this is why we are still borrowing money

[cmonstanley]

the UK Government is considering plans to spend hundreds of millions of pounds on a replacement for the Nimrod spy planes that were axed last year the Ministry Of Defence may buy Boeing P-8s from America to solve the capability gap left by the cancellation of the Nimrods – a move that has already cost the country billions Defence Secretary Liam Fox pulled the plug on the £4 billion procurement deal after the project ran over budget and fell behind schedule. Private contractors for the MoD have since started the dismantling job at the BAE Systems site in Stockport, Lancashire.local jobs gone
t also provoked elements of the defence establishment to claim that scrapping the Nimrods left a hole in the UK’s national security.
Nimrods can carry out a variety of duties, the most important being the protection of the UK’s Trident nuclear submarine fleet and the interception and destruction of enemy submarines. The aircraft’s range and flying capabilities also give it a vital role in air-sea rescue operations. It can also be deployed as a communications aircraft in support of operations by special forces
thats more money leaving the british economy

The cancellation of the Nimrods means the UK has no maritime patrol aircraft which, critics believe, leaves the country at risk.
A joint letter condemning the decision was recently signed by former senior officers, including Lord Craig, Gulf War commander Major General Patrick Cordingley, Falklands naval task force commander Admiral Sir John Woodward, and Air Vice-Marshal Tony Mason
They wrote: “Machine tools have been destroyed; several millions of pounds have been saved but a massive gap in British security has opened.
“Vulnerability of sea lanes, unpredictable overseas crises and traditional surface and submarine opposition will continue to demand versatile responsive aircraft.
“Nimrod would have continued to provide long-range maritime and overland reconnaissance ... and perhaps most importantly, reconnaissance support to the Navy’s Trident submarines.”

[steeljack]

wouldn't worry to much about the Royal Navy , all they seem good for these days is handing out halal meals and ciggies to Somali pirates before releasing them and making sure all ratings have enough batteries for their IPods so they don't cry. Think I also read somewhere today that the RN has signed a "time share' contract with the Frence for the operation of an Aircraft Carrier ...... but you have to remember you are Europeans now

re .... protecting the 'valuable sea lanes' , one thing you can be sure of is that the Chinese Navy will keep them open, otherwise where will they sell all the cheap goods (that have destroyed millions of UK manufacturing jobs) that Britain has fallen in love with

[Boeing Guy]

There are two types of Nimrod's here, firstly the older MR2 and the newer MRA4 which was to be the replacement aircraft.
The MRA4 is not a new airframe, but a re working of the fuselage with larger super critical wings, larger air intakes for the newer Rolls Royce BR700 engines, the flight deck is borrowed form the Airbus A340.
Its regarded as a bit of a cut and shut.
The Nimrod a reworking of the de Havilland DH 106 Comet, a aircraft that first flew in 1949.
There were a lot of problems with the new design, the most worrying being that it had "significant aerodynamic issues with flight control problems in certain regimes of flight", in other words it does not fly.
It was nine years late in delivery and £789 Million pounds over budget.

Now the MOD are looking at the Boeing P-8, a modified Boeing 737-800, (a aircraft I am very familiar with). It has the larger wings off the Boeing 737-900 with a strengthened fuselage. The Boeing 737-800 first flew in 1994.
Bearing in mind that the Boeing 737 is the worlds most popular airliner, parts are freely available and so are engineers to repair it.
The Nimrod would only have one operator world wide and spares etc would be strictly limited to the MOD, meaning that BAE could charge anything they wanted.


