Air Forces Monthly: Is the Tornado Up to it?

[ATFQ]

ZZZZZZZZZZ

[ZH875]

Of course it is just a straightforward swap over of aircraft typesBut then again I believe Gordon Brown is as honest as the Winter Day is long.:rolleyes:

[Rakshasa]

8 hours!?

You give our glorious leader too much credit, ZH. :}

[ATFQ]

The Editor bloke asks whether the Tornado can "take off safely with a 'war load' of weapons, with the same broad effects as the Harrier?", and he also calls into question "the service (serviceability?) levels of the 'tired' Tornado". He finishes off with the question "will the Tornado continue to save the lives of NATO troops on the ground in the same way that the Harrier is now doing?".

[Pontius Navigator]

The Editor bloke asks whether the Tornado can "take off safely with a 'war load' of weapons, with the same broad effects as the Harrier?",

No, it has a gun which the Harrier does not but no rockets which the Harrier does.

and he also calls into question "the service (serviceability?) levels of the 'tired' Tornado".

As the Tornado has been in theatre for some years I imagine its serviceablity will be a known factor.

He finishes off with the question "will the Tornado continue to save the lives of NATO troops on the ground in the same way that the Harrier is now doing?".

Did he have an opinion? Anyone can ask a question.

[BluntM8]

I read the same editorial yesterday, and was all ready to start a thread almost exactly like this one. However, having re-read the article, and thought about the Herrick Misreps I read last month I would say that it is very clear that the AFM editor is writing from a Lay point of view - which is how it should be. Leave the worrying to those who know the ins and outs, and write some more about the 'phoon! :}

[Krueger Flap]

BluntM8,

The editor may be 'lay' in terms of his military experience but given the nature of his magazine I would have expected far better. I agree with PN, anyone can ask a question - surely having reached the lofty heights of Editor he could have stretched himself to provide some opinion. This really smacked of a rush job to meet the print deadline.

[TwoStep]

More to do with the fact that so few of the pertinent questions relating to the deployment of Tornado to Herrick were answered at the Crown Condor Press Day last month that the attending journalists left with few facts, just the PR spiel and wondering what was really going on.

[Jackonicko]

The Crown Condor press day gave an excellent insight into the operations, capabilities and plans for the Swedish Gripen fleet.

As a platform for the Tornado, for Shiny Twelve, and the RAF, however, it was an embarrassingly shocking farce. The RAF looked as though it had been given a PR makeover by the best of New Labour's spin doctors.

[LooseArticle]

Somebody is on a mission. Hansard details a series of very telling questions being tabled by Mark Lancaster MP (Milton Keynes!) on why Tornado should be replacing Harrier, the answers to which, if answerd honestly would result in Harrier's extension on the Op:

:D
18
N Mr Mark Lancaster (North East Milton Keynes): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what estimate he has made of the anticipated cost of urgent operational requirements for the Tornado aircraft in order to meet theatre entry requirements for Afghanistan.(235904)
19
N Mr Mark Lancaster (North East Milton Keynes): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, when the Harrier aircraft is due to be withdrawn from Afghanistan.(235905)
20
N Mr Mark Lancaster (North East Milton Keynes): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether Harrier will be subject to a programme review in 2009 if it is withdrawn from Afghanistan (a) before and (b) after 1st April 2009.(236193)
21
N Mr Mark Lancaster (North East Milton Keynes): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, for what reasons the Harrier force is being withdrawn from Afghanistan.(236194)
22
N Mr Mark Lancaster (North East Milton Keynes): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the technical ground abort rate was for (a) Harrier and (b) Tornado aircraft in (i) operational and (ii) non-operational environments in each of the last five years.

;)


House of Commons website reports scheduled discussion in da house on why Tornado is replacing Harrier (11am 19 Nov) led by Mark Lancaster! The questions are not those of a layman but those of someone in the know.

Who is feeding him the questions and the argument?

The AFM editor is also adding to the debate but can't possibly be coming to these conclusions without assistance.

Somebody is pulling strings and we demand to know who and why.

[Wrathmonk]

Q20 is a bit naughty. As is whoever is feeding him the questions - did they ever track down the individual (I believe from the 5th floor) who was feeding lines, photocopied documents etc to the Daily Telegraph around about this time last year?

IMHO Mr Lancasters Q21 is the most pertinent question. Shame he is not asking, for example, how many Harrier crews are fully qualified, and current, to undertake carrier operations. If you don't have the crews qualified to fly off the decks why have carriers in the first place? I'm sure the answer would come back as 100% qualified but I suspect that would be more spin, smoke and mirrors etc.

Where is our well informed HARRIERPILOTWALT (or whatever he called himself) when you need an answer!

[CirrusF]

Is not a more pertinent question why the Typhoon is not ready yet for the role?

[Toddington Ted]

"The Crown Condor press day gave an excellent insight into the operations, capabilities and plans for the Swedish Gripen fleet.

As a platform for the Tornado, for Shiny Twelve, and the RAF, however, it was an embarrassingly shocking farce. The RAF looked as though it had been given a PR makeover by the best of New Labour's spin doctors"

Ouch! Well Jacko, as I was there (on the Ex CC Media Team) I'll have to take that one as a direct hit. I didn't think it was that bad at all!

[Jackonicko]

There was one bright spot - one PR minder who went the extra mile to try to respond to the needs of the journos. If Toddington Ted is Squadron Leader C****** P******n, then he needs to take a bow.

But I hope that I never again talk to an RAF pilot or nav who answers an innocuous question with a half relevant pre-prepared piece of PR (party line) spin.

Aircrew don't need to be pre-prepared in this way - they have the sense not to talk about tactics or parametrics, and the caution to avoid talking about problems to unknown journos. But a little bit of bias in favour of their own unit/type/community (and gentle teasing of Harriers and Harrier mates) is what we expect and appreciate - since its a reflection of their confidence, esprit de corps and unit pride.

[Toddington Ted]

Jacko

I'm the same rank but not he, although he kindly asked me to attend to assist with the training (we were on Herrick together). I have to say that I do not disagree with you entirely as "spin" should not be our aim on this, or any occasion and its regrettable if it comes across as such. Enough said from me.

[Jackonicko]

The PR types there on the day were by no means the cause of the fundamental problems, and were, I'm sure, as keen as the journos to promote the RAF's interests. Now that I know who you were (elimination) I know that I thanked you, and I meant it.

[sooms]

Sooooo.....

Back to the question.....is the Tornado up to it?

[airborne_artist]

Jacko - I could tell you who TT is, but I'd have to kill you afterwards...however, TT is easily recognised as the tall slim one with the debonair looks, a sort of cross between Roger Moore and Daniel Craig with a touch of Roger Lazenby :}

TT - 30 years ago tomorrow I passed Grading at Roborough :ok:

[ATFQ]

sooms/LooseArticle

seems to be some stuff on this now at:

Hansard - Commons | Houses of Parliament (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtoday/cmwhall/07.htm#hddr_2)

haven't had time to read it all yet, but seems to be to do with the same thing as questions above

[Mr C Hinecap]

Wrathmonk - perhaps the Harrier Mates can now get back to carrier work and back up to speed. They have been concentrating on Afghan for too long now. The USMC is doing the same thing - remembering that they should be afloat - so are going back to carrier work so they don't forget - fight a war, not the war. I have no problem that most guys are probably not carrier-current, but can be.

[Not_a_boffin]

Mmmmm...

"The bucket of flying hours remaining for the Harrier would enable a two or three-year out-of-service date extension beyond 2018 to 2020 or 2021. The full five-year out-of-service date extension to 2023 that is so desperately needed by the Royal Navy "

Thats one cat ex-bag then.

[Growbag]

Having visited a grey tub recently, I witnessed several Zoomie types getting both day and night qualified on the Carrier, so where are all these reports that they have stopped doing such things come from? They seemed fairly proficient at it to me, so much so they were being filmed by ITV! (Well, no-one went swimming anyway):D

[Wrathmonk]

Mr C / Growbag

Sort of my point - the Harrier Force need a break in order to consolidate/learn their other skills that only they can provide (which they obviously haven't otherwise why embark a Spanish or US air group onto a Brit carrier to keep the decks hot?). Put it this way - they may have a few who are proficient at carrier ops (for a PR opportunity ...) but as a Force I would suggest they are no where near the standard of 3 years ago. Skill fade, pure and simple (and to be expected). I'm led to believe they have some first tourists who have done nothing but the war. Not suggesting thats a bad thing but if you have the capacity elsewhere (and I'm sure the original "long term plan" was to replace JFH with the Typhoon) then why not utilise all your assets to get the best capability across all operating conditions. The Tonka mates (and their jets) are more than capable of getting the job done - however, more than a few years on double ops (assuming TELIC continues ....) may see some skill fade in the Tonka fleet as well. Typhoon really needs to step up to the plate and soon. Given that TELIC seems to be less intensive than t'other place you'd think they'd "blood" the Typhoon there first thus leasving the Tornado with just one op to concentrate on.

[cresta10]

Are we still using Harriers ?? :ooh:

The only place they should now be operating from is the AMARC at Davis-Monthan , USA...:}

[XV277]

Are we still using Harriers ?? :ooh:

The only place they should now be operating from is the AMARC at Davis-Monthan , USA...:}

Is it half term?

[LateArmLive]

On a final note about weapons capability, doesn't the Reaper carry more ordnance than a Harrier?

No, not by a long way.

[Modern Elmo]

Wrathmonk - perhaps the Harrier Mates can now get back to carrier work and back up to speed. They have been concentrating on Afghan for too long now. ...

Umm, there's a war still going on in the Afghan, in case you haven't noticed. Not too many big sea battles pending.

[Backwards PLT]

On a final note about weapons capability, doesn't the Reaper carry more ordnance than a Harrier? No, not by a long way.


Oh reeaaaaly!

[seanbean]

The view from the Torygraph:

Withdrawal of RAF Harrier jets from Afghanistan 'will threaten' troops - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/3496829/Withdrawal-of-RAF-Harrier-jets-from-Afghanistan-will-threaten-troops.html)

[Wrathmonk]

And it was ever thus. How long ago were the Harrier boys described by the Army as "utterly, utterly useless"? In a few years time the headlines will be "how can a combat unproven aircraft like the Typhoon possibly replace an capability such as Tornado (with its 20 years [by then] of non-stop operational experience":ok:

Wasn't it Lancaster that also got his knickers in a twist over the AT bridge? I think we can all look forward to him being in the Government, rather than Opposition - think of all the money he will ensure is diverted into the MOD coffers. Or not.:oh:

[Evalu8ter]

JFH should consider itself lucky that there are other types that can give it a break from Herrick to arrest the skill fade, and that there is a hierarchy in the RAF that is keen to give them a rest. This is most certainly not happening in the wokka community, which also has "unique capability" as the only RAF amphib RW asset and as the only meaningful lift platform in theatre. A few years ago the Chinook wing had a considerable spread of experience (various environmental / amphib / TLT etc). The attrition of experienced personnel and the paucity of cabs has resulted in a veneer thin level of experience that when (if) they get a rest will take years (and a lot of money) to recover. Skill fade indeed....

Replacing Harrier with Tonka seems a lot better than replacing Chinook with Merlin / Carson Queenies. The latter complement, they cannot replace.

I do wonder, in a cynical moment, how much of this is meant at getting the NSW out of Afghanistan....

[Wrathmonk]

Modern Elmo - so in your view no need for two new RN carriers, a sea-borne capability etc?:mad: How very forward thinking!

[Modern Elmo]

Two new RN aircraft carriers -- nice to have, but not the UK's top military spending priority.

Furthermore, I detect an additional motive in this enthusiam for getting the Harriers back to the aircraft carriers: to get the UK out of Afghanistan, just have nice RN exercises far away from all that nasty war.

[Tourist]

Elmo you plonker,
The RN desperately does not want the Harriers out of Afghanistan.
Once they are out and not displaying their usefullness on a daily basis, they are a lot easier to quietly dispose of by the RAF under some "costly", "old" , "outdated", "short range" type bollocks arguments.
This is the opening gambit of a beautifully cynical plan to wipe out the RN's fixed wing fleet for good.
The RAF may have lost a very hard fought battle to scupper the carriers, but they have not given up the war...........

