Royal Navy unveils its New King Air's

Location : trowbridge Spotter Watch Member : no

The royal navy has unveiled its new king Airs which are to enter service in 2011.

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/operations-and-support/establishments/naval-bases-and-air-stations/rnas-culdrose/news/united-kingdom-military-flying-training-system-at-culdrose

Subject: Re: Royal Navy unveils its New King Air's 2009-09-28, 14:20

Saw this earlier, noticed they only have 4 replacing the 9 at Culdrose and the two at Yeovilton (which went a while ago).
So, Culdrose, who now take up (and augmented) the VIP/Utility flight now have to make do with 4 airframes shared for that purpose and the nav training purpose.

Goes back down the line of, our RAF only need 12 Airbus to replace all our VC10s and Tristars.
And the Nimrod saga,....

Location : Sheffield Spotter Watch Member : no

Sadly it's the way things always go. Another interesting old machine replaced by yet more dull, boring King Airs. Instant insomnia!

Location : Portsmouth , UK Spotter Watch Member : no

How many have they ordered ? Any ideas ?

Cheers

Subject: Re: Royal Navy unveils its New King Air's 2009-09-28, 15:52

I can't think how they can justify 4 aircraft can do the job of 9 (+2).
I live in the area these Jetstreams train in, they conduct sorties twice a day with all 9 jetstreams.... so how can the crews get their time in with 4 King Airs?
Plus some of the Jetstreams are currently taking on the jobs of Heron flight which lost their two Jetstreams...

On a daily rate, you have 3/4 of them doing low level navex's and nav training with the other 1/4 conducting radar training and spotter sorties over the sea....
It simply cannot work, unless of course the MoD plan to drastically cut the number of crews training each year (plus get rid of the exchange crews of which two Germans are currently on them).

Location : Portsmouth , UK Spotter Watch Member : no

They may be getting 4 new King airs , but are they getting rid of all nine Jet streams , Perhaps not. looking at what you say Razor looks like they may be keeping a couple of them in service.

Subject: Re: Royal Navy unveils its New King Air's 2009-09-28, 17:16

All jetstreams are being retired... Will. The RN will have just 4 prop aircraft to fulfil the need for navigation training, spotter training, radar training....the lot.

Location : London Spotter Watch Member : Not yet

Here's a thought...

If they like them so much then they might buy some more later, just like the RAF have.... Royal Navy unveils its New King Air's 345990

TS

Subject: Jetstreams 2009-09-29, 04:14

Another silly decision. Will miss the Jetstream, also see them on low level navexes around here.

Location : Sheffield Spotter Watch Member : no

Well I suppose it makes sense from a financial point of view. It's just that from an enthusiast's viewpoint it's pretty depressing. It was tragic enough when they disposed of the magnificent old Sea Princes and rolled-out the "plastic" Jetstream. Funny how the passage of time made the "boring" Jetstream become a welcome sight. Somehow, I think I can be pretty sure that no matter how long the King Airs might stick around, nobody will give a stuff when they are finally retired!

Location : London Spotter Watch Member : Not yet

I suspect the age of the Jetstreams is the primary reason for replacing them, which is hardly a daft move. And as there are not that many HP built Jetstreams knocking around, spares are somewhat hard to come by.

Location : Sheffield Spotter Watch Member : no

Were they HP-built? I thought they were Prestwick-built machines (not that I've ever checked!).

Subject: Re: Royal Navy unveils its New King Air's 2009-09-29, 07:39

XX475-481 were built by HP for civilian operators then bought by Scottish Aviation for conversion,the rest were all built at Prestwick.

Location : Sheffield Spotter Watch Member : no

Blimey, some of 'em really are old then! One hopes that some will at least be preserved - the last of HP's long line of products.

Subject: Re: Royal Navy unveils its New King Air's 2009-09-29, 07:55

Sheff wrote:: Blimey, some of 'em really are old then! One hopes that some will at least be preserved - the last of HP's long line of products.

