Time to bin the Red Arrows

[Trenchard Brat]

Think with the demise of the Harrier Force and the biting cuts in Defence spending, its about time we got rid of the last great ego trip for fast jet aircrew and bin the Reds once and for all, after all we are going to have a lack of frontline units soon to draw crews from and im sure the wearing of a scarlet suit whilst all your mates are in Desert DPs is going to be a sign of im alright Jack to others, there is no place in a reduced RAF for a flying circus whilst COs of frontliners beg cap in hand for extra fuel to carry out training sorties...........nice whilst it lasted but.........time to go im afraid
(plus the jets now need 25hrs maintainance for every hour in the air)

[Whenurhappy]

Next we'll be wearing overalls and breaking wind in the Palaces of the Mighty, Comrade.

Vasco di Gama famously stated:

'Where there is no vision, the people perish'.

The Red Arrows (funded largely through industry) are HUGE ambassadors for the RAF and UK PLC. Nett effect of binning them?

[SRENNAPS]

Trenchard Brat

Wow! I bet morale is really high where you work, especially if you are in charge.:}:}

Keep it up.

[Climebear]

My understanding is that the recomendation was made to cut the Reds by the military during the SDSR; however, our political masters chose not to take it.

[Postman Plod]

While the Red Arrows exist, the public see that all is right and well with the Air Force and that defence cuts can't possibly be causing any issues for the front line, or for capabilities.

SAR is the same, but they're not getting rid of it, they're only privatising it, so its all OK!

[Lord Trenchards Brat]

TB

A well researched name there. :ugh:

Sorry thread creep.....

[orgASMic]

At least you can 'Lord' it over him :ok:

[spectre150]

the last great ego trip for fast jet aircrew

the wearing of a scarlet suit whilst all your mates are in Desert DPs is going to be a sign of im alright Jack to others

flying circus

Thanks for you reasoned, unemotional and considered input TB.

[GeeRam]

While the Red Arrows exist, the public see that all is right and well with the Air Force and that defence cuts can't possibly be causing any issues for the front line, or for capabilities.

:D

Which is exactly why the Govt won't bin them...and probably why the top brass wanted to...?

[orgASMic]

The Reds will continue to be put up as a savings option in each Planning Round, safe in the knowledge that they will not be taken.



Just like HMY BRITANNIA!

[oldgrubber]

Do I want the Reds to go? No.
Do I think they should go? Yes.
If the Reds actually filled a role other than display flying you could at least argue for their existence. The fact is that I have heard all you obviously knowledgeable chaps, going on about “cutting your cloth”, and taking austerity measures etc, as justification for the emasculation of the RN and it’s essential (that should get a bite) fixed wing capability and the RAF with it’s Nimrod etc.
The dripping about the reduction of RAF fixed wing fast jet squadrons on this forum makes me laugh when you read (on the same forum) that we should keep the Reds “because” (insert excuse here).
Over the years the military have been able to display their aircraft and men for the large part without resorting to unique display squadrons or units.
I refer to Vixen displays by “Fred’s five”, “Simon’s Sircus”; later the helicopter displays by the “Sharks”, the “Whales” and the army Lynx more recently. Excellent singleton displays of jets and helicopters have come and gone and as memory serves, they were all pretty good and all from “active” squadrons. (yes I know I’ve missed many other great display teams out, start a thread if it worries you).
Yes the Reds are great, but so was the Field Gun Run and the Field Gun was cut because the leaning of manpower meant that a purpose manned display unit was no longer feasible, (we just couldn’t spare the manpower). The Royal Yacht went years ago and you could argue that as a national icon and “ambassador” she was better known than the Reds (I’ll bite orgASMic). If these are the austere years then to use some else’s phrase; “cut your cloth to suit”.

Cheers all

[jindabyne]

Do I want the Reds to go? No.
Do I think they should go? Yes.

Having been more than a casual supporter over the years, I'm now finding it somewhat difficult to disagree.

[Flightmech]

I'm not from a military background, but as much as I have loved watching them over the years, how can they be justified what with the current defence cutbacks??:(

[Sideshow Bob]

So what would be the nett effect on military output in binning them?

Also, just how much do they cost once sponsorship is taken into account?

We did without them for the first 46 years, but that led to several independent teams (and a few more accidents).

Would a Sqn now have the budget (or aircraft) to form an individual team? Probably not.

Personally I think that if it's a choice between front line capability and them then they should go.

If they can self fund through sponsorship, then let them stay.

[Out Of Trim]

Might as well bin the whole Armed Forces now!

We haven't got enough left be credible anymore.. Sad but true!

The welfare state that supports thousands of feckless, do nothing but collect dole families out there and useless bankers have reduced this Country to one hardly worth fighting for anyway!

Yeah I'm fairly pi:mad:d off with what we have become. :sad:

[philrigger]

;)

If the RAF were to bin the Reds, how much more money would there be available to keep the Harrier flying? Not much I think. Just a thought.

[Postman Plod]

I think I share your thoughts there OOT. Always been a big fan of the Reds, but given what we've lost and will continue to lose, to continue to pretend all is well in the RAF is pure folly.

Defence no longer matters. Once we're out of Afghanistan, more cuts will come, and we will barely be left with a self defence force. I bet that won't stop the politicians from trying to flex their muscles, but "can do" will become "can't do," and I hope to god that the masters in charge of the forces will have the guts to say no, or else we'll find ourselves very much and likely bloodily on the losing side.

[Jumping_Jack]

Just seen a PR11 submission to bin the Gun Troop, RHA. Maybe they and the Reds could do a joint final show where they demonstrate a pack howizter taking down a Hawk! (all carefully choreographed of course!) :E

[Winco]

gentlemen,

Please don't get succered in to thinking that chopping the Arrows will save us any money whatsoever, because it won't. The Red Arrows are the only RAF asset and probably UK military asset that actually makes money for UK PLC.
Getting rid of them might seem logical in these difficult times, but it would be a mistake of the first order, and wouldn't provide a single extra penny for the front line.

[foldingwings]

Amen to that, Winco! You are spot on.

Foldie:ok:

[Postman Plod]

Winco, you're right, it wouldn't. For me, its not about saving money though. Having a 10 ship display team in the current climate is like fiddling whilst Rome burns.

Why would it be a mistake to get rid of them though? What exactly would be lost by not having them? (beyond PR, where retaining the Red Arrows is arguably working against the RAFs best interests right now, but working very well for the government!)

You know what? I don't really want the Red Arrows to go. I don't think they will go. However until they are seriously threatened, then the general public will NOT pay any attention to these defence cuts, our dwindling capability, and the state of our forces.

[oldgrubber]

Give us the sums then Winco.
I understand that sponsorship is used but I bet it barely covers the hotel bills.
A statement like that is hard to believe when you hold the cost of running a squadron up against body armour for your RAF regiment or medical treatment for the wounded

[Sideshow Bob]

Winco,

If it makes money for UK plc then let them pay for it not the defence budget. I'd rather see my mates and I in a job than generate publicity for BAe

[Out Of Trim]

PP I think you're onto something. The CAS is running the RAF and should bin the Red Arrows; explaining to the General Public