Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Contains threads on Joint Service equipment of the past, present and future.
Locked
jonas
Member
Posts: 972
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by jonas »

This is one of the more important decisions that will need to be addressed in SDSR 2015. I think general consensus is with the P8 Poseidon but there are options.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/maritim ... generated/

User avatar
Phil R
Member
Posts: 82
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:10
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by Phil R »

I agree that P8 Poseidon is the logical choice, but i do like the interesting possibilities that Kawasaki P-1 would enable.

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

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by S M H »

The M.P.A requirement should follow the C17 procurement path with 8 to 12 aircraft. With an initial buy of 4 aircraft. Then aircraft bought 1 or 2 at a time as the Seadcorn personnel are expanded. This would allow the M. P. A. fleet to be affordable in a very tight defence budget

jonas
Member
Posts: 972
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by jonas »

Phil R wrote:I agree that P8 Poseidon is the logical choice, but i do like the interesting possibilities that Kawasaki P-1 would enable.
It would be interesting, but it will never be seen in UK markings. The P8 has got to be the odds on favourite, not least of which is our relationship with the USA.
Apart from the interoperability with our closest allies,the long production line that would enable us to buy at leisure,the logistical and maintenance support,and hopefully the kind of deal we would get, it is I believe the aircraft that the UK user prefers.
As we have had our personel embedded in the Seedcorn initiative for some time,they have experience of it's capability. These personel are also tagged to be the instructors for our future MPA force
The US is being extremely helpfull not only in helping us keep our skills honed in the area of MPA ops, but also providing even greater assistance in training the future crews for the QE class carriers.
Due to the above, I cannot see us buying anything else but the P8, and the sooner the better.

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

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by Gabriele »

A P-8 purchase should also adopt a maintenance and update path similar to that for the Rivet Joint: sticking with the american schedule, and keeping changes to the minimum. One problem is Stingray. Not only would its integration be required (unless it is to remain unarmed, or armed with a limited stock of US torpedoes procured specifically for it) but it would kind of screw up the P-8 high altitude ASW method of employment unless it is fitted with the same wingkit as MK54.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

jonas
Member
Posts: 972
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by jonas »

Anyone wishing to read one of the most comprehensive reports on the P8, need look no further than to read one of our own members articles on this aircraft.
I hope Gabriele won't mind me posting the link :- http://ukarmedforcescommentary.blogspot ... nd-uk.html

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

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by Gabriele »

Thank you for that, actually. That article by now is a bit old, but the substance is still there, and valid. To release manpower and funding, the less painful option would be to have the P-8 Poseidon fitted with an additional radar, ideally the US Navy's AAS, so it can pick up overland surveillance as well, and replace Sentinel R1. As it is highly unlikely that a new MPA fleet and the Sentinel could both be sustained by the budget, it could be a way to go. The other stumbling point is the already mentioned torpedo problem, and eventually the high-altitude, drone-mounted MAD sensor if it is felt that it is required.
The US Navy did not put a MAD on Poseidon as it is meant to fly at high level where the MAD can't operate. But they don't seem happy with completely losing that bit of kit, and are investigating small, expendable drones with MAD, which could be dropped from the Poseidon to do the low-level searching. Added cost which the UK might not be able to afford.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7179
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by SKB »

I've added a RC-135W Airseeker (Joint Rivet) specific thread to the forum.
http://ukdefenceforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=60

jonas
Member
Posts: 972
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by jonas »

Gabriele wrote:Thank you for that, actually. That article by now is a bit old, but the substance is still there, and valid. To release manpower and funding, the less painful option would be to have the P-8 Poseidon fitted with an additional radar, ideally the US Navy's AAS, so it can pick up overland surveillance as well, and replace Sentinel R1. As it is highly unlikely that a new MPA fleet and the Sentinel could both be sustained by the budget, it could be a way to go. The other stumbling point is the already mentioned torpedo problem, and eventually the high-altitude, drone-mounted MAD sensor if it is felt that it is required.
The US Navy did not put a MAD on Poseidon as it is meant to fly at high level where the MAD can't operate. But they don't seem happy with completely losing that bit of kit, and are investigating small, expendable drones with MAD, which could be dropped from the Poseidon to do the low-level searching. Added cost which the UK might not be able to afford.
Gabriele. I knew I had read somewhere that in ref to the expendable MAD drones, they would be cheap at $5000 per batch of 100. Do you think that this is a realistic price as it does seem extremely cheap.The actuall title of the post made me think twice, given that it seems to be one of the less troubled projects.

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4630
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by marktigger »

The Future MPA should be part of the Navy and the Fleet Air arm.