[Wrathmonk]

Tourist

Can't fault your first line!

Getting rid of FW FAA would not be good for either Service and those kind of politics will result in everyone losing out. End of the day who cares what colour cloth the pilots wear as long as it is the best pilots suitable filling those cockpits - being selected, or only available, for Harrier because you are Dark Blue is wrong. Similarly, Typhoon and Tornado only being available to light blue is also wrong - how many gapped cockpits are there? Howabout each Valley course being judged on the overall merits of the students - if the best available for Harrier (or JCA) happen to be all dark blue or all light blue or a mix of differing amounts so what! If a dark blue student is not making the grade for Harrier/JCA but is good enough to graduate onto another (RAF) platform then let him. No different from exchange officers (and far better than exchange officers from non-swimming nations!).

However, still believe that pulling the Harriers out will allow people to see the utility of carrier borne aviation and will hopefully protect both the QEII and PoW (and JCA) from the ravages of the current planning round. The more time Harrier spends on land based ops the more potential there is (for less informed individuals) to assume carrier aviation is no longer required.

[Tourist]

Wrath,

"Getting rid of FW FAA would not be good for either Service and those kind of politics will result in everyone losing out. End of the day who cares what colour cloth the pilots wear as long as it is the best pilots suitable filling those cockpits - being selected, or only available, for Harrier because you are Dark Blue is wrong. Similarly, Typhoon and Tornado only being available to light blue is also wrong - how many gapped cockpits are there? Howabout each Valley course being judged on the overall merits of the students - if the best available for Harrier (or JCA) happen to be all dark blue or all light blue or a mix of differing amounts so what! If a dark blue student is not making the grade for Harrier/JCA but is good enough to graduate onto another (RAF) platform then let him. No different from exchange officers (and far better than exchange officers from non-swimming nations!)"

Agree with you entirely on all points above.

Unfortunately I don't think the people doing the high level political backstabbing on all sides in the military arguments at the moment will give your last paragraph a chance.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

No offence, but has that MP not heard of "going for the spare"?

[Pontius Navigator]

pulling the Harriers out will allow people to see the utility of carrier borne aviation

How?

The more time Harrier spends on land based ops the more potential there is (for less informed individuals) to assume carrier aviation is no longer required.

Exactly.

It is on land based ops right now. Come April it reverts to naval ops and does what exactly?

A very powerful argument could be made for a capability holiday.

Tourist

How about each Valley course being judged on the overall merits of the students - if the best available for Harrier (or JCA) happen to be all dark blue or all light blue or a mix of differing amounts so what! If a dark blue student is not making the grade for Harrier/JCA but is good enough to graduate onto another (RAF) platform then let him.

Brilliant. The perfect solution and counter to my argument that a very small RN Harrier pool is wasteful of resources whereas a larger RAF pool would enable those that are not suited to Harrier to be posted to outher more suitable types.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

PS to add: Relatively frequently when dark blue guys don't make the single seat grade on 19 they crossover to the light side and go Tonka... I can think of this happening in several instances in fairly recent memory

[ATFQ]

ZZZZZZZZZZ

[Wrathmonk]

Pontious

Come April the Harrier force reverts to being able to conduct its full range of tasks that may be required of it in a future conflict. This includes the need to be able to conduct operations from the carriers. The Tornado can undertake both theatres so why not make best use of your full range of capabilities for a war whilst also ensuring success in the wars. If assets that are not being used on the war are to take a capability holiday then why are the E3s still flying? In fact, lets go the whole hog - shut down all the training units, put the instructors back on the front line (particularly the rotary mates), retrain the studes as Rock Apes until we have won in Irag and Afg, ignore the future and pick up the pieces when we've won. :E In the meantime we'll just cross our fingers nothing else is required ....