The cost of the Boeing is expected to be £1 Billion as opposed to the Nimrods cost of £ 3.6 Billion.


http://e-goat.co.uk/wiki//index.php?title=Nimrod

[Boeing Guy]

There is a interesting article here about the Nimrods AEW3, itself a mess up at the time:
BAe Nimrod AEW 3

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Boeing Guy

There is a interesting article here about the Nimrods AEW3, itself a mess up at the time:
BAe Nimrod AEW 3

I think the idea with our friend from Scotland is why let the real truth get in the way of a point scoring exercise, I'm pleased that we have some one like you BG who actually knows about these issues, because its you job and your in the know, maybe if more care had have been taken by by the MOD (which has been shown recently to have been less than careful when spending money over quite a few years previously) in commissioning the new system in the first place then money wouldn't have been wasted in this way

[Neil]

Originally Posted by jaysay

..... maybe if more care had have been taken by by the MOD (which has been shown recently to have been less than careful when spending money over quite a few years previously) in commissioning the new system in the first place then money wouldn't have been wasted in this way

Maybe they wanted to keep the money in the UK and keep the equipment more under there control.

[Gordon Booth]

Not only was the Nimrod based on a 1949 design, its electronics were specified and designed over 10 years ago and were totaly obsolete before they even got into service. In fact they were still not ready for operation.
The sin is that the MOD kept changeing its requirements and with BAC already notorious for overuns on cost and time the delays were inevitable. And the Government allowed it to happen(which one?).
If you ordered a cathode ray TV 15 years ago and the shop rang you up now to say it's ready, what would you say? Even if you lost your deposite you wouldn't have it.
Having said that, with no aircraft carriers, no Harriers, no Nimrods, we can hardly claim to be a world power. Watch out, Falklanders!

[Neil]

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth

Having said that, with no aircraft carriers, no Harriers, no Nimrods, we can hardly claim to be a world power. Watch out, Falklanders!

I have explained that before, drop a trident with no warhead on buenos aires, then phone them up and say you have 12 hours to get out or next will go bang

[MargaretR]

War with conventional weapons (including nukes) is soooo 'old hat', and only serves to make populations fearful/more controllable.

Weather manipulation/earthquakes (HAARP), and engineered epidemics are more effective - your enemy is never sure whether you or 'mother nature' did it.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by MargaretR

War with conventional weapons (including nukes) is so 'old hat', and only serves to make populations fearful/more controllable.

Weather manipulation/earthquakes (HAARP), and engineered epidemics are more effective - your enemy is never sure whether you or 'mother nature' did it.

You little sceptic Margaret you

[Boeing Guy]

Hold on Cmonstanley, where are you. I and others responded to your very lucid argument, I am waiting for a response, you have time to have a further dig at the government, we wait you with baited breath.....

[cmonstanley]

so why buy a replacement from the u.s.a. ohh hold on this is another reason why this country is in a mess .we had a chance to build ,create jobs in this country .the extra money that would have been spent we would have clawed money back in tax and less money paid out in benefits .you need to spend money to create money

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by cmonstanley

so why buy a replacement from the u.s.a. ohh hold on this is another reason why this country is in a mess .we had a chance to build ,create jobs in this country .the extra money that would have been spent we would have clawed money back in tax and less money paid out in benefits .you need to spend money to create money

The reason this countries in a mess is we had a Labour Government who tossed money about confetti, they didn't do too much building did they, trouble is with your ilk is you talk a good game but are absolutely bloody useless in practice, for gods sake stop flogging a dead horse unless you have something sensible to say that actually makes sense

[Boeing Guy]

You make me wait 3 days and then only to make ridiculous statements???
There was nothing to build here in the UK. Aerospace here went down the pan many many years ago.
So the RAF should be given 60 year old aircraft to fly, wow that would scare anybody.

If you were so interested in UK manufacturing why did you not protest at BAE's sale of their share in Airbus a few years ago while your mates were in power. Airbus will soon pull out of the UK thanks to that.

[Boeing Guy]

Actually we do have a aviation manufacturing case in the UK, we make the Hawk Trainer, make bits for the Joint Strike FIghter and bits for the Typhoon.
Oh and still make some Airbus wings.

If it was not for Rolls Royce building Trent and RB engines we would be stuffed.
Wow Boeing and Airbus should quake