Preparing The Country For The Disbandment Of The Raf?

[Downwind.Maddl-Land]

Is it me? Or is there a distinct “denigrate the RAF at every opportunity” culture in the air? A few recent examples:
The now (in)famous “ the RAF is utterly, utterly useless” quote; did that remark really get released into general circulation by accident? ie was one person’s emotional and personal remark worthy of all the coverage that it got?
No mention of RAF losses in current operations (that I heard) during the annual Remembrance Day coverage or even during the BBC (!) Festival of Remembrance TV coverage – despite the Nimrod and C-130 tragedies.
The first female fatality in a combat zone was RAF (an ATC/Ops O if I am not mistaken) but the recent Army loss was extensively reported as the first female death. (Heartfelt sympathies to all families who have suffered loss – whatever Service or gender)
Every TV shot of helicopter support operations always implies that the Chinooks, Merlins and Pumas are Army operated.
Disproportionate coverage of the ‘Nimrod teapot’ story.
The constant carping about Air Transport Operations.
The constant carping about Typhoon.
Even the abandonment of the RAF Antarctic expedition was covered on Teletext over Christmas and portrayed as an only-to-be-expected failure.
I would be pleased to be corrected on any of the above. But nothing positive currently seems to be reported about the RAF; I just smell a rat.
Not having a pop at the Army at all – they are deserving of all the positive reportage that they get.
Now, the really cynical person may just suspect that a distinct policy is being pursued here, whereby the Media are being manipulated by a manipulative Government (well versed in the art) to condition the populace that the RAF is now redundant and can safely be disbanded as an ‘efficiency measure’. Such preparatory work would result in a much-muted outcry from Joe Public, when it’s announced (following the obligatory leak - to test reaction- of course!).
If I am wrong, and I truly hope I am, then the RAF PR machine wants sacking in toto and a new Team needs to start actually doing something to redress the balance. Today wouldn’t be too soon.

[boogie-nicey]

You'll only get an outcry from people with ounce of respect for their armed services and a degree of common sense realising what the role these services play in the nations overall strategic picture. Unfortunately such persons are few and far between and I doubt the new army of eco-nazis, social freeloaders, giddy matron style female voters could care less.


I sincerely wish there was a more passionate debate about this but alas no, shame that .....

[Statty]

Is it me? Or is there a distinct “denigrate the RAF at every opportunity” culture in the air? A few recent examples:
The now (in)famous “ the RAF is utterly, utterly useless” quote; did that remark really get released into general circulation by accident? ie was one person’s emotional and personal remark worthy of all the coverage that it got?
No mention of RAF losses in current operations (that I heard) during the annual Remembrance Day coverage or even during the BBC (!) Festival of Remembrance TV coverage – despite the Nimrod and C-130 tragedies.
The first female fatality in a combat zone was RAF (an ATC/Ops O if I am not mistaken) but the recent Army loss was extensively reported as the first female death. (Heartfelt sympathies to all families who have suffered loss – whatever Service or gender)
Every TV shot of helicopter support operations always implies that the Chinooks, Merlins and Pumas are Army operated.
Disproportionate coverage of the ‘Nimrod teapot’ story.
The constant carping about Air Transport Operations.
The constant carping about Typhoon.
Even the abandonment of the RAF Antarctic expedition was covered on Teletext over Christmas and portrayed as an only-to-be-expected failure.
I would be pleased to be corrected on any of the above. But nothing positive currently seems to be reported about the RAF; I just smell a rat.
Not having a pop at the Army at all – they are deserving of all the positive reportage that they get.
Now, the really cynical person may just suspect that a distinct policy is being pursued here, whereby the Media are being manipulated by a manipulative Government (well versed in the art) to condition the populace that the RAF is now redundant and can safely be disbanded as an ‘efficiency measure’. Such preparatory work would result in a much-muted outcry from Joe Public, when it’s announced (following the obligatory leak - to test reaction- of course!).
If I am wrong, and I truly hope I am, then the RAF PR machine wants sacking in toto and a new Team needs to start actually doing something to redress the balance. Today wouldn’t be too soon.

No fella its not just you.

Have felt this way for quite a time now - too many things tied together - none of them too big on their own. The faceless/nameless ones are playing their games with our lives.

Never mind - soon be Christmas<img>

[Chugalug2]

Is it me? Or is there a distinct “denigrate the RAF at every opportunity” culture in the air?
But nothing positive currently seems to be reported about the RAF; I just smell a rat.
Not having a pop at the Army at all – they are deserving of all the positive reportage that they get.
Now, the really cynical person may just suspect that a distinct policy is being pursued here, whereby the Media are being manipulated by a manipulative Government (well versed in the art) to condition the populace that the RAF is now redundant and can safely be disbanded as an ‘efficiency measure’.
If I am wrong, and I truly hope I am, then the RAF PR machine wants sacking in toto and a new Team needs to start actually doing something to redress the balance. Today wouldn’t be too soon.

Well, yes DML, I'm sure there is a distinct policy being pursued against the RAF, but not necessarily by the government. They merely turn the screw ever tighter on the Forces as a whole, and leave it to them to fight amongst themselves for survival. It is a battle that has had to be fought from the very birth of the RAF, hence Trenchard's original Iraq bargain basement deal that saved it from infanticide. It is a fight that the present leadership of the RAF seems somewhat disinterested in. With Admiral West having done his pitch for the Navy carriers, the silence from the CAS, et al, is deafening. So important we are told to have a FJ pilot in charge at last, so significant that he has in excess of 4000 hours (and growing!) of FJ logged, so inspiring that he has just soloed in the Typhoon. Well from where I'm standing it's all irrelevant to his real job to fight the RAF's corner, out loud and in public just as the CGS has done. Get out on the front steps of main building Sir, and tell your real masters, the British Public of how important an independant Air Force is to their security. DML has given you a goodly list of RAF achievement and sacrifice to be going on with, then attend to ESF for the Hercs (stalled!) and Chinook airworthiness (and overrule Wratten and Day, that infamous double act). Might make waves for your retirement plans? Then please amend them, or step aside now to save our service before their leadership do their duty to their services and kipper us up!

