Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Contains threads on Royal Air Force equipment of the past, present and future.
Post Reply
User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7927
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by SKB »

Image

Introduction
The Hawker Siddeley Nimrod was a maritime patrol aircraft developed and operated by the United Kingdom. It is an extensive modification of the de Havilland Comet, the world's first operational jet airliner. It was originally designed by de Havilland's successor firm, Hawker Siddeley; further development and maintenance work was undertaken by Hawker Siddeley's own successor companies, British Aerospace and BAE Systems, respectively.

Designed in response to a requirement issued by the Royal Air Force (RAF) to replace its fleet of ageing Avro Shackletons, the Nimrod MR1/MR2s were primarily fixed-wing aerial platforms for anti-submarine warfare (ASW) operations; secondary roles included maritime surveillance and anti-surface warfare. It served from the early 1970s until March 2010. The intended replacement was to be extensively rebuilt Nimrod MR2s, designated as Nimrod MRA4; however due to considerable delays, repeated cost overruns, and financial cutbacks, the development of the MRA4 was abandoned in 2010.

In addition to the three Maritime Reconnaissance variants, two further Nimrod types were developed. The RAF operated a small number of Nimrod R1, an electronic intelligence gathering (ELINT) variant. A dedicated airborne early warning platform, the Nimrod AEW3 was in development from late 1970s to the mid-1980s; however, much like the MRA4, considerable problems were encountered in development and thus the project was cancelled in 1986 in favour of an off-the-shelf solution in the Boeing E-3 Sentry. All Nimrod variants had been retired by mid-2011.

Development
MR1
On 4 June 1964, the British Government issued Air Staff Requirement 381 to replace the Avro Shackleton. Such a replacement was necessitated by the rapidly approaching fatigue life limits of the RAF's existing Shackleton fleet. A great deal of interest in the requirement was received from both British and foreign manufacturers, offered aircraft including the Lockheed P-3 Orion, the Breguet Atlantic and derivatives of the Hawker Siddeley Trident, BAC One-Eleven, Vickers VC10 and de Havilland Comet. On 2 February 1965, British Prime Minister Harold Wilson announced the intention to order Hawker Siddeley's maritime patrol version of the Comet, the HS.801.

The Nimrod design was based on that of the Comet 4 civil airliner which had reached the end of its commercial life (the first two prototype Nimrods, XV148 & XV147 were built from two final unfinished Comet 4C airframes). The Comet's turbojet engines were replaced by Rolls-Royce Spey turbofans for better fuel efficiency, particularly at the low altitudes required for maritime patrol. Major fuselage changes were made, including an internal weapons bay, an extended nose for radar, a new tail with electronic warfare (ESM) sensors mounted in a bulky fairing, and a MAD (magnetic anomaly detector) boom. After the first flight in May 1967, the RAF ordered a total of 46 Nimrod MR1s. The first example (XV230) entered service in October 1969. A total of five squadrons using the type were established; four were permanently based in the UK and a fifth was initially based in Malta.

R1
Three Nimrod aircraft were adapted for the signals intelligence role, replacing the Comet C2s and Canberras of No. 51 Squadron in May 1974. The R1 was visually distinguished from the MR2 by the lack of a MAD boom. It was fitted with an array of rotating dish aerials in the aircraft's bomb bay, with further dish aerials in the tailcone and at the front of the wing-mounted fuel tanks. It had a flight crew of four (two pilots, a flight engineer and one navigator) and up to 25 crew operating the SIGINT equipment.

Only since the end of the Cold War has the role of the aircraft been officially acknowledged; they were once described as "radar calibration aircraft". The R1s have not suffered the same rate of fatigue and corrosion as the MR2s. One R1 was lost in a flying accident since the type's introduction; this occurred in May 1995 during a flight test after major servicing, at RAF Kinloss. To replace this aircraft an MR2 was selected for conversion to R1 standard, and entered service in December 1996.

The Nimrod R1 was based initially at RAF Wyton, Cambridgeshire, and later at RAF Waddington in Lincolnshire, England, and flown by 51 Sqn. The two remaining Nimrod R1s were originally planned to be retired at the end of March 2011, but operational requirements forced the RAF to deploy one to RAF Akrotiri, Cyprus on 16 March in support of Operation Ellamy. The last flight of the type was on 28 June 2011 from RAF Waddington, in the presence of the Chief of the Air Staff, ACM Sir Stephen Dalton. XV 249, the former MR2, is now on display at the RAF Museum Cosford, West Midlands.

The R1 is being replaced by three Boeing RC-135W Rivet Joint aircraft, acquired under the Airseeker project; the first aircraft was delivered in late 2013.

MR2
Starting in 1975, 35 aircraft were upgraded to MR2 standard, being re-delivered from August 1979. The upgrade included extensive modernisation of the aircraft's electronic suite. Changes included the replacement of the obsolete ASV Mk 21 radar used by the Shackleton and Nimrod MR1 with the new EMI Searchwater radar, a new acoustic processor (GEC-Marconi AQS-901) capable of handling more modern sonobuoys, a new mission data recorder (Hanbush) and a new Electronic Support Measures (Yellow Gate) which included new pods on the wing tips.

Provision for in-flight refuelling was introduced during the Falklands War (as the MR2P), as well as hard points to allow the Nimrod to carry the AIM-9 Sidewinder missile to counter enemy Argentine Air Force maritime surveillance aircraft. In preparation for operations in the Gulf War theatre, several MR2s were fitted with new communications and ECM equipment to deal with anticipated threats; at the time these modified aircraft were given the designation MR2P(GM) (Gulf Mod).

The Nimrod MR2 carried out three main roles – Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW), Anti-Surface Unit Warfare (ASUW) and Search and Rescue (SAR). Its extended range enabled the crew to monitor maritime areas far to the north of Iceland and up to 4,000 km out into the Western Atlantic. With Air-to-Air Refuelling (AAR), range and endurance was greatly extended. The crew consisted of two pilots and one flight engineer, two navigators (one tactical navigator and a routine navigator), one Air Electronics Officer (AEO), the sonobuoy sensor team of two Weapon System Operators (WSOp ACO) and four Weapon System Operators (WSOp EW) to manage passive and active electronic warfare systems.

Until 1992, the Nimrod MR2 was based at RAF Kinloss in Scotland (120, 201 and 206 Squadrons), and RAF St Mawgan in Cornwall (42 and 38(R) Squadrons). Following Options for Change, 42 Squadron was disbanded and its number reassigned to 38(R) Squadron. The Nimrod MR2 aircraft was withdrawn on 31 March 2010, a year earlier than planned, for financial reasons. The last official flight of a Nimrod MR2 took place on 26 May 2010, with XV229 flying from RAF Kinloss to Kent International Airport to be used as an evacuation training airframe at the nearby MOD Defence Fire Training and Development Centre.

AEW3
In the mid-1970s a modified Nimrod was proposed for the Airborne Early Warning (AEW) mission – again as a replacement for the Lancaster-derived, piston-engined Shackleton AEW.2. Eleven existing Nimrod airframes were to be converted by British Aerospace at the former Avro plant at Woodford to house the GEC Marconi radars in a bulbous nose and tail. The Nimrod AEW3 project was plagued by cost over-runs and problems with the GEC 4080M computer used. Eventually, the MoD recognised that the cost of developing the radar system to achieve the required level of performance was prohibitive and the probability of success very uncertain, and in December 1986 the project was cancelled. The RAF eventually received seven Boeing E-3 Sentry aircraft instead.

MRA4
The Nimrod MRA4 was intended to replace the capability provided by the MR2. It was essentially a new aircraft, with current-generation Rolls-Royce BR710 turbofan engines, a new larger wing, and fully refurbished fuselage. However the project was subject to delays, cost over-runs, and contract re-negotiations; the type had been originally intended to enter service in 2003. The MRA4 was cancelled in 2010 as a result of the Strategic Defence and Security Review at which point it was £789 million over-budget and nine years late; the development airframes were also scrapped. The cancellation of the MRA4 marked an abortive end of the Nimrod's era; the functions it provided were largely abandoned leading to a significant UK capability gap. A few functions were dispersed to other assets, including the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) to conduct limited maritime surveillance.

Design
The Nimrod was the first jet-powered maritime patrol aircraft (MPA) to enter service, being powered by the Rolls-Royce Spey turbofan engine. Aircraft in this role have been commonly propelled by piston or turboprop power-plants instead to maximise fuel economy and enable maximum patrol time on station; advantages of the Nimrod's turbofan engines included greater speed and altitude capabilities, it was also more capable of evading detection methods by submarines, whereas propeller-driven aircraft are more detectable underwater to standard acoustic sensors. In-flight, the Nimrods had a flight endurance of ten hours without aerial refuelling; the MR2s were later fitted to receive mid-air refuelling in response to demands in the Falklands War.

