Saintsman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2002, 2065 posts, RR: 2 Posted (11 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3281 times:
I've been hearing rumours that the government is going to pull the plug on the Nimrod MRA4. Cost over-runs, late etc are some of the reasons but the biggest one is that there is no real submarine threat anymore so do we really need them?
I would like to see them in service but I think that the writing is on the wall. I wonder if it would have been more secure if it actually had entered service in line with the original programme (albeit it was never going to happen anyway). There's nothing like a sucess to help your case. Mind you it won't be the first time something like this has happened (TSR2 is a good example) but it may well be the last time.
Ant72LBA From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 417 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (11 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3233 times:
Would be interesting to know how much longer the current Nimrod force could continue without modification and are any alternatives available? The mission the Nimrod was designed for still exists the only doubt is whether or not it justifies the expense of the MRA4.
Tony has been having tea with his chums in Paris and Berlin today; what price another European collaboration? Are there any such programmes in the offing? Lots of European countries would see maritime patrol as an area of defence which would be of continued importance unlike large fleets of fighter-bombers.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13448 posts, RR: 77
Reply 3, posted (11 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3154 times:
MRA4 would have more than just Martime capabilities, there is a need, so all the government have to do is to instruct BAE to get it working, with their own money (BAE screwed up after all), that is if they ever want a major defence contract again.