Geoff_B
Member
Posts: 67
Joined: 01 May 2015, 22:25
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by Geoff_B »

marktigger wrote:The Future MPA should be part of the Navy and the Fleet Air arm.
Won't happen as Manpowers too tight now anyway, although i suspect they have a bigger part to play to ensure the RAF maintain the MPA role rather than let mission creep steal them away for too many other jobs.

As to which MPA, i don;t think the Japanese P-1 has proved itself as yet, thry have had issues with the design and build for it to be really considered. Th/ey may look at the cheap options such as the Airbus C-235 or converting the C-130J to MPA config, but the preferred option is to match the Australian deal and work them closely with the USN to get the benefits. We might even see thge UK act as a regional support hub to the type.

However we have this week to deal with first, then see who twists the SDSR to suit their policies before we find our the future of UK MPA and if it even has one. Even with a Tory lead i suspect they will initiate a requirement programme with an in-service post 2020 to keep costs down whilst getting the brownie points for filling the capability gap in the long run. In the short term, more Seedcorn possibly with a request to temporarily base allied MPA in UK to cover us

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4630
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by marktigger »

Tories have so far promised to protect the regular army and the navy!

It will depend what they want the MPA for if its full ASW/ASV cold war type concept or just a surface search maritime security/SAR support aircraft. What platform they go fore I hope its the former with P8

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1727
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Tuvalu

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by Pseudo »

If we were to go down the P-8 in 2020 route would it be possible and/or worthwhile to lease surplus P-3's until the P-8's enter service?

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

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by Gabriele »

jonas wrote:
Gabriele wrote:Thank you for that, actually. That article by now is a bit old, but the substance is still there, and valid. To release manpower and funding, the less painful option would be to have the P-8 Poseidon fitted with an additional radar, ideally the US Navy's AAS, so it can pick up overland surveillance as well, and replace Sentinel R1. As it is highly unlikely that a new MPA fleet and the Sentinel could both be sustained by the budget, it could be a way to go. The other stumbling point is the already mentioned torpedo problem, and eventually the high-altitude, drone-mounted MAD sensor if it is felt that it is required.
The US Navy did not put a MAD on Poseidon as it is meant to fly at high level where the MAD can't operate. But they don't seem happy with completely losing that bit of kit, and are investigating small, expendable drones with MAD, which could be dropped from the Poseidon to do the low-level searching. Added cost which the UK might not be able to afford.
Gabriele. I knew I had read somewhere that in ref to the expendable MAD drones, they would be cheap at $5000 per batch of 100. Do you think that this is a realistic price as it does seem extremely cheap.The actuall title of the post made me think twice, given that it seems to be one of the less troubled projects.

I am sure they are aiming for something as inexpensive as possible, but i don't know if i can believe the claim it will be THAT cheap...
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum


User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1727
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Tuvalu

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by Pseudo »

I'm sympathetic toward the cost vs. capability argument. While the P-8 is individually far more capable, I wonder whether half a dozen of them would give us a sufficient and cost effective capability when compared to a dozen C295's. I probably don't know enough about what capabilities are absolute necessaries, would C295 be good enough?

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

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by serge750 »

Hi guys

just wondered if the MOD may lease some P8 poseidons for a few years then buy them? not a good idea in my book but may help in the short term or maybe a Hirepurchase deal if that's possible....

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

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by S M H »

The purchase of the Maritime Patrol Aircraft would be feasible with little change from U.S. Navy aircraft as per the Rivet Joint Aircraft imbedded in U. S. maintenance program. But the lack of air to air refuelling would have to be addressed
Some of the two point Voyager aircraft would need to be outfitted as per R.A.A.F. aircraft with a refuelling boom. P.F.I. permitting (C17 and Rivet Joint would gain R.A.F refuelling capability)

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by shark bait »

@ Pseudo despite the P8 being more capable, I'm still swaying towards the C295 argument.

The P8 is clearly more capable, but the C295 gives you 90% of the capability for 33% of the price (no i dont work for airbus).
The question is are we ok with loosing that 10%? I am of the opinion the UK can no longer afford to maintain a best in class capability in all areas, perhaps a MPA is an easy option to let slip. The 295 is much more the multimission aircraft too which makes me happy!

Whats more, if the savings are used for more ASW variants of the T26 and more merlins, one could argue the capability could be just as strong.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1727
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Tuvalu

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by Pseudo »

shark bait wrote:@ Pseudo despite the P8 being more capable, I'm still swaying towards the C295 argument.

The P8 is clearly more capable, but the C295 gives you 90% of the capability for 33% of the price (no i dont work for airbus).
The question is are we ok with loosing that 10%? I am of the opinion the UK can no longer afford to maintain a best in class capability in all areas, perhaps a MPA is an easy option to let slip. The 295 is much more the multimission aircraft too which makes me happy!
It may just be that since we currently have 0% of the capability, 90% sounds like outrageous luxury. :(
Whats more, if the savings are used for more ASW variants of the T26 and more merlins, one could argue the capability could be just as strong.
I like your optimism. :)

jonas
Member
Posts: 972
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by jonas »

shark bait wrote:@ Pseudo despite the P8 being more capable, I'm still swaying towards the C295 argument.

The P8 is clearly more capable, but the C295 gives you 90% of the capability for 33% of the price (no i dont work for airbus).
The question is are we ok with loosing that 10%? I am of the opinion the UK can no longer afford to maintain a best in class capability in all areas, perhaps a MPA is an easy option to let slip. The 295 is much more the multimission aircraft too which makes me happy!

Whats more, if the savings are used for more ASW variants of the T26 and more merlins, one could argue the capability could be just as strong.
Agree with a lot of what you say, except for the last sentence. Since when have any savings made,been plowed back into defence. We always have the treasury waiting in the wings like vultures ready to grab the lefovers.

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

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by Gabriele »

90% of the capability, with C-295, is quite optimistic... It clearly isn't quite THAT good, otherwise everyone would be buying C-295. It has a fraction of the sonobuoys, a fraction of the sensors, 54% of the hard points (0% of internal hard points) and so along.

But the real key issue with the C-295 is also who is going to pay to keep the aircraft and its systems up to date once it is in service. You might pay it little when you purchase it, but who is going to pay to integrate active multi-static active coherent sonobuoys; who is going to keep up evolving the radar and embarked sensors...?
When you are tied in to the US Navy's vast fleet, you can piggyback on their vast budget and their regular programme of development. And have such things as MAC sonobuoys, which will ensure you can actually find submarines, even the most modern and stealthy ones. With the 295, you are betting on sharing the costs of obsolescence removal on countries such as Mexico and Portugal.
With all due respect for all countries, keeping the aircraft up to date is going to be a complex affair, with a lack of realistic development and funding partners.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by shark bait »

perhaps 90% is slightly optimistic, its mostly a payload thing and range thing. These things always seem to boil down to the Pareto principal, almost all the capability, a vastly reduced cost, can the uk accept this? There are always novel approaches to problems, perhaps the 295 could cue in an F35, with spear 3 if needed.

On the topic of upgrades, clearly there are advantages being part of the US fleet, airseeker is a perfect example, for a small fleet its great to piggy back on the Americans economies of scale. But if you operate alot yourself the returns diminish.

There are also advantages when we do things by our self. We get exactly what we want, and then we can try and sell the upgrades to other fleets. But most importantly we maintain our industry. The F35 is strangling European aerospace and leaders seem all to happy to hand over control of our industry to the americans. Whilst there may be short term financial gain by using the Americans work, the long term economic effects of doing so may be severe
@LandSharkUK

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

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by Gabriele »

I agree with the principle, but doing things autonomously requires money that is not there. Unless there is a change of policy, it just won't do. Nimrod was done in house, and was better in almost every performance aspect. But we know how that ended. Greater caution will be needed in the future when choosing which system will have to be supported mainly with national expenditure, and what is better to support as a partner in a greater family.
There just isn't the money. The F-35 might be strangling european fighter jet know how, but what aircraft could have been designed with short of 4 billion dollars in development money forked out by UK, Italy and Netherlands...? Not much of anything could have come out of that.

As for how much compromises are acceptable in an MPA purchase, my opinion is that there is one key thing to consider: an MPA must have a good and constantly supported ability to find, track and attack submarines. Surface search isn't an issue, it is a requirement that can be met in many ways indeed. But underwater target surveillance and attack, no. The reason why we even bother about a MPA is for its ability to look and hit underwater.
If it can't do that in the right way, and if there is no clear way to support this key capability in the long term, installing the necessary upgrades, then it risks not being worth the expense.
On the rest, compromises are perfectly acceptable.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

User avatar
WhitestElephant
Member
Posts: 389
Joined: 06 May 2015, 10:57
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Maritime Patrol Options

Post by WhitestElephant »

What are the options of P8 being capable of performing the same job as Sentinel? As I understand it, Sentinel could be upgraded to perform maritime surveillance (but no weapons capability), so what about P8 being capable ground ISTAR too?

If so, Sentinel could be retired in favour of a single P8 fleet performing both roles, saving money. Imagine an armed ISTAR over Iraq fighting ISIS...

Or am I being silly?
Though we are not now that strength which in old days moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are. - Lord Tennyson (Ulysses)

Locked