This is becoming nothing more than a pro-Carrier vs anti-Carrier pi55ing contest. I'm sure the Harrier mates who are actually doing the job are quite looking forward to a break from ops and I suspect a lot of rotary mates are quite jealous.

pba_target

Understand that to be the case but a shame they have to leave the Service they joined (although in years gone by some dark blue have done ab-initio "exchange" tours with Tonka squadrons prior to returning to the SHAR/JFH). And have to say what a waste of training for the RN up until then. Not advocating a joint armed forces a la Canadian experiment but there must be a more efficient way of putting bums on the front line seats.

[whowhenwhy]

The other side of the coin is that I've heard some serious noises that I'm afraid makes the last 2 pages of the thread irrelevant. Something about money, saving now to pay later....:ugh::{ Bad news ahead I'm afraid chaps.

[Thelma Viaduct]

How much of a drama would it be to put an IR seeker on Brimstone & integrate it on Tornado? I don't think the 'terrorists' have too many tank target sets for the mmW jobbie.

[Pontius Navigator]

Come April the Harrier force reverts to being able to conduct its full range of tasks that may be required of it in a future conflict. This includes the need to be able to conduct operations from the carriers.

Remembering the notorious 'no war for 5 years' rule, how soon would you anticipate a future war? Next year, 2010? 2012? If you can afford the insurance policy, fine. If not then what do you do? Put out the house fire today and consider insurance when you have rebuilt the house?

If assets that are not being used on the war are to take a capability holiday then why are the E3s still flying?

True.

In fact, lets go the whole hog - shut down all the training units, put the instructors back on the front line (particularly the rotary mates), retrain the studes as Rock Apes until we have won in Irag and Afg, ignore the future and pick up the pieces when we've won. :E In the meantime we'll just cross our fingers nothing else is required ....

This last in nonsense and a hang over from the Cold War. It was only valid where a hot war was predicated to last a matter of days before becoming incandescent. We realised that we must maintain the training machine 20 years ago. I would guess half the Army has turned over since the Balkans, perhaps more recently.

Until we have won . . . mmmmmmm

This is becoming nothing more than a pro-Carrier vs anti-Carrier pi55ing contest.

Not at all, more a question of budgets. Why is that other sacred cow, Dii/f, which is the same ball park cost as two QE-class not being mentioned?

And have to say what a waste of training for the RN up until then.

No training is wasted. There are many light blue billets that would benefit from the training delivered at BRNC. I still remember my Army training and have been able to put some to good use even many years later.

[SirPercyWare-Armitag]

Makes perfect sense to rotate aircrew and airframes through an operational theatre and I don't believe there is a loss in capabilities, rather a slight change in capabilities: what you loss in one area, you gain in another.

We all know the rumours exist that NSW will be chopped or indeed, the entire Harrier force. If the whole force goes, I think it safe to say the carriers are doomed, certainly wrt to planned size and probably doomed completely.

If the NSW goes, well, what is wrong with the RAF providing fixed wing assets for carriers?

I don't think we need carriers at all. A nicety, not an operational necessity. The last time carriers had a decisive effect was in 1982. But they remain largely on scedule so lets make it work

[Once A Brat]

................I'm fairly certain that when I was at the home of the Norfolk Land Shark circa 03/04 that one of the Squadrons (IX) had a dark blue stick monkey!!

Thought that with common training that it was now best pilot for the type rather due to the cut of your cloth.........I also seem to recall a Capt (No, not a yank either) pilot on JFH but there agin he may have been a bootie.....

Having experience of both ac types (from an EngO perspective) ...the Tonka will struggle in Herrick and will be a sucess, but only whilst its the will of the people (air and groundcrews) on the force to make it so ...........just like the air and groundcrews made Harrier suceed.

[airborne_artist]

I also seem to recall a Capt (No, not a yank either) pilot on JFH

Guaranteed to be a Bootie - no chance that a Captain RN would be on a squadron.

[Once A Brat]

Actually AA I was aluding to the fact that he may have been AAC........someting to do with having 3 pips rather that lots of gold piping........in a flying suit he had Sqn patches where I would normally expect to see a dagger if he were a boot!

so glad I stayed awake in rank recognition class all those years ago !:)

[LateArmLive]

Yes, he was (and still is!) a swamping, cross-dressing bootneck. :ok: