£200 Million to be paid to scrap the Nimrod (BBC News)
Discussion
Regarded as one of the biggest Military blunders since the Cancellation of the TSR2, the government is to pay another £200 Million to BAe Systems to get out of the Nimrod project. Other rumours have quoted a figure nearer to £1 Billion.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-12206044
Although BAe Systems have mightily messed up it is regarded by many as an attempt by Cameron to bin the toxic Nimrod name and use it as an example of Labour waste. Rumour was it was his personal decision to axe it, whilst at the same time having no replacement. Indeed there is nothing as capable currently avaiable, The American P8 is inferior in many aspects.
Huge shame as it would have been the last large aircraft ever to have been built in the UK.
On a side note, the Harriers at Cottesmore, (another victim of the Military Cull by the Coalition) are being dismantled for storage and a decision on their future in a few months time.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-12206044
Although BAe Systems have mightily messed up it is regarded by many as an attempt by Cameron to bin the toxic Nimrod name and use it as an example of Labour waste. Rumour was it was his personal decision to axe it, whilst at the same time having no replacement. Indeed there is nothing as capable currently avaiable, The American P8 is inferior in many aspects.
Huge shame as it would have been the last large aircraft ever to have been built in the UK.
On a side note, the Harriers at Cottesmore, (another victim of the Military Cull by the Coalition) are being dismantled for storage and a decision on their future in a few months time.
They were fully paid for.
The role it would have had was:
Anti-Submarine and Anti Surface warfare.
ISTAR capability.
Ability for long range Search and Rescue.
The MR2 had been involved in overland operations and for anti-gun and anti-drug running.
It also provided cover for transits of FAST jets over the Atlantic, in the event one ditches it would drop rescue gear.
It also provided above the scene rescue co-ordination.
The MRA4 also could have been adapted to carry conventional weapons and would have had an outstanding range.
So far from a Cold War dinosaur.
The 3.6Bn was originally for a fleet of 21, but was reduced by Labour to 18, 12 then 9.
Because of escalating costs the order was cut, to absorb the costs.
The £3.6 Billion has on all counts fully paid for the 9 aircraft.
All we are saving is a rumoured £200 Million a year in operating costs. If the rumours I have seen on the web are true much of that would have been maintaining Kinloss. The BAe Systems Support was under half of that. A figure around £70 Million was quoted.
The simulators had been delivered Kinloss had been readied for the aircraft, taxiways etc widened.
The Chief of Airstaff apparently met Cameron face to face but Cameron was insitant that it was cancelled.
Just days after the SDSR US Navy P3's were operating out of Kinloss trying to locate Russian Subs that we couldn't.
Within a few days time an emergency on a ship in the channel meant a French Commuications Jet had to be scrambled. A Nimrod would have been on scene in both of those cases. We have nothing to do that role now.
Nothing is being bought to replace them, The US Navy are introducing the P8 in a few years time, but they are having problems with that. The Indian Navy has seen the importance of Maritime Patrol as they have placed an order for P8's.
The role it would have had was:
Anti-Submarine and Anti Surface warfare.
ISTAR capability.
Ability for long range Search and Rescue.
The MR2 had been involved in overland operations and for anti-gun and anti-drug running.
It also provided cover for transits of FAST jets over the Atlantic, in the event one ditches it would drop rescue gear.
It also provided above the scene rescue co-ordination.
The MRA4 also could have been adapted to carry conventional weapons and would have had an outstanding range.
So far from a Cold War dinosaur.
The 3.6Bn was originally for a fleet of 21, but was reduced by Labour to 18, 12 then 9.
Because of escalating costs the order was cut, to absorb the costs.
The £3.6 Billion has on all counts fully paid for the 9 aircraft.
All we are saving is a rumoured £200 Million a year in operating costs. If the rumours I have seen on the web are true much of that would have been maintaining Kinloss. The BAe Systems Support was under half of that. A figure around £70 Million was quoted.
The simulators had been delivered Kinloss had been readied for the aircraft, taxiways etc widened.
The Chief of Airstaff apparently met Cameron face to face but Cameron was insitant that it was cancelled.
Just days after the SDSR US Navy P3's were operating out of Kinloss trying to locate Russian Subs that we couldn't.
Within a few days time an emergency on a ship in the channel meant a French Commuications Jet had to be scrambled. A Nimrod would have been on scene in both of those cases. We have nothing to do that role now.
Nothing is being bought to replace them, The US Navy are introducing the P8 in a few years time, but they are having problems with that. The Indian Navy has seen the importance of Maritime Patrol as they have placed an order for P8's.
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 17th January 21:07
RedLeicester said:
I stand corrected.My Grandfather was also on 206sqn (Coastal Command) during the war as groundcrew, so I have a bit of an interest in that type of thing.
t old and not needed.The original idea came from the MOD/Government (Tory I believe) in the early 1990's. The other options were overhauled Orions or Atlantiques.
I believe the option to use the old Nimrod airframes was taken as it would have cost too much to build new ones without guaranteed new orders from the US. Using the old airframes and zero timing them was seen as a way I think of also getting around some of the regulations required.
The insistance of using Rolls Royce Engines early on (rather than GE), meant the wings had to be radically designed.
The problems came in with the wings, when they were disgned on two different CAD systems and each plane was also slightly different.
Since then it has been through testing and protracted negotiations, and there were a few minor issues being ironed out.