At the start of a patrol mission all four engines would normally be running, but as the aircraft's weight was reduced by the consumption of on-board fuel up to two engines could be intentionally shut down, allowing the remaining engines to be operated in a more efficient manner. Instead of relying on ram air to restart an inactive engine, compressor air could be cross-fed from a live engine to a starter turbine; the cross-feed duct was later discovered to be a potential fire hazard. Similarly, the two hydraulic systems on-board were designed to be powered by the two inner engines that would always be running. Electrical generation was designed to far exceed the consumption of existing equipment to accommodate additional systems installed over the Nimrod's operational service.

The standard Nimrod fleet carried out three basic operational roles during their RAF service: Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) duties typically involved surveillance over an allocated area of the North Atlantic to detect the presence of Soviet submarines in that area and to track their movements. In the event of war, reconnaissance information gathered during these patrols would be shared with other allied aircraft to enable coordinated strikes at both submarines and surface targets. Search and rescue (SAR) missions were another important duty of the RAF's Nimrod fleet, operating under the Air Rescue Coordination Centre at RAF Kinloss, and were a common sight in both military and civil maritime incidents. Throughout the Nimrod's operational life, a minimum of one aircraft was being held in a state of readiness to respond to SAR demands at all times.

Avionics
The Nimrod featured a large crew of up to 25 personnel, although a typical crew numbered roughly 12 members, most of which operated the various onboard sensor suites and specialist detection equipment. A significant proportion of the on-board sensor equipment was housed outside the pressure shell inside the Nimrod's distinctive pannier lower fuselage. Sensor systems included radar, sonar, and the magnetic anomaly detector; a 'sniffer' could detect exhaust fumes from diesel submarines as well. The Nimrod and its detection capabilities was an important component of Britain's military defence during the height of the Cold War.

The Nimrod's navigational functions were computerised, and were managed from a central tactical compartment housed in the forward cabin; various aircraft functions such as weapons control and information from sensors such as the large forward doppler radar were displayed and controlled at the tactical station. The flight systems and autopilot could be directly controlled by navigator's stations in the tactical compartment, giving the navigator nearly complete aircraft control. The navigational systems comprised digital, analogue, and electro-mechanical elements; the computers were directly integrated with most of the Nimrod's guidance systems such as the air data computer, astrocompass, inertial guidance and doppler radar, navigation information could also be manually input by the operators.

Upon its introduction to service, the Nimrod was hailed as possessing advanced electronic equipment such as onboard digital computers; the increased capability of these electronic systems allowed the RAF's fleet of 46 Nimrod aircraft to provide equal coverage to that of the larger fleet of retiring Avro Shackletons. The design philosophy of these computerised systems was that of a 'man-machine partnership'; while on-board computers performed much of the data sift and analysis processes, decisions and actions on the basis of that data remained in the operator's hands. To support the Nimrod's anticipated long lifespan, on-board computers were designed to be capable of integrating with various new components, systems, and sensors that could be added in future upgrades. After a mission, gathered information could be extracted for review purposes and for further analysis.

Armaments and equipment
The Nimrod featured a sizeable bomb bay in which, in addition to armaments such as torpedos and missiles, could be housed a wide variety of specialist equipment for many purposes, such as up to 150 sonobuoys for ASW purposes or multiple air-deployed dinghies and droppable survival packs such as Lindholme Gear for SAR missions; additional fuel tanks and cargo could also be carried in the bomb bay during ferrying flights. Other armaments equippable in the bomb bay include mines, bombs, and nuclear depth charges; later munitions included the Sting Ray torpedo and Harpoon missile for increased capabilities.

The Nimrod could also be fitted with two detachable pylons mounted underneath the wings to be used with missiles such as the Martel; two specialised pylons were later added to enable the equipping of Sidewinder missiles, used for self-defence purposes from hostile aircraft. A powerful remote-controlled searchlight was installed underneath the starboard wing for SAR operations. For reconnaissance missions, a pair of downward-facing cameras suited to low and high-altitude photography were also equipped on the Nimrod; in later years a newer electro-optical camera system was installed for greater imaging quality.

Various new ECMs and electronic support systems were retrofitted onto the Nimrod fleet in response to new challenges and to increase the type's defensive capabilities; additional equipment also provided more effective means of identification and communication. A number of modifications were introduced during the 1991 Gulf War, a small number of MR2s were fitted with improved Link 11 datalinks, new defensive ECM equipment including the first operational use of a towed radar decoy, and a forward looking infra-red turret under the starboard wing.

