Yet more bad news?

[dougiedubh]

Channel 4 news has broken a story about major defence cuts to be detailed next week.

EXCLUSIVE: The government is to announce a package of defence cuts next week including the closure of at latest one RAF base and a scaling back of the British base in Cyprus, after overspending massively on large scale military construction projects. Cathy Newman reports.

[Pontius Navigator]

That'll be Wainfleet then?

At last the minister got yo see the paper?

[LFFC]

Here's the link:

RAF base to close after Ministry of Defence cuts (http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/domestic_politics/raf+base+to+close+after+ministry+of+defence+cuts/3459142)

Next week's cuts will be contentious enough, but much worse is to come. Senior Whitehall sources admit the future of the Navy's two new aircraft carriers and the A400M aircraft is in doubt. Defence could face cuts of up to 16 per cent over three years because of the government's decision this week to protect spending on schools, hospitals and police.

[NutLoose]

Looks like you are up sh*t creek without a paddle....... the paddle being lost in the last round of defence cuts........... still they will be happy in Africa with our latest Billions of pounds of handouts......

Notice how the blundering buffoon mentioned the Global warming budget in Dollars today, then our Bigger than everyone elses cut in Sterling so as to make it appear smaller....... then he had the audacity to say he was commiting us to over our share of the budget in years to come.... The man wants putting in a straight jacket, still reeling over his fopar with his expenses and the painting of his shed on his second home allowance........ WTF is he being paid a second home allowance for when he has No10 ?????

[GeeRam]

still they will be happy in Africa with our latest Billions of pounds of handouts......

I see the one-eyed monster was over in Europe today proclaiming the fact that the UK overseas aid budget isn't being cut - all £8bn of it :ugh:

[Melchett01]

And we can afford to stump up in excess of £1Bn at the drop of a hat for this EU climate change piggy bank - you know, the one where we bank roll some 3rd world dictatorship to reduce their CO2 output, but which actually goes on Presidential bling and weapons.

Time this absolute shower of sh1t were shown the door. I don't want to wait for an election - this once great nation will be little but scorched earth come next spring.

In the name of God man - Brown will you just go.

[Roland Pulfrew]

In the name of God man - Brown will you just go.

Melchy

Much as I completely support your viewpoint regarding the one eyed Scottish idiot, do your really think that any other UK mainstream party would do anything different? WTF are "we" doing donating more money than any other European Govt when "we" are the only one still in recession?:ugh::ugh:

[Razor61]

Much to my surprise tonight was the same on ITV news which stated Cottesmore as the main contender for closure but that was known.... the surprise was they mentioned Lossiemouth as a possible closure.
I thought this station was safe?

1.5 Billion quid to other countries so they go 'green' whilst slashing 6 billion of our budget.

[acmech1954]

It will not be their problem after next May, what is left of them will be sat in opposition slagging the next government over increased taxes and spending cuts that have been forced on them by the one eyed snake and his lackies.
It would almost be amusing for them to be re-elected, if it would not be such a disaster for the country as a whole, exept Scotland.

[Finnpog]

With such incompetence to see a £6Bn overspend, should not the person(s) responsible for blowing the budget so outrageously not be disciplined?

Oh, would that not be at Ministerial level perhaps?

Off to the Lords then.

[tucumseh]

With such incompetence to see a £6Bn overspend, should not the person(s) responsible for blowing the budget so outrageously not be disciplined?

Oh, would that not be at Ministerial level perhaps?

Off to the Lords then.On the Air side (as this is an aviation forum) the two main "culprits" from my viewpoint are retired. One was a Knight before taking up post, the other made CB in-post, having been blamed, but not named, for the "gold standard cock-up" (Chinook Mk3).

I generally take a more benign view of Ministers. After all, the reason they become MPs is because they are sod all use at anything else; and becoming a Minister or Lord means they haven't learnt anything so can't be set loose in the real world again.

Nevertheless, Moonie, Ingram, Caplin and Ainsworth have all confirmed they are content with the level of deliberate waste in MoD so, yes, I'd say they have attained the necessary level of incompetence to become Lords. (One already is. Have a look at his list of Directorships).

[vecvechookattack]

The RAF has 57 bases around the UK

The RAF operate 1100 Aircraft which means that each base is home to 19 aircraft.

If one RAF base were to close that would mean that each base was home to 20 aircraft.




There are 44,300 people in the RAF which means that each base is home to 778 people.

If one RAF base were to close that would mean that each base would be home to 791 people.

Whilst I for one would not want to see any airfield close, using those figures you can see how the bean-counters work.

I'm sure that the FDR will be far reaching and will be very painful. However, I am not concerned much about airfields or bases or ships or aircraft but what does concern me is jobs. The FDR will introduce some very scathing cuts to our people. Compulsory redundancies are going to hurt.

[Sgt.Slabber]

........... still they will be happy in Africa with our latest Billions of pounds of handouts......

Don't forget India. How many 'carriers, P8's, etc., are they buying?

Then there's the rest of the overseas DEVELOPMENT aid pot - more like funding for Merc's and Single Malt's....

Not forgetting the GBP 40 Million PER DAY - GBP 65 Million from April '10 - to the Bureaupean Protection Scam...

[Biggus]

Vec....

What makes you think there will be compulsory redundancies?

Given that redundancies, if there are any, will probably not be announced until after the election (May/June 10) in order to save political face, and the MOD will take at least 6 months to sort it out, we will be talking about people leaving in late 10 or early 11.

If, and it might well be a big if, the economy is picking up by then, and the employment market is better, there are probably sufficient people who have had enough of a military being hacked to pieces, and the prospect of at least 3 years with at best a 1% pay rise (almost certainly effectively a pay cut), to allow for voluntary redundancies to fulfil any requirement to decrease personnel.

In order to "spin" any reductions in numbers both the politicians and MOD will look at all other alternatives - reductions in recruiting, reducing re-engagements and extensions and voluntary redundancies - before they resort to compulsory dismissals. It makes them "look" like a more caring employer!

Or are you hinting that the manpower reductions required will be so HUGE that only compulsory redundancies will provide the numbers required? :(

Personally I have no doubt that there will be reductions in personnel, as to the numbers involved.....who knows?

[LFFC]

Vec,

Sometimes your simple view of life staggers me! So I'm being generous and assuming that you've got your tongue firmly in your cheek and have your fishing line firmly in both hands.

But just in case any innocent people are taken in by your post, I have to point out that quite few of the "57 RAF bases" actually have aircraft based at them. Which just goes to show what a large contribution RAF personnel make to defence overall.

If you count the red RAF Flying Stations (http://www.raf.mod.uk/organisation/stations.cfm)on this link, you'll see that there are only 19, and I think even that is out of date.

To get a real idea of what RAF personnel get up to at many of the non-flying "RAF Bases", try clicking on some of the blue circles on the map. Start with the one on the south coast, just above the Isle of Wight. You should read the following:

LATCC(Mil), an Air Command Unit which is embedded within the London Area Control Centre. It is the home of the London Area Control Centre (LACC). It is a civilian establishment run by the National Air Traffic Services (NATS), with military Air Traffic Control staff working alongside civilian colleagues in a joint civil/military radar operations room. The controllers are responsible for the safe and expeditious passage of aircraft flying over England, Wales and their associated coastal waters.

Please note that it's not even an MOD establishment! Neither are many other of the so-called "RAF Stations" on that link.

So Vec, the number of 57 RAF bases is just spin to make the loss of another RAF airfield seem not so important (if that's what's going to be announced next week). You haven't been taken in have you?

[vecvechookattack]

Personally I have no doubt that there will be reductions in personnel, as to the numbers involved.....who knows?

Very true...Who knows. However, I have heard rumour that the redundancy package is very attractive. So much so that a good friend of mine who is very senior and a complete "lifer" is seriously considering banging out and taking the money.

[5 Forward 6 Back]

I'm certain Vec was just offering a possible insight into the way a bean-counter's mind works, not actually trying to suggest this is the way we should be thinking....!

As far as closing airfields goes, if it's not Wainfleet they're referring to, what else is seriously in the firing line? How about Wittering? An airfield with lots of ground units, but just one flying squadron? Must be room for 20(R) to move to Cottesmore?

[Pontius Navigator]

How about Wittering? An airfield with lots of ground units, but just one flying squadron? Must be room for 20(R) to move to Cottesmore?

True, to a point, but Collyweston might be the stumbling block there and its proximity to North Luffenham.

Now lets play Heinz.

Name 57 RAF bases. Only rule, they must be bases without any aircraft squadrons based there.

Starter for 10, Digby.

[charliegolf]

St Athan.

And wtf is Wainfleet. I did the 80s and never heard of it!

CG

[Wrathmonk]

CG

Bombing range on the east coast (Wash). And its closure has already happened (or is very close to happening)!

[Razor61]

Wainfleet closed last month i think.

Surely it would save a bit of money by relocating the CRC back to Neatishead from Scampton, moving out the Reds elsewhere and closing Scampton. It's not doing much for a large airfield is it? (Keep the dog bit).

[Gainesy]

The 57 list, the MoD's list of RAF Bases is hoop. Another home goal for RAF PR, about time they got a severe kick in the slats.

As said above, Joe Public will be under the impression that the RAF has 57 Brize-Size Stations with hangars, runways etc. And whose fault is that?

[Wrathmonk]

5f6b

Must be room for 20(R) to move to Cottesmore?

Speaking with a couple of 'bona' mates in the pub (so its obviously a rumour!) but they said the height (amsl) of Cottesmore (400 ft-ish) makes it unsuitable for the OCU (something to do with the hover charateristics of the T10, particularly in the summer months). To move the Cott sqns back to Witt may require a reduction in front line GR9's. But then if the Carriers are under threat (again) who needs them ...:E

I reckon the base "closure" will be one already earmarked for closure (such as Lyneham or St Mawgan). It's all in the spin ....

[TheChitterneFlyer]

RAF Wainfleet is a weapons range on The Wash on the east coast of England near Wainfleet, in the civil parish of Friskney, although the north-east part of the range is in Wainfleet St Mary.

Courtesy of Wikipedia.

Oooops, I got beaten to the answer!

Google Earth says that it's a pub called 'The Barley Mow'!

TCF

[Melchett01]

Name 57 RAF bases. Only rule, they must be bases without any aircraft squadrons based there.

Starter for 10, Digby.

Being greedy - but they are linked by a theme - I have 2 offerings:

RAF Croughton and RAF Menwith Hill.

However, I suspect our colonial cousins may have something to say if we try to close those!

[cornish-stormrider]

have a look at Alan Turnbull's www.secret-bases.co.uk (http://www.secret-bases.co.uk) and see how many ex RAF bases are still in use by "someone else" but still called RAF *****xyz and then tell me we will not be shutting them, so we pick one of what we have left and close it down just after spending a fortune on it, sell it at a loss and then spend more than we saved trying to shoehorn everyone in elsewhere.

politics - don't you just love it.

[airborne_artist]

Let's not forget that Cameron's bunch will need to find camps and quarters for the 20,000 lads in Germany who they have promised to bring home.

[Cornerstone958]

57 RAF Bases my contribution RAF Fylingdales
CS

[Finnpog]

As much as I wanted to pick Brampton, Wyton, Henlow - however a quick search on the RAF/Camp site does show a Grob EFT Squadron there...

So, can I have Halton?

[dkh51250]

57 Bases. High Wycombe

[Spanish Waltzer]

St Mawgan...

[Melchett01]

Of course, and being provocative here, you could always close Cranwell.

Move the fg sqns into Waddington - if you believe the rumours of the numbers of ac types and sqns actually going into Waddington over the next few years, you should quite easily be able to shoe-horn a couple more in, with sqns 'hot bunking' when sister sqns are away on ops.

And the Air Force Board have already established their credentials as being no respectors of ethos and history when it comes to getting rid of significant bases - how many BoB stations left, Bentley Priory etc - so why should Cranwell be any different.

Just think, CHOM could become home to Kesteven Borough Council, or maybe even Sleaford Town Hall ;)



And yes my tongue is firmly in cheek here before anybody says anything.

[dkh51250]

57 Bases. Kirton in Lindsey

[mr fish]

if wittering is to close, will we get the moped endurance race at cottesmore??

i need to sort my engine's fueling out, be a shame to waste, ahem,
"hours" in the shed this winter!!!


ok, i'll admit the truth....

15 minutes and a sh*t load of tie wraps!!!

[bayete]

Briynham?

When it only costs something like 20mil to run Lyneham per year and something like 300mil to spend on Future Brize and who knows how much wasted on CATARA?
Could we have just moved some of the smaller units mentioned above into Lyneham and Brize and kept 2 large airfields going?

And no I don't want to start a Future Brize discussion here there are other threads for that

[DICKY the PIG]

Just been on the local news up here in the frozen North, "Both Lossie and Kinloss are at risk of closure". The resident 'expert' reckons Lossie will be saved because it has two runways. Glad I'm not at Kinloss with my own house in the local area......oh hang on wait a minute.......Bugger!

[orca]

I appreciate that they're in charge and hardly likely to vote themselves into redundancy, but when are we going to see a cull of senior ranks.

The latest Hansard I can find will tell you that the RAF employs over 1200 Wg Cdrs and 300 plus Group Captains. Without wanting to sound blunt; WTF? One in every 30 people is a Wg Cdr or above?!?

Seriously, you want to save costs? This is a force that can deploy (much) less than 100 fixed wing fast air. When's it going to start acting like it?

And before the band wagon gets going, I think that I'm right in saying that the RN employs 900 Cdrs, 260 captains and almost 100 one stars...seriously? These figures need to be cut by half, haven't they?

I suggest the SDR comes up with a quota system. The crabs are allowed one OF-5 per squadron, the fishheads are allowed one 1-star per surface combatant, the rest falls out in a 3:1 ratio up and down the ranks...that'll fix it. I reckon that'll give the RN siro 40 Cdres, 120 Captains, 360 Cdrs, etc etc. The RAF will be a little bigger, and the Israelis would still think us top heavy.

I have no idea about the pongos, but they are reputed to be the only officer corps actually over manned at the moment..

[Wrathmonk]

the RAF employs over 1200 Wg Cdrs

And if thats not frightening enough how many are Engineers (or to be correct, as they are all GD branch these days, formally from the Engineer branch)

[Rigga]

Using Vec's beancounter methods and Orca's stats:-

Current Winco's - 1200/57 = 21+ per station
Current Groupies - 300/57 = 5+ per station

Thats quite a good ratio for compulsory pensions - Any Takers?

[Melchett01]

Orca,

Without wishing to be that turkey voting for Christmas (no I'm not a senior officer), you may have a point. I wouldn't be surprised if the RAF's top heavy status stems from not only the fact that it sends its officers to war as aircrew, but also the perception from years back that as a highly technical service, it required above average education, skills etc etc etc which were the preserve of the officer corps.

If I'm being honest, this probably doesn't hold a great deal of water any more. However, as we move further and further into a Joint environment, where Joint is spelt A-R-M-Y, having the firepower that an extra stripe here and there can provide is rather handy at times. Otherwise, we'd all be living in shell scrapes, eating rat packs and changing into 'Thursday Afternoon Dress' along with various other quaint customs.

As long as the Army remains as dominant as it does - notwithstanding the current land-centric campaign giving their voice even more weight - the RAF and the RN need to be able to argue across the table as equals and if necessary shout the Army down when required. For that reason alone, I can't see us getting rid of lots of senior officers in a fell swoop.

The fact that it would destroy career pyramids at a stroke and leave a time bomb ticking away in the form of PVRs and options being exercised as the economic climate eases, is another but equally imprortant consideration in this one.

[Old-Duffer]

....except ATC and stuff. Syerston, Halton, Stanbridge, Hendon, Fylingdales, Cosford, Henlow, Brampton, Uxbridge, Woodvale. There's my ten and several RLG like Church Fenton and Mona.

[Roland Pulfrew]

Syerston, Halton, Stanbridge, Hendon, Fylingdales, Cosford, Henlow, Brampton, Uxbridge, Woodvale. There's my ten and several RLG like Church Fenton and Mona.

OD

Not wishing to be picky or anything but...

Syerston - home of Central Gliding School
Cosford - home of Birmingham UAS
Woodvale - home of Liverpool UAS and Manchester UAS
Church Fenton - home of 85 (R) Sqn and Yorkshire UAS :ok:

[Toddington Ted]

"Church Fenton - home of 85 (R) Sqn and Yorkshire UAS"

Church Fenton - I can remember when the real 85 Sqn flew Meteor NF14s out of Chrich Fenton. Well no I can't actually but I wish I could! (JPs and Tucanos when I was there - lovely station, shame its only an RLG now.)

Given the figures regarding the numbers of wg cdrs I'm so glad I didn't make it that far, because I feel less guilty resettling as a sqn ldr - yeah right! Does this count as self-banter?

[mike_alpha_papa]

More for the list: Honington, Neatishead, Spadeadam, Buchan & Benbecula.

[andyy]

Via a work colleague last week I received a report which indicates that it is likely that there will be:

a 10,000 loss in head count

early retirement of Harrier & consequent closure of Wittering & Cottesmore

Training activities at Linton On Ouse and Leeming to transfer to Valley, presumably (although not stated) with closure of Linton, Leeming & their satellites.

[dctyke]

RAF Cowden....................... with a Chf Tech 'stn cdr' to boot!

http://www.rafweb.org/Stations/Images/Cowden.jpg

[5 Forward 6 Back]

Best build another annexe to the mess at Valley then.... and another outstation for the myriad of Tucano circuit sorties!!

[Dengue_Dude]

The figure of £6 billion was bandied.

Let's be silly and multiply it by a factor of 10 and call it £60 billion (bear with me).

Even THIS figure is peanuts when viewed against what the government 'borrowed' to shore up the banks.

I heard £1.4 'trillion' mentioned for the first time last week. A debt figure of £44,000 for every man, woman and child (and probably the illegals too) was mentioned - as a scale of perspective (must admit I didn't bother to do the maths). Yes I did £2.64 with 12 zeroes (assuming 60 million population).

Personally, I find THAT scary.

But hey, give the bankers their bonuses, otherwise they might leave - where?

[covec]

Melchett01

The RAF does NOT send only its Officers to War.

NCA? RAF Regt? TSW? Get a grip, man! How long have you been in?:)
-----------------------------------------------------
Back to the post:maybe the time has come to try to redefine our Defence Strategy?

Perhaps we should take this opportunity to downscale our aspirations and accept becoming more like say, The Netherlands, Norway, Denmark or Belgium? That does not mean no Typhoons or Carriers or Main Battle Tanks - lets just manage numbers in line with any new strategy better than we hitherto have done.

And ensure that the saved cash helps towards National Debt reduction and social frameworks like the NHS, Education and Law Enforcement AND THE INTELLIGENCE SERVICES.

This would mean causing massive heartache to our British sense of martial tradition, but would also (pleasingly) cause alot of heartache for those politicians who, as Douglas Hurd once said, perceive the UK Armed Forces as a fantastic export:we help politicians to "play the big men" at the World Table because of our ability to "punch above our weight".

[orca]

Chaps,

The figures from the MoD stats, (rounded and 'remembered from another window') accessible through open source, are a year old, but they show that the army has a total strength of 104,000 with officers of Lt Col and above numbering 2600. The RAF has a strength reducing to 41,000 and has 1700 officers of Wg Cdr and above. So, for whatever reason the RAF appears a little more top heavy. Interestingly though, the RAF are 160 officers short, the RN has 10 too many and the army has 690 officers over requirement.

If you fancy a look try www.dasa.mod.uk, or just search for officers numbers at mod.uk.

[Climebear]

Melchet

notwithstanding the current land-centric campaign

It may be land-centric (as COIN ops are); however, it is air power (delivered by air and aviation) that is giving our forces an assymetric advantage over the insurgets (especially in ISTAR, rapid battlespace mobility, and firepower).

[Melchett01]

Climbear,

Agree with you entirely there. In fact, I would go so far as to say that in terms of ISTAR, air power is absolutely fundamental to targeting insurgent networks, and the F3EA targeting cycle makes excellent use of it, ney, relies on it for much of its success.

I just wish that some of the less enlightened 'Brown jobs' could see the same thing, and get past the whole mindset of RAF = utterly useless, delayed AT and 'that white elephant Typhoon'.

That said, if you look at the forces we have deployed on HERRICK, and take out all the support elements - inc ISTAR, SH, AT, eng, admin, cooks, bottlewashers etc (all vital I know, but hear me out) - and look at the numbers in terms of actual prosecuting enemy targets by land or air, then it becomes very sobering and rather depressing when you realise that the entire MOD can now only effectively support a Bde+ and a couple of sqns (FJ / AH) theatre at any one time. And to do that, we have had to more or less mortgage defence for the next generation and get rid of any notion of maintaining a contingent capability. Yes, a rather simplistic view I know, and very rough numbers, but you get the general idea of just how bad a way Defence is actually in these days.

[minigundiplomat]

Melchett -

Can you take data samples from which ever planet youre on and forward them to NASA. It may save them launching an expensive probe so deep into outer space.

MGD

[Melchett01]

MGD -

I assume it is my contention that Defence can now only support one Bde+ and a couple of air / aviation sqns that you disagree with. Difficult to say though from your post it just sort of hangs there as an open statement. If it's the ISTAR comments at the start you disagree with, you best have a word in theatre, because that's what we're using.

But working on the assumption that you don't agree that Defence can't manage to field any more than a Bde+ and a couple of FJ / AH as specifically roled combat / teeth arms - and I did make that differentiation and the importance of the CS/CSS units quite clear - let's have a look at some rough numbers (all open source before anyone calls for black Omegas).

RC(S) is about 35,000 strong. We currently command it via 6 Div. How many troops in 6 Div? Not many at all - in fact 6 Div is little more than a trg / admin Div lifed until the end of 2011 when it is scheduled to be disbanded.

In terms of pure combat / teeth arms in RC(S) you have:

TF Helmand - UK
TF Leatherneck - USMC
TF Kandahar - Can
TF Stryker - US / Romania
TF Uruzgan - Dutch

Now of all those TFs, only Helmand is British, and even then its role has become more concentrated in a relatively small pocket of the Province. UK Plc certainly does not have a large number of teeth arm forces outside of Helmand BG.

Drilling down into UK Plc's contribution, look on the MOD website at which British units from across all 3 Services are involved in Herrick during the course of 2009. Many of the units on that list are not permanent fixtures, but rotate through theatre on short tours. But having one big consolidated list makes life easy and makes our contribution look numerically much bigger than it is at any one time.

http://http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/FactSheets/OperationsFactsheets/OperationsInAfghanistanBritishForces.htm

We have roughly 10,000 in country i.e a Division's worth of troops, which is probably at the lower end of what constitutes a Division. If you acknowledge that most of our fighting power is based around TF Helmand and its Battlegroups, then by the same token of what constitutes a Division, a Bde is generally thought to be between 2 - 5,000 troops. Now I haven't been in theatre since late 08, so may be a little out of date, but I would suggest that we don't quite have 5,000 teeth arm troops in Helmand, but I'm willing to play along and run with 5,000 as the upper end of a Bde-sized unit. That still leaves another 5,000 troops to provide support of all kinds - CS, CSS, ISTAR, intelligence, etc etc etc to the 5,000 combat troops.

Now how big are the collective UK armed forces? Lets call it a nice round 225,000, to include Reserves and those going through training. Based on these numbers, 10,000 troops equates to just under 5% of the total strength of the UK armed forces deployed in Afghanistan, of which probably only half i.e. 2.5% -Bde+ and AH / FJ are actaully there in a pure combat role.

And to allow us to sustain that the Army has had to go onto a permanent war footing with its Op Entirety, the RAF is cannibalising airframes left right and centre across all fleets whilst harmony figures are now only found in an History of the RAF, and the Navy have more or less deployed the majority of its air assets whilst the rest of its surface fleet can largely manage a couple of laps of the Channel before somone in the Treasury hauls them back in for costing too much to operate. And as for the MOD, they seem to be in a constant tail spin with trying to keep up with events. And whilst all this is going on, we aren't doing anything else. Surely even you have heard the cries of 'if we can't use it in Afghanistan in the next couple of years, we aren't interested / can't afford it'. Now how many troops has the USMC just deployed to Helmand at a stroke, and how many more US troops are coming in over the next few months? Puts things into perspective about how broken we actually are doesn't it.

So do you still disagree that the UK armed forces are in such a state that effectively our future has been mortgaged to support a numerically limited amount of combat power? Most of this has come through the UOR process rather than Core or organic capability; when our time in Afghanistan comes to an end and we have to sit down and look seriously at what we want to do and more importantly what we can do. We must also remember that there is a chance that much of this current UOR-derived capability will not make it into Core in the longer term, meaning that when HERRICK ends, if this capability is not brought into Core, Defence will potentially be looking at a serious regression in capability and will be significantly weakened as a viable tri-service organisation. And as much as it pains me to say it, even you with an endless supply of ammo wouldn't be able to sort this one out - although I would quite like to let you loose in Main Building and watch the feathers flying even more than usual!

[minigundiplomat]

It was nothing to to with all that guff, it was the placement of SH/AT in the same sentence as cooks and bottlewashers.

Nice in-depth retort though, wasted on a crewman!

[Melchett01]

Nice in-depth retort though, wasted on a crewman!

Oh I don't know - I deliberately kept the words short so you might understand it :E

And fair enough - I'll take it back about SH being in the same sentance as cooks and bottlewashers, but AT stays!

[occhips]

Cooks and Bottlewashers ......

Could i nearly be on the hook ? did anyone ask the cooks and bottlewashers if they want to be put in the same bracket as you..of course we would not be in a job with having such wonderous persons as you as our lords and masters!

God Bless you Guv'nor - I forgot that its only people like you that make the airforce work...may i doff my beret to you!

Knowing quite a few AT/SH mates and lots of FJ mates, i think you may be the odd one out here with a view point such as that..

lol - the team works!

My money is on Kxxxxxx closing by the way and Cxxxxxxxxx too! shame -

[minigundiplomat]

I think Kxxxxxx is likely too.

[Climebear]

Melchet

That still leaves another 5,000 troops to provide support of all kinds - CS, CSS, ISTAR, intelligence, etc etc etc to the 5,000 combat troops.

Careful there, you are in danger of sounding like a 'brown job' yourself there.

From the Air perspective, many of the UKs air assets (and association ACS and ACSS) are not[B specifically there to sp the UK's bde in Helmand. I now that this may be a shock to our friends in the geographically challenged land arms; but bear with me. The UK's air assets operate as part of the Coalition's Air Component. As such, they are tasked to sp non-UK ground forces in both RC(S) and the other RCs. Similarly, the RAF FP Wgs deployed provide FP for ISAF forces not, just UK ones.

Coalition Air should, and is, allocated on the basis of best platform to perform the task not on the basis of nationality of the ground troops supported. Hence why, on TELIC 1 much of the UK CAS around Basra was not provided by RAF fast air as that was being employed suporting the coalition's main effort further north on the advance to Baghdad.