Roland Pulfrew Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 Unlike the P1, P8 can not operate at low level which really rather compromises its ability as an MPA! A little bit of knowledge...... Got any evidence for this erroneous assertion?I would suggest that P8 doesn't fall in to being "a very capable platform". Why? Again what is your evidence for this? Do you really think the USN would buy a $150M aircraft that wasn't very capable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PLC1966 Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 P-8 has a lot of similar mission equipment based on the Nimrod MR4 kit, and Project Seedcorn is based in the US and not Japan for a reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 I was going to say what PLC1966 did - the RAF is pretty much embedded in the P-8 program Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin @ RAM Models Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 I saw the P8 low over the sea off Flamborough Head last year. Amusing to listen to the reaction of fellow tourists as it flew low and banked heavily over the sea. Still a 737 though in my eyes no matter how capable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truro Model Builder Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 P-8 has a lot of similar mission equipment based on the Nimrod MR4 kit, and Project Seedcorn is based in the US and not Japan for a reason. Not just the US, but in Canada, Australia and New Zealand as well. I think one or two may be on tours with the French Navy as well. Not Japan as I suspect not many RAF aircrew have a good knowledge of Japanese! There is an issue with low level operations with the P-8, and US Navy procedures do indeed call for it to operate primarily at medium altitude. This is an airframe issue, and stems from the fact that the 737 was never designed to undertake this type of work. There has been plenty of discussion about the subject in multiple topics in the Military Aviation section of PPRuNe, which I do not intend to wade through and repeat here. For that reason the P-8 is not fitted with a MAD boom, and plenty of ex-Kipper fleet personnel question the usefulness in particular of dropping sonobuoys from medium altitude, and the whole idea in general of medium altitude ASW. Having said that, the P-8 is a very capable aircraft, and I suspect that if the RAF do get back in the business of ASW it will be selected over the P-1. I hope that the P-1 is given a fair chance to show its capabilities as well, however, and I lean towards it because the Japanese requirements for the job fit very closely with our own. Whatever we buy, I hope it is mainly off the shelf, to keep the costs down and BAE Systems out of it, though I would be happy for the P-1 to receive Rolls-Royce engines. Of course, if we decide to reintroduce MR only and not ASW, I think it will be something much cheaper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 The Indian P-8 has a MAD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Foster60 Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 The P1 looks as if it would be a great model, especially in RAF Colours. It is after all a wonderful idea for an island nation to produce a 4 engine MPA. Good luck to them. Nigel 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upnorth Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Not just the US, but in Canada, Australia and New Zealand as well. I think one or two may be on tours with the French Navy as well. Not Japan as I suspect not many RAF aircrew have a good knowledge of Japanese! I'd wager it has less to do with language than it does with resources and available training spots. I've no doubt the Japanese military has a decent number of competent English speakers who could form the nucleus of a multinational, English speaking P-1 crew but the real question is one of practicality and how many multinational crews they could support at any given time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomastmcc Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 So who's going to do the site walkaround? anyone going ? .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radleigh Posted July 8, 2015 Author Share Posted July 8, 2015 I'll try my best for photos, see how it's parked and how I do for time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flankerman Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 This is a bit of Deja Vu.... Remember back in the 90's when the Russians sent over a Beriev Be-40 'Mermaid' - rather cheekily touted as a contender for an RAF ASW/MR requirement. Now that would have been a purchase - a Mermaid flying boat in RAF markings....... My photo from Gelendzhik 2006..... It was accompanied to Fairford by an Ilyushin Il-38 ASW machine..... those were the good old days Ken 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Dot Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 (edited) the yen rate isn't too bad at the moment so why not just leave a couple here for us? Can't wait to see them (again) :-) There is a model out already in Japan by Fox One in 1/144 scale. Don't all rush at once though as it is £250!!! Might look nice in Hemp though Edited July 8, 2015 by Red Dot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upnorth Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 There is a model out already in Japan by Fox One in 1/144 scale. Don't all rush at once though as it is £250!!! Might look nice in Hemp though With a price like that for 1/144, hemp might well be involved in purchasing it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radleigh Posted July 8, 2015 