There's RAF examples at Newark and Cosford Museums,hopefully a Navy one will be preserved somewhere too.

Location : Birmingham Spotter Watch Member : No

Blackcat1 wrote:: Another silly decision. Will miss the Jetstream, also see them on low level navexes around here.

I'm struggling to think why it's a "silly decision" to replace an aircraft at the end of it's service life!

Subject: decision 2009-09-29, 11:04

No i meant replacing 9 aircraft with just 4.

Subject: Re: Royal Navy unveils its New King Air's 2009-09-29, 16:01

Yep...
If my comments were read, people would see the importance of having 9 aircraft replace 9 aircraft.

Culdrose uses all 9 Jetstreams extensively for their training (2-3 sorties by each aircraft per day).
Those sorties now include the communications/VIP role that the Yeovilton Jetstreams had up until recently when they were retired. The Yeovilton Jetstreams just happened to be one of the busiest flights in the UK Military but were axed and not replaced.
So now the Culdrose 9 aircraft have to make several sorties a day training future helicopter and fixed wing navigators, radar operators and spotters/crew as well as do the utility/comms/vip role of the Yeovilton axed aircraft.
So... how on earth can the MoD state that 4 new Beech aircraft can do the same role as 9 Jetstreams in their current extensive mission sortie rate.... the only way the MoD can state this is because they plan on probably reducing the number of crew that go through training dramatically (they have too.... ) as there is no way the smaller Beeches can do the job of the Jetstream without making a 4 sortie per day mission rate or more. The airframe hours would be up like theres no tomorrow.

Look at what the MoD have done to the Nimrod order, slashed it in half, so we now have to have half the number of Nimrods on patrol and on short SAR cover notice (two of which are on SAR cover, 24hrs a day).
As an island nation we need maritime patrol as a priority, not just in the military role but for the Search and Rescue role.
Not only that, our Nimrods now have to conduct yet another mission which is ISTAR.
So although the MR2s which are conducting it very successfully now, we will have less airframes to now conduct Training of crews, ASW, Maritime Patrol, SAR and ISTAR. With them deployed to Afghanistan and elsewhere, there won't be many left in the UK!

Same goes with the Airbus, not many really to conduct the high profile operations that the RAF need them to do.
We will need one on permanent Tansor duty now the Russians have started to get more nosey again, then some will be deployed in theatre, some will need to be used for training and UK refuelling, and some of course will be needed for transporting troops and cargo.
Again, where does the MoD see fit to have just a small amount of tanker/transports? They are obviously (although using civilian Airbus anyway for our contract) wanting to increase the contracted out civilian transports for trooping flights and cargo.

It has come to the point where we are so short on airframes now due to increased mothballing (without replacements ready) that we have had to reintroduce the Hunter to do some of the jobs we need.

Location : Sheffield Spotter Watch Member : no

I don't think you need to sell the argument that the procurement process is leaving us short-changed! I think it's pretty obvious to everyone that we're being sold short on all manner of projects and programmes. We're stuck in the book-balancing business which is all about saving money, and nothing to do with maintaining adequate defence capability. It's clear to everyone that we no longer have anything like an adequate defence capability and it's clearly going to be reduced still further. Catering for the reduced needs of "peacetime" is fine but as ever, our political masters are unwilling (or unable) to accept that defence is about the long-term, and all about maintaining a credible defence against threats which may or may not emerge. It shouldn't be about what happens next year or the year after, nor should it be about cutting every programme back to the proverbial bone so that whatever cash is left can be used to drive politically-motivated crusades overseas.

But that's the way politics works and it has always been thus. The further we retreat from the very obvious threats of the Cold War, the smaller our defence capability will become, until every politician has completely lost sight of how tensions and conflicts develop. We will then simply have to hope that none of the potential threats do emerge because if they do, it's clear that we'll be unable to do anything about them. We've already gone way too far down the cost-cutting route already. I mean, seriously, what kind of credible defence capability do we have now? Ultimately, all we have now is Trident. Talk about cracking a wallnut with a hammer...