Nimrod Dismantling Underway

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by trelawney126, Jan 26, 2011.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Utterly disgraceful. Such short-sighted, precipitate lunacy will never be reversed. I wonder who will stand accountable for the many lives that will be lost as a result of this criminal decision?
     
  2. This is not simply getting rid of Nimrod. It hides lots of accountable funds in addition to build costs which can be hidden so that the slush funds become invisible. If there was a genuine need to save costs I'm sure a buyer somewhere in the world could have been found. If the costs were contractual, does anyone know if these costs included scrapping, or are the scrapping companies being given a freebie. This government needs to be hauled up short and quick before they are forced to pull out of the £55 Billion space program for which no accounts will be published as it will be against the national interest. And why are they keeping Trident now we can no longer ensure some secrecy. Bloody politicians. Fiddling while Nimrod burns. End rant.:glasses5:
     
  3. There are many very clever people in the UK, sadly few of them are politicians.
     
  4. What "slush funds" would that be? The disposal costs were not, by definition, in the Contract. This is new money for spend this year. The disposal contractor is being paid outside the BAES contract. DE&S are the disposers, not BAES.

    For a bit more insight; Scrapping the RAF's £4bn Nimrod fleet 'risks UK security' - Telegraph

    and more "locally";

    Grounded: End of an era as £4bn Nimrods built at Woodford are scrapped - Stockport Express
     
  5. Only 10 years overdue

    Gawd knows how much £ over budget and still not passed flight tests

    it is the MOD procurement process that should be under the microscope here
     
  6. Can anyone explain (preferably using small words or pictures) whether a shift from Nimrod to Rivet Joint is actually going to result in a huge loss of capability (forget about the financial issues at this stage, I just want to hear the operational effectiveness argument - but not in ninja-techie speak)
     
  7. Hopefully the hierarchy of the RAF. The cash for 232 Typhoons had to come from somewhere. Their blind greed for lots of shiny, expensive, fun to fly, aircraft has basically fucked the entire UK Armed Forces for the next 30 years.

    Cheers you crab *****.
     
  8. From my perspective, background in SAR. The Nimrod did provide excellent communications top cover. The Nimrod also provided emergency kit in the form of liferafts dropped to sinking vessels prior to the helicopters arriving.

    Ask any survivor, to have an aircraft over you means some one knows your there and rescue is imminent, moral booster.

    Is Rivit Joint being an Int aircraft going to provide ASW cover, drop sonar buoys and monitor them in the event of an incursion of foreign submarines in our territorial waters?

    We have lost a huge Maritime asset, shame on Cameron and his cronies.

    Who voted for the Pleb?
     
  9. and when was the last time a nimrod dropped a liferaft…..???
    The bottom line is it’s obsolete before it;s built….


    there’s better technology in a TomTom…..

    ...
     
  10. As true for every other piece of kit in the Services and about to be introduced after a period of development. The same applies to our allies and potential foes. Are you suggesting that a TomTom has the same functionality and range of capabilities as an MRA4?

    As for the last occasion a Nimrod dropped liferafts, it might have been here:
    However, if I took more time to look, I'm sure I could find many more examples like this:
     
  11. Thank you Naval _Gazer, saved me much finger work there. Having been involved in SAROPs when Nimrod provided top cover they were invaluable, acted as comms link, monitored our fuel, arranged a Frigate to RV for Helo in flight refueling. Without it many folk may not have survived.

    As for the Dimrods radar - Fukcin awesome describes it well. Coke cans at 50 miles.
     
  12. I would suggest that the satellite system that provides the TomTom with information is far superior to an MRA4…

    The Nimrod is an old comet with a lot of bits added on …It could and should and probably will be replaced with a satellite system …until then we lease off the septics…simple

    ….
     
  13. Interesting concept.

    Satelites dropping sonar buoys! and not forgetting mail drops!!!

    It should never have removed without a replacement. Even an off the shelf US aircraft.
     
  14. The dropping of lifesaving equipment is a red herring…..the nimrods role is to direct operations whilst cruising at 33000 ft ….This will be done with satellites ..like it or not …thats the way forward

    ….
     
  15. Then you're wrong. A GPS satellite system that simply provides your receiver with distances (you need a 'constellation' to achieve a fix) has nothing approaching the functionality and range of capabilities of an MRA4.

    90% of the MRA4 is new. And how can a satellite drop and monitor sonobuoys, deploy a MAD (Magnetic Anomaly Detection) boom, detect an object the size of a periscope on radar, sink a submarine with homing torpedoes or deploy liferafts mid-ocean? The US equivalent MPA has nothing like the same capability.
     
  16. I agree, it's all his fault he inherited a devastated economy, hugely expensive war, unbreakable mod contracts and a cash guzzling underclass.
     
  17. spot on monty……
    I can’t understand why some can’t embrace new technology….

    Reminiscent of King Harold preparing to do battle and whilst issuing instructions to his archers was interrupted by a chap trying to get him to buy machine guns…
    ‘Fcuk off’ say’s the King “I’m trying to fight a war here”…….

    …….
     

Share This Page