Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Contains threads on Royal Air Force equipment of the past, present and future.
Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6209
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by Lord Jim »

Yes, these five P-8s are an interim platform for Germany as the P-3Cs bought from the Netherlands, though upgraded and capable, have been around since the 1980s.

User avatar
Ianmb17
Member
Posts: 114
Joined: 01 May 2015, 21:33
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by Ianmb17 »


User avatar
Ianmb17
Member
Posts: 114
Joined: 01 May 2015, 21:33
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by Ianmb17 »


serge750
Member
Posts: 823
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by serge750 »

Ron5 wrote:And now Germany is buying 5 while reassuring France they're still committed to the new French MPA project (eyes roll).
Maybe the RAF could buy them cheap when the MPA project comes to fruition.......

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1230
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by Scimitar54 »

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1748
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by seaspear »

Is there an argument to purchase more of the Poseidons for the R.A.F to have a role as a bomber, carrying a large number of long-range missiles would provide a different capacity with the increased range of the aircraft over the present aircraft
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4 ... senal-ship

Defiance
Donator
Posts: 736
Joined: 07 Oct 2015, 20:52
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by Defiance »

seaspear wrote:Is there an argument to purchase more of the Poseidons for the R.A.F to have a role as a bomber, carrying a large number of long-range missiles would provide a different capacity with the increased range of the aircraft over the present aircraft
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4 ... senal-ship
There's an argument but not neccesarily a compelling one in the face of restricted budgets and other priorities. We have TLAM from SSN, Storm Shadow on Typhoon and, in future, FC/ASW or derivative of on Tempest and Type 26. Do we need another system to provide long range strike?

It's different from a USAF perspective as the Pacific is huge and they're probably curious about cheap long range strike options for a post-B-52 world.

J. Tattersall

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by J. Tattersall »

Defiance wrote:There's an argument but not neccesarily a compelling one in the face of restricted budgets and other priorities. We have TLAM from SSN, Storm Shadow on Typhoon and, in future, FC/ASW or derivative of on Tempest and Type 26. Do we need another system to provide long range strike?

It's different from a USAF perspective as the Pacific is huge and they're probably curious about cheap long range strike options for a post-B-52 world.
Your are right. It's difficult to see what the RAF's need (if any) would be and how that would stack up against other priorities.
seaspear wrote:Is there an argument to purchase more of the Poseidons for the R.A.F to have a role as a bomber, carrying a large number of long-range missiles would provide a different capacity with the increased range of the aircraft over the present aircraft
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4 ... senal-ship
This does really seem to be a flight of fancy in the Drive, a rehash of many similar concepts over the decades.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6209
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by Lord Jim »

For the USAF such a platform dies actually make sense. In the past there has been talk of restarting the B-1 production like to produce a similar platform, or converting 747s, but actually using a 737 airframe is in the realm of reality whilst the previous ideas have really be pure fantasy. One of the issues I can see though is the loadout such a platform could carry. If it is just a stripped out P-8 then it would be relatively limited, but to modify the platform to carry the number of weapons ideally wanted to be an "Arsenal" platform may make the plane much more expensive and defeat the objective.

As for the RAF, this is a route we do not want to pursue, we have no real need of such a capability even if some RAF Officers go all goggle eyed at the thought.

Phil Sayers
Member
Posts: 82
Joined: 03 May 2015, 13:56

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by Phil Sayers »

While a long way down the priority list I don't doubt it would be a very useful option to have. Certainly we once had that option as a requirement because the Nimrod MRA4s were to be equipped with Storm Shadow.

downsizer
Member
Posts: 834
Joined: 02 May 2015, 08:03

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by downsizer »

Phil Sayers wrote:While a long way down the priority list I don't doubt it would be a very useful option to have. Certainly we once had that option as a requirement because the Nimrod MRA4s were to be equipped with Storm Shadow.
No they weren't. BAE bunged a few on a demonstrator to show a possibility.

It was never planned to be, nor had any work been done to, integrated onto Nimrod.

Phil Sayers
Member
Posts: 82
Joined: 03 May 2015, 13:56

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by Phil Sayers »

Thanks, I stand corrected.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6209
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by Lord Jim »

With only 4-6 Nimrod MRA4 destined for service such a capability would have rarely been used if ever if it had been adopted. When I was at the Paris Air Show in teh 1990s, A Nimrod MR2 was displayed trying to drum up orders for the MRA4 conversion and sale of surplus RAF airframes. I was sitting next to some Americans in the Northrop/Grumman hospitality areas and they stated that they thought it was a bomber until corrected due to the size of its weapons bay!

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1748
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by seaspear »

This article suggests that there is a gap in the capability of missiles held by the R.A..F
https://www.navylookout.com/the-puzzlin ... apability/

Defiance
Donator
Posts: 736
Joined: 07 Oct 2015, 20:52
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by Defiance »

seaspear wrote:This article suggests that there is a gap in the capability of missiles held by the R.A..F
https://www.navylookout.com/the-puzzlin ... apability/
There is a gap but things have changed since that article was published.

P-8 was officially equipped with Harpoon with NSM on the horizon as a potential Norwegian requirement. Since then the USN have confirmed and funded LRASM integration onto the P-8 so should the UK want to buy an AShM then we have a good range from more cost-efficient to high capability.

Then the discussion around Typhoon is a bit clearer as well. It's recently been confirmed that Typhoon will be receiving FC/ASW (alongside Type 26) by 2030. Still a big gap but clearer than when the article was written.

