Nimrod R1s replaced by even older aircraft!!!

#1
Ahh...more millions squandered by the government who cares...

(apologies if already done,could'nt find it)

http://www.key.aero/view_news.asp?ID=1404&thisSection=military

January 14: Flightglobal reports that the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) is set to announce a long-expected deal to buy three Boeing RC-135 ‘Rivet Joint’ aircraft as replacement for its fleet of Nimrod R1s operated by 51 Squadron at RAF Waddington in Lincolnshire.

One Nimrod R1 was withdrawn last year, leaving just two in service with the squadron. With the recent announcement by the Secretary of State for Defence of the early withdrawal of the Nimrod MR2 fleet by April, maintaining the pair of R1s will become more difficult and costly as Nimrod maintenance contracts are withdrawn.

The report says that the three RC-135s will be modified for UK use by L-3 Communications Integrated Systems in the USA and are expected to be fitted with CFM-56 engines to provide commonality with the RAF’s fleet of E-3D Sentrys. Ironically the RC-135 airframes are expected to be even older than the Nimrods they will replace, the latter being constructed in the early 1970s.
 
#2
I'll reserve judgment on whether money's being squandered based on two things.

1. Do we need Nimrod?
2. Will the 1970's airframe do the job?

If the answer to both is yes, then money's not been squandered... hell, it might even have been saved (now, theres a thought).
 
#3
This is the R1,NOT the MR2 which has seen the controversy over the mid-air explosion ect.This one's an entirely different role than the MR2.
Magic Mushroom'll be the one with the insight on this one.
 
#5
Yes on both counts - Its not so much the airframe, but the kit inside that matters in this case.

Its an essential capability, and this was pretty much the only option that the MOD had under the circumstances it had.
 
#6
Given the long standing UKUSA Sigint agreement, surely it can only be a good thing that the RAF and USAF are using a common collection platform? (I'm assuming that RAF RJs will have a similar fit to USAF ones).

C_C
 
#8
Nimrods from the 70's?

More like the 60's and based on a 40's design!
 
#9
Someone somewhere has to be taking backhanders for such a farce of a deal.

These RC-135s are in US parlance FY64 airframes(or older).

Clear logic would dictate new airframes with independance from the spams.
 
#10
Le_addeur_noir said:
Someone somewhere has to be taking backhanders for such a farce of a deal.

These RC-135s are in US parlance FY64 airframes(or older).

Clear logic would dictate new airframes with independance from the spams.
So given the chance to actually improve ties to the US in part of the defence/security world where there are still vestiges of the special relationship, clear logic demands we actually do the opposite??

C_C
 
#11
These RC-135s are in US parlance FY64 airframes(or older).
Fantastic! as I'm a FY65 product myself can I rejoin for the SigInt role?
 
#12
jim30 said:
Its an essential capability, and this was pretty much the only option that the MOD had under the circumstances it had.
So no doubt it was priced accordingly?
 
#14
Le_addeur_noir said:
Someone somewhere has to be taking backhanders for such a farce of a deal.

These RC-135s are in US parlance FY64 airframes(or older).

Clear logic would dictate new airframes with independance from the spams.
I don't know the details of this deal, however, I expect the following are true:

The airframes will be rebuilt to as new condition.

All the things that make modern aircraft better will be replaced with new components (the article tells us that the engines will be replaced).

The USA is the only place we can buy mission electronics of that capability. So we either have a very long and expensive development programme or we buy US.

If we did buy US equipment and a new airframe, then we would have to waste time and money integrating the 2.
 
#15
We really are going to end up as a 4th world air force. Even Togo's presidential jet (a 707-320) is probably "younger" than what is being procured. Surely there must be some spare A330/A340's lying around doing nothing, so why not procure some of them, then we will have a fairly modern fleet with a fair degree of commonality with the incoming (although delayed) A330 MRTT. If its what is on the inside that matters, does it matter what carries it?

As for bringing back the Shack - why not??...the only mod it would need is a half decent microwave to heat the pies.. and while we on about buying geriatric jets, can we buy back the Vulcan and the the Victors as well.. oh yes and the Brunty Lightnings.....


Nurse ....I need me pills.
 
#16
baldbof said:
We really are going to end up as a 4th world air force. Even Togo's presidential jet (a 707-320) is probably "younger" than what is being procured. Surely there must be some spare A330/A340's lying around doing nothing, so why not procure some of them, then we will have a fairly modern fleet with a fair degree of commonality with the incoming (although delayed) A330 MRTT. If its what is on the inside that matters, does it matter what carries it?

As for bringing back the Shack - why not??...the only mod it would need is a half decent microwave to heat the pies.. and while we on about buying geriatric jets, can we buy back the Vulcan and the the Victors as well.. oh yes and the Brunty Lightnings.....


Nurse ....I need me pills.
I don't think it's actually as simple as buying some spare airframes and throwing a few black boxes in the back ....

C_C
 

seaweed

LE
Book Reviewer
#17
Is this one of those deals where we buy the cheapest we can find and lock ourselves into years of excessive maintenance cost (and serviceoutage) instead?
 
#18
seaweed said:
Is this one of those deals where we buy the cheapest we can find and lock ourselves into years of excessive maintenance cost (and serviceoutage) instead?

No, this is one of those deals were we actually buy a proven platform and use it.
 
F

fozzy

Guest
#19
Semper_Flexibilis said:
seaweed said:
Is this one of those deals where we buy the cheapest we can find and lock ourselves into years of excessive maintenance cost (and serviceoutage) instead?

No, this is one of those deals were we actually buy a proven platform and use it.
Absolutely. This is by far the best option.
After all, we wouldn't want to be going down the road to another Chinook HC3 fiasco would we.....?
 
#20
fozzy said:
Semper_Flexibilis said:
seaweed said:
Is this one of those deals where we buy the cheapest we can find and lock ourselves into years of excessive maintenance cost (and serviceoutage) instead?

No, this is one of those deals were we actually buy a proven platform and use it.
Absolutely. This is by far the best option.
After all, we wouldn't want to be going down the road to another Chinook HC3 fiasco would we.....?
Oh well,might be in service for Somalia,with luck 8O
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Trevelez Aviation 1
AndyPipkin The Intelligence Cell 16
Ralf Aviation 23

Similar threads

Latest Threads