MK2 nimrod retired from RAF service

seems the MK2 nimrod has finally been put int retirement by the RAF,41 years of service from the variations are to be replaced by a MK4? MK4 what?

it was our spy in the sky and were to be given air support from the USA, sorry if this is old news i know how tight this section of fATS is run

news.stv.tv...

edit to fix link AHhhhh!

[edit on 26/3/2010 by stealthyaroura]

[edit on 26/3/2010 by stealthyaroura]

Link is busted?

anyways... remarkable aircraft

reply to post by zoomer72


thanks for the heads up i hate it when links bust ok now

Originally posted by stealthyaroura
seems the MK2 nimrod has finally been put int retirement by the RAF,41 years of service from the variations are to be replaced by a MK4? MK4 what?

The Mk 4 referred to in the video is the Nimrod Mk 4, officially designated the MR/A.4. this designator stands for Maritime Recconnaissance/Attack because the new version also has a stand off cruise missile launch capability.

It has an all-new and slightly bigger wing and more efficient BR710 turbofans in place of the Spey's, hence the much bigger nacelles and intakes.

Didn't these airplanes have an enormous "nose" at one time ? If so, I remember seeing one when I was younger flying over Haugesund, Norway. My Father said they were the largest fighter plane in the world because they have Sidewinder missiles ??

More often though it was a slow lumbering 4 engined propeller airplane we used to see, in RAF colours, which performed maritime patrols over the Northern Sea and up the Norwegian coast, it looked like a WW2 bomber ! (But I don't know its name, sorry).

A shame when old airplanes are retired. Will any be preserved ?

What replaces the Mk2 airplane for the next couple of years, until the Mk4 is deployed ?

Originally posted by Ulala
Didn't these airplanes have an enormous "nose" at one time ?

That would be the Nimrod AEW.3. It had large fairings on the nose and tail for a new cassegrain radar system developed by Marconi and was supposed to operate in the AWACS role. The radar was plagued by problems though and it was axed after only one prototype and the RAF got the Boeing Sentry AEW.1 instead.

My Father said they were the largest fighter plane in the world because they have Sidewinder missiles ??

Nimrods did start to carry sidewinders during the Falklands War and this continued afterwards

More often though it was a slow lumbering 4 engined propeller airplane we used to see, in RAF colours, which performed maritime patrols over the Northern Sea and up the Norwegian coast, it looked like a WW2 bomber ! (But I don't know its name, sorry).

Ah, yes. That would be the Avro Shackleton. The final member of the family that began with the 1939 Avro Manchester and that was finally retired in 1991. A remarkable run!

What replaces the Mk2 airplane for the next couple of years, until the Mk4 is deployed ?

Apart from a lot of wishful thinking, the Sentinel R.1 will take up some of the slack.

Retiring aircraft before the replacement is ready is becoming an annoying habit of the UK's (see also Jaguar, Sea Harrier etc)

reply to post by waynos


Yes ! I'm sure the Shackleton is the one, because it had the tail of the English bombers which went to Germany in the war, that's what I remember most. Mainly they flew over the sea in the distance but sometimes they overflew the land.

In the middle 1980's, when we lived in Haugesund, there were many attempts by CCCP submarines to enter Scandinavian waters and I guess that's why the English airplanes were patrolling about the Norwegian skies. But we moved back to Finland after that, which isn't an OTAN/NATO country so we saw the English planes no more

I can't be sure about the Nimrod with the nose, it was a huge distance away but had the bulb nose ... I don't know if any other sea patrol airplanes had that ? But my Father said it was a Nimrod and he's never wrong (even when he is !)

Thank you for the pictures & explanation, it is appreciated

reply to post by waynos


thanks for the info,you no ya stuff! yeah the women in one of the reports i saw said MK4 then i heard another interview say MR4 but i did not realise it was still a nimrod, All be it a new one see them time to time here in north yorkshire big beast of a plane.

Originally posted by waynos

Retiring aircraft before the replacement is ready is becoming an annoying habit of the UK's (see also Jaguar, Sea Harrier etc)

The MoD can be forgiven for the Sea Harrier, considering the main role of the Royal Navy carriers these days is not air supremacy or even fleet defence, but ground and close air support - the switch to the GR.7 and GR.9 was an astute one for this.

reply to post by RichardPrice


We might have to agree to differ on this one Richard. The loss of the Shar removed a whole level of capability that the GR.9 cannot replicate. Frankly I believe the AV-8B+ should have been acquired as a replacement for both, if the Shar HAD to go, but we both know this was never going to happen. I wonder if they looked at fitting the Shar2 radars onto the GR.9's, to make an FGR.11?

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by RichardPrice

 

We might have to agree to differ on this one Richard. The loss of the Shar removed a whole level of capability that the GR.9 cannot replicate. Frankly I believe the AV-8B+ should have been acquired as a replacement for both, if the Shar HAD to go, but we both know this was never going to happen. I wonder if they looked at fitting the Shar2 radars onto the GR.9's, to make an FGR.11?

As I said, the role of the Harrier force has changed dramatically - its not an air superiority or fleet defence force any more, and I cannot think of the last time it needed to be. Fleet defence has been taken over by better missiles and systems, while air superiority - well, lets not kid ourselves there...

Fleet defence is one of the roles of the F-35B. It is a key need for any 'carrier' operating force. The need didn't go away, only the aircraft. Don't underestimate the BVR and anti missile capability of the Shar2.

Look at the recent hot air between ourselves and Argentina? If that had escalated once more we would have been unable to operate any sort of air defence autonomously around the fleet. The 'better missiles' angle is a myth the various govts have been peddling since 1957 as I recall

Funny how the French and US Navies don't seem to agree, isn't it? While we may argue the merits and demerits of the Super Hornet and Rafale (one of while I like quite a lot, the other I don't much care for) at least the importance of providing fleet air defence is recognosed with both of them.