Jump to content

Norway joins the P-8A club...


Slater

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, Latinbear said:

Over 40 years which is pretty good going. Thinking of the size of Norway and its population relative to the UK and they buy five P8s while we're buying nine. Hmmm.   

Norway hasn't squandered it's oil and gas revenue so has money to spend to defend those important assets. They have a huge coastline and Russia as near neighbours (who regularly transit vessels through Norway's waters) so they could probably use double the number they have ordered.

 

Duncan B

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plan is to have all of the 5 P-8's in service by 2022 latest, whereby the P-3's will be gradually withdrawn from use in parallell. 

Given that decision and Agreement hasn't been made, this is quite quick overall 

 

Our coastline is long, and we need a good tool. The rewinging and other service work on the P-3 was completed some 18 months ago, and will by the time the P-8's are delivered have done their work. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Duncan B said:

Norway hasn't squandered it's oil and gas revenue so has money to spend to defend those important assets. They have a huge coastline and Russia as near neighbours (who regularly transit vessels through Norway's waters) so they could probably use double the number they have ordered.

 

Duncan B

 

I agree entirely but I thought to mention or suggest that the UK has squandered much of our oil and gas revenues (and by which I mean not invested or saved a percentage as the Norwegians, Kuwaitis, Saudis and others have done) might be seen as a bit too political. Bearing in mind how far the Nimrods used to roam we could certainly use more than nine aircraft.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Latinbear said:

 

I agree entirely but I thought to mention or suggest that the UK has squandered much of our oil and gas revenues (and by which I mean not invested or saved a percentage as the Norwegians, Kuwaitis, Saudis and others have done) might be seen as a bit too political. Bearing in mind how far the Nimrods used to roam we could certainly use more than nine aircraft.

 

Agreed, I originally put the exact same phrase about squandering revenue in but removed it as it might have been taken by some to be a political statement as opposed to stating the facts (no Oil Fund was ever set up in the UK as far as I'm aware unlike most other Oil Producers).

Will having P-8s patrolling both sides of the GIUK gap be a positive step with common systems etc or will it provide a sensor gap to be exploited?

 

Duncan B

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Latinbear said:

 

I agree entirely but I thought to mention or suggest that the UK has squandered much of our oil and gas revenues (and by which I mean not invested or saved a percentage as the Norwegians, Kuwaitis, Saudis and others have done) might be seen as a bit too political. Bearing in mind how far the Nimrods used to roam we could certainly use more than nine aircraft.

 

 

The Norwegian sovereign wealth fund is used to pay goverment pensions. The UK government used its oil revenue to pay for, among other things, government pensions so there isn't a great deal of difference. The Norwegians used it to smooth out volatility in the income stream from oil but the UK doesn't need to as it has a much more diversified economy and a greater ability to borrow via gilts.

Edited by magwitch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got a feeling the Norwegians are going to tie up with the UK on the P-8 programme with regards to training and maintenance, so I think that might have sped up the process a bit.

 

As to the UK it was 9 to regenerate the MPA capability I suspect we may see that increase in future SDSR's to replace the Sentinels and cover some of the other battlespace roles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, magwitch said:

 

The Norwegian sovereign wealth fund is used to pay goverment pensions. The UK government used its oil revenue to pay for, among other things, government pensions so there isn't a great deal of difference. The Norwegians used it to smooth out volatility in the income stream from oil but the UK doesn't need to as it has a much more diversified economy and a greater ability to borrow via gilts.

 

Indeed. This is veering off topic but in my mind the question is to what extent the North Sea oil and gas might be seen as a windfall albeit over 40 plus years? it's a naturally diminishing resource which costs more to access over time as the easy reserves are tapped first. I agree that we do have a larger and more diversified economy than Norway and the Gulf states but HM Government's debt levels are eye wateringly high thereby constraining the government's room for manoeuvre. Also had we saved or invested some of the oil and gas revenues then our roads and railways and other infrastructure - including defence - might be in a better condition.

 

Ultimately it of course it comes down to voters, politicians and choices that are made at the time but on the basis that things go up and things go down then any windfalls I am lucky enough to get go into the rainy day fund.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...