WHy get rid of Harriers when we can drop the ADV's instead...

[Yeoman_dai]

There has been much fuss about the possible removal of the Harrier fleet - the seimnal COIN/FGA aircraft we have - and how it will loose us the ability to land on and operate carriers, and remove the FAA's fixed wing capabilities, both of which are important aspects of British defense.

However, I don't see the need for continuing to operate 16 Tornado Air defense varients now the Typhoon has arrived - there is no need, especially as the damn things can't fly high enough to be true interceptors. I'm NOT saying get rid of the IDS/GR4 of course, as they are still useful, as they will shortly prove now they can operate in Afghan.

So get rid of these ineffective aricraft, and keep the harriers - we retain the most useful airframe, and the FAA's happy, and the RAF's happy cause they can point at Typhoon and show how useful it is (finally), and the MoD's happy because its saving money. All at the cost of losing 16 odd 21 year old airframes who are pretty bad at their role anyway.

*places on helmet, and jumps into foxhole to await incoming*

[WolvoWill]

The F3 will disappear partly for the reasons you mention, but not just yet!

There are not enough Typhoons and trained pilots to effectively take over the full commitments of the F3 fleet - these being the Falklands air defence flight, and northern and southern QRA alert, as minimum requirements. The Typhoon force could probably manage these just about (if you dedicated every squadron, man and aircraft to it), but would have no spare capacity to continue to train pilots or develop the aircraft multi-role capability in a timely fashion. Once the force size is built up though (with more aircraft delivered and more crews fully trained), there'll be sufficient slack for these tasks to continue alongside the 'operational' tasks such as QRA and Falklands air defence.

[Obi Wan Russell]

The thought occurs to me the RAF could play this a little clever, and present the impending withdrawal of the F3 fleet as a cost saving defence cut, without actually changing the dates of withdrawal anyway. Treasury think they have gotten one over on the forces, and go back their hobbit holes happy once more. After all therecent announceent of a delay to the CVF completion dates was nothing more than smoke and mirrors to keep the treasury happy in the same vein. The start dates for the ships have been delayed by at least two years prior to the order earlier this year, even though the in service dates remained static. once the ink was dry on the contracts, industry has a quiet word in the defence minister's shell like and informs him that as the start dates have been pushed back, the finish dates must logically follow. The the treasury goblins rear their ugly heads ionce more deanding tribute from the ministry, and the minister says he will make great savings by 'delaying' the in service dates of the CVFs by up to two years. Goblins go away happy once more. Carriers will still be built and delivered as early as they would have otherwise. High time the forces stopped fighting one another and recognised the true enemy... HM Government and the HM Treasury!:ok:

[soddim]

I think the true picture is that the cost of keeping the F3 in service until Typhoon is ready to fully replace it is minimal and most of it is already spent. I understand that is certainly not the case with Harrier and that running it down earlier will save £1bn.

Perhaps, Yeoman_dai, you could enlighten us with your plan to fill the gap in air defence that your suggestion would result in?

Better to have a fighter struggling for altitude than not to have a fighter at all.

[Yeoman_dai]

Lets take a look at the comparitive usefulness, shall we?

Harrier - in almost constant use since we went into Afghan...

FR3 - when was the last time they contributed anything useful to British Defense beyond working up ships and ground air defense crews? Even the last interception of a Bear was by a Typhoon!

Important AD roles are down on the Falklands, and in the North to deal with Russian overflights - lest face it, anyone apart from Russia in range of the UK mainland isn't going to warrent needing air defense!

And if the upgrades ARE paid for, it was a collosal waste of money, by a service who has more money than it knows what to do with, in an effort to once again validate its existance and need for a full third of the defense budget.

Soddim, if I remember your the one going against SHAR in another thread? an RAF type who resents the fact that in the Falklands the FAA proved to be far more capable...what was it, 21 kills to SHAR, how many to the RAF? You managed to dent the edge of Stanly runway...oh, and managed one 30mmAAA gun, with a shrike.

The only useful assets were - surprise surprise, the RAF HARRIERS, who you seem to keen to get rid of? I'm in the Army, and even I can tell that with Trident we don't really need to worry about a full scale assault on the UK mainland...

No, we could stand to lose quite a bit of our air assets at the moment, and still continue to work up Typhoon - once thats up to speed we can regain our air defense squadrons, all well and good, AND save money in the process by getting rid of the FR3's


Obi Wan Russell, by the way - well said that man!!!

