British surveillance aircraft patrols near Russian border

It is. And we are good at it.

Wonder how the chieftains are performing?

Yep you are right on both counts these airframes are nearly 60 years old. But that was omitted in the article, it was just a warmed up rehash of previous articles.
And as for the enablers where are the next ones ? AEW gapped and to be replaced with only 3 E7 Wedgetails, Sentinals gone and no replacement. We are fighting blind.
I was at RIAT last month and it was honestly embarrassing the lack of U.K participation. The Italians and Swedes were very impressive, the Swedish display of the Gripen in appalling weather was simply unbelievable. But for me the highlight was one of my favourite enablers popped in “The Dragon Lady” showed up with all her peculiarities.
Britain did contribute some things, we provided copious Torrential Rain, a Fun Fair that none used and very well mannered Queues.
So the Nation can sleep safe ☹️

I have never seen the U2/TR1 at an airshow.

Agree regards Sentinel, I think they plan to use Protector when that arrives.
We have a good number of Reaper, which cannot fly at Fairford. They dropped more ordnance than Tornado/Harrier in Afghanistan and Iraq. Do Italy and Sweden have those flying around the Middle East? They also have a little publicised SIGINT capability that ties in with the platform in this article at certain places.

Maybe our assets were busy actually doing the jobs they are designed to do rather than sitting pretty on an airfield, which I suggest applies to many ME and European nations.

Otherwise, you’d want to see your own assets at an airshow as good publicity for your nations forces, recruitment and all that. If they allow white males to join….🙄

Don’t go too moany on me mate, like some of the others here who literally only do one thing, moan.

Max Hastings wrote a good article some months ago, saying, in my view with more than a grain of truth, that most people think that the armed forces only exist to provide the Household Division so that the grockles can gawp at the changing of the guard, the BBMF and the Red Arrows so we can all go ooh and aah at airshows.
However, ABCR has a good point, there are so many gaps in capability that we really do have a hollowed out military. Navy Lookout had a good article last week about Albion going into reserve before Bulwark takes over, the best part of a year with much diminished amphibious capability. And so it goes on.

We do have a hollowed out military, even I admit that, and I highlight the cuts government ( all of them! ) make regularly.

However, I also try to look at the positives that we still maintain, what else can we do? Else I’d give up this subject and take up bird watching.

Yes, I too saw the LPD report though I did not read it in detail. Is Bulwark really not worked up to take over yet or is it a case of money saving by gapping?

I believe Bulwark is still deep in refit, and won’t turn a screw until next year.

Is that a dockyard worker? Surely somebody else could turn a nut, bolt or screw sooner than that even if it’s just on the wardroom door

It’s a screw propeller, if you don’t turn them the ship doesn’t move!

I’ve taken up trainspotting it’s amazing how economical the BR810 is on a long journey compared to the BR750 GPZ😄👌

Well the general public will be noticing some of the impact of cuts in the next few years. Because I cannot see the Red Arrows existing much longer as they have a unique aircraft type now.

I think that the aircraft may actually be older than the pilots.

That’s not to mention the gap when one of the carriers goes into maintenance. It’s bad ENOUGH losing a T23 for the best part of two years. Scheduling seems a bit of heath Robinson affair i.e make it up as we go along. Unfortunately this kind of thing doesn’t surprise anymore

No need to defend our position re Italy AF participation at RIAT, they decided to celebrate their Centenary at RIAT, hence they went well “All Italian”. And they do actively operate their Predators in the Med and Black Sea.
Unlike most folks splashing around what really impressed me wasn’t their Kinetic kit, but their AEW and SIGINT Aircraft, the G550 AEW and SAAB Globaleye AEW&C.
IMHO although drones are seen as an alternative to manned platforms they do have some real drawbacks. Our potential adversaries have demonstrated absolutely no restraint from knocking them out of the sky in peacetime.
And they are susceptible to EW, whereas a manned aircraft aren’t (we hope).