[Exrigger]

Before I left the RAF in 99 I happened to mention to some of the management that the new policies/management had put the RAF on the rim of the toilet bowl and that in the near future someone in the MOD/Government is going to slip and flush the RAF down the pan.
I have read so many things on this site that makes me concerned for those current members of the forces and fighting in areas without support and proper equipment and the MOD/Government seem to be blind to what is staring them in the face.

[camlobe]

Now there, dearie, You just sit there and relax. Try and think of nothing while I give the cristal a rub. A bit cloudy at the moment, you see. That's it dearie, just relax. Ahh. It is starting to clear. What have we here? There is a sight to behold, but it is still a little bit murky. Easy my dear. Don't get too excited. I'll keep rubbing. That's better. I can see. Ah, yes. The future is the past, and the past is the future. Oh, it makes so much sense. Yes my dear, I can foretell your future. I can see it so clearly.

Before your very eyes, all your problems will be solved. For you have a future. It is not a future that you want. Nor is it a future that your people want. But it is what your elected representitives have been working hard at for many years. And they will only do their best for you, won't they, dearie?

Behold, in the cristal ball, you can see...the Canadian example. This is your future, my dear. One service combining all three arms. It is a wonderful idea, don't you think? If one side is short handed, take from the other two. And Your government has been practicing this policy so successfully for years, hasn't it?

Think of the money it will save. Only one uniform. Only one band. Only one HQ building. Only one admin department. Only one person in charge. Your government will be able to cut so much. I am sure they will give it back to the country somewhere. Oh, what wonderful benifits for you.

Oh, oh dear. The cristal is going dark. Oh, what is this? Mayhem. Distruction. Doom. But don't worry about that, my dear. It might never happen.

Yes, dearie. That is what I see in your future. What did you say your name was?

The price?
















Oh, that's ok Britannia, just your soul.

[FJJP]

And the Canadian example was such a disaster that they have all but reverted back to single service.

Not that our lords and masters ever take any notice of history or other examples of things that go wrong - they'll blindly go their own way, regardless of the top rate advice they will be given...

[herkman]

I have many Canadian service friends, and was without doubt the greatest stuff up, one has ever seen.

The only people who did well out of the Canadian program, were those who played the party game, and many who perhaps just made the grade were promoted.

However those who did not conform, quickly found they had no career and in many cases no job at all.

A sad situation, how short peoples memories can be, one of the finest air forces, all but destroyed, by people who had no interest bar their own.

Find me a serviceman from Canada who was in at the time, who thought was a good idea, they would be well and truelly outranked by those who thought it was a great step backwards.

Regards

Col

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

I've also noticed this dangerous trend and, yes, we'll learn sod all from the Canadian's experience. It's also disturbing that the concept is projected very forceably on ARRSE and RumRation; eg http://www.rumration.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/p=55261.html#55261 . If it was simply banter, fine.

I also see another trend towards the Army being the predominant Service. Whether that's because nothing that happened more than 10 years ago is relevant these days, I don't know. I can tell you now that, as far as military logistics is concerned, the only accepted solution to anything is the Land one.

[Blacksheep]

As a citizen, I wonder how the current slimmed down (???) military is supposed to ensure the security of the nation. Unfortunately, as an ex-serviceman, I suppose I understand the issue better than most of today's electorate, so politics will solve nothing. The Empire has gone. The Commonwealth is meaningless to almost everyone except The Queen. The Europeans, quite sensibly, don't give a stuff about anything outside Europe. Nor should we. TB and New Labour (what's new about them???) use the armed forces as a means of sitting at the top table with the USA. TB and his cronies never see how ridiculous they look to the rest of the world and even ordinary folk only get the authorised message threough the carefully manipulated news media. They never get to see it the way those of us who live and work on the outside can view the farce.

We have most of our people committed to fighting in a place where we have no strategic interests whatsoever. What did we ever get from Afghanistan? Iraq? Trouble from the natives has always cost us much more than we ever gained from dominating them. Iraq has to sell its oil on the open market at the market price, regardless of who's in control. As for Afghanistan, apart from half the drug dealers in Europe, hardly anyone would notice if an asteroid plunged into the place and vapourised it.

Our armed forces in the field don't, according to reliable reports, have adequate equipment, ammunition or air support. There also seems to be a problem with getting supplies and materials flown into the operational areas. I'd be perfectly happy to see 150,000 civil servants fired and sent out to look for proper, wealth creating jobs. Their salaries could be spent on recruiting and equipping say another 75,000 soldiers sailors and airmen to defend our shores. That would still leave us short handed and exposed, but much better off than we are now. Especially if they were all in UK where they're supposed to be if they're defending us.

Defend our shores? Where's the threat?

History tells us that threats appear from unexpected places whenever there's a weakness. Should we wait and see? We need a large, strong navy equipped to fight submarines to protect our supply lines, not with a couple of carrier groups to deploy British "Peacekeepers" in support of US operations. We need an air force that can repel air attack and control our own skies. We need a few soldiers to fight anyone who tries to set foot on our soil. Even tiny Singapore does a better job at protecting itself than Britain.

Its not only the RAF that's being undermined, for just like the hospitals, schools and universities, the state of all our armed forces is a damned disgrace.

[Willi B]

I'd be perfectly happy to see 150,000 civil servants fired and sent out to look for proper, wealth creating jobs.

Mate, you're on the money. Time wasting oxygen thieves who contribute nothing civil and even less service. Time to put them on three year contracts, with renewal subject to both Service requirements and superior performance assessment.

[allan907]

(following the obligatory leak - to test reaction- of course!).


Can we take it that that was the "obligatory leak"???

Perhaps the CAS needs to be very very careful next time he's logging hours. Should the need arise to eject then he may find himself ending up as wobbly jelly at the end of his 'chute on account that bang seats don't work too well if you haven't got a backbone.

[Rev I. Tin]

From the Daily Telegraph's Pictures of the Year:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2006/12/29/yearpix/060222kabul.jpg
The caption reads:
Nato continued its mission to subdue insurgency by the Taliban in Afghanistan as British Army troops patrolled Kabul.
Really?
Wonder why a British Army soldier is wearing RAF Flt Lt rank?
You would have thought the DT would know the difference between the services by now.:ugh:

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

I'd be perfectly happy to see 150,000 civil servants fired and sent out to look for proper, wealth creating jobs. Their salaries could be spent on recruiting and equipping say another 75,000 soldiers sailors and airmen to defend our shores.

So that's the Navy's support chain buggered then. To take just one aspect, given time, I suppose the Navy could learn to operate the other side of the RAS Line. A minor detail is that they don't have enough bodies and the operating cost would increase.

It's a pity that a well presented Post was marred by broad generalisations. Has Willi B copied that point?

I must confess to being fed up of continually arguing the Air Force's corner. When the other 2 Services don't understand its role, how the hell can we expect the Public or some f**kwit politician to. CAS needs to make some pre-emptive strikes, I think.

[mayorofgander]

Bit of a gay watch!!!:eek:
Wonder if any of his 'Rock' mates can ID him from it.

And what's he doing pestering that kid???;)

MOG:cool:

[allan907]

If I am wrong, and I truly hope I am, then the RAF PR machine wants sacking in toto and a new Team needs to start actually doing something

What PR machine???? Have a look at the RAF website. "Recent Appointments" - November 2005; Honours list - 2005. And this is a matter of days away from 2007.

Jesus bloody wept!

[chevvron]

I've read many reports over the years that certain high ranking military/MOD persons regard the RAF as 'unnecessary' as a separate entity from Army and Navy and proposing it's merger with these two forces. Personally I think the roles of all three services have become 'diluted' by 'overlapping' of their specific duties, but I regard the present system as the best there is; I would also add that I think the Royal Marines ought to have more autonomy as do the USMC; whatever happened to Royal Marines helicopter flights?

[Tourist]

I have to concur with many of the posts above.

The RAF PR machine, (usually supernaturally successful) certainly seems to be failing to do its job recently.


What I would say however, is that the frustrating feeling you are experiencing is the same one that traditionally the RN have felt when our PR team has repeatedly let us down. (RAF SAR from Culdrose stories etc)

[Lucy Lastic]

I have to concur with many of the posts above.

The RAF PR machine, (usually supernaturally successful) certainly seems to be failing to do its job recently.


What I would say however, is that the frustrating feeling you are experiencing is the same one that traditionally the RN have felt when our PR team has repeatedly let us down. (RAF SAR from Culdrose stories etc)

I'm not sure about this. It looks to me as though the forces generally are refusing to go quietly and using the media to lay the blame where it belongs - at the feet of this half-*ss*d government.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=425051&in_page_id=1770

[Jimlad1]

"Mate, you're on the money. Time wasting oxygen thieves who contribute nothing civil and even less service. Time to put them on three year contracts, with renewal subject to both Service requirements and superior performance assessment."

How strange, I was going to suggest the very same thing for the not insignificant number of forces personnel in my part of the MOD who treat their office posting as an excuse to get drunk, come in late (usually hungover), take every Wednesday afternoon off for "sport" and the f*ck off home early on Friday. Doubtless were a CS to act in this way you'd be screaming from the rooftops, or is it just double standards for HM Forces?

[timex]

How strange, I was going to suggest the very same thing for the not insignificant number of forces personnel in my part of the MOD who treat their office posting as an excuse to get drunk, come in late (usually hungover), take every Wednesday afternoon off for "sport" and the f*ck off home early on Friday. Doubtless were a CS to act in this way you'd be screaming from the rooftops, or is it just double standards for HM Forces?

Or...just the fact that your job is the only place for some down time from front line Mil service and not Mon-Fri 9-5?

[cooheed]

I'm not sure about this. It looks to me as though the forces generally are refusing to go quietly and using the media to lay the blame where it belongs - at the feet of this half-*ss*d government.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=425051&in_page_id=1770

The way they have been running up the white flag to the EU over the years exemplifies this crass proposal!

[Bismark]

I think the RAF would fare better if they appeared more Joint in their thinking. Their problem is that their (Torpy) attitude is "if it flies it must be RAF".....relax chaps and do not feel constantly threatened by the other Services.

Embrace JHC, JHF, CVF, etc and you will find that you get more support from the other 2 Services. Drop the attitude that SAR is for the Air Force, Harriers must be flown by the Air Force (but look what 800 NAS are doing in Helmand), AH should really be flown by the Air Force, SH must be flown by the Air Force.

No doubt the RAF is also claiming ownership of UAVs despite the fact that all 3 Services operate them (actually in my day it was only the RN and Army that operated UAVs).

So why not start the New Year on a friendly note RAF, be more Joint and you may find you have more friends.

PS Great job you aare doing in Morecambe Bay searching for the lost helo guys.....but the RN are there with you, you know.

[Chugalug2]

I think the RAF would fare better if they appeared more Joint in their thinking. Their problem is that their (Torpy) attitude is "if it flies it must be RAF".....relax chaps and do not feel constantly threatened by the other Services.

Embrace JHC, JHF, CVF, etc and you will find that you get more support from the other 2 Services. Drop the attitude that SAR is for the Air Force, Harriers must be flown by the Air Force (but look what 800 NAS are doing in Helmand), AH should really be flown by the Air Force, SH must be flown by the Air Force.

So why not start the New Year on a friendly note RAF, be more Joint and you may find you have more friends.

I know this is going to be a mistake but, hell, I'll bite! Of course the FAA and the AAC are skilled, capable and professional operators, but their operations are of necessity of a tactical nature and usually for the tactical needs of their parent service. The philosophy of the RAF is to use Air Power at that level as well, but also (and often with the same assets) at a strategic level. So when Dowding insisted that the RAF element of the BEF be withdrawn from France to the UK in 1940, to preserve it for the inevitable Battle of Britain, it was a Strategic decision at the expense of the Tactical needs of the Army, and not a popular decision amongst those making that bloody withdrawal. When Harris insisted that the 4-engined bomber force be used solely for the Strategic Bomber Offensive it caused great friction with the Royal Navy who wanted sustained attacks on the Kriegmarine's Bases and U-boat Pens, and he had to be ordered to switch the effort to Northern France for the tactical requirements of the Army before and after D-day. Both led to a bitterness between the three services that lasts to this day.
On the whole the Army's and the Navy's assets are their own, and neither has a great interest in interfering in the other's environment. The Air however is part of all military operations, and there is rarely a sufficiency of supply to meet the demand. The RAF has always to keep an eye on the strategic woods at the expense of the tactical trees. A lot of discussion is going on now re Typhoon. Very expensive in monetary, resource and manpower terms to ensure an Air Superiority that is not even threatened at the moment!
So Joint is good, but only up to a point! The Luftwaffe was very joint, making the Wehrmacht's Blitzkrieg tactics seemingly unstoppable. But the lack of a Strategic Bomber Force later in the war meant that Soviet War Production could grow unmolested, churning out the thousands of T34s that would overwhelm that same Wehrmacht. The customer is not always right, and Air Power must be independent to be a war winner, which was what Trenchard intended when he founded the RAF in 1918, and which the present CAS has got to push now just as hard!
Rant ends, take cover, very heavy incoming!