[Backwards PLT]

Dai

Soddim and wolvowill have given you the 2 answers to your question.

1. Cutting F3 early saves bugger all, cutting Harrier saves loads.
2. F3 is heavily committed on core defence commitments (yes I know it isn't a shooting war, nobody dies etc) and the Typhoon force is not large enough yet to take on those commitments as well as bring on its AG capability so that it can go and take over where it is needed more.

oh and you didn't have to mention that you are in the army - your posts make that painfully clear.

[Badass]

Not exactly the most impartial of posts Yeoman...

The F3 is never going to wow the masses in the visual arena but beyond that you underestimate it at your peril..

It has inherent limitations (as do all ac) which the crew know, understand and work to surpass.

The GR7/9 has done a fantastic job over the last few years and the force deserves respite from its high tempo.

When it comes to cost-saving - you really have to examine the operational requirement, both now and in the future. Is the Harrier needed? Quite probably, yes. The F3? Definitely - until the Typhoon force can assume the role. Perhaps the solution then is a reduction in numbers for both forces..

Slinging mud without the background knowledge can be a dangerous game. Perhaps sticking to the argument in favour of the GR9 rather than a mis-informed snipe at the F3 would be a better angle.

[Yeoman_dai]

Bah i'm tired and not currently in the mood to be impartial, but i'll admit a mistake and apologise when needed - its a fair cop, guv. :oh:

Although I do stand by my comments, the core of which is that our GR9's are needed far more than the FR3's currently, and in the foreseeable future, plus that the carriers are key to british defense interests.

And whats that Army comment supposed to mean ;)

[Ogre]

A Slight tangent, not too long ago I heard about a plan by someone to look into the feasibility of entending the GR4 fleet by removing the nose section rear of the cockpit, and bolting it onto an F3 main fuse. Now this is not too far fetched, seeing as the aircraft were originally built in sections by different nations then assembled by MESSY BEAST into flying aircraft. The throw away line was something like "Of course it will fit, the F3s are basically built from GR1 frames anyway".

Needless to say after the issue was investigated by some real engineers it was concluded that maybe it was not that simple after all......

[Backwards PLT]

I think that part of the problem is that you think like a sharp end guy ie "what do I need here and now" not an accountant ie "where can I save money". Just realise that there is a lot of the latter happening in the hierarchy of the MOD and especially amongst the politicians.:uhoh:

[Wrathmonk]

... or like the poor souls in The Ivory Tower, trying their hardest to swim against the stream, and balance the requirements of the "hear and now (the war)" against the demands of the future (a war).

And the calls for the F3 to be disbanded are not helped by the "just wait for the Falklands to kick off again" brigade - withdraw them now and you could send the wrong message ....

Does raise an interesting question - if you were to disband/suspend any capability not directly supporting current ops what would you lose? AWACS? Challenger? Rapier? Kings Horse Troop? Red Arrows? BBMF? All of which would probably save the square root of very little!

[Farfrompuken]

The harrier is to be scrapped to save 1 Billion??!!

For such a piffling amount of money you'd have thought that cost could have been written off.

Just shows how low defence sits In HMG's priorities.

AFAIK wasn't the F3 last "operational" just before it got kicked out of PSAB for being a waste of pan space/fuel??

[Wrathmonk]

Farfrom

As I understand it the F3 remains operational in two theatres. There is more to current military operations than Iraq and Afg. :ugh:

In the same way some people would have you believe that operations didn't start in Iraq until 2003 ....

[Occasional Aviator]

Seems like the RAF can't get it right for some people! Finally, we have come to the realisation that a) we need more/better strat lift, b) we need to invest more in RW c) we've probably got too many fast jets. Sage nods all round from the other Services.

So, how do we save on fast jets? Well, the Harrier's a no-brainer. It's the smallest force, it costs the most to support, we would actually save money by cutting it (unlike the F3), we haven't signed an enormous 30-year support contract which we'd have to continue paying for (unlike the GR4), and its role CAN be covered by the GR4 force to a large extent.

But, once again, this is all apparently some devious crab plot to emasculate the fleet air arm, undermine the carriers and make sure we have as many Typhoons as possible to go to air shows in......

[iccarus]

Firstly, please elaborate on what exactly an FR3 is???If you are referring to the F3, you have already shown your ignorance!

The F3 continues to provide a 'World Class' capability in many different areas - a mature platform which continues to leave many an american with his jaw on the floor....

If my memory serves me correctly, there was an article on sky news just last monday entitled ' RAF Fighters See Off Russian Bombers' - i wonder who did that.

