Nimrod aircraft scrapped at Stockport

  peter99co 20:17 26 Jan 2011
Locked

click here

Very sad? Or very necessary?

  morddwyd 20:30 26 Jan 2011

Sad, but not necessary.

Once all the secret stuff had been removed they could have been used as hulks for crash/fire fighting training, training airframes (put a fireaxe through the mainplane and tell the trainee to patch it), ground handling training, could have gone to Duxford or any one of a number of provincial collections.

Just bloody mindedness.

Even the TSR2 has one or two surviving examples.

  AL47 20:35 26 Jan 2011

id say the money needs to be saved tbh

  VCR97 20:55 26 Jan 2011

From this week's "RAF News".
" RAF aircrews have began[sic] training on the US Air Force's Rivet Joint intelligence gathering aircraft...due to replace the Nimrod R1 which retires from service in March. ...after defence chiefs agreed a deal to buy three Rivet Joints due to enter service in 2014."

There is no indication of cost.

  beeuuem 21:07 26 Jan 2011

From click here
"So, we are replacing a world leading capability with something that is slightly less capable by all accounts and in the gap will have to rely on the USAF for SIGINT i.e. no sovereign capability.

Just to add icing to the cake, the RC-135 Rivet Joint uses a boom refueling system and the FSTA airborne refueling aircraft don’t have one so the RAF will have three strategic level assets that cannot be refueled by RAF aircraft, the C17, Rivet Joint and E3D Sentry.

The final contracts have yet to be finalised but in 2008 (yes, that long ago) the US Defense Security Cooperation Agency published a notification of a possible sale to the UK of three RC135 Rivet Joints and associated support and logistics systems for up to $1.068 billion."

  WhiteTruckMan 22:41 26 Jan 2011

chopped up into pieces, and quite simply felt unwell at the sight. I have no great love of nimrods as such, and have never had anything to do with them (although I know people who have, and they speak highly of them). Rather, it's what they represent that has me feeling like this.

It seems to me that as a nation we are being systematically stripped of our military. The royal air force is being reduced to little more than state sponsored flying club for university graduates, while the royal navy is being reduced to a level barely enough to contain an all out assault by the swiss navy. As soon as the army can be withdrawn from afghanistan on the flimsiest of face saving pretexts I predict it too will face large scale reductions in manpower and the disbanding of regiments.

I know we need to make serious cuts as a nation, but these are cuts in the wrong direction.

I'm not one to take much notice of conspiracy theories. but even I'm beginning to smell a rat on this one.

WTM

  ams4127 22:48 26 Jan 2011

I used to work on the Nimrod in it's previous incarnation as the Comet 4C. Didn't like it then and don't suppose I would now.

  Forum Editor 00:05 27 Jan 2011

is being reduced to little more than state sponsored flying club for university graduates"

Tell that to the Tornado F3 and Typhoon pilots who are on permanent readiness, available to intercept and (if necessary) destroy any airborne threat to the UK' airspace.

Tell it to the troops in Afghanistan who are only too glad to have the support afforded by Tornado GR4 aircraft, and by the Chinook and Merlin helicopter crews, and the C17 Globemasters and Tri-stars - the heavy lifters without which the troops on the ground would have no supply line from the UK.

To say nothing of the RAF's Airborne Stand Off Radar which supplies information on Taliban movements to ground force commanders.

Then there are the UK based Search and rescue and Mountain rescue helicopters, on stand-by all day every day.

I expect the Falkland islanders find the presence of RAF Typhoons, VC10s, Hercules, and Sea Kings quite reassuring.

Some flying club.

  DippyGirl 00:27 27 Jan 2011

I know the current climate is all about cuts and savings but ....
I have seen reports that say it is going to cost as much to scrap these aircraft as it would cost to get the fleet operational.
If that is so why not spend the money to complete them and then mothball them (something that may be useful tomorrow)?
If there are to be no Nimrods - what will do what they would have done?
If nothing.. Is that a problem?
If it isnt a problem that there is nothing to replace these planes that have never really flown .... why were billions spent on developing them?

  beeuuem 01:57 27 Jan 2011

'Cos that what defence reviews do.
Scrapping TSR2 cost £650 million - more than the cost of putting them into service and was replaced by aircraft of questionable suitability.
click here
And then we have our aircraft carrier(s) - complete with no aircraft.

  KremmenUK 06:57 27 Jan 2011

Reminds me of the fiasco around us buying the US Apache attack helicopter but not being able to use them because of some software licensing issue.

Just a heap of metal on the tarmac for many years.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

WPA2 hack: How secure is your Wi-Fi?

Microsoft Surface Book 2 hands-on review – bigger and 5x faster

Best kids apps for iPhone & iPad

Que faire si son iPhone ou iPad est tombé dans de l'eau ?