[tucumseh]

" Time to put them (civilians) on three year contracts, with renewal subject to … superior performance assessment."

I tend to agree. But first I’d insist that ALL staff are treated the same instead of the current two-tier approach whereby direct entrants are not required to attain the competences of the five grades they skipped. By doing this, you would avoid the situation we have today whereby some very senior staffs in DPA think it acceptable to trade-out safety and airworthiness, and consider it the done thing to knowingly waste money; all with the express approval of their bosses.

“How strange, I was going to suggest the very same thing for the not insignificant number of forces personnel in my part of the MOD who treat their office posting as an excuse to get drunk, come in late (usually hungover), take every Wednesday afternoon off for "sport" and the f*ck off home early on Friday. Doubtless were a CS to act in this way you'd be screaming from the rooftops, or is it just double standards for HM Forces?”

I also agree with this sentiment, if not the details. If one accepts that a large percentage of Service personnel at Abbey Wood are employed on “Requirements” and “ILS”, the real problem in my experience is they are seldom trained for these tasks, particularly requirements management. Couple this with the rule (long upheld by successive CDPs and Ministers) that if Servicemen cannot or will not carry out these roles, then the project manager must do them himself without the benefit of further manpower or financial resources, then you have a recipe for disaster and discontent. And in turn couple this ruling with the above concessions to direct entrants (who, by definition, have not learnt Requirements or ILS as they have skipped the relevant grades) it is easily seen why failures in these disciplines are now screwing up projects on a regular basis.

There is good and bad on both sides. I have unfortunately experienced Service RMs who, being unwilling to do their job, have actively lobbied for projects to be cancelled; thereby avoiding any blame for delay. Not a good quality in a Lt Colonel I suggest. Equally, I know many civvy PMs who have done the same because their lack of basic competence and experience (and hence premature promotion) has left them quite incapable of managing anything but the simplest task. On more than one occasion I have been instructed to cease work on a project because it involved, for example, a modicum of system integration – a taboo subject among many of DPA’s higher flyers. Too difficult you see. Too much scope for risks they don’t understand and so can’t mitigate. And can’t abide the thought of their subordinate doing it effortlessly. Sod the user who’s dug in a ditch begging for the kit. (I just ignored them, every time).

So yes, put us on contracts by all means, but first make it a level playing field. No promotion to C1 until they’ve managed a variety of technologies, across all 3 services, in every stage of the acquisition cycle. And don’t get me started on beancounters!

[Jimlad1]

"So yes, put us on contracts by all means, but first make it a level playing field. No promotion to C1 until they’ve managed a variety of technologies, across all 3 services, in every stage of the acquisition cycle. And don’t get me started on beancounters!"

Very good point - its too easy for new entrants to get fast promotion using the JOB system to reasonably senior levels based solely on a job interview. There is no detailed assessment until B2, possibly too senior.

The problem I've had with forces in my office is that they are keen for a while, then lose interest as they have their next posting to sort out. They also take 6 - 12 months to build up reasonable corporate knowledge and then move on taking it with them. While getting a Central TLB post is doubtless a good thing career wise for forces personnel, only having people for 2 years does not build long term stability. I'd strongly argue for a 3 - 4 year tour to implement knowledge and reduce the time spent working up (the time taken to brief new senior folks is literally stunning).

I am concious that many see it as a well deserved break - 9-5 work is a nice change for a lot of guys. The problem is that a lot of these posts are pretty important and treating it as 'downtime' is very damaging to the MODs wider interest.

[engineer(retard)]

Spooky, I was discussing this 2 days ago. As well as the utterly useles diatribe, we've also had the Tim Collins self publicity stunt and the RAF hammered for celebrating Christmas. Bismarck is on the money but forgets jointery is green. Scrap those aircraft carriers, you'll need more troop ships.

regards

retard

[Bismark]

On the whole the Army's and the Navy's assets are their own, and neither has a great interest in interfering in the other's environment. The Air however is part of all military operations, and there is rarely a sufficiency of supply to meet the demand.

Chug,

I do not think 800/801 NAS nor the Junglies could be considered part of the RN's own - they are tasked by either JFH/PJHQ or JHC/PJHQ - my RN serving colleagues would say they have little control over their tasking.

Who said Harris was right?

[Chugalug2]

Chug,

I do not think 800/801 NAS nor the Junglies could be considered part of the RN's own - they are tasked by either JFH/PJHQ or JHC/PJHQ - my RN serving colleagues would say they have little control over their tasking.

Who said Harris was right?

I was thinking more of non aviation assets, but your point is taken and of course with a shrinking UK defence base Joint, wherever it can be done, makes sense. My point is that the strategic use of Air Power must sometimes override joint if you want to win wars as against battles.
As to Harris, I might be tempted to answer Speer. For though he charmed and lied his way out of the Hangman's noose, in his more unequivocal moments he would let slip the chaos that the campaign caused him. His much vaunted success in maintaining production was not the point, for his enemies were increasing theirs dramatically. If he could have done the same, Germany's superior technology could still have won the war. My other candidate would be Eisenhower. When he told Allied D-day troops not to bother looking up if they heard aircraft, for they would be ours, he knew that the Luftwaffe was on the Eastern Front or defending the Reich against the round the clock bombing. Otherwise they would have been in France, and the close run thing that was D-day could have swung the other way and we would have been driven back into the sea. So strategic air campaigns have far greater effects than the obvious ones of laying waste to city after city. To my mind Harris was right, and it was a war winning campaign. It was however an embarrassment in the peace, especially as friends became foes and vice versa. But all that is currently featured on another thread.
I think it's safe to come out now, but whatever you do don't mention the war! I did, but I think I got away with it!

[really not]

Forgive me for being parochial, but has the justification for the RAF always been The Battle of Britain and er...... that's it? An excellent PR machine in the past moved Australia 200 miles to get the CV programme cancelled in the late 60's, and it has managed to continue to justify what can be considered the biggest MOD white elephant - the Typhoon. (Soon to be outclassed at at massively reduced cost by the JSF).

The argument for devolving the CRABs to the battlefield owners (over/on/ under SEA = RN , Over/on/under land= Army) has been going on since 1919, and gathered pace since the defence of the UK home base has become less of a requirement, and more of an insurance policy.

The RAF's ability to operate anywhere in the world is now severely hampered or even in doubt with the lack of overflight rights, and an empire to land aircraft in. If a nation wants to project power anywhere in the world, the only platform capable of "instant" response is sea based. But the daily bigot, sorry Mail and the currant bun would never let the heroes of the BofB (forget the RN and other forces that were rushed into that crisis) be "phased out".

If it were to be looked at coldly and dispassionately, IMHO there is no justification for the 3rd service these days, but no government would ever have the wherewithall to make the change.

Rant over, your mess kit is still crap!

[Willi B]

Jimlad1/GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU

OK, from an Antipodean perspective, I'll bite.

If memory serves me correctly, there have been eight major reviews into the structure of the Australian Defence Department in as many years; and five recent reviews into equipment failures and cost blow outs.

The total cost to the taxpayer of the various procurement bungles alone must now run into the several billions - funds that might have been used to address some major inequalities in our society.

Yet those responsible for such largesse with taxpayers' funds remain on the public payroll, seemingly immune from retribution.

If the situation were replicated in private enterprise, the corporation would have gone to the wall, with the shareholders and ASIC baying for the directors' blood.

And you've not walked around the Department of Defence Russell Hill complex in recent times, and noted the number of people in plain clothes standing outside buildings, smoking, gossiping and generally not attending to the duties for which the taxpayer shells out generous recompense.

These days, Defence is a haven for indolent left handed basket weavers; where regression to mediocrity is preferred to the pursuit of individual excellence; where individual worker ‘rights’ ‘permanency’ and ‘entitlements’ take precedence over the duty to do a fair days’ work for a fair days pay; where commercial experience and business acumen is vilified; and where poor performers are retained and even promoted because of an inability to terminate employment without endless counselling, letter writing and other warnings.

I used to believe in permanence for public servants to ensure 'frank and fearless advice'. But these days, all permanence seems to represent is a senior bureaucratic 'sheltered workshop' in Canberra (and London), where, in a restricted gene pool, ethical standards of public administration and concerns/accountability for taxpayers' funds have reached a new low.

And comparisons to alleged shortcomings in serving personnel are, with great respect, quite irrelevant, mischevious and unhelpful. When public servants are subject to the same posting, disciplinary, and administrative sanctions as their military counterparts, then you may have grounds for complaint.

[Chugalug2]

Forgive me for being parochial, but has the justification for the RAF always been The Battle of Britain and er...... ).

The RAF's ability to operate anywhere in the world is now severely hampered or even in doubt with the lack of overflight rights, and an empire to land aircraft in. If a nation wants to project power anywhere in the world, the only platform capable of "instant" response is sea based.

If it were to be looked at coldly and dispassionately, IMHO there is no justification for the 3rd service these days, but no government would ever have the wherewithall to make the change.

Rant over, your mess kit is still crap!

Doh! and just when I thought it had all gone quiet!

Well RN (oh that is clever, do you see boys and girls his initials are the same as zzzz....), oh yes the BoB, well it was our party piece until Hitler's waiter said that Hitler never had any intention of invading, which rather made the RN (there they are again!) claim to it somewhat superfluous. I should sort it out with the waiter if I were you.
I see you share the same concerns as Admiral West has about Dip Clearances. Personally I don't know what all the trouble is about. Ours were always tickety-boo and done by a Corporal in Ops. Perhaps the waiter could help with that as well?
As to my Mess Kit, Sir, how very much dare you! Mrs C always said I looked very fetching in it, and I'll value her opinion against yours any day!

[N Joe]

To add to Rev I. Tin's photo - it was typical of the coverage of Basrah over Christmas to see the interview with the Sqn Ldr Doc from the "Army".

Now to play devil's advocate with a theory dreamed up in the bar during a course at AWC:

SAMs are better at shooting down aircraft than AA guns. AAMs are just SAMs with a vulnerable launch platform. You don't need the RAF to look after SAMs.

Cruise missiles (and possibly ballistic missiles, and in the future, UCAVs) are better than aircraft at IDS-type missions. You don't need the RAF to look after cruise missiles.

With the jointery that surrounds everything rotary, the Army and Navy would happily snap up anything that actually remains light blue.

The AT fleet is primarily tasked with moving the Army about. With the increase in the number of charters, the RLC would certainly take on this role.

With last orders looming, close air support, recce, ELINT, SIGINT, SF etc were lumped together - mostly tasked by the Army in support of the Army. Could be run by the Army.

So all that's left to justify the existence of the RAF is a token FJ fleet for CAS to champion and to support Red Flag. And of course you couldn't do without a CAS or Red Flag!?!?!?

Yes, I know the theory ignores essentials such as Regt, PEd, Admin, but these branches were not represented on the course!

N Joe

[Golf Echo 30]

Reading about the 'imminent demise' of the RAF in this thread is pretty sad:) . Despite all of the negative press that the RAF may have received (some justified, some not) the politicians in Whitehall are not about to fall into the trap of merging or disbanding what is a very high profile institution. Do the Army top brass really want the RAF merged in? I doubt it very much for a significant number of reasons. (too many to type) Do the politicians have the guts to disband it? Again, I very much doubt it due to their moral cowardice and the Falklands factor (let's sell our landing ships!).

However, would the RN and Army like a bit of the aviation action? Almost certainly! Show me the armed forces of any country and all three services (if they have three) are always encroaching on each others turf. It's one big game of office politics in which there are ups and downs.