User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1699
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by The Armchair Soldier »

First torpedo dropped from an RAF Poseidon — a recoverable exercise variant torpedo (REXTORP):

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6209
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by Lord Jim »

I really hope that in five years at the next review, the capabilities of the P-8 are fully appreciated and we order a few more plus integrate them with our Protectors and Rivers to provide far greater coverage of our EEZ. It shouldn't take too long for the benefits of these MPA's with their varied capabilities are fully realised, as would giving them a AAR ability. This was done with the E-3s and the front fuselage plumbing is the same for the 707 and 737. Such work would also be attractive to other P-8 and E-7 users who do not have boom equipped tankers. Just a few ideas.

User avatar
Jensy
Member
Posts: 548
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by Jensy »

Lord Jim wrote: This was done with the E-3s and the front fuselage plumbing is the same for the 707 and 737. Such work would also be attractive to other P-8 and E-7 users who do not have boom equipped tankers. Just a few ideas.
Worth considering that the largest P-8 fleet and the largest Western probe/drogue user is the USN.

They chose to stick with boom AAR, as they had with the P-3, for a number of reasons (including: compatibility/speed/aerodynamics) but mainly because they get their fuel delivered by the USAF, not their own KC-130s.

A lesson that should have been well learned from Nimrod is to avoid Jerry-rigging bespoke AAR systems to converted airliners, especially when other OEM fitted solutions are available.

The highly unfortunate decline of Marshall, with their unique and domestic capabilities, is another consideration....

If we want to refuel the P-8s, which I support but don't think is an urgent priority, the most logical choice is to fit booms to some of the Voyagers.

Whilst the P-8 is still in production we should focus on growing the fleet as much as possible.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6209
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by Lord Jim »

The probe installation on the P-8s and E-7s would be the same as used on the E-3s. Also far more nations have access to probe and drogue AAR than to boom. A comparison of cost for installing Booms on a number of Voyagers to that of installing probes on out P-8s and E-7s would be interesting. I so not see why we should rely on allied air forces or contractors to provide AAR to our AWACS and MPA fleets, especially if our aim is to have all our Armed Forces have an innate ability to be deployed globally.

S M H
Member
Posts: 420
Joined: 03 May 2015, 12:59
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by S M H »

Talked to one of the crew on the Air support craft yesterday. The informed me that they had been on a torpex recovery for a dril drop mk 56 from a P 8 in the Morray firth range. Said it was the first torpedo recovery for the type and the first one they had recoverd since the demise of the Nimrud. Didn't say which range but i presume it was D809 north of Fraserburgh as the wind farm round the ex rig would preclude using D807 the original dedicated range. It strange that he was training when we recovered a drill Sting Ray as part of the 1000 th production of the type.

User avatar
Jensy
Member
Posts: 548
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by Jensy »

Lord Jim wrote:The probe installation on the P-8s and E-7s would be the same as used on the E-3s. Also far more nations have access to probe and drogue AAR than to boom. A comparison of cost for installing Booms on a number of Voyagers to that of installing probes on out P-8s and E-7s would be interesting. I so not see why we should rely on allied air forces or contractors to provide AAR to our AWACS and MPA fleets, especially if our aim is to have all our Armed Forces have an innate ability to be deployed globally.
Sure, Probe & Drogue is a more common method than boom refuelling. However when you remove Russia, China and other users of non-western technology it's not a particularly significant advantage.

More specifically, centre-line HDU refuelling (as we have fitted to some of the Voyagers) is pretty niche for large aircraft. The days of V-Bombers, VC-10s, Nimrod and Hercules fleets all needing lots of compatible tankers are long gone.

The more widespread refuelling pods are only really useful and safe for smaller, fighter sized aircraft. For instance the C-130, KC-390 and A400m use wing mounted pods, rather than centre-line.

[Edit: As SW1 notes there is a Cobham centre-line HDU option developed for A400m]

Of the bigger P-8 operators the only other Probe & Drogue user is India, and they're in the market for Airbus MRTTs or similar, which as we know can be fitted with booms or hoses. The smaller nations don't have AAR aircraft and most of them are former P-3 users, so even if they had the capability it would be for booms (see Germany).

As things stand, by the end of this decade the only large aircraft fitted with refuelling probes in UK service will be the A400m. Conversely we'll have C-17, P-8, RC-135 and potentially E-7 that are compatible with boom refuelling. Seems sensible to adapt what we have, rather than embarking upon a bespoke system for us and maybe (but almost certainly not) India.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2674
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by SW1 »

A400m has a centre line refuelling option. The principle customers of air to air refuelling is the fastjet fleet.

The choice of refuelling method is largely governed by receiving aircrafts fuel system and the flow pressure it can accept. No point have a very high flow rate boom or centreline pod if your receiving aircraft can’t take any more than what’s offered by wing pods and you can refuel 2 rather than one a/c at a time.

With only a handful of p8 and e7 along with c17 basically never using it may take some convincing to come up with the cash to introduce it. Where it may come onto the radar is if or when an aar capability is seen as necessary for unmanned systems or if the aar function becomes automated it maybe easier to do that using a boom than a drogue. A real force multiplier in short supply with all our allies we should of expanded the aar fleet in the integrated review

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1230
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by Scimitar54 »

With the size of our AAR fleet (current or with an increase), we cannot afford to have them subdivided into 2 types. There would be a severe reduction in availability to the end user. We either need a much larger fleet, which with our overall fleet numbers is neither sensible or likely, or we must make sure that we have full utility across all aircraft types. I am fairly certain that this probably means Probe and Drogue. The MOD needs to ensure that all appropriate aircraft are fitted with P and B ASAP, preferably yesterday! :mrgreen:


User avatar
Ianmb17
Member
Posts: 114
Joined: 01 May 2015, 21:33
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing P-8A Poseidon (MRA Mk.1) (RAF)

Post by Ianmb17 »


Post Reply