| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 Jim WH |
|||
|
Posts: 863 ( 5-Apr-2008 04:37:54) |
The curve ball in the equation Meeware and Zen, is that the actual electronic bits of Nimrod MRA.4 are probably the most functional... IIRC, the system forms
the basis of the CMS in the P-8!
Ergo, the problem with Nimrod are bizarrely and unacceptably, primarily related to trying to re-engineer the airframe and dynamic systems. |
||
|
Obi Wan Russell |
|||
|
Posts: 153 ( 5-Apr-2008 13:46:12) |
Wouldn't they save a fortune by just ordering new build MRA4s instead of these frankestein hybrids? Cut the existing order to eight then order 22 all new
airframes....
|
||
|
Jim WH |
|||
|
Posts: 864 ( 5-Apr-2008 13:53:43) |
Benefit of hindsight shows that new-build airframes would almost certainly have been better and cheaper, but the damage is now essentially done (i.e. too much
money spent in the existing order for new-builds to be a plausible alternative).
As an aside though, I think there is an interesting case to be made that in the early 1990's the UK could have invested in a fleet of perhaps 30 or so new build Nimrod-class airframes (i.e. narrow body quads or narrow body twins) with variants for maritime patrol and attack, ELINT, and overland surveillance (i.e. ASTOR). |
||
|
Zen9 |
|||
|
Posts: 3406 ( 5-Apr-2008 15:14:03) |
Jim back when the decision was made on MRA4 I was advocating new build Nimrods, and have been proved to have been on the right track. In fact I seem to reccal
saying ASTOR should be a part of the new build run as well.
It would be a far easier task to fit the new kit into new airframes, and a new Nimrod II adapted to modern manufacturing, the demands of modern electronics and could've been the product with potential for export orders since. We missed a big opportunity back then, for supposed parsimony that has cost us a fortune. Paucity of imagination rules in ministerial circles, and this was an example. In fact we could have developed a new machine entirely for Tanker, ASTOR, MRA and ELINT roles. Which, back then we still had the basis of a large aircraft manufacturing workforce around the RJ somthing ___(name forgotten) regional airliner, that could've been turned to a new aircraft. Instead we saw the end of civil airliner building, the dispersal of the workforce and this idiotic idea of new wings on old planes. All this was visible to anyone with half a brain AT THE TIME, and not with hindsight. That ministers of the government did'nt opt for this solution shows their short sighted nature for all to see. Like so much else, they chose the supposedly cheap option, and in the short term it was, now its costing us far more. So much for smart procurement. |
||
|
Bledlow |
|||
|
Registered Member
Posts: 40 ( 5-Apr-2008 22:18:50) |
IIRC BAe has said that the design & manufacturing work done on the rebuilt MRA4s has prepared it to build new MRA4 airframes if wanted. If I understand it
right, they ended up having to model the whole airframe in their CAD/CAM system, not just the redesigned sections.
Much of the fuselage is now new, not just the wings, & the metal-cutting, forming & so on to make new copies of those airframe sections retained from the old Nimrods is relatively easy & cheap, now that they're all defined in the CAD/CAM system. Those new sections might actually be cheaper than re-using old bits, as they'd be precisely machined from the start & not need the trimming & bodging needed for the imprecise old sections, nor the strip-down, clean, examine for stress & corrosion etc. each old component needs. There's quite a nice diagram here of exactly what's new & what's retained, the latter described as "re-lifed and upgraded". Scroll down about halfway. Therefore, it's not technically too late to make new MRA4s - though it's probably politically too late, unfortunately. |
||
|
Zen9 |
|||
|
Posts: 3407 ( 5-Apr-2008 23:31:48) |
I would'nt be surprised in the least by what you say Bledlow.
I still think it would've been cheaper to just build the lot new. Alas politicians are not really good at technology, procurement or any function of government. Their good at winning elections by persuading people vote for them. |
||
|
PMN1 |
|||
|
Posts: 3427 ( 9-Apr-2008 14:04:11) |
If a 'Nimrod' line had been reopened, who else would have been in the market for this size of aircraft?
|
||
|
Zen9 |
|||
|
Posts: 3414 ( 9-Apr-2008 16:23:11) |
At the time Japan and the USN I think, and considering the capability, one might have touted to a number of other states.
India is another possibility. If we're producing this in MRA, ASTOR and R1 what else might we squeeze into this type? The use of Storm Shadow on it does'nt give it the stand off range to become a bomber, we'd need to have something longer range integrated with it for a small CASOM bomber fleet. |
||
|
PMN1 |
|||
|
Posts: 3428 ( 9-Apr-2008 19:26:55) |
Zen9 wrote: AEW.........
|
||
|
shaun |
|||
|
Posts: 160 ( 9-Apr-2008 20:16:05) |
^^ tascheone corrected me on another thread saying that it cannot be done because of interference of the various radars and electronic equipment.
|
||