Moving onto the RAF and its bad PR..... Does the Army have a high opinion of the RAF? Not really and the problem is that it is a matter of perception and 3rd hand stories. How many soldiers can tell you about a 3 day patrol in Norther Ireland when p*ss wet through, tired and you are told that the RAF can't pick you up as a)there is a small cloud over RAF Aldergrove b)The pilots have flown over 2hrs that week and regs state they can't do more c)the aircrew are having trouble checking out of their 5* hotel. Not to mention having to turn up at RAF Lyneham well ahead of your flight and being mucked around from dusk til dawn. (See recent Cyprus debacle)

In short, fully support maintaining the RAF; but comeon chaps, you don't always cover yourself in glory in the eyes of the other services.

[engineer(retard)]

I suspect that the current furore is more to do with fighting over a budget that is miniscule in proportion to the task. This governement is not swayed by historical argument, nor by whose got the best mess dress, but by by press headlines.

In between the Gulf Wars, the RAF had the whip hand in the politicians eyes due to the various ops going on and were at the front of the money queue, their money was spent on fast jet and weapons. The others had the hind t1t.

The situation is now changing, the Army needs the budget urgently and the defence budget by its nature is not very responsive in the short term. Typhoons money is locked down in contract, I would guess that anything else is up for grabs by delay or cancellation. JSF delays are a good reason for delaying CVF and releasing near term budget. I would also guess that FSTA money will be siphoned off.

regards

retard

[Bismark]

the Army needs the budget urgently

I am not too sure this is actually the case - do not be swayed by comments from hard pressed troops on the front line - they will never have enough. What the Army needs is a break from ops so they can re-group, recover and re-constitute themselves with some proper training. Costs of being on ops comes from the Treasury not MoD, but Gordon will only pay for the additional cost of being on ops not the full cost (ie MoD would be paying for the people etc anyway). We should listen to the likes of West who rightly said that all funds should not be squandered on the "now" as there will be nothing to pay for future equipment, whether it be for replacement of earlier than planned wear out or the big ticket projects like CVF. What is important with future project is that they are not allowed to haemorage money like Typhoon, MRA4, Astute etc - this means more intelligent contracting by MoD.

[engineer(retard)]

Bismark

Again, I agree with most of what you say but believe that the army are not adequately equipped or manned to do the job without taking avoidable losses. Decent patrol vehicles would be high on the shopping list.

Also you mention the Treasury are footing the bill, I understood that the defence budget was supposed to be set for 2 simaltaneous medium sized conflicts and that the Treasury had not intention of bailing out the MoD. I also find it hard to believe that we will not rob Peter to pay Paul and that anything the Treasury doles out now will be recouped in the future. Perhaps its the cynic in me.

regards

retard

[Chugalug2]

I am not too sure this is actually the case - do not be swayed by comments from hard pressed troops on the front line - they will never have enough. What the Army needs is a break from ops so they can re-group, recover and re-constitute themselves with some proper training.
What is important with future project is that they are not allowed to haemorage money like Typhoon, MRA4, Astute etc - this means more intelligent contracting by MoD.

Really Bismark, for someone who tells the RAF to be more friendly, and enthuses over the joys of Joint, am I alone in finding your opening remark little short of outrageous? In all fairness to the Army on the front line, what they need is not just enough, but the right type and quality of enough. A military that goes to war constantly on the scrounge is hardly a vote of confidence in any ministry of the British Government, or its CS, or its service staffs. They have been betrayed by malign neglect, incompetence and good old politics. Never mind the means, we must secure CVF, and devil take the hindmost! May I respectfully suggest that you practise what you preach? The only protection against this bigoted, incompetent and malevolent government is for Joint to start and be practised from top to bottom. Do you really believe that this bunch of shysters have any intention of laying down a keel, let alone launching, fitting out and equipping two carriers, and then acquiring the aircraft to arm them? Get real! These people have been opposed to the Armed Forces for their entire political careers, our esteemed leader was a fully paid up member of CND, none of them have served, nor have their children AFAIK. They are grinding down the UK bases to minuscule numbers, and the trend is much more of the same. No service will survive unscathed, let alone be augmented at the expense of the others. The habits of generations have got to be cast aside and a Joint stand made against our most dangerous foe ever-HMG! So bin the banter and get together, for divided we fall, united we stand :ok:

[Bismark]

Chug,

I agree with much of what you say. However, if Hansard is to be believed - that the RAF are still operating 72 airfields - then something is seriously out of balance (I think the RN only operate 2 and the Army about 4). Cut the waste for sure, but please get the RAF to think of Joint benefit not "light blue or bust" as is the present CAS (and CDS?) mantra.

[Sven Sixtoo]

RAF Stations operating aircraft as the primary task.
Kinloss
Lossiemouth
Leuchars
Leeming
Linton-on-Ouse
Church Fenton
Waddington
Scampton
Coningsby
Cottesmore
Cranwell
Barkston Heath
Wittering
Marham
Benson
Odiham
Lyneham
Brize Norton
St Mawgan
Valley
Shawbury
Woodvale
Aldergrove
23
Other RAF Stations operating aircraft:
Mount Pleasant
Boulmer
Wyton
Other places the RAF operates aircraft from
Leconfield
Wattisham
Chivenor
I must have missed a few, but 72 active airfields? I think not.

[NURSE]

Could the RAF publicity machine and its spinning be part of the problem now? with spin having become more and more discredited and the other 2 armed services and other rescue services getting spun out by the RAF media machine has the press become more cynical and the other services more agresive in down playing the RAF role?

[tutordriver21]

I'm just starting my career in the RAF and I am beginning to think i've made the biggest mistake since Diana said to Dodi "lets take the car." I may just shaft the RAF before they shaft me - get as many hours as possible and jump ship. A good deal of my mates going through training feel the same way. Is anyone happy out there?

If you're happy and you know it click reply.

[FB11]

TD21,

It's unsurprising that you have a (light hearted) cynical touch but try not to get too dragged down by some of the old buggers who populate Prune with their frustration venting comments.

There are lots and lots of Army, Navy and Air Force and Marine aircrew (plus any other servicemen/women) who are out and about here in the sand doing exactly what they joined up for. They might not like being away at Christmas; they might not like being away from home for months on end; they might be very opinionated about an MP or an Admiral but most quite like doing the job.

Some will leave because they have had enough of being away, some will leave because they feel passion for a service that's being eroded and so on, with a bunch of other reasons you'll find scattered throughout the threads.