Introduction to service
The Nimrod first entered squadron service with the RAF at RAF St Mawgan in October 1969. These initial aircraft, designated as Nimrod MR1, were intended as a stop-gap measure, and thus were initially equipped with many of the same sensors and equipment as the Shackletons they were supplementing. While some improvements were implemented on the MR1 fleet to enhance their detection capabilities, the improved Nimrod MR2 variant entered service in August 1979 following a lengthy development process. The majority of the Nimrod fleet operated from RAF Kinloss.

Operationally, each active Nimrod would form a single piece of a complex submarine detection and monitoring mission. An emphasis on real-time intelligence sharing was paramount to these operations; upon detecting a submarine, Nimrod aircrews would inform Royal Navy frigates and other NATO-aligned vessels to pursuit in an effort to continuously monitor Soviet submarines. The safeguarding of the Royal Navy's Resolution-class ballistic missile submarines, which were the launch platform for Britain's nuclear deterrent, was viewed as being of the up-most priority.

Falklands War
Nimrods were first deployed to Wideawake airfield on Ascension Island on 5 April 1982, the type at first being used to fly local patrols around Ascension to guard against potential Argentine attacks, and to escort the British Task Force as it sailed south towards the Falklands, with Nimrods also being used to provide search and rescue as well as communications relay support of the Operation Black Buck bombing raids by Avro Vulcans. As the Task Force neared what would become the combat theatre and the threat from Argentine submarines rose, the more capable Nimrod MR2s took on operations initially performed by older Nimrod MR1s. Aviation author Chris Chant has claimed that the Nimrod R1 also conducted electronic intelligence missions operating from Punta Arenas in neutral Chile.

The addition of air-to-air refuelling probes allowed operations to be carried out in the vicinity of the Falklands, while the aircraft's armament was supplemented by the addition of 1,000 lb (450 kg) general purpose bombs, BL755 cluster bombs and AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles. The use of air-to-air refuelling allowed extremely long reconnaissance missions to be mounted, one example being a 19-hour 15-minute patrol conducted on 15 May 1982, which passed within 60 miles (97 km) of the Argentine coast to confirm that Argentine surface vessels were not at sea. Another long-range flight was carried out by an MR2 on the night of 20/21 May, covering a total of 8,453 miles (13,609 km), the longest distance flight carried out during the Falklands War. In all, Nimrods flew 111 missions from Ascension in support of British operations during the Falklands War.

Gulf War
A detachment of three Nimrod MR2s was deployed to Seeb in Oman in August 1990 as a result of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, carrying out patrols over the Gulf of Oman and Persian Gulf. Due to the level of threats present in the Gulf theatre, operational Nimrods were quickly retrofitted with a Marconi-towed active decoy. Once hostilities commenced, the Nimrod detachment, by now increased to five aircraft, concentrated on night patrols, with daylight patrols carried out by US Navy Lockheed P-3 Orions. Nimrods were used to guide Westland Lynx helicopters and Grumman A-6 Intruder attack aircraft against Iraqi patrol vessels, being credited with assisting in sinking or damaging 16 Iraqi vessels.

After the ground offensive against Iraqi forces had ended, Britain elected to maintain an RAF presence in the region through assets such as the Nimrod and other aircraft. Nimrod R1s operated from August 1990 to March 1991 from Cyprus, providing almost continuous flying operations from the start of the ground offensive. Each R1 was retrofitted with the same Marconi towed active decoy as well as under wing chaff/flare dispensers, reportedly sourced from the Tornado fleet.

Afghanistan and Iraq War
Nimrods were again deployed to the Middle East as part of the British contribution to the US-led invasion of Afghanistan; missions in this theatre involved the Nimrods performing lengthy overland flights for intelligence-gathering purposes. On 2 September 2006, 12 RAF personnel were killed when a Nimrod MR2 was destroyed in a mid-air explosion following an on-board fire over Afghanistan, it was the single greatest loss of British life since the Falklands War. The outbreak of the Iraq War in March 2003 saw the RAF's Nimrods being used for operations over Iraq, using the aircraft's sensors to detect hostile forces and to direct attacks by friendly coalition forces.

Search and rescue
While the Nimrod MR1/MR2 was in service, one aircraft from each of the squadrons on rotation was available for search and rescue operations at one-hour standby. The standby aircraft carried two sets of Lindholme Gear in the weapons bay. Usually one other Nimrod airborne on a training mission would also carry a set of Lindholme Gear. As well as using the aircraft sensors to find aircraft or ships in trouble, it was used to find survivors in the water, with a capability to search areas of up to 20,000 square miles (52,000 km2). The main role would normally be to act as on-scene rescue coordinator to control ships, fixed-wing aircraft, and helicopters in the search area.

