a lot of the overpaid consultants they employ.

User avatar
Old RN
Member
Posts: 226
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:39
South Africa

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by Old RN »

I do not know but may the high endurance Zephyr drones provide a similar facility. The electronics package is clearly far smaller but with modern electronics advancing wonder what its synthetic aperture radar performance would be?

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Little J wrote:Can they not "rent out" the capacity to help pay?
Effectively that is already happening as the UK does not pay money into the NATO Ground Surveillance initiative, but (when needed!) will contribute (these!) assets in kind
jimthelad wrote: I was under the impression that the 5th airframe was stripped for use as an MPA testbed and was going to cost a fortune to revert to sqn service.
- correct
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Dahedd
Member
Posts: 659
Joined: 06 May 2015, 11:18

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by Dahedd »

Well if the other one has been stripped keep it but reconfigure it for training, VIP & Medical evacuation use.
Save wasting a precious Voyager

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Dahedd wrote:if the other one has been stripped
"If"... we can follow (with the serials) where it will end up. My bet is as a flying demo of whoever it was that had their equipment fitted for trials
-most nations cannot afford full-fat MPAs, but many (esp. in Asia) still have the need
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Smokey
Member
Posts: 272
Joined: 18 Feb 2017, 13:33
Cyprus

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by Smokey »

IMO, the Sentinels will go the same way as the Nimrod MRA.4's

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by shark bait »

whitelancer wrote:They would be better off streamlining a top heavy "head office" and getting rid of a lot of the overpaid consultants they employ.
Absolutely, or a bunch of the half empty bases they have, instead they insist on wiping out genuine valuable capability.

The battlefield surveillance capabilities alone should be enough to keep these in service, add in a maritime surveillance mode and there is a strong argument to keep these going long term. Huge stupid decision.
jimthelad wrote:DS would know better but I was under the impression that the 5th airframe was stripped for use as an MPA testbed and was going to cost a fortune to revert to sqn service.
What we're the changes? I was under the impression is was just software...

Operationally it has already proved its self in this area, over Libya the RAF found they were tracking surface vessels, so the plan was to expand this discovered capability through an optimized maritime mode in the software.

They never wanted it to be a true MPA, so no hardware changes we're wanted, instead the goal was more of a maritime surveillance aircraft to complement the high end P8. The 'low-end' R.1s could be used for everyday maritime surveillance, saving the 'high-end' P-8 for ASW.
Old RN wrote:I do not know but may the high endurance Zephyr drones provide a similar facility. The electronics package is clearly far smaller but with modern electronics advancing wonder what its synthetic aperture radar performance would be?
Yes it will do, a synthetic aperture radar is in development for Zephyr, but no way will it have the power generation to run a system comparable to ASTOR.
@LandSharkUK

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by Timmymagic »

shark bait wrote:Yes it will do, a synthetic aperture radar is in development for Zephyr, but no way will it have the power generation to run a system comparable to ASTOR.
Also Watchkeeper has the Thales i-Master SAR/GMTI onboard. That should be vastly more capable than a capability that even Zephyr T could carry, unfortunately the iMaster is a little too heavy/power intensive for inclusion on the Zephyr T. Either way none of the above are even close to the capability that Sentinel has or as integrated. There are radar pods that could be carried on Reaper/Protector. But again size and power come in to play. The only realistic replacement for Sentinel would be P-8's with the AAS pod, and even then that wouldn't match the capabilty of Sentinel. It's an awful decision. Part of me wonders if, given the utility, quality and reliance on the ISR generated by Sentinel if the RAF haven't offered it up for cuts in the anticipation of howls of anguish from Washington and other countries reaching the corridors of power in Whitehall and forcing some additional funds to be found.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Raytheon Sentinel R1 (RAF)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Timmymagic wrote:There are radar pods that could be carried on Reaper/Protector. But again size and power come in to play.[1] The only realistic replacement for Sentinel would be P-8's [2] with the AAS pod
[1] Not just that; how long did it take the USN to get the de-icing work in the N. Atlantic conditions (though very high up the conditions by region are not that dissimilar)

[2] Yep, double the crew and quadruple the size of the a/c (and fuel burn?) to do the same job?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Post Reply