Harrier - great little platform, hats off to the boys, BUT i'm afraid that, in the very near future, if you don't have a radar you aint coming to the party...

[The Helpful Stacker]

Indeed OA, the RN sure is one very paranoid service. Should people with such a serious persecution complex be allowed to look after nuclear weapons?;)

[spamcanner]

Mmm, so scrapping the Harrier force will save 1 Billion
but I'd rather see that money spent keeping the fleet
flying than bailing out those greedy merchant bankers
:E

[Vox Populi]

I can't believe people on this forum are already accepting the need for a £1bn cut, and squabbling about which RAF Aircraft MUST go to balance the books.

How about saying NO. Followed by "Sod off and tackle the black hole of the British economy - social security". When they've been as rigorous and brutal with the DHSS as they have with the Armed Forces, then they can come back and be listened to.

2007/8 Govt Spending*

£million
Social security benefits 133,882
Health 89,673
Education 57,846
Local Government 22,000
Defence 32,831
Home Office 13,571
Scotland 23,510
Wales 12,481
International Development 4,637

*planned expenditure, Source: economicshelp.org.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

Sod that, chop off wales. That's 12bil saved... result!

[abbotyobs]

"The F3 continues to provide a 'World Class' capability in many different areas - a mature platform which continues to leave many an american with his jaw on the floor...."

I have never heard so much phish in my life!!!!!!

[mlc]

By 2010, our 'overseas aid' budget will be £8 billion. Perhaps India can buy the Harriers off us with their cut!

[mr fish]

india, a regional superpower spends lots of money upgrading jags while the country which sold them loses theirs to defence cuts.
said country then gives said regional superpower millions in "aid" while they buy shiny sukhoi's.
strange times indeed!!!

[Impiger]

Sadly I don't think it will be a question of Harrier or F3 but both. :{

[BEagle]

And you would know, eh mate?

How are you keeping these days?

[Farfrompuken]

Wrathmonk,

Good wah! Nearly bit but not before I fell over laughing!

Reminds me of the time an F3 crew were telling me how busy they were being deployed. When I asked of their commitments they informed me that Q involved being away for huge amounts of time.

Me: "Q? But it's all UK-based isn't it?"

F3 dude: "yes but we're out of the house, you know."

I think I wet myself.

[glad rag]

And so it continues.............:ugh:

[Mud Clubber]

Hey 'Yeoman', don't believe everything you read in Zoo/Nuts - check your stats.

Did an F3 mate plough your girlfriend or something?

Try to look beyond the end of your nose. Monkey.

[KG86]

Mud Clubber, I don't think there is any need for that response.

I have a lot of sympathy with Yeoman_Dai. The Harrier Force is doing an exceptional job in the Stan at the moment. The AD Force, no matter how important, is not in the eyes of the public.

The Harrier Force is saving lives on a daily basis. When was the last time the AD Force fired a weapon in anger?

By the way, I am not a Harrier pilot, merely a helicopter puke.

[soddim]

Yeoman_dai - get your head out of your anus!

Your suggestion of jealousy of RN achievements in the Falklands are absolute nonsense - just like your cute ideas of how to save Harrier which, as far as I am aware, does not yet need saving because no decision has been made to bin it.

Suggest you might think before you post here again - this used to be a big boys' forum not a place for spoilt brats to whimper when someone disagrees with them.

If you really want to contribute, think about the big picture where better reasons than you have given are used to quantify how to divide defence budgets. You might then concede that some should be spent on air defence assets just in case the unthinkable happens and we need to exercise some airspace management other than asking nicely for flight plans.

If you are looking for alternatives to the savings made by binning the Harrier you had better look further than the end of your nose.

To all the rest of the anti-F3 idiots who have posted here - just be grateful that we still have some weapons systems in service that work.

[Yeoman_dai]

Whoa, guys, steady on. If you read my third post, I apologised for my tone - but at the end of that day, although I don't want to bite or be petty enough to point this out....well, i'm weak what can I say. If its a 'big boys forum' please don't just insult others because your last post was nothing but := - I did, and aplogised. Also, thank you, KG86. Mud Clubber, FHM is by far the best publication of the three...:ok:

To debate... not once, in any single post have I advocated scrapping all air defense - cutting the numbers, yes, and I even made the point that it should be increased as more Typhoon come online. All well and good. Currently, what threats do we face in the south of england that ground based missle defenses would be imcapable of dealing with? To the North, yes, Russia and its Bear probes - but, in rebuttal to a point made about the latest interception of them....it was a Typhoon that did it, not an ADV. There are 35 Typhoons in service (double check me there) with 22 trainers - enough to cover the north and continue to train pilots ready for the continuing deliveries, which could replace the F3's on a one to one basis - we only need 30 more and then thats a match to the entire F3 fleet! (production being what it is that comment is tongue firmly in cheek;))

Phase the things out, the fleet sizes of Harrier and F3 are similar in size, (65/67) and the F3 costs more to run and maintain, so cutting the F3's would save more money than cutting the more useful Harrier Fleet!

Interesting point, as well, made by iccarus about Radar - can anybody explain why we didn't go down the same route as the Septics and fit it ours? (I have a horrible feeling someone will say 'cost')

Although, I heard iccarus, from a RAF type, US tanker pilots routinely laugh AT F3's, as they have to descend for the Tornado's to be able to reach them!! In an Air Defense Aircraft, surely thats not what you need! Like a sniper rifle with a 300m effective range :ugh:





All in all several good points have been made, no least Vox Populii - Social Services is a disgrace, and needs a complete overhaul to bring it in line with the 21st Century, as does for that matter the civil service - both have been expanded in areas to cope with new issues, but the older less useful parts havn't been axed, leaving the bloated monstrosties you have today. :(

[TEEEJ]

Yeoman dai wrote

To debate... not once, in any single post have I advocated scrapping all air defense - cutting the numbers, yes, and I even made the point that it should be increased as more Typhoon come online. All well and good. Currently, what threats do we face in the south of england that ground based missle defenses would be imcapable of dealing with? To the North, yes, Russia and its Bear probes - but, in rebuttal to a point made about the latest interception of them....it was a Typhoon that did it, not an ADV.

Iccarus stated

' RAF Fighters See Off Russian Bombers' - i wonder who did that.'

This was in reference to the Tu-160 Blackjacks intercepted by RAF Leuchars F.3s.

RIA Novosti - Russia - NATO jets shadow Russian bombers over North Sea (http://en.rian.ru/russia/20081212/118828766.html)

The Russian Bears and Blackjacks don't simply probe the North. Bears and Blackjacks do sometimes go south where they will come under the responsibility of QRA South. Simply having one QRA base in the UK won't be able to cover the entire country. You can't intercept hi-jacked airliners or intercept straying aircraft, etc with ground based missiles. In terms of land-based missiles there are only short-ranged Rapiers in Army hands.

The following highlights the current planning for policing UK airspace

House of Commons Hansard Ministerial Statements for 19 Oct 2007 (pt 0001) (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmhansrd/cm071019/wmstext/71019m0001.htm)

Defence
Airfield Review (Tertiary Airfield Support)
The Minister for the Armed Forces (Mr. Bob Ainsworth): On 18 July 2002, Official Report, columns 460-464, my right hon. Friend, the Member for Ashfield (Mr Hoon) the then Secretary of State for Defence, announced the publication of a new chapter to the 1998 Strategic Defence Review (SDR) that was designed to ensure that our defence policies, capabilities and force structures matched the challenges that the new terrorist threats posed.

Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) comprises: armed Tornado F3 and Typhoon aircraft held at ground readiness for immediate take-off; the Air Surveillance and Control System to provide warning and command and control of the fighter aircraft; and tanker aircraft also held at high ground readiness. QRA fulfils two concurrent functions. Firstly, it meets the United 19 Oct 2007 : Column 60WS Kingdom's responsibility within NATO to provide air policing of agreed member airspace. Secondly, under UK national control, QRA provides an airborne contribution to countering threats against the UK by terrorist organisations or individuals. The SDR New Chapter confirmed that airfields across the UK—RAF Marham, RAF St Mawgan and RNAS Yeovilton—would be able to support QRA aircraft when needed, in addition to the bases from which the QRA aircraft usually operate.

Following the decision to dispose of the airfield at RAF St Mawgan, we have reviewed the short term tertiary airfields that support quick reaction alert aircraft and decided that MOD Boscombe Down and RNAS Culdrose will now be enabled by Spring 2008 to cover any potential threats to the south and south-western airspaces. In the interim, RAF St Mawgan will continue to be utilised as necessary to support short term QRA aircraft. RAF Marham will continue to be maintained as a tertiary QRA airfield. This support is in addition to the bases that are already able to operate such aircraft and will give us enhanced flexibility in our air defence arrangements.