But you are in flying training. You are at the beginning and have no baseline to suggest that the best thing to do is shaft an armed service that you as yet have no real experience of. Other than the posts of some (note some, not all) of the most seasoned, bitter, twisted and negative military people .(Most ex-military I hope.)

Enjoy yourself, get drunk, go on det, fly. Let the old knackers worry about the state of their service as though they individually are the most hard done by.

Although I'm sure that you, without even a set of wings on your chest yet, were joking about shafting the RAF and jumping ship? That would be a bit silly, wasting an opportunity that so many others will never have.

Lots of people are happy flying aircraft in any of the 4 services (note the 4th for Royal) don't worry too much about the paranoid Prune posters.

[Chugalug2]

Chug, Cut the waste for sure, but please get the RAF to think of Joint benefit not "light blue or bust" as is the present CAS (and CDS?) mantra.

That would be the"light blue or bust" of AT and SH? A chance would be a fine thing! Now if you were to have used "BAE or bust" as the CAS's mantra , I might have concurred!
As to the rest of your post, I think SS has done a pretty sound job of rebuttal. It is just such spin that we have all got to get out of the habit of using! Mr Browne, etc, can play one or two off against the other(s) and we fall for it every time. When everyone had some measure of fat to fall back on, winning out at the cost of others meant little real harm was done. With things parred beyond the bone now, it means the difference between life and death, as we have all too regrettably seen. We need to agree, before it is done for us, that if it aint bust don't fix it, so keep the separate services particular to their own indigenous elements of Land, Sea and Air, with the peculiar variations that have proved their worth over the years (RM, FAA, AAC, etc). But after that is conceded co-operate and agree to organise, operate and order for maximum cost effectiveness. And "Keep it Simple, Stupid!", for it seems to me that the spiralling costs stem as often as not from cleverness, gold plating projects that would have been cheaper, quicker, and often better, if bought off the shelf instead of the complex and mysterious programmes so beloved of our Staffs, both service and civilian. And the most contentious point of all, the British Armed Forces are not there to ensure the continued existence of British companies who would otherwise go bust producing over priced and uncompetitive tat. We need access to the best deals in the market, no matter who produces it, providing of course that support and supplies are not at risk in time of conflict. That process needs to be transparent. It is anything but, now.

[Bismark]

SS,

I think you are forgetting all the VGS's etc.

Chug,

I think we remain in violent agreement. But it is CAS and his accolytes who are plying the "light blue or bust" mantra who are so poisonous to harmonious output by the 3 Services.

[Chugalug2]

But it is CAS and his accolytes who are plying the "light blue or bust" mantra who are so poisonous to harmonious output by the 3 Services.

Bismark, could you please spell out what exactly the CAS and his acolytes are plying? From where I am (which is admittedly way off centre) I have been blissfully unaware of anything much he has done, is doing, or is likely to do for the light blue. If you mean his single minded obsession with Typhoon, that is as much at the cost of everything else in the RAF as of the other services. Pity they didn't name it the Albatross, far more appropriate! Meanwhile his AT crews carry on lacking protection that others have enjoyed for some 40 years, and half the Chinook force is on bricks gathering dust locked in a hangar. But the FJ guys are over the moon that one of theirs is in charge. God help us!

[Sven Sixtoo]

VGSs belong to the RAFVR or the Air Training Corps or some such.
Anyway the two I know personally fly out of Dalton Barracks (guess who owns Abingdon these days) and RNAS Predannack. That'll be another one each for the FAA and AAC!
I missed
Northolt.
Mona.
I think I may have missed
Glasgow airport (UGSAS UAS??)
Belfast City Airport (Queens UAS??)
Or am I behind the times with those two?
PS
TD21
Yes we may be old and cynical about it.
Remember:
It is every Serviceman's God-given right to moan about his lot. As a commander, the day to start worrying is when the troops stop moaning.
There is no other way on earth that you can have the opportunity to commit the adrenaline-charged legalised mayhem that is flying a fast jet at low level. You cannot buy the privelige, you can only offer your heart and soul to Aunty Betty in exchange for the chance.
There is nothing in this life (other I guess than your own children - I wouldn't know) that comes close to the satisfaction in the words "Target Sighted" when you have spent hours ploughing up and down a dark and lumpy chunk of ocean and you go on to pull a fellow being alive from the sea.
If you think you're tough, how about going into a hostile country's defended airspace with no effective weapons, no escort and no plan B? Because if the Infantry are going to get the support they need you have to.
The Army want to be in a particular location. They don't really care that you are short on field length, power, fuel and a load of other stuff I don't know about. It's going to need all your skill but you do it because you are one of the best and you do the job right even if you break the aircraft in the process.
The Royal Air Force was the first and is still, pound for pound, the best. We just need a Sh1tload more pounds. That's politics, you have a vote, use it.
Sven

[Chugalug2]

I'm just starting my career in the RAF and I am beginning to think i've made the biggest mistake since Diana said to Dodi "lets take the car." I may just shaft the RAF before they shaft me - get as many hours as possible and jump ship. A good deal of my mates going through training feel the same way. Is anyone happy out there?
If you're happy and you know it click reply.

Well I'm rather unhappy TD21, not with the RAF which I love, but with you! The replies to your post so far have been conciliatory, supportive and encouraging. You have even been warned about bitter twisted ex-military people. Well I'm not sure the first two adjectives describe me, that is for others to say, but I am ex mob. Also I have learned enough about this game to know that you may or may not be what you say you are, and that you may or may not mean what you say. But being a BOF I can blissfully discount all those provisos, and go at you like a bull in a china shop!
To even suggest at this stage that you and your chums are seriously discussing whether to "shaft the RAF before they shaft me" is completely unacceptable. How on earth were you ever selected in the first place? I do not know if you are an airman or an officer, on ground or flight training. It doesn't matter, my comments apply equally, though if you have a commission and are training as aircrew (pilot?), which posting on this forum would imply, then my advice would be to change your attitude PDQ, for you will be unable to function in your primary role as is! That is, of course, as an RAF officer, to lead and inspire others. Is that you would you say?
The discussions and arguments on this forum are either light hearted banter, which you will already know more about than I, or serious attempts to address problems caused primarily by continuous cuts in the Defence Budget and exacerbated by two wars being fought side by side. If you think that everything RAF should be sweetness and light, you have indeed missed your vocation. This one is about service and duty, and men and women little older than you, no doubt, are doing both in spades right now. I salute them, and hope in turn to be able to salute you, as I do them, with respect.
So we enter a New Year, and we both should ponder our resolutions for 2007. Mine, I'm sure you would agree, must be to lighten up and get a life! And yours?
Happy New Year to you, your colleagues, to all who serve, especially those in harm's way, to all the BOFs like me (you have something invaluable to offer, experience), and all at Pprune Towers. :ok:

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

Sven Sixtoo

Remarkably well said.