And don’t worry about me going into the Moany brigade on you M8, it isn’t in my nature (blood group is B+😉).
I just think that yesterday wasn’t a particularly good day for Defence Journal. They are usually far better than this, informative, challenging and spark honest debate.

I thought that the premature scrapping of Sentinel was an act of strategic vandalism forced upon the RAF by bean counters. Am I right in thinking that these airframes are still flying in the USA?

Stregegic vandalism, started in the 1950’s ask the navy.

Italy don’t have SAAB Globaleye. But yeah they have extensive eletronic capability, 2 G550 AEW 2 G550 SIGINT of 8 G550 buy that will be converted for more AEW , SIGINT and command control. Plus they have 3 EC27J modified transport aircraft for jamming. They also have a 12 Tornado ECR for SEAD.

If you read my original comment I was talking about Italy and Sweden. Hence the SAAB Globaleye comment. And interestingly you just answered a question I had at RIAT. There was C27J there with no label to identify what version or role it was there for. Funny thing the Italian personnel were nowhere to be found (it was torrential), but the Swedes were soggy but incredibly friendly. But it was covered with active jammers and passive ESM, so that explains it. I’m now even more impressed with what they brought with them 😉

In your comment there is no reference to Sweden unless i am going crazy.

Go up a bit further to the comment that starts with Yep. I mention how impressed with both Italy and Sweden.

Ok got it.

Both are innovative towards defence and, without many noticing, have been impressive at raising the quality and size of their forces, which is more than we say for ourselves

IMHO although drones are seen as an alternative to manned platforms they do have some real drawbacks. Our potential adversaries have demonstrated absolutely no restraint from knocking them out of the sky in peacetime.

I was just pondering this. To us laymen, we have been told that drones are the way ahead and that all future wars will be fought with drones/uavs. And I know there are different types of drones, but the Ruskies do seem to be able to find and interfere with the big ones and both Russia and Ukraine claim to intercept every one sent at each others countries.

So are manned aircraft and their missiles still actually the best system for successfully striking the enemy?

Having said that, the Russians do ‘claim’ to intercept everything thrown at them, including storm shadow.

The regular talk of the end of tanks and manned aircraft because of drones or cyber attacks being the future of warfare does seem to have the rug pulled from under it every time a new conflict arises.

Sorry for the off topic ponderings, but there seems nowhere else to discuss these things.

No prob but I am actually referring to the Russians knocking a US Drone down over the Black Sea. Dumped fuel on it and then collided with it.
Could have been worse in the good old days pre PC the F111 of USAFE air display party peace was to dump fuel parallel to the runway, pull up and put the reheat on.

Hi Phil, not a question that is an easy answer, but here goes.

The peacetime rules of engagement against unmanned aircraft are a bit of a grey area. However, any aircraft that has entered your sovereign airspace, which is demonstrably posing a threat and is not complying with communications, you are allowed to shoot it down. Outside the sovereign airspace, it would be damaging someone else’s property, unless it could be proven that it poses a risk to air traffic for example.

However, apart from Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) and possibly automatic dependent surveillance – broadcast (ADS-B). There are no direct communications from the drone that are available to a 3rd party.

Something like the RAF’s Reaper drone, has quite a large radar cross section, so search radars can detect them quite easily. Which is why Russia can find them over the Black Sea. Though they are also likely broadcasting IFF and ADS-B to make sure other civilian air traffic can avoid them. Which also makes them easy to find by Russia.

A Reaper for example normally carries a single electro-optical (EO) turreted sensor under the belly along with electronic surveillance measures (ESM). Though it can also carry another EO turret if required. It does not have a radar warning system or a missile approach warning system (though the Protector replacement may get them). Therefore, it does not have any defensive countermeasures. It is mostly dependent on the operator seeing an approaching aircraft, when they see it via the EO sensor. However, some of the ESM it carries may detect an aircraft’s search radar.

