A P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft from RAF Lossiemouth has been conducting exercises with HMS Mersey, a Royal Navy Offshore Patrol Vessel, in the Baltic Sea.
A P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft CXX Squadron joined HMS Mersey off the Estonian coast during a ‘Presence and Patrol operation’.
This deployment, say the RAF, aims to enhance understanding and interoperability among Joint Expeditionary Force nations and NATO allies in the Baltic Sea region.
Additionally, integration training with other UK military forces in the region is being conducted. The Poseidon aircraft, flying from RAF Lossiemouth, established communication with HMS Mersey and collaborated to compile a comprehensive overview of maritime activity in the area.
Wing Commander Livesey, Officer Commanding of CXX Squadron, was quoted as saying:
“This was an excellent example of what the Poseidon can do… reassuring our Allies and cooperating closely with our Royal Navy colleagues at range. The ability to project our RAF Maritime Patrol capability into different areas like this allows us to better understand the battlespace, both above and below the waves, and this ability continues to grow as Poseidon builds towards Full Operational Capability. Despite the poor weather, we were able to achieve our mission objectives whilst conducting valuable training, which prepares us better for future challenges, whatever those may be.”
Hi folks hope all is well.
Can’t recall, how many is there in our fleet, was it 8/9 . I know we need a few more given the level of activity UK military is deployed.
Cheers,
George
9 Poseidon P8s delivered.
The RAF also has 16 MQ-9B Protector/SkyGuardians ordered which have been touted as possibly being used to augment the Poseidon force.
(A STOL kit has also been developed for SkyGuardian which would make it of interest to the RN for carrier-borne operations.)
HMG/MoD stated explicitly the apportionment of the £5Bn (over 2 yrs.) budget increase on 13 Mar 23; evidently, no announced corresponding partition of the £11Bn (over 5 yrs.) 15 Mar 23 increase. Anyone proposing additional purchases (A400M, E-7, P-8, Typhoon (Tranche 4), etc.)? Would be unfortunate if a potential opportunity was not explored…🤔😳
Hi USAF. I suspect much of the that 5 bn will be allocated to inflationary pressures, You do make a sound point re Typhoon T4, practically considering theT1version will be retired circa 2025.
The U.K. needs to decide how it’s forces are to have the advantage. It says no to a big land army. If it’s AirPower then the airforces need to be able to operate in contested environments where loses will happen.
As an island the navy is important and so are marines.
Ideally the navy should have more escorts equipped to detect, deter, underwater, surface and air.
Perhaps instead of more wedge tails the U.K. should be pushing nato to renew its E3 fleet and join that. I don’t really know how the sharing thing works.
Basically the £5b goes for submarines and ammo replacement. The rest which is some promise of money after an election will be lucky to cover inflation and a couple of project overspends.
Normally these money announcements have so many catches and trickery involved.
E.g press release reads defence gets £20b boost. we will increase the available defence budget by £20b over 3 years.
Actual breakdown £7b of this come from efficiency savings, £5b will come from rationalising defence estates (basically selling them for top valuation, which rarely happens), £2b will come from working with industry to realign projects to meet future needs. £1b will come from moving accounts around, First year gets £1.5b actual money, 2nd year £1.5b, third year £2b. So real money is £5b not £20b.
Obviously this is a made up example based loosely on previous actual announcements.
Then add in inflation and the budget is the same or declines. Especially when viewed from GDP percentage, government spending percentages.
When the U.K. was going to go below the 2% defence spending the budget didn’t get increased, the government moved pensions, nuclear deterrent and anything remotely defence related into the budget.
More ignorant nonsense. NATO has internationally agreed expenditure definitions. We have the 3rd biggest defence equipment budget in the world.
Given the U.K. defence budget is around £50bn, and that inflation is currently 10%, then the extra £5bn looks likely just to be spent coping with rising costs.
You do know that retail prices do not equate to long term defence procurement prices right? There is a difference between what you buy in supermarkets and fixed price defence contracts or defence contracts that “risk share” or defence contracts that are long term or defence contracts which depend on hedged exchange rates. Why would anyone post nonsense to appear uneducated.
Not to good on economics are you?
CPI is an average for consumer spending, but it is only an indicator. So while some consumers will see costs rising at 10%, so will experience figures far above and far below this figure. But it is an indicative figure which gives an indication or both direction and scale in increases and decreases.
Similarly in different industrial sectors there will be different inflation rates depending upon the component costs in those sectors. So the health-care inflation-rate will be different to the military inflation-rate and to that for the rail-industry.
However the ONS does not calculate different inflation-rates for different sectors, it’s focusses on trying to calculate the most accurate figure possible for the whole economy. As such the current 10% figure is the most accurate figure available in the U.K.
(Please feel free to provide links to any other independent organisations that have been able to provide a validated specific interest rate just for the U.K. military.)
You seem completely ignorant that the U.K. defence budget is spent on things other than procurement. 🤦🏻♂️
Running costs, such as wages, energy costs (electricity, gas, etc), pensions, etc all come out of the defence budget. Even when it comes to procurement, a large volume is not military specific, from the obvious such as food, clothing etc to civilian equipment purchases.
As such, without a specific military inflation-rate from the ONS, the 10% figure is the best ballpark available.
Unlike my comments above, your pompous hubris is far from edifying.
I had forgotten about these drones but they aren’t armed with anything yet. I wonder if the UK will also order drones in the Triton/Global Hawk class?
