• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

Italian Navy Retires Breguet BR1150 Atlantic MPA

#1
The Italian AF has retired the last of its upgraded Breguet BR115 Atlantic MPA after 45 years service. This leaves France as the last remaining operator of the type; Germany, the Netherlands and Pakistan also formerly operated the Atlantic.

They're being partially replaced by the P-72, a maritime variant of the ATR-72. However, the P-72 lacks an ASW capability so Italy is now experiencing a similar capability gap to ourselves.

Ironically, the Atlantic I was the type preferred by the RAF in the early 1960s to replace the Shackleton. The Atlantic was also one of the very few post war types designed (in this case to a NATO requirement) from the outset as an MPA; the next and only aircraft subsequently so designed was the Kawasaki P-1!

Regards,
MM
 
#2
Whoa MM, your knowledge outstrips my english reading capability and google fu from 5 pints.

I though the italians operated P-3, obviously not.

What is the P-72, I thought there were only two real choices (unless its carrier enabled) the Mistubishi and the P-8...what is this witch the Italians a launching and it looks pretty nice, seems to have appeared out of thin air being as though mainly this forum is my guide to goings on in the realms between the earth (or carriers) and somewhere up above?

Please do tell what you know of this craft?

I am slightly p1ssed we had the mission systems and lost it all because of the stupid Comet upgrade idea. UK could possible have been the prime for the world beating MPA but instead we are buying it....

At least we are buying from you guys!
 
#3
Does the ATR 72 still suffer the icing problems that caused the Roselawn crash? I seem to remember that the U.S.operators moved the type south to avoid cold weather situations. I know Italy isn't northern continental U.S. but putting limitations on a maritime aircraft seems odd unless they've fixed the problem.
 
#4
...I though the italians operated P-3, obviously not...
Nope, they've never operated the P-3. You may be thinking of the Dutch, Germans or Pakistanis who replaced their Atlantics with Orions.

...What is the P-72, I thought there were only two real choices (unless its carrier enabled) the Mistubishi and the P-8...
There are if you want a true MPA with credible ASW and ASuW. Indeed, there is no Western carried based fixed wing MPA type now since the retirement of the USN's S-3Bs. They now rely on rotary and land based fixed wing.

...what is this witch the Italians a launching and it looks pretty nice, seems to have appeared out of thin air being as though mainly this forum is my guide to goings on in the realms between the earth (or carriers) and somewhere up above?
It's a variant of the Leonardo ATR-72MP and therefore merely a glorified Coastguard type; Pakistan and I think Turkey also operate it.

The P-72 will have a very capable ASuW capability as well as defensive aids and limited weapons carrying options, but will not be able to find or prosecute submarines. Even with an ASW suite, it would have been about as much use as a chocolate fire guard for the UK because of the ranges we operate at.

Regards,
MM
 
Last edited:
#5
It's a glorified Coastguard type which will have a very capable ASuW capability as well as defensive aids and limited weapons carrying options. However, it would have been about as much use as a chocolate fire guard for the UK.

Regards,
MM
Is that because of the difference between the Med and our North Altantic requirements?

Tell me to go research by all means but i find you cut to the chase.
 
#6
Is that because of the difference between the Med and our North Altantic requirements?...
No, it's because it's all the Italians can afford. They still apparently have an aspiration to but a full up MPA, presumably in the class of the P-8. In reality, I suspect they may just have to upgrade the P-72.

Regards,
MM
 
#8
The P72 looks awfully delicate compared to other type, I wonder how it will fair in the low level role.
 
#9
MM - Slightly different subject but how close was the RAF in selecting the Kawasaki P-1 over the P-8? surely with 4 engines, designed for low and slow, more or less same on station time and cheaper therefore a bigger buy!
 
#10
MM - Slightly different subject but how close was the RAF in selecting the Kawasaki P-1 over the P-8? surely with 4 engines, designed for low and slow, more or less same on station time and cheaper therefore a bigger buy!
Sufficiently close that Boeing were worried, not least as in several respects the P-1 is superior to the P-8. I won't go into the details here about what swung it as it's probably commercially sensitive. However, I disagree that there would've been a bigger buy of P-1s.

Regards,
MM
 
Last edited:
#12
Presumably a lot of their relatively short range/shallow sea requirements are met by their Merlin fleet?
Presumably, together with FFGs and SSKs. However, whether land or ship based, helicopters are more predictable and have less capacity than fixed wing ASW.

Regards,
MM
 
#13
Sufficiently close that Boeing were worried, not least as in several respects the P-1 is superior to the P-8. I won't go into the details here about what swung it as it's probably commercially sensitive. However, I disagree that there would've been a bigger buy of P-1s.

Regards,
MM
Still, seeing a 737 in a MPA role, with missiles (if equipped) just looks bloody weird, having been on a zillion flights on them.
 
#15
Still, seeing a 737 in a MPA role, with missiles (if equipped) just looks bloody weird, having been on a zillion flights on them.
The P-1 does look more of a man's MPA!

Regards,
MM
 
#17
Looks like it has room for a much bigger radar.
The P-1 actually has 3 AESA arrays: one in the nose and one either side as shown by the darker grey panel below the '04' digit below. They provide over 270 degrees of coverage.

Regards,
MM
 
#18
@Magic_Mushroom
Was the P8 innards transferrable to the P1.UK had we chosen it ?
Could that have made use of seedcorn ?
 
#19
@Magic_Mushroom
Was the P8 innards transferrable to the P1.UK had we chosen it ?
Could that have made use of seedcorn ?
That would've introduced unacceptable risk, cost and probably around 5 years of delay. It would've been the worst of both worlds.

Both the P-1 and P-8 met the RAF's requirements admirably and each had advantages and disadvantages over the other. Personally, I think the right decision was taken in opting for P-8. The Japanese understood that but were delighted that their product was taken seriously by us.

Regards,
MM
 
#20
The P1 certainly has more of the old aviation adage "if it looks right, it probably is right" about it than the P8.

Its a shame we couldn't use the P1 and a few other projects to leverage our defence & commercial relationship with the Japanese (again). Might be healthy to create some competitive space with US...
 

Latest Threads

Top