Author Share Posted July 8, 2015 http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234974969-1144-kawasaki-p-1-resin-kit-by-foxone-design-studio-released/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PLC1966 Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 the yen rate isn't too bad at the moment so why not just leave a couple here for us? Can't wait to see them (again) :-) There is a model out already in Japan by Fox One in 1/144 scale. Don't all rush at once though as it is £250!!! Might look nice in Hemp though £250, you sure that is not 1:1 Scale ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magwitch Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 There's this: LINK States P-8 costs about two-thirds more. The JPYGBP and USDGBP exchange rates have moved a lot since that article was written. Current 2015 unit acquisition costs: P-1 188m GBP P-8 166m GBP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oggy4624 Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 If something Japanese doesn't work - they fix it and take it personally If the yanks make something that doesn't work - F35 - lie bull$hit cost over run, oh and the P8 doesnt work either. Special relationahip means that we get screwed by the US and have to like it. (rivet joint) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Foster60 Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 I am interested in the comment that "and the P8 doesn't work either". I have not heard it reported that the aircraft in anyway does not perform. There have been the equivalent to at least two full crews from the RAF have flown them, probably more now. Please could you clarify what does not work as intended? Nigel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomastmcc Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 I am interested in the comment that "and the P8 doesn't work either". I have not heard it reported that the aircraft in anyway does not perform. There have been the equivalent to at least two full crews from the RAF have flown them, probably more now. Please could you clarify what does not work as intended? Nigel nigel RAF crews have only flown in them in order to keep their skills up not as precurser to purchasing the P8 .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XV107 Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 If something Japanese doesn't work - they fix it and take it personally If the yanks make something that doesn't work - F35 - lie bull$hit cost over run, oh and the P8 doesnt work either. Special relationahip means that we get screwed by the US and have to like it. (rivet joint) The Kipper Fleet (Resting) members that I know of who've flown/flown in P-8 would disagree Three good mates and a number of my former students who serve on 51 Sqn would, to a man, disagree about Rivet Joint. (Wasn't the US's fault that the MAA's requirements have proven troublesome). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 Translation: The US does not accept responsibility because the machine does not meet the requirements. Caveat Emptor. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Foster60 Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 I really hope that RAF crews are flying the P-8 because one day we are going to have MPA again. It is hard to believe this island nation would not wake up one day. That is not to say you are wrong, anything can happen when certain people know the price of everything but the value of nothing. It is a massive hole in capability and balanced forces. An aircraft carrier without MPA capability is, well words fail me, but then my barcode is a very low "price". I read an interesting book ten years ago, Total War in 2006 by Simon Pearson. It was ahead of its time, by about 10 years. Dip into a copy if you can, especially the first half, compare to where we are today. In my opinion it should be compulsive reading for those charged with our security. The point is we need balanced forces with a range of capabilities. MPA are a key part that is missing at the moment. MPA are needed to patrol the sea lanes and protect the shipping that is vital to our island. They have a useful ability to act as command and control centres also. Lets hope that we are building models of P-8's with RAF roundels on them some time soon. Lets hope they are not just appearing in the WHIFF section. Nigel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 The Kipper Fleet (Resting) members that I know of who've flown/flown in P-8 would disagree Three good mates and a number of my former students who serve on 51 Sqn would, to a man, disagree about Rivet Joint. (Wasn't the US's fault that the MAA's requirements have proven troublesome). Indeed, the results of the USN ASW competition last year would suggest that the combination of RAF skills and P-8 technology has proven to be a winner. There are certain things the P-8 doesn't do - but that was always part of the planing to do a staged incremental introduction. It introduces new ways of working and new operational methods. The USN is in the comfortable position of being able to use the P-3 to do those 'other' taskings. The same goes for the Japanese - and the P-1 introduction has probably been more troublesome than the P-8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radleigh Posted July 10, 2015 Author Share Posted July 10, 2015 They're on their way apparently.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truro Model Builder Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 Arrived this morning. Looking forward to seeing them on Sunday. 1 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