Nimrods finally scrapped

[Garry Russell]

The Nimrod R1's are being replaced by Boeings that are ten years older

[Paul K]

What I do not understand is why they are scrapped. The Americans have a habit of keeping their old aircraft in boneyards for a few years after they are retired, surely we should do the same, and at least be able to recondition them for service if need be...
Its not as if it costs much to ask tghe americans whether we can borrow a little bit of space at Mojave or Davis Monthan

The problem would be bringing them back into service in 5 years time or so. We would have to keep all the RAF maintenance and BAe engineering support capabilities in place, all the associated ground crew and aircrews qualified. You can't do that indefinitely just on the off chance we might want them back. The Americans store all those aircraft, but the difference is they also have a lot of the same types still in service. Aircraft like the A-10, B-1B, F-15 etc are still flying, and so the USAF maintenance infrastructure and qualified personnel are still there.

[tango234]

Fair point.

[ChrisHunt]

Garry, the new Nimrod is/was effectively an all new aircraft - almost nothing of the original aircraft (apart from bits of the fuse) survived the build to the 4 standard. It is this that highlights the first mistake in assuming that the old airframes were a suitable basis for the new aircraft; when they were opened them up most if not all airframes were too far gone to use all but a small percentage. Even if they were in good nick the new engines required a new wing. The onboard sensor suite and avionics were all new. The project's initial optimism quickly soured but no-one was willing to take the rather obvious step of revisiting the basis of the entire project.

Perhaps we should be kind and credit the original decision with a strong desire to retain at least some big jet capability even if we couldn't afford an all new one.

Regards,
Chris

[Garry Russell]

I know that only the basic fuse shell was re used and the airframes are effectively new

The only reference I used was to say they were well past it and by that I mean the design.........too small and difficulty with the way the engines were designed making it hard to modify easily. I never said these airframes were old.

[ChrisHunt]

Understood Garry. It was the whole concept that was past it to be honest. There were a number of Comet airframes used (or at least bits of them) but I can't remember what the percentage of Nimrod v Comet used as the basis for the new aircraft. I was at Warton when the project was getting off the ground (so to speak) and it was realised very early on that most of the old airframes couldn't be reused. The old Nimrod effectively became nothing more than a template for the new one.

Regards,
Chris