[Pureteenlard]

There is nothing in this life (other I guess than your own children - I wouldn't know) that comes close to the satisfaction in the words "Target Sighted" when you have spent hours ploughing up and down a dark and lumpy chunk of ocean and you go on to pull a fellow being alive from the sea.
If you think you're tough, how about going into a hostile country's defended airspace with no effective weapons, no escort and no plan B? Because if the Infantry are going to get the support they need you have to.
The Army want to be in a particular location. They don't really care that you are short on field length, power, fuel and a load of other stuff I don't know about. It's going to need all your skill but you do it because you are one of the best and you do the job right even if you break the aircraft in the process.
The Royal Air Force was the first and is still, pound for pound, the best. We just need a Sh1tload more pounds. That's politics, you have a vote, use it.
Sven

Fair enough. BUT none of that has anything to do with being in the RAF. If you were flying SAR with the navy would you do the job to anything less than the best of your ability? Or flying CAS with the AAC? Or is this real light blue arrogance?

[Chugalug2]

Fair enough. BUT none of that has anything to do with being in the RAF. If you were flying SAR with the navy would you do the job to anything less than the best of your ability? Or flying CAS with the AAC? Or is this real light blue arrogance?

Be fair PTR, this thread is about the RAF. Indeed it is about the proposition that some would see it disbanded. SS's post was in reply to that of a trainee RAF pilot (I think), asking if there was any future for him/her in the RAF other than grabbing hours and getting out. I think it was meant to impress that person, TD21, with the notion that this is not a job, but a calling and a challenge and expressed in a way that I can only applaud. Of course it could have been said of those other services and corps, and no doubt has been. But this time it was said of the RAF and to the RAF, and was rather more constructive than my rant that followed it. Well done SS, take note TD21! :D

[tornadoken]

I was around MoD when Joint was invented (by Tories, who had won an Election by slimming out military waste and muddle), and was implemented under a non-Joint and thus compromised RN CDS. Labour started the process (many-names since) of trying to identify all cost-for-a-Mission, to work out best Joint solution - say, projecting power over the Himalayas: displace dodos from Br.Indian Ocean Territory, or sally forth from CVA-01. Feel free to object to the conclusion, but not the logic. Do not assume Tories would spend more on defence than G.Brown: it was Labour who invented UK nuclear Force, Tornado, Hawk, Nimrod, Jaguar, Lynx, Harrier, its RN platforms and CVF 01/02.
Much noise here misses many points: deleting a uniform colour would save nowt unless their tasks were removed, not just re-assigned. Whatever can be consolidated at training level already is - dentists, padres, rotary: all good, with Jointery at junior levels. If there were a conspiracy to Belgify/Canuckify, not one other rank would be displaced, but brass would. We would have heard the squeals by now.

[SARREMF]

Finally, a post worthy of actually logging in and lending support - and its been a long time since anything has stirred me to log on! Well done tornadoken, common sense at last and a point others should consider. Those in the RAF - and technically I still am although on Terminal leave - stop with the moaning. You have a choice, go or stay, make it and get on. Please don't dribble on this forum about I might or might not. No one is going to beg you stay - someone WILL take your place. Yes, we might miss out on the next CAS, but there will be others. Life goes on. Do whats best for you and stop shouting about it. Mind you if you stay I would push for single seat FJ - your suited!

[Tranx]

I may have not even signed up yet, waiting for forms and interviews, and thus have little to back up my opinion as such.

However, I'm shocked at the thought of "shaft them before they shaft me". I'm joining up out of a sense of duty, there's a job that needs doing and I want to do it! The RAF needs every dedicated person it can get if this is an indication of the lack of committment it has currently. Every job should be done to your upmost, everything is your responsability - even if your shift is soon to end or that "isn't in my job description".

Chins up lads, I may be young and naieve but damnit I want to make a difference!

[A Time To Heal]

Something experienced and overheard at an airfield in west London.
TB of London flying out on a chartered aircraft from aforementioned base, rather than the supplied large aircraft in its lovely new white trim, unlike MB of London who is. One of MB's aides asked why TB wasn't using the aircraft, reply was that they had gone u/s on him twice and he wasn't happy with their reliability.

[An Teallach]

Tinfoil hats on, chaps and chapesses. The man who steered Canada's Armed Forces into the purple paradise is now advocating the use of 'captured' UFO technology to combat global warming.

Are these traits by any chance related? I think we should be told: The truth is, after all, out there!

UFO science key to halting climate change: former Canadian defense minister (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070228/od_afp/canadaenvironmentkyoto;_ylt=AkFNvoTajAmob7k4blMSj4YDW7oF).

OTTAWA (AFP) - A former Canadian defense minister is demanding governments worldwide disclose and use secret alien technologies obtained in alleged UFO crashes to stem climate change, a local paper said Wednesday.

"I would like to see what (alien) technology there might be that could eliminate the burning of fossil fuels within a generation ... that could be a way to save our planet," Paul Hellyer, 83, told the Ottawa Citizen.

Alien spacecrafts would have traveled vast distances to reach Earth, and so must be equipped with advanced propulsion systems or used exceptional fuels, he told the newspaper.

Such alien technologies could offer humanity alternatives to fossil fuels, he said, pointing to the enigmatic 1947 incident in Roswell, New Mexico -- which has become a shrine for UFO believers -- as an example of alien contact.

"We need to persuade governments to come clean on what they know. Some of us suspect they know quite a lot, and it might be enough to save our planet if applied quickly enough," he said.

Hellyer became defense minister in former prime minister Lester Pearson's cabinet in 1963, and oversaw the controversial integration and unification of Canada's army, air force and navy into the Canadian Forces.

He shocked Canadians in September 2005 by announcing he once saw a UFO.

[Gainesy]

Well spotted AT, classic!:)