The Nimrod was most often featured in the media in relation to its search-and-rescue role, such as in the reporting of major rescue incidents. In August 1979, several Nimrods were involved in locating yachting competitors during the disaster-stricken 1979 Fastnet race and coordinated with helicopters in searches for survivors from lost vessels. In March 1980, the Alexander L. Kielland was a Norwegian semi-submersible drilling rig that capsized whilst working in the Ekofisk oil field killing 123 people; six different Nimrods searched for survivors and took turns to provide rescue co-ordination, involving the control of 80 surface ships and 20 British and Norwegian helicopters. In an example of the search capabilities, in September 1977 when an attempted crossing of the North Atlantic in a Zodiac inflatable dinghy went wrong, a Nimrod found the collapsed dinghy and directed a ship to it.

Operation Tapestry
The Nimrods were often used to enforce Operation Tapestry. Tapestry is a codeword for the activities by ships and aircraft that protect the United Kingdom's Sovereign Sea Areas, including the protection of fishing rights and oil and gas extraction. Following the establishment of a 200 nautical miles (370 km) Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) at the beginning of 1977 the Nimrod fleet was given the task of patrolling the 270,000 square miles (700,000 km2) area. The aircraft would locate, identify, and photograph vessels operating in the EEZ. The whole area was routinely patrolled; in addition to surveillance, the aircraft would communicate with all oil and gas platforms. In 1978, an airborne Nimrod arrested an illegal fishing vessel in the Western Approaches and made the vessel proceed to Milford Haven for further investigation. During the Icelandic Cod Wars of 1972 and 1975–1976, the Nimrod fleet closely cooperated with Royal Navy surface vessels to protect British civilian fishing ships.

Accidents and incidents
Five Nimrods were lost in accidents during the type's service with the RAF:

On 17 November 1980, a Nimrod MR2 XV256 crashed near RAF Kinloss after three engines failed following multiple birdstrikes. Both pilots were killed but the remaining crew survived.

On 3 June 1984, a Nimrod MR2 XV257 stationed at RAF St Mawgan suffered extensive damage when a reconnaissance flare ignited in the bomb bay during flight. The aircraft successfully returned to base but was subsequently written-off due to fire damage. There were no casualties.

On 16 May 1995, XW666, a Nimrod R1 from RAF Waddington, ditched in the Moray Firth 4.5 miles (7.2 km) from Lossiemouth after an engine caught fire during a post-servicing test flight from RAF Kinloss. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) inquiry identified a number of technical issues as the cause. There were no casualties.

On 2 September 1995, a Nimrod MR2 XV239 crashed into Lake Ontario while participating in the Canadian International Air Show, killing the seven crew members.

On 2 September 2006, a Nimrod MR2 XV230 crashed near Kandahar in Afghanistan, killing all 14 servicemen on board – the largest loss of UK military personnel in a single event since the Falklands War. This was the first Nimrod to enter service, originally as a MR1 but upgraded to MR2 standard in the 1980s. On 23 February 2007, the Ministry of Defence grounded all Nimrod MR2s while fuel pumps were inspected, but stressed that the inspection was not necessarily related to this crash.

On 5 November 2007, XV235 was involved in a midair incident over Afghanistan when the crew noticed a fuel leak during air-to-air refuelling. After transmitting a mayday call, the crew landed the aircraft successfully. The incident came only a month before the issue of the report of a Board of Enquiry into 2 September 2006 fatal accident to XV230 in (likely) similar circumstances. The RAF subsequently suspended air-to-air refuelling operations for this type.