The planes were 90% new build, and would have given 30 years service+. The cockpit had been completely refitted with A340 derived controls and software. Some of the mission systems are being adopted in the P8.
The RC-135's we are buying from the US in the next couple of years are 40 year old coonverted tankers!!
When you consider the things the Nimrod has been involved in over the last 30 years, you can see that it is probably more adaptable than any other plane the RAF had.
Fastnet Yach Race
Falklands War
Virgin Atlantic Challenger rescue
Piper Alpha rescue co-ordination
Gulf War Liberation of Kuwait
Enforcing blockade of Serbia & Montenegro
Overland operations in Iraq and Afghanistan
Plus many more anti drug running, communication and rescue mission that are unheard of.
The role of the MRA4 would have been able to do those and protect the new Nuclear Subs!!
I would argue that role is more important than upgrading loads of 40 year old battlefield helicopters (Puma) when we are unlikely to be able to afford to go to war anyway. The Nimrod had a peactime mission protecting the shores of a Maritime Nation. BAe systems were to blame, the MOD were to blame. It was virtually operational. It only went from becomig an expensive aircraft to a huge waste when Cameron dropped the axe on it. All planes were being built and are now going to end up in skips.
Why are we calling on the French if it is not needed anymore?
I believe the option to use the old Nimrod airframes was taken as it would have cost too much to build new ones without guaranteed new orders from the US. Using the old airframes and zero timing them was seen as a way I think of also getting around some of the regulations required.
The insistance of using Rolls Royce Engines early on (rather than GE), meant the wings had to be radically designed.
The problems came in with the wings, when they were disgned on two different CAD systems and each plane was also slightly different.
Since then it has been through testing and protracted negotiations, and there were a few minor issues being ironed out.
The planes were 90% new build, and would have given 30 years service+. The cockpit had been completely refitted with A340 derived controls and software. Some of the mission systems are being adopted in the P8.
The RC-135's we are buying from the US in the next couple of years are 40 year old coonverted tankers!!
When you consider the things the Nimrod has been involved in over the last 30 years, you can see that it is probably more adaptable than any other plane the RAF had.
Fastnet Yach Race
Falklands War
Virgin Atlantic Challenger rescue
Piper Alpha rescue co-ordination
Gulf War Liberation of Kuwait
Enforcing blockade of Serbia & Montenegro
Overland operations in Iraq and Afghanistan
Plus many more anti drug running, communication and rescue mission that are unheard of.
The role of the MRA4 would have been able to do those and protect the new Nuclear Subs!!
I would argue that role is more important than upgrading loads of 40 year old battlefield helicopters (Puma) when we are unlikely to be able to afford to go to war anyway. The Nimrod had a peactime mission protecting the shores of a Maritime Nation. BAe systems were to blame, the MOD were to blame. It was virtually operational. It only went from becomig an expensive aircraft to a huge waste when Cameron dropped the axe on it. All planes were being built and are now going to end up in skips.
Why are we calling on the French if it is not needed anymore?
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 17th January 21:41
They should have been scrapped 10yrs or more ago, it's been a waste of money from the start trying to convert them. It was the RAF who awarded the contract to BAe over tenders from Lockheed with the P-3 Orion (already in service), the French Dassualt Atlantique (already in service).
Look at the amount of work just gone into the engine area, those tiny wing root mounted engine bays that needed to be enlarged for the more powerful engines and strengthened, why rebuild an old airframe to that extent when you could have bought in one ready made. They called it essentially a new aircraft with new wings, refurbished fuselage. But the work of a new aircraft into the bones of a 1940s veteran.
Stupid. £3.8 billion spent, £789 million over-budget and 9.5 years late.
Look at the amount of work just gone into the engine area, those tiny wing root mounted engine bays that needed to be enlarged for the more powerful engines and strengthened, why rebuild an old airframe to that extent when you could have bought in one ready made. They called it essentially a new aircraft with new wings, refurbished fuselage. But the work of a new aircraft into the bones of a 1940s veteran.
Stupid. £3.8 billion spent, £789 million over-budget and 9.5 years late.
FourWheelDrift said:
They should have been scrapped 10yrs or more ago, it's been a waste of money from the start trying to convert them. It was the RAF who awarded the contract to BAe over tenders from Lockheed with the P-3 Orion (already in service), the French Dassualt Atlantique (already in service).
You're obviously aware of the fact, if the "RAF" (think you might mean MoD) had given the contract to Lockheed, or Dassault we'd have got old airframes, that are less capable than the MR2???anonymous said:
[redacted]
That goes on all of the time though, constant upgrades will happen with any aircraft. There were cockpit upgrades going ahead on the Tristar up until Christmas when they were abandonded as they aparently didn't work. The Tristar is going out of service in 2014, if they hold together that long, so you have to wonder why upgrade only for retirement in 3 years. anonymous said:
[redacted]
And...... co-incidently, the same amount that it claimed it would be saving in operational costs which was the reason it was supposed to have been axed...... 
Prove, as if it wasn't needed, that as you say, it was Call Me Dave wishing to remove the 'toxic' Nimrod name regardless of any possible consequences to UK plc.
The guy is muppet, not that Clegg, Brown and Blair etc.,etc were/are any better.
And..... there's a shed load of inaccurate crap being spouted in these posts as well..... but this is PH, so please don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant
Edited by aeropilot on Monday 17th January 22:27
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff