UK buys Rivet Joint

[buglerbilly]

DATE:22/03/10

SOURCE:Flight International

UK approves Rivet Joint purchase

By Craig Hoyle

The UK has agreed to buy three Boeing RC-135 Rivet Joint electronic intelligence aircraft and related ground equipment from the USA, defence secretary Bob Ainsworth has announced.

Confirming the development on 22 March, Ainsworth said the aircraft will deliver a "vital capability for the Royal Air Force to replace the Nimrod R1 that will be retired from service in March 2011".

The UK Ministry of Defence will introduce the Rivet Joints under Project Helix, a long-running effort to upgrade or replace its Nimrod R1 fleet, which was reduced to two airframes in 2009.

Operated by 51 Sqn at RAF Waddington, Lincolnshire, these will be the RAF's only active Nimrods from 31 March, when its last maritime patrol- and surveillance-configured MR2s will be retired. The Nimrod MRA4 will replace the latter type, and is scheduled to achieve delayed initial operational capability in October 2012.


[B]© Master Sgt Scott Wagers/US Air Force

The USAF expects to fly its Rivet Joints until around 2040

[rawcs]

Will these be "new builds" i.e. conversions from C-135 or taken out of the USAF's existing stock? I would imagine the conversion process is complicated and if the RAF wants an operational replacement for the R1 soon after they're retired then they don't have much time.

edit: Wikipedia tells me they are conversions from KC-135R's

[buglerbilly]

Slight Updates of existing stock from what I've read...........

[SteveJH]

Rebuilds of airframes possibly older then the R1's they have at the moment....crazy....

[Gubler, A.]

Rebuilds of airframes possibly older then the R1's they have at the moment....crazy....

Only crazy if the only metric of importance is the calender age of the airframe. But in terms of the realiability and maintability of the vehicle system the KC-135 is a much better choice than the Nimrod. In terms of the effectiveness and supportability of the mission system again the latest block of Rivett Joint is much, much better than the old stuff in the R.1.

[buglerbilly]

This clarifies it............

USAF Planes To Help U.K. Fill SIGINT Gap

By andrew chuter

Published: 22 Mar 2010 16:15

LONDON - Britain's Royal Air Force (RAF) is to operate three RC-135V/W Rivet Joint signals intelligence aircraft supplied under a Foreign Military Sales deal with the U.S. government, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) announced today.

The Boeing 707 airframes destined for Britain will be drawn from the U.S. Air Force tanker fleet.

L-3 Communications, which handles airframe and mission-system modifications on USAF Rivet Joints, will modify, refurbish and install mission systems on the British aircraft.

The first plane is to be delivered in 2014, three years after the RAF plans to withdraw the last two of its Nimrod R1 signals aircraft. A third R1 retired last year.

The gap in Britain's electronic intelligence capabilities is likely to be filled by U.S. Rivet Joints tasked and partly crewed by the RAF, sources said.

That could be a controversial move; for at least three years, the British will forgo control of what the defense secretary said in a statement March 22 to Parliament was a "vital capability."

An MoD spokesman said that between "2011 and 2014, the U.K. will enter into a partnering arrangement with the U.S. that will safeguard U.K. personnel core competencies."

The spokesman declined to provide more details.

The U.K. will have "full sovereignty of the aircraft when received in 2014," the spokesman said.

The spokesman said there were no details available on program costs; initial contracts will be placed in June.

The cost of buying the Rivet Joint planes, installing ground terminal gear, training crews and buying other equipment was estimated in late 2008 at slightly more than $1 billion, according to the announcement of Britain's formal interest by the U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

A letter of offer and acceptance on what is known here as "Project Helix" was signed by the British on March 19.

Britain will be the only non-U.S. operator of the highly sensitive Rivet Joint, Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth said.

He said Rivet Joint was the most cost-effective and the only viable option that meets British military requirements, beating out proposals to develop a new mission system for the R1 airframe or a modified Nimrod MRA4 airframe.

In 2007, L-3 was awarded an assessment phase deal for Helix, which was then envisaged as a mission systems update of the R1.

The deal to buy the USAF aircraft was one of a number of announcements made by the U.K. government March 22 ahead of the Labour administration calling a general election in the next few days. The most notable was the U.K. arm of General Dynamics winning a major order to develop a family of armored fighting vehicles for the British Army.

Further announcements are expected later this week, including an assessment phase deal with BAE Systems to build a new generation of frigates as part of the Future Surface Combatant program.

The decision to replace the R1s comes just days before the aircraft's sister machine, the Nimrod MR2, is withdrawn from RAF service as a maritime reconnaissance and intelligence-gathering aircraft. The move will leave Britain short of maritime reconnaissance and anti-submarine capability until the MRA4 becomes operational in 2012.

The first of nine MRA4s planned for delivery was last week handed over to the RAF for support training activities. The aircraft's entry into service is being delayed until 2012 to help save money at the cash-strapped MoD.

[Zen9]

Well looks good on having Helix onboard, assuming thats still new, rather than rebranding of US extent systems.

Still not happy about this, its just another sign or how bad the Nimrod business has been handled. It was the greatest mistake to not just build new Nimrods back when thiat process set off. Worse to see the R1's cut out of the modernisation/rebuild.
Now to add insult to injury RAF have tack on another aircraft type, and plug into US support and training piplines. Were previously R1 and MPA where the same aircraft in essence, with the internals and mission crew different of course.

[Gubler, A.]

It was the greatest mistake to not just build new Nimrods back when thiat process set off. Worse to see the R1's cut out of the modernisation/rebuild.

The mistake was to not form a co-operative ventrure to replace Nimrod. Especially with the USN and what eventually became the P-8 in both ASW and ELINT versions. The vehicle system is the least impotant part of managing such a program and the difference between trying to sustain the only 20 Nimords in the world compared to 20 out of 6,000 B737s is staggering.

[Zen9]

The mistake was to not form a co-operative ventrure to replace Nimrod. Especially with the USN and what eventually became the P-8 in both ASW and ELINT versions. The vehicle system is the least impotant part of managing such a program and the difference between trying to sustain the only 20 Nimords in the world compared to 20 out of 6,000 B737s is staggering.

Well considering how at the time, they could have had focused on a generic platform for a number of roles, the decision to fit modern wings to old fusilages was the daftest of the options and completely removed any possibility of exports.
ELINT(R1), MRA, ASTOR could all have used the same airframe, potentialy even adding in VIP, and idealy a stand off missileer for land attack. Though Tanker Transport is likely pushing things too far.

Alternatively, having a UK fit for a MRA/R1 type of a common US/UK machine opens up quite some scope for export of various components of that fit.

Spoiling the ship for ha'penth worth of tar, that 'saving' by opting for the 'cheap' option, now costs more than any of the other options they had before them.

[SteveJH]

Only crazy if the only metric of importance is the calender age of the airframe. But in terms of the realiability and maintability of the vehicle system the KC-135 is a much better choice than the Nimrod. In terms of the effectiveness and supportability of the mission system again the latest block of Rivett Joint is much, much better than the old stuff in the R.1.

I was actually thinking that the KC-135's nominated for conversion would likely also have large numbers of hours on the airframes, or are there a number of them that were relatively under utilised? On the plus side, I guess they still have airframe commonality since the 707 was also used for E3.