Nimrod General characteristics

Crew: 13
Capacity: 24
Length: 38.65 m (126 ft 9 in)
Wingspan: 35.00 m (114 ft 10 in)
Height: 9.14 m (31 ft)
Wing area: 197.05 m² (2,121 sq ft)
Empty weight: 39,009 kg (86,000 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 87,090 kg (192,000 lb)
Powerplant: 4 × Rolls-Royce Spey turbofans, 54.09 kN (12,160 lbf) each
Maximum speed: 923 km/h (575 mph)
Cruise speed: 787 km/h (490 mph)
Range: 8,340–9,265 km (5,180–5,755 mi)
Service ceiling: 13,411 m (44,000 ft)
Guns: None
Hardpoints: 2× under-wing pylon stations and an internal bomb bay with a capacity of 20,000 lb (9,100 kg) and provisions to carry combinations of:
Rockets: None
Missiles: Air-to-air missile: 2× AIM-9 Sidewinder (non-standard in RAF service, only mounted on the MR2 during the Falklands War)
Air-to-surface missile: Nord AS.12, Martel missile, AGM-65 Maverick, AGM-84 Harpoon
Bombs: Depth charges, US-owned B57 nuclear depth bombs (2) (until 1992)
Other: Air-dropped Mk.46 torpedoes, Sting Ray torpedoes, Naval mines, Sonobuoys

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7927
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by SKB »




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

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by shark bait »

I know its hindsight, but its is such a shame they didn't choose a modern platform for the Nimrod replacement.
New wings on an old body does seem a terrible idea.
@LandSharkUK

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

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by marktigger »

one of many in the Nimrod 2000 program! the biggest one getting BaE to do the work

Digger22
Member
Posts: 347
Joined: 27 May 2015, 16:47
England

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by Digger22 »

marktigger wrote:one of many in the Nimrod 2000 program! the biggest one getting BaE to do the work
I can't help but feel that the Government of the day was somewhat let off the hook by the opposition when the decision to scrap the practically completed fleet was made, probably due to the huge overspend they had sanctioned and approving the original concept of mating new bits to old in the first place. Why someone in the know didn't realise that would not work, and say something, is either a case of demonstrating just how little experience remained with the manufacturer or how desperate they were to rip off the tax payer again.
I read somewhere that the first production machine was due to fly to Coventry, I believe, to be painted, well before the cancellation.
Did this happen?, or does this demonstrate the decision to scrap the fleet was made well before the 2010SDSR?. Dr Fox was on record at the time as saying that 'no production MRA4's had flown'. More like they were prevented from flying if you ask me. With Woodford due to close after the last production machine had left, in March 2011 I think, and the cancellation just 6 months earlier, doesn't that tell us just how complete these machines were?.
Having spent over £3Bn to get nothing, with the P9 being the most likely 'replacement', the whole thing just stinks. No smoke without fire I'm afraid and the whole question of who was advising who and what was in it for who I find deeply concerning.
The most bizarre thing that happened though was when the stripped airframes were rolled outside to be publicly cut up and then left there for a few days!, as though we were showing someone that they had been destroyed, when they could have been cut up inside the construction hall just a easily. A bit like the B52's that were cut up in the desert and left there to be verified by Russian spy satellites' as part of the S.A.L.T. in the 60's and 70's.
Very odd. And here we are 5 years on with no effective MPA (although the MRA4 was so much more than that). An island nation with one of the world largest potentially hostile submarine forces on our doorstep. That's not a capability gap, that's just plain suicide.
So how much more do we now have to spend to get this essential capability back?.
Having spent so much developing the MRA4 surely we should order new build Nimrod, rather than P9's?.
When I was a little chap, in the 70's, it was always a Nimrod that was out there finding people in distress, miles out in the Atlantic, always the first on the scene. Then again in the 80's helping Victor's find Vulcan's. And in Afghanistan and elsewhere, Nimrod's were always called upon by ourselves and our Allies. And now?.
Sad, very sad indeed.

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

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by marktigger »

BaE had asked for more money for systems and weapons integration and there was rumours it was almost as much as they had already spent. Then there was an engineering report with 72 safety issues down to poor design and bodged engineering.

the decision was more about getting the equipment budget under control but i also suspect to put a warning shot across BaE's bows that the days of blank cheques were over.

But allot of this should have been forseen. We have been down this route before with Nimrod british industry not delivering and us having to buy american. Obviously the lessons of the Nimrod AEW3 project weren't learnt.

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1732
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Tuvalu

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by Pseudo »

Digger22 wrote:
marktigger wrote:one of many in the Nimrod 2000 program! the biggest one getting BaE to do the work
I can't help but feel that the Government of the day was somewhat let off the hook by the opposition when the decision to scrap the practically completed fleet was made, probably due to the huge overspend they had sanctioned and approving the original concept of mating new bits to old in the first place.
Wasn't the design approved and contract signed in 1996, under the Conservative government of John Major? With the subsequent Blair government redrawing the contracts in the early 2000's and forcing BAe to take a charge of £500m against the project. I think that the charge against the Labour government is that in hindsight they should have cancelled the project back in the early 2000's, but given that the P-8 development contract wasn't awarded to Boeing until the mid 2000's it would have represented something of a leap in to the dark unless they were able to leverage their experience developing MRA4 to participate in the development of the P-8.