Therefore, the approaching manned aircraft has all the advantages. It could easily shoot down the drone with a missile or even using its internal gun. But Russian pilots are using a passive aggressive means of trying to knock down the drone. By using the head-butt technique, where they fly very close to the drone then cross in front of it at high speed. Making the aircraft’s wake and jet exhaust disrupt the airflow over the drone. Possibly causing it depart from controlled flight. The other option they have used, is passing over the drone and dropping flares on it. They have damaged a couple of USAF MQ-9 drones by doing this.

Only Iran has taken a no nonsense approach to dealing with drones. Where they shot down a US RQ-4A Global Hawk operating over the Gulf of Oman, using a surface to air missile. Iran claimed it was in their airspace, whilst the US clearly said it wasn’t. The Global Hawk is a very expensive surveillance drone and carries a high resolution ground mapping radar, that can look far into a country’s territory when flying outside their airspace limits. Which is probably why it was shot down.

Drones are used as a force multiplier, as they are in general much cheaper and quicker to build than a manned aircraft. Therefore, a Country can buy a larger number of them and operate them in large numbers. As they aren’t manned, losing one although relatively expensive, does not compare to the cost of loosing a manned aircraft with a fully training pilot.

The original RQ-1 Predator drone started out as something that was designed for one role, which was aerial surveillance using a EO turret. As the years progressed it evolved to carrying a better thermal imaging EO turret with a laser designator, then mounting a pair of Hellfire missiles. Where it was then designated as MQ-1, ie M = multi-role, Q = unmanned.

The Reaper or MQ-9 is an evolution of the Predator, it was initially called the Predator B. It is a much larger aircraft, it can operate a lot higher, carry more sensors along with more weapons and fly longer (with drop tanks) and faster. It is also a lot more expensive.

The Reaper drone for example is controlled via either direct line of sight data-link or via a satellite data-link. The satellite antenna is mounted in the nose pointing upwards. Whilst the line of sight antennas are mounted on the upper and lower fuselage. Can the aircraft be hacked or jammed?

Yes is the answer. A lot will depend on the handshake protocols of when the satellite data-link takes over from the line of sight one and vice versa. If the aircraft is given the correct broadcast, then it could be hacked. Which is what had possible happened to the USAF RQ-170 Sentinel (stealth drone), which “landed” in Iran. Similarly the satellite signal could be jammed, by an airborne jammer especially.

Normally if a drone loses its command communications it will back track its course, trying to re-establish communications. If this fails it can either fly back to its launch site or fly circuits at its last known good communication point, waiting to regain comms.

For the first 6 months of the Ukraine War, the Turkish made TB-2 Bayraktar seemed to be unstoppable. The best and most modern Russian air defence systems, either couldn’t detect it or track it. Which led to videos of TB-2s circling above these systems, whilst dropping a guided bomb on to it. However, Russia soon learnt and TB-2s were then shot down in droves, mostly by the Pantsir system. What is surprising though is that Russian Pantsirs faced TB-2s in Libya, they did quite well against them prior to the Ukraine War, so why did it have problems in Ukraine?

Drones will make up a larger portion of an armed force in the future. They can be considered as sacrificial if bought in numbers and relatively cheaply. Not to mention the loitering “kamikaze” type of drones that bring a new type of horror to the battlefield. But is not just the air domain that should be considered, both land and sea can and will exploit drone use. Where they will be used to boost numbers as additional sensors or as weapons carriers.

Many brigade is full try next door

We spout on about how fabulous our kit is yet when we get the opportunity to showcase it, we fuck out some half assed, rubbish it’s not good enough.

Now now – don’t start that again 😂

Doesn’t matter three is what we have, any more are well down the list of must haves

Indeed. We have had 3 aircraft in this role for decades, no need for more.

Ok… But… What are the benefit for UK in Nato involvment? For US, sure, I understand, but for UK? I don’t relate it easily to a benefit, except that in the big picture, we are of course delighted from UK involvment, since UK is the allied French trust the most.
But may be I ask too much questions for nothing. Benefit of Nato for Poland, Roumania, Germany, Finland are very clear. For France, somehow yes. For UK, mistery.

