Rumours of cuts in E-3D fleet?

[Biggus]

Posts have appeared on a thread on e-goat discussing cuts to the UK E-3D fleet. Someone apparently in the know says it was briefed (presumably at Waddington?) on Friday that one of the E-3D Sqns is to fold.

See post 26 on this thread...

More defence cuts? - Page 3 - E-Goat :: The Totally Unofficial Royal Air Force Rumour Network forums (http://www.e-goat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=24487&page=3)

If it's true not particularly surprising given the current financial climate.

And this is a "rumour" site!

[Bunker Mentality]

Looks as though they are talking about a manpower reduction rather than a cut in the number of aircraft. Don't know why they ever needed 2 operational squadrons to operate just 7 aircraft aircraft, anyway. Nevertheless, reducing the number of trained crews and support personnel would constrain options for long-term OOA operations in the future. If true, I can only suppose that the other (untaken) measures would have caused more immediate, and/or even less acceptable, pain.
Now stand by for PR10.

[minigundiplomat]

2 squadrons, 7 aircraft, a seperate eng structure and very little in the way of requirement (currently).

Doesnt take an entire lean team to work the math out.

[NutLoose]

They can always take up the resulting hole in capability with Nimrod :E

[ZH875]

Seven aircraft and two squadrons.....:hmm:


....Get rid of one squadron and keep all seven airframes, promote one sqn boss to Gp Capt, give him a couple of Wg Cdrs to manage A Flt and B Flt, and keep everyone else.

Net result one new Gp Capt post........:ok:

Now there's something for their Airships to think about.

[5 Forward 6 Back]

Then you'd need to make Waddington's stn cdr an Air Cdre to fit into the command structure, and hey presto another 1 star job too! You could call him AOISTAR.

[Tourist]

So they have taken 2 catastrophicaly undermanned sqns and made them into one.
I suspect that there may be almost no personnel losses at all (one bosses job?), just suddenly one fully manned sqn for the first time in E3 history.

[reds & greens]

I love the Ru in PPRuNe.
8 & 23 combine (LlllllllOoooooooNnnnnnnnnGgggggg overdue)
8 have seniority with numberplates & VC
Down to 8/9 crews
54 Stay as ISTAR
Max 5 ac in fwd fleet (with 1 always in single track serv)
2 ac in 'rotational cyclic (poss) cal-based' spin within fwd, maintaining full numerical fleet assets.
Eng manpower pooled into 8 with SEngO control
Eng groundcrew down to approx 65%
Fg hrs reduced.
excess posted out
Morale shattered

[StopStart]

Groundcrew down to approx 65%
Fg hrs reduced.
excess posted out
Morale shattered

Welcome to our world then Waddo.... :hmm:

[waddingtonpete]

Manning to 65%

I wish 62%:ugh:

[Runaway Gun]

For a minute there I thought they meant a cut in the rations !! :eek:

[Roadster280]

What was the justification for 2 squadrons in the first place?

[Navy_Adversary]

Why did the RAF have its own E-3s and not share/expand/join the NATO ones?
I always thought it strange that we had our own airframes.

[caped crusader]

Back in the mid 1970s, the UK was originally in negotiation with NATO to be part of the NATO E-3 Force. However, there were several delays in getting agreement amongst the various contributing nations, especially Germany. As a consequence of these delays, Britain went down the road of the AEW Nimrod, with the agreement that this would be the UK's contribution to the NATO Force. The UK conveniently had surplus Nimrods to convert to the AEW role, as we were pulling a Nimrod Squadron out of Malta as part of the withdrawal from the island.

Not so long afterwards, Germany was able to sign up to the E-3 Project, and with the UK now committed to to the Nimrod Project, the Germans very kindly offered Geilenkirchen as a base for the E-3s. With the failure of the AEW Nimrod project, the UK government eventually went for the E-3D. The UK stuck with the original pledge, that the UK would still contribute towards the NATO Force, with the aircraft and UK crews based at Waddington.

All the nations that make up the NATO E-3 Force at Geilenkirchen make a financial contribution to the running of the base and provide the personnel. The aircraft at Geilenkirchen are owned by NATO, and registered in Luxembourg.

The UK completely funds the NATO E-3D Component at Waddington, and the Station Commander has a NATO appointment as the E-3D Component Commander, reporting to the 2* NATO AEW Force Commander. With the UK contributing over a quarter of the total NATO AEW Force, the Deputy Force Commander is a RAF 1*

[Wensleydale]

The original concept for Waddington was to have just one Sqn (8). In those days (1991) it was envisaged that 9 op Crews would be available plus an extra 2 x Crews for Sentry Training Sqn (STS) plus Staneval. However, this gave a supervision burden for the leadership - with 17 personnel per crew then the Sqn would be over 150 strong (including Boss, XO etc). This was more than half the aircrew in 11 Group!

So, for example, iaw GASOs the Surveillance leader had to personally fly a 6 month check with each of his charges - each crew having 5 surveillance personnel. In those days we flew 10 hour missions, so the leader would have to fly 900 hours a year just to carry out checks! (not that we got close to 9 crews available).

At the same time, STS wanted a Sqn number plate, so the decision was taken to reform 23 as the second E-3D Sqn. This would lead to 8 Sqn with 6 Op Crews, and 23 with 3 Op crews plus the training crew.

Following 11 years of continual operational deployments (Balkans/Bosnia/Albania/Kosovo/Afghanistan/GW2), it was decided that more crews were needed (personnel were flying in excess of 800 hours per year - One pilot even approached 1000 hours and had to be sent on leave so as not to break the tabboo. Therefore both 8 and 23 received 6 Op crews each, and 54 was reformed to take the training effort. Although in theory we had 14 crews, that figure was rarely approached, and personnel had to be brought back to the Component to man the Sqns for some operational flying.

Following GW2, the Sqn were brought home for rest and recouperation having greatly outflown all expected hours. Sadly we never went back again - tha aircraft considered too expensive and too capable to carry out the roles over Afghanistan and Iraq (the low overall flying allied rate and lack of a creditable air threat). So, not on Ops we have taken a low priority for funding for the past few years and although we are forbidden to talk about the result......

lets just hope that we are given an operation again soon, and resources will return (but don't hold your breath!

W

[berzerker]

Bye Bye 23.

Nimrod, 9 Aircraft, two squadrons

[caped crusader]

It wasn't just the Sentry Training Squadron that wanted a number plate, there was at least one Wing Commander in the decision making process who was hoping to command a squadron.

Politics apart, I've always found it healthy to have some inter squadron comptetition, and it gives more options for those on the promotion ladder, even if they are ex F-3s and looking for a Squadron command. Having just the one squadron can make for an insular outlook.

It will be interesting to see which squadron their Airships decide to disband.

[Roadster280]

Thanks for the explain, Wensleydale.

This does beg the question though, if the requirement existed in 1991, for seemingly very good reasons, why has it gone away now?

So by inference, not only are there insufficient crews as is, the intention is to make that situation permanent by making it impossible to maintain standards?

I must be missing something, nobody is that stupid.

[minigundiplomat]

I think anyone outside of AT/SH & CAS needs a very robust case for existence when the beancounters inevitably arrive in the near future.

The rationale applied several years ago will cut very little in the form of ice. Don't agree, but there you go!

[navibrator]

Let us just hope that any cuts are part of an overall assessment of threats to the UK and not just cut so we can afford Afghanistan. History is littered with similar type of events - it takes someone strong with a big mouth to stop us slicing away capability only to find us on having to pay a fortune to get it back when the situation changes. I can certainly see a role for E3D - and there is nothing wrong with only one squadron provided we still have the capability.

[spheroid]

Just a quick question...... How many Engineers / Maintainers would a Squadron of 5 Nimrod have?

[Navy_Adversary]

Crusader
Thank you very much for your very comprehensive reply to my query:D

[Milarity]

Further to the Caped Crusader’s history, I understand that pressure was bought to bear on finding an AEW solution as long-range, ground based AEW had been promised to the RN as part of the sweetener for losing their organic fixed-wing AEW with the demise of the carriers. Hence the pressing need to go it alone and maintain the AEW capability while NATO dallied over a decision. The history books detail the saga of Nimrod AEW and the Shackelton before the E-3D was selected.

There are a couple of curious side issues to this. Firstly, the E-3D Component is a contribution in kind to NATO. That is, instead of paying money into the communal pot, the UK contributes trained crews and serviceable aircraft to the NATO AEW&C Force for their tasking. I am very surprised that the MNCs have agreed to give up a fair chunk of their AEW capability.

Secondly, as part of the original deal, The RN is joint owner of the AEW capability. The 1* at Force Command rotates RAF/RN for this reason. I am also surprised that the RN has agreed to lose part of their share.

I guess budgets are being cut everywhere.

[andyy]

Milarity, I didn't know that. Does the RN contribute a contribution to the manpower, too?

[justone26]

2 weapons controllers. One Surface, one Sk Mk7

[skippedonce]

'long-range, ground based AEW'??? You mean the sky carrier is alive and orbiting the planet; I missed that somewhere!

[caped crusader]

Navy_Adversary

Thanks for your post, glad I could answer your query.

Milarity

You are correct about the present origins of the RAF AEW Force being in response to the demise of the flat tops and the need for AEW coverage of the fleet. Prior to the standing up of 8 Sqn as an AEW squadron in 1972, the RAF had posted a handful of aircrew onto 849 Sqn to gain experience in the role, and they did cruises on Eagle & Ark Royal. When 8 Sqn was re-formed at Lossiemouth there was a large Navy presence on the Squadron.

It was therefore regretable that there was no proper AEW coverage for the RN in the Falklands, but full credit to the dark blue for coming up with the Sea King Whiskey.

Concerning the RN 1* as the Deputy NAEW Force Commander, I believe the RN relinquished the post when there was a Joint Service review of 1* posts back in the mid 90s. I think the RN was more concerned about trying to get a more influential 1* post within MOD.

Back in the early 1950s, I believe the RAF did look at long range shore based AEW with the Neptune. After the RAF disposed of the Neptunes, I think the airframes were procured by the Argentinians and were in use during the Falklands.

It will be interesting to see which AEW platform is used by the RN on the future carriers. I would go for the E-2D, but you need a catapult for that.

CC