Truro Model Builder Posted June 16, 2017 Share Posted June 16, 2017 Another capability we don't need. Seemingly. https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/raf-scrap-sentinel-surveillance-aircraft-due-cuts/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jinxman Posted June 16, 2017 Share Posted June 16, 2017 ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vickers McFunbus Posted June 16, 2017 Share Posted June 16, 2017 Been on the cards for years sadly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cngaero Posted June 17, 2017 Share Posted June 17, 2017 It's the usual bean counters failing, knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing. A very short sighted decision indeed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted June 17, 2017 Share Posted June 17, 2017 Stupidity knows no bounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Headroom Posted June 17, 2017 Share Posted June 17, 2017 Oh dear.... Instead of cutting the capability why not offer it to NATO in the way E-3's and C-17's are pooled? That way other NATO members can benefit from it and we 'hire' the capability? Trevor 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Latinbear Posted June 17, 2017 Share Posted June 17, 2017 The weakness of sterling and big bills to pay for F35s, Apache Es and P8's suggests to me that there will be more of this come but not all will be of the headline variety like Sentinel. By way of example I'm told that the Royal Military College at Sandhurst has had its budget cut by £50m although I don't know over what time period that applies. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlamgat9 Posted June 17, 2017 Share Posted June 17, 2017 (edited) 5 hours ago, cngaero said: It's the usual bean counters failing, knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing. A very short sighted decision indeed. The beans are going to become a lot fewer and farther between. Reality is we're going to have even less resources due to the economic winter that is coming our way and this won't be the last capability to be cut. I'd be quite surprised if both carriers really of enter service. I expect one will go into mothballs. Trident replacement is going to become increasingly unaffordable due to collapse of the £. Hold tight, it's going to be a rough ride. Edited June 17, 2017 by Vlamgat9 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vickers McFunbus Posted June 17, 2017 Share Posted June 17, 2017 7 hours ago, cngaero said: A very short sighted decision indeed. Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveJL Posted June 17, 2017 Share Posted June 17, 2017 Just out of interest, is there a possibility that the P-8 has some of, or similar, capabilities to the Sentinel in addition to it's maritime role? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vickers McFunbus Posted June 17, 2017 Share Posted June 17, 2017 2 hours ago, DaveJL said: Just out of interest, is there a possibility that the P-8 has some of, or similar, capabilities to the Sentinel in addition to it's maritime role? There is. Boeing has touted the potential to add the capability to the US DOD to replace JSTARS. Sadly for Sentinel, there are probably more pressing capabilities to be funded within the MoD/RAF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cngaero Posted June 17, 2017 Share Posted June 17, 2017 2 hours ago, Vickers McFunbus said: Why? I can only assume that some of it's surveillance capability can be taken up by the P8, but that's a good while off and like our 2 new aircraft carriers with no aircraft, we will have a gap. From what I understand, a further 6 serial allocations have been reserved for the P8 aircraft, bringing the total to 15. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vickers McFunbus Posted June 17, 2017 Share Posted June 17, 2017 3 hours ago, cngaero said: I can only assume that some of it's surveillance capability can be taken up by the P8, but that's a good while off and like our 2 new aircraft carriers with no aircraft, we will have a gap. From what I understand, a further 6 serial allocations have been reserved for the P8 aircraft, bringing the total to 15. Apparently the extra serials is a normal procedure and not related to any expectation of ordering further airframes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head in the clouds. Posted June 17, 2017 Share Posted June 17, 2017 11 hours ago, bentwaters81tfw said: Stupidity knows no bounds Agreed and it is wholesale. When will it end ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vickers McFunbus Posted June 17, 2017 Share Posted June 17, 2017 1 hour ago, Head in the clouds. said: Agreed and it is wholesale. When will it end ? Stupidity, or safely trying to operate assets within an ever tightening budget? The unfortunate truth is that of all the assets on the table, although relatively modern in terms of entry into service and its host airframe, the ASTOR platform and its associated technology has possibly been overtaken both by events in the "here and now" and by other platforms that can provide either similar, or more relevant, data for those that need it, some of which will also be far less manpower intensive and hence potentially carry a lower risk and financial burden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oggy4624 Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 E3 has been in service some 27 Years or so, I am sure that sentinel and P8 could cover the E3's role quite easily unless the RJ program is reliant on a 707 /CFM 56 fleet size for training and stores holding given the commonality between the the 707 and 737. We all know how Bubba throws his toys out out of the pram when he doesnt get his way. Getting rid of sentinel eliminates a whole stream of training through to parts holding, whereas a significant amount of parts and Sim commonality makes E3, RJ and P8 look more attractive. In time Wedgetail will probably replace E3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head in the clouds. Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 It struck me this week while reading an article on the Falklands war that in a period of 5 days in May 1982 the Task force had six ships sunk and fifteen damaged, most of which were withdrawn for obvious reasons. If a similar attrition rate occurred now our fleet would be incapable of operation...well it would be literally wiped out so maybe the question should not be simply on quality but numbers, in other words sustainability. While the Argentines were a brave and courageous foe they were not China, Russia or some other major aggressor and our margin of success in the South Atlantic was not huge. Having one platform to do several jobs is OK in peace time but in war when you need it everywhere it won't happen, the lack of numbers will present itself as the real Achilles heel of modern thinking. Whatever arguments are put forward for cuts there is a point when they(cuts) stop being tactical and become political and are therefore not in the best interests of our Armed Forces If taken to the 'n'th ' degree would one squadron of super tech fighters, one transport, one MPA be combat persistent? only if you suffered no losses and that is pie in the sky in warfare and looking through rose tinted glasses. My thought is that we are now into bone and that cannot be good. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 10 hours ago, Vickers McFunbus said: Stupidity, or safely trying to operate assets within an ever tightening budget? The unfortunate truth is that of all the assets on the table, although relatively modern in terms of entry into service and its host airframe, the ASTOR platform and its associated technology has possibly been overtaken both by events in the "here and now" and by other platforms that can provide either similar, or more relevant, data for those that need it, some of which will also be far less manpower intensive and hence potentially carry a lower risk and financial burden. Now we all know the BBC are not the sharpest tools in the box, but I watched the highlights of 'Culling the Trooper' last night. A Sentinel was in the flypast, and the commentator said it was the most advanced battlefield surveillance platform in the world. Perhaps it's believed the all singing, all dancing F-35B can replace it? Nimrod: World beater - scrap it Sentinal: World beater - scrap it TSR 2 : Potential world beater - scrap it Yes folks, it's the P word again. Can we afford to keep it? Yes. Where does the money come from? That 0.07% of GDP that we give to Nations who do not need it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglierating Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 7 hours ago, oggy4624 said: E3 has been in service some 27 Years or so, I am sure that sentinel and P8 could cover the E3's role quite easily unless the RJ program is reliant on a 707 /CFM 56 fleet size for training and stores holding given the commonality between the the 707 and 737. We all know how Bubba throws his toys out out of the pram when he doesnt get his way. Getting rid of sentinel eliminates a whole stream of training through to parts holding, whereas a significant amount of parts and Sim commonality makes E3, RJ and P8 look more attractive. In time Wedgetail will probably replace E3 Im sure sentinal and P8 wont be able to cover E3 role.....its a completely different concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglierating Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 (edited) 19 minutes ago, bentwaters81tfw said: Now we all know the BBC are not the sharpest tools in the box, but I watched the highlights of 'Culling the Trooper' last night. A Sentinel was in the flypast, and the commentator said it was the most advanced battlefield surveillance platform in the world. Perhaps it's believed the all singing, all dancing F-35B can replace it? Nimrod: World beater - scrap it Sentinal: World beater - scrap it TSR 2 : Potential world beater - scrap it Yes folks, it's the P word again. Can we afford to keep it? Yes. Where does the money come from? That 0.07% of GDP that we give to Nations who do not need it. You would be suprised what that 0.07% actually does for defence....ake friends and influence people.....nothing especially defence should be done in isolation. Waving a big stick sometimes has consequences if you dont nation build afterwards.....the last 20 years have shown that ....you are allowed to disagree Edited June 18, 2017 by junglierating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 10 minutes ago, junglierating said: You would be suprised what that 0.07% actually does for defence....ake friends and influence people.....nothing especially defence should be done in isolation. Waving a big stick sometimes has consequences if you dont nation build afterwards.....the last 20 years have shown that ....you are allowed to disagree I know what that 0.07% is 'wasted' on. I used to work for the Governments freight agents, and I know what was exported where. Not just defence contracts, but things like railway box cars, that sat rusting in the ports for decades; fishing nets and equipment thrown away while they go back to using sticks. India is so rich, it has a space programme, they tell us they don't need our aid, and buy their weapons off Russia. Quote 'Foreign aid: Money given by poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries.' 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglierating Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 Anyway its 0.7 % arouns 13 billion ,agree with you that there is wastage but not all afganistan and seiera leone are two places that recieve aid and why not 5 th richest nation and just two of my attendance gongs. But dont getvme started on distribution of assets it not allowed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head in the clouds. Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 I know where the money goes and I think most of us do but it shall not be mentioned( I am not talking Voldermort either) but I was reading on the inter weby thing that the voices about the problems associated with the F35 are getting louder and therein lies the problem, Jack of all, Master of none. You do not get a plumber to build a web site, a baker to build a wall, a lorry driver to do brain surgery so why do we expect defence systems to do just that, they are some of the most complex systems man has and the more you ask of it so the complexity rises along with the cost. It really is not rocket science. A point in hand; we build two new super carriers, BLUE WATER assets for obvious reasons, and then decide than one of them or both can do the job of HMS Ocean which by it's raison d ' etre is to get close to shore to land troops and vehicles...complete and utter lunacy and politicly motivated and not tactically motivated. By being close to shore you more vulnerable and loose one ship like that and, well you loose the fight, we are not exactly awash with them. The money is in this country, it is just misappropriated. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Headroom Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 As to HMS Ocean, my understanding was that it was built to a commercial (read "cheaper") specification rather than military and that as such had a 'shelf life' which has been or will shortly be reached. When is the next strategic defence review? Trevor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglierating Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 The O boat was built to civilian standards .....and boy they have got their monies worth but she is old .Its a great idea to keep her g9ing but expensive so a swing role ship the carriers will be. Im not going to go on about lit ops but you can bet the Q and the P boat will be a long way from shore More escorts are required....give me frigates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now