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

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by marktigger »

the other alternate was the P7 recycled P3 airframes with new engines and avionics.
I wonder if they had built a new airframe would it have been easier and cheaper

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

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by shark bait »

marktigger wrote: I wonder if they had built a new airframe would it have been easier and cheaper
It all most certainly would have.
I believe it was an attempt to save money, by doing a bit of a bodge job and it failed miserably. I shocks me know one thought it would be a bad idea at the time. Perhaps its just hindsight or perhaps it was and overwhelming desire of the accountants to make it cheap.

I think now days it is almost impossible to think about using anything other than a commercial airframe .
@LandSharkUK

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

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by marktigger »

I remember something also being made at the time about recycling. But BaE made an assumption all the fuselages were standard size forgetting these aircraft were hand built.

given the numbers we would need its not economically viable

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1732
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Tuvalu

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by Pseudo »

marktigger wrote:the other alternate was the P7 recycled P3 airframes with new engines and avionics.
I suspect that would have ended up being P-3's with as much MRA4 kit bolted on to them as possible, and a concomitant cost to go with it.
I wonder if they had built a new airframe would it have been easier and cheaper
I think that the P-1 cost about £3bn and we'd spend nearly £4bn on MRA4 at the time of cancellation. So, maybe?
shark bait wrote:I believe it was an attempt to save money, by doing a bit of a bodge job and it failed miserably. I shocks me know one thought it would be a bad idea at the time. Perhaps its just hindsight or perhaps it was and overwhelming desire of the accountants to make it cheap.
I think that it was a combination of a desire to save money along with their not being a suitable in-production British built commercial design that could be used as a base. The assumption of course being that designing a new aircraft from scratch would always be more expensive than adapting the design of an existing aircraft.

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

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by shark bait »

Pseudo wrote: The assumption of course being that designing a new aircraft from scratch would always be more expensive than adapting the design of an existing aircraft.
I can accept that assumption, but why not just reproduce full Nimrod airframes rather than putting together old and new?
They should have recognised British manufacturing was not good at the time of the MR2
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1732
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Tuvalu

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by Pseudo »

shark bait wrote:
Pseudo wrote: The assumption of course being that designing a new aircraft from scratch would always be more expensive than adapting the design of an existing aircraft.
I can accept that assumption, but why not just reproduce full Nimrod airframes rather than putting together old and new?
They should have recognised British manufacturing was not good at the time of the MR2
Another assumption that it'd be cheaper to rebuild existing airframes than to produce new ones. IIRC, the major new part was the wings which we already produced for the Airbus at Broughton, so there was an existing manufacturing expertise base to take advantage there. The assumption would have been that we'd have to develop manufacturing expertise for the other bits of the aircraft were we to build a whole new aircraft. Though, I don't think it would have been all that costly, since we already had the design expertise and requisite manufacturing knowledge.

Digger22
Member
Posts: 347
Joined: 27 May 2015, 16:47
England

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by Digger22 »

Pseudo wrote:
Digger22 wrote:
marktigger wrote:one of many in the Nimrod 2000 program! the biggest one getting BaE to do the work
I can't help but feel that the Government of the day was somewhat let off the hook by the opposition when the decision to scrap the practically completed fleet was made, probably due to the huge overspend they had sanctioned and approving the original concept of mating new bits to old in the first place.
Wasn't the design approved and contract signed in 1996, under the Conservative government of John Major? With the subsequent Blair government redrawing the contracts in the early 2000's and forcing BAe to take a charge of £500m against the project. I think that the charge against the Labour government is that in hindsight they should have cancelled the project back in the early 2000's, but given that the P-8 development contract wasn't awarded to Boeing until the mid 2000's it would have represented something of a leap in to the dark unless they were able to leverage their experience developing MRA4 to participate in the development of the P-8.
Yes, that's kind of what I meant. The lack of opposition to the decision was a case of keep our heads down we made as many mistakes as they have. Ultimately though the project didn't become a waste of money until it was cancelled. Until then it was a late overspent project. Cancellation left us with nothing, and ironing out the remaining issues would have been cheaper than starting over. I do think though that there is far too much made about new tooling, and jigs and so on. Modern construction requires more erecting than actual attaching to jigs, as components are constructed to far greater tolerance, with laser alignment etc. The same arguments circulate around why we can't order more T45's for example. Convenient and plausible excuses. Building new aircraft would be possible and not cost much more than P9's, keeping a skilled and more capable workforce has to be worth something, as well as benefiting the local economy. Besides what happened to all the stuff they took out of the MRA4's?, engines were all built, glass cockpit display's etc......

