russian sub off uk raf has no planes to find it

[craig.mason]

This has come back to bite the Tories remember when they scrapped all our nimrod aircraft
An RAF plane is "conducting activity" off the Scottish coast, the Ministry of Defence says, amid reports of a Russian submarine being spotted in the area.
A Royal Navy Frigate and submarine are also thought to be involved in the search, along with Canadian and French maritime patrol aircraft.
The Telegraph reports the French plane has searched for the submarine for at least 10 days.
The RAF currently has no maritime patrol aircraft of its own.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34896956

[Traveller]

Does it really matter with our own subs and frigates looking? I don't know what exactly goes on in these searches and childish games, so if we find it then what? If its >12 miles out then its legally entitled to be there. Im sure the Clyde has plenty of other underwater detection measures to ensure our Trident patrols can get out to a reasonable area from where they can go off undetected by Russians. Of course the Russians may already have a perfect acoustic signature of all our subs collected over the years.

[cg_341]

This has come back to bite the Tories remember when they scrapped all our nimrod aircraft

No, when did they do that?!

[Brevet Cable]

I don't know what exactly goes on in these searches and childish games, so if we find it then what?

If they locate & track it , they've proved that they can......think of it as a live training exercise with the added bonuses of not having to use your own forces to act as the Red/Orange ( whatever the current in-word is ) Team & of having some of your potential opposition's kit to track ( as opposed to your own )
As to what the Russians may be up to.....nothing to do with ELINT/SIGINT or acoutic tracking ( they've had plenty of supposedly civilian surface assets doing that for years ).....possibly something like this :
http://www.navytimes.com/story/military/2015/10/30/uuvs-protecting-undersea-cables-russia-darpa/74823926/

[ATrs.jules]

the timing of it......

[Brevet Cable]

Not that the Russians have to worry about it for another 5 or more years.

[Wissam24]

What a needlessly sensationalised title.

[Alanko]

What a needlessly sensationalised title.

No capital letters and no punctuation either. 0/10, see me.

[Brevet Cable]

Sensationalist......but true.

[CJS]

Sensationalist......but true.

Sam and Brevet I agree - straight out of the Daily Wail. Although they at least normally get their punctuation correct.

[JetA1]

The RAF cancelled training flights over the North Sea last week as they knew they were sitting listening.

[Vodka]

so much for our hunter killer sub force. . . Astutes and trafalgar classes ?

[T_J]

so much for our hunter killer sub force. . . Astutes and trafalgar classes ?

How do you know that Royal Navy subs are not trailing and monitoring the Russian sub?

[Traveller]

And all in intermational waters................

[Brevet Cable]

T'was ever thus......they send aircraft/ships/subs to snoop on our stuff & conduct ELINT/SIGINT during our exercises , we do the same to them.

[AlexC]

This has come back to bite the Tories remember when they scrapped all our Nimrod aircraft

It was Labour that decided to update the Nimrods which was disastrous for numerous technical reasons. The Tories were right to have cancelled the Nimrod update, but they were wrong not to have immediately ordered a new fleet of maritime patrol aircraft which they appear at long last about to do.

[Mul]

This has come back to bite the Tories remember when they scrapped all our Nimrod aircraft

It was Labour that decided to update the Nimrods which was disastrous for numerous technical reasons. The Tories were right to have cancelled the Nimrod update, but they were wrong not to have immediately ordered a new fleet of maritime patrol aircraft which they appear at long last about to do.

I'm not sure you are being serious AlexC, I can't comment as to the problems with wanting to update the Nimrods but do you seriously think it was a good idea to have no wartime aircraft in a nation that is surrounded by water? and also claims sovereignty over another island a few thousand miles away particularly close to a certain south american country?

[DerekF]

This has come back to bite the Tories remember when they scrapped all our Nimrod aircraft

It was Labour that decided to update the Nimrods which was disastrous for numerous technical reasons. The Tories were right to have cancelled the Nimrod update, but they were wrong not to have immediately ordered a new fleet of maritime patrol aircraft which they appear at long last about to do.

The contract to update the MR2s into Nimrod 2000 or MRA4 was awarded in December 1996. I can't remember who was in power at the time.....

[Brevet Cable]

December 1996 would have been the Consevatives ( John Major ) , with Labour taking over in May 1997.

[DerekF]

Really! Who'd have thought eh?

[Brevet Cable]

[AlexC]

December 1996 would have been the Conservatives ( John Major ) , with Labour taking over in May 1997.

I wouldn't have thought that much work on the project would have been completed between December 1996 and May 1997, therefore I'd say that Labour was responsible for at least 99% of the cock-up!

[AlexC]

I can't comment as to the problems with wanting to update the Nimrods but do you seriously think it was a good idea to have no wartime aircraft in a nation that is surrounded by water?

I assume that you meant to say 'maritime aircraft'?, and if so then no, I certainly don't think it was good idea!

[Big Eric]

I think that the scrapping of the Nimrods was probably the best idea ever made by any government, they were originally built at Woodford with wooden jigs which changed shape depending on the moisture in the atmosphere. They were a mess when they were originally delivered to the RAF and were in a much bigger mess when they were delivered back at enormous expense to be re-created into the joke that was the MRA4.

[Mul]

I can't comment as to the problems with wanting to update the Nimrods but do you seriously think it was a good idea to have no wartime aircraft in a nation that is surrounded by water?

I assume that you meant to say 'maritime aircraft'?, and if so then no, I certainly don't think it was good idea!

Yeah I did sorry, poor mistake. Why do you think it wasn't a good idea?