I suppose the first question is whether they can carry both the necessary sensor package AND weapons at the same time; ie weight, drag, hard point availability etc. If not they could hunt in pairs, one with sensors and one with weapons.
More likely the drone would call in a P8 Poseidon to confirm the detected contact and the P8 to attack with its Mark54 torpedo/glide-bomb.
The USA complements it’s P8s using the Triton, but I don’t know if it’s planned to the ability to fly in congested air-space like the Protector/SkyGuardian can. I think the RAF may regard that capability as essential.
I think Wedgetail numbers need a bit more attention.
absolutely Coll – 5 should be the minimum number
NAO stated that 3 Low Hours Airframes, would give the UK 2 serviceable airframes available, 1 in reserve for 3 years before any Major maintenance of checks would be required. this would allow time for the USAF development of the Wedgetail to be developed and could allow the UK to piggy back that order to source the Updated aircraft. made sense actually, and we still have crew shortages on the P8s
Blimey, I know the price of fish is going through the roof but deploying a P8 and a fishery protection vessel is going some
I’ve haddock with these fish jokes.
It’s a load of old “cod”blers if you ask me… Lol 😁
There’s a plaice for people like you!
Now your just talking pollocks!
Well it’s “Barra-Monday” here in Australia 🇦🇺…😏
I’d intrigued to know what they were practicing together?
Might be SAR? But seems OTT.
I’d guess an undeclared capability on the Rivers. Or was the River mother to something?
Of course we will, probably, never know!
Interesting to speculate!
I think you’re on the right track re Rivers and RB2 in particular. Such potential, but not in the wary bang field like so many want.
Alternatively: p8 practising guiding a warship onto a target and it doesn’t matter if that ship is a Frigate or a OPV to gain the P8 crews experience.
Possible.
Seems an extraordinary use of resources unless it was part of a training package.
Depends though doesn’t it? If the River was already in the Baltic then it could easily be viewed as killing three birds with one stone.
Showing commitment to the Baltic
Training the P8 crew
Saving money on putting a type 23 to sea.
We will never know the whole story in this tense times.
Just glad we got P8 when we did – vital now.
If the U.K. is going to be a force in Estonia it makes sense to be able to protect not just the land and practice every scenario.
Putins invasion that he says was forced on him to stop nato expansion has backfired badly and turned the Baltic into nato lake.
Australia has signed a A$13m contract with QinetiQ for a 3 year investment in its industrial base to create the capability to domestically manufacture a Dragonfire protoype.
https://www.aerosociety.com/news/countering-the-hypersonic-threat/
Before it’s even adopted by the RN? I wonder if they’re planning Dragon Fire on the T45s post PIP, the Carriers, T26s and even on the T23s? A single unit could fit nicely on the latter’s hangar roof and complement the CAMMs and hopefully not drain the power supply.
While they will produce a prototype unit at the end I think its mainly an infrastructure program to develop the industrial capacity to manufacture the high quality optics and other tech required to domestically produce high power lasers in the future. It would of course have a secondary function as a lot of the equipment used to produce these high grade optics could also be used for recon cameras and laser targeting systems on drones.
As has suggested by others before, maybe it’s time to reactivate two T-boats to increase sub numbers more or less immediately and have some extra P-8s on order. We need to have as many eyes and ears under and over the sea to watch for Russian subs and their much vaunted “Poseidon” nuclear torpedo type drones. I don’t think they are a joke. Hope they blow up on Russia’s own backyard! What bloody hypocrites… complaining about depleted uranium shells in Ukrainian Challengers and they’re gloating about deploying these things! Well if you don’t like it get the hell out of Ukraine! Hope Ukraine can absolutely shovel the Russian completely out of their territory within the year. If they can breakthrough to the Asov Sea East of Mariupol and surround the buggers to the West and push through to Crimea. Sorry to be corny but “may the Force” truly be with Ukraine forces. And maybe don’t publish too much in the media beforehand.
Application by BAE in Barrow to demolish warehouse building B36 and ancillary structures as well as base slab to make way for a non-specified future redevelopment.
Application BPA4/2023/0203
Western half of the building would be demolished Aug-Oct this year, eastern half and ancillary structures including water tanks would be demolished between Oct this year and June/July next year.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/54%C2%B006'22.8%22N+3%C2%B013'40.6%22W/@54.1063403,-3.230132,930m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m4!3m3!8m2!3d54.1063372!4d-3.2279433
Evidence of serious intent at Barrow.
I hope they at least keep the stone wall at the bottom of the structure.
According to the plans looks like it will be demolished but the sandstone blocks that make up the low wall will be reclaimed for possible future use. First stage of the demolition works will demolish and level the street level western half of the warehouse keeping the retaining wall next to the Kings Gate descent ramp, then in the second stage they will demolish the eastern half of the building and level to waterside ground level, they will then possibly level the western side to waterside level as well and demolish the retaining wall (the application raises the possibility but is non committal).
Maritime patrol is usually a navy function. So why don’t the Fleet Air Arm operate the P-8s. Always found it odd the RAF do it in the UK.
Landbase Aircraft, RAF pilots and mixed crew in the Cabin, Navy Aviators don’t train on Multi Engine aircraft. THIS IS THE WAY
The RAF have been doing land-based maritime patrol since 1918, Paul.
Does anyone Know if we have Got Full Crews Yet for the P8s there was a report stating that we had a crew shortage for the P8s