The benefit for the U.K., Europe, USA, Canada etc is that a war free Europe, the west helps keep economy going, stability etc. WW2 ravaged Europe and other parts of the world. To make sure that never happens in Europe again we all have to stick together, travel in the same direction and so on. To quote the stay together campaign in the Scottish independence vote: better together.
Oh even using the same cringe words as David Cameron leaves a bad taste

I see. Well, I think so too, better together.

As MS says.

Forget the EU nonsense. The EU is not Europe.
Europe is a geographic continent, with Europeans.
We are all Europeans, and UK citizens remain so, despite the nonsense the pro EU lot spew forth with the UK leaving the EU, which is a political club.
We are allies, and have western liberal values, which Russia, China and other hostile actors do not.
And NATO was formed to face down the Soviet Union.
The UK removing itself from NATO, which it was a founding member of, and of which the US, UK, Canada, were its driving force at its inception as victorious wartime allies against Nazi Germany, makes no sense to the UK.

I don’t know if EU is a non sens. Sometimes it is exasparating, sometime, it is sweat. I prefer our 2 countries to be part of it, but I also know that you have seas. Besides, there is versatility in the air in US.
I don’t know why, but when you look in movies from the 50’s, you see a USA men very strong minded, trustworthy. Today, in movies, they display weak character, that are difficult to trust.
Nevertheless, good to see that Great Britain remain a strong ally! And hope to see USA and Europe overcome current bad trend in Asia and Europe!

Mate I just think given the economic situation and an upcoming GE the uplift may never happen. If the inflation rate drops by year end there will be Money available, I’d reckon @£25 Billion in FY24/25.
So if the Government realise that their Goose is cooked and decide to cause their successor a real headache they could do the uplift. Just get GB in to do some very well crafted binding Contracts that are Bomb Proof, with eye watering penalty’s. It’s called payback for the QE’s and that nice note they were left.

Or they can try for a vain last minute give away budget to try and change the Polls.

Simple thing is that unless someone turns water into wine and taps it into our homes for free then Labour are the next Government (sorry you may now cry).

Do you think the Ukrainian war will be still going on post GE ?

If not and there hasn’t been a sudden outbreak of doing the right thing by the present Lot, then I see us slowly going up to 2.5%. There will be no uplift except possibly for the RN.
Reasons for that one are purely Political, AUKUS commitments and the SNP (they are still there) holding the U.K Governments feet over the fire with the National Shipbuilding Strategy !

NB I am not moaning, nor being a pessimist but a realist.

As Shakespeare said “kill all the Lawyers” because back in his day they were usually what passed as Politicians.

There that was the B+ thought for today 😉

I think it will be going for years mate.

I agree with you, I suspect it will be one long slow slugfest, akin to the Western Front on WW1.
As I see it the only way of shortening the war is to either massively up the Ante on sanctions and increase the military aid for Ukraine on a higher level of capability than we do now.
Or they grind each other down to such a point that one side has to quit. Unfortunately I think Russia would sanction the use of NBC weapons if they saw that happening to them.

On the other hand it means that the obviously overdue uplift in Defence spending will carry over to the next Government and by then the economy should be OK to support such a move.

The problem is threefold. Firstly the austerity crunch in 2010 pretty well nailed things to the floorboards in most departments.
Secondly the biggest budget by far is the NHS and it is political suicide to cut that by any party. That is followed by Pensions, welfare, education all are politically difficult to cut.
Thirdly the underlying problem is lack of growth in U.K. economy, that combined with the 11% of revenue being spent on interest is crippling us.
The way forwards is to get inflation under control, that reduces the % payments and means we can stop borrowing to cover existing expenditure.
Then concentrate on inward investment including regenerating our own Defence industry.
You just need to look at the economic effects of inward defence investment in shipbuilding to see it is a very effective way of boosting growth.