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7927
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by SKB »

MRA4 - First flight


MRA4 - Last flight...

Digger22
Member
Posts: 347
Joined: 27 May 2015, 16:47
England

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by Digger22 »

SKB wrote:

Unbelievable!! Thanks for posting that SKB. Although I must sit down to ensure my blood pressure stays low ish.

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

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by shark bait »

Digger22 wrote: Unbelievable!! Thanks for posting that SKB. Although I must sit down to ensure my blood pressure stays low ish.
Its very disappointing. Such a shame but I can understand the desicion, the costs we're horrendous
@LandSharkUK

Digger22
Member
Posts: 347
Joined: 27 May 2015, 16:47
England

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by Digger22 »

shark bait wrote:
Digger22 wrote: Unbelievable!! Thanks for posting that SKB. Although I must sit down to ensure my blood pressure stays low ish.
Its very disappointing. Such a shame but I can understand the desicion, the costs we're horrendous
I know the costs went crazy, but these things were finished and we scrapped them. Nothing to show for it, we could have improved them while in service, or if the issue was their annual running bill, why not put them in storage?. Still I'm sure they will have fun spending billions more ordering P9's. What hypocrisy.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7927
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by SKB »

MRA4's being cut up and scrapped in 2011.


Woodford hangar in 2011, home of the Nimrod MRA4. Just an empty shell ready to be demolished.

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

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by shark bait »

Digger22 wrote: I know the costs went crazy, but these things were finished and we scrapped them. Nothing to show for it, we could have improved them while in service, or if the issue was their annual running bill, why not put them in storage?. Still I'm sure they will have fun spending billions more ordering P9's. What hypocrisy.
No, they were far from finished, that's part of the problem, all that money spend and still not finished. It's reported BAE wanted billions more to finish the programme.
@LandSharkUK

Digger22
Member
Posts: 347
Joined: 27 May 2015, 16:47
England

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by Digger22 »

shark bait wrote:
Digger22 wrote: I know the costs went crazy, but these things were finished and we scrapped them. Nothing to show for it, we could have improved them while in service, or if the issue was their annual running bill, why not put them in storage?. Still I'm sure they will have fun spending billions more ordering P9's. What hypocrisy.
No, they were far from finished, that's part of the problem, all that money spend and still not finished. It's reported BAE wanted billions more to finish the programme.
Mmmm, SKB's video shows the second proper production machine flying. Not sure how that can not be described as finished?. With ZJ514 having already been accepted by the Mod as well. So that's at least two of the 9 production machines finished. All the others were due to be complete by the following March. Anyway this is all very pointless, and leaves the RAF with only two types of manned attack aircraft, excluding weapons capable trainers. With their ability to launch multiple Storm Shadow, and even carry conventional bombs, the MRA4 would have been in huge demand, a true multi role type. RIP.

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

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by shark bait »

Digger22 wrote:
Mmmm, SKB's video shows the second proper production machine flying. Not sure how that can not be described as finished?. With ZJ514 having already been accepted by the Mod as well. So that's at least two of the 9 production machines finished. All the others were due to be complete by the following March. Anyway this is all very pointless, and leaves the RAF with only two types of manned attack aircraft, excluding weapons capable trainers. With their ability to launch multiple Storm Shadow, and even carry conventional bombs, the MRA4 would have been in huge demand, a true multi role type. RIP.
F35 has been flying for ages , but one could argue that is not finished yet. Still needs engine work, weapons and sensor works and possible structural work. Just because something is in the air, posing for the press, doesn't mean its finished.

Nimrod still required structural work and weapons and sensor work, which was expected to cost multiple billions.

Agree the MRA4 could have been great, and would be in huge demand, it's a shame it was such a balls up !
@LandSharkUK

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

Re: Nimrod (Maritime Patrol Aircraft) (1969-2011) (RAF)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

From someone who worked in ASW for over 40 years, latterly at DRA/DERA Farnborough formerly the RAE. Contains a personal view of what happened with the MR4A project:

Sonobuoy History from a UK Perspective: RAE Farnborough's Role in Airborne Anti - Submarine Warfare Paperback – 4 Jul 2016
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