[Yeoman_dai]

Second apology - I missed that one.

Typhoons could have done the job...

[soddim]

On the basis that it takes a man to apologise, Yeoman_dai, I also apologise for the 'big boys' forum' comment.

A couple of factors you might not be aware of in your calculations are that a. Harrier will apparently need additional funding if it is to run on and that
b. External funding has already been injected to run on the much-reduced F3 fleet to fill the gap created by the Saudi Typhoon buy.

As far as your comments about F3 high altitude capability are concerned, it is only a factor affecting a very limited number of airspace integrity possibilities and does not in any way preclude the engagement of identified threats. For those few possible cases the Typhoons are already available but not in the numbers required to cover both Northern and Southern Q.

I think particularly at this time of goodwill we should recognise that the F3 crews have for a long time now been making the best job they can out of operating a converted bomber in the fighter role. In fact, they have driven the process of getting the weapons system updated to the present state where, despite its' lack of manoeuvrability, the aircraft is a potent long range interceptor.

Any old fool can get good results in an aircraft with superior performance to his adversary but it takes skill and experience to win in an inferior machine.

Well done to the F3 crews - keep on being proferssional and ignore the jibes.

[Yeoman_dai]

Ha! Agreed! They'vce been doing sterling work these past years, despite equipment foised upon them by the MoD, and I laughed when I heard the traditional response by said crws upon the tanker abusing them was to give a two fingered salute!

[hotshots!]

Yeoman_dai,

If its a 'big boys forum'

If your age is truely only 21, perhaps you should pass judgment when you are older and know more about the subjects that you are referring to?

[Yeoman_dai]

Dear lord some of you lot are ageist, aren't you! I can start speakin in strreet slaaaang ya know? It is cause I is hip, with it. Safe. And all that nonsense. Plus, of course i'm 21, why on earth would I lie about it?

Age has nothing whatsoever to do with it, at all, I know 30+ year olds who wouldn't have a clue. Its a ridiculous statement to make. I'll freely admit I'm no true expert but I have some knowledge, enough to spark and continue debate, which is surely what this forum is for?



Oh, and Merry Christmas everyone!!

[whowhenwhy]

We've been around this buoy a couple of times now in the last 2 months. The simple question that our airships are asking is how can we continue to fight todays war? Financially, we've given up the ghost of thinking of fighting the next war; therefore, they need to find out what needs to go, in order for us to continue to do what we're doing. F3 OSD will accelerate by about 12 months, the Harrier will go. HERRICK and TELIC are shortly both to be covered by GR4 which means that the JFH will be training to regain their carrier qualifications. I can't see us losing the opportunity to save £1bn, just to maintain a capability that we're only going to use in the next war! The MoD is £6bn in a hole, the govt desperately need money to shore up the fact that they now own most of the UK banking industry, whilst keeping up payouts to the society for left-handed, homosexual ex-jugglers. Social wins votes, defence does not. We're in the poo

[wiki]

Yeoman - You're !!!!; Farfrompuken - so are you.

[Backwards PLT]

whowhenwhy - dunno if you watch the news bot Telic only has a few months left. I can't help thinking that saving money was a primary driver. So GR4 can sustain Herrick. Don't think it could have done both for the long term.

farfrompuken - Perhaps you might want to be careful about being so vitriolic on a subject that you obviously know little about. I know that this anonymous forum allows you to spout whatever you like but try to keep a semblance of professionalism.

[Farfrompuken]

TLP

They were the crew's words not mine! I too agree that it sounded unprofessional. Unless I was the recipient of a well-executed Wah!:\

However I'm more than happy to stand corrected on the operational output of the F3, however, provided it doesn't pose a security breach etc.

I'm not advocating we bin it either- I am
Under the impression it possesses some useful capabilities that will take time to replace. I'm also of the opinion that scrapping the GR9 would be a mistake on many levels.

However, whether we like it or not, we're going down to 1 medium scale congflict at a time when HMG is bankrupt and holds defence way down the priority list. We're going to see some agressive and unpleasant cuts over the next couple of years. Brace! Brace!



Happy Xmas!

[Wrathmonk]

TLP

Are the GR4s leaving TELIC? All the press announcement said was that troops would leave Iraq. As I know you know GR1/GR4 have been flying over Iraq since 1992, under a number of op names, doing a lot more than supporting troops on the ground. And don't they provide the only fast air recce capability in theatre? Personal view but I can't see the Tonka mates coming home from the Iraq theatre just yet ...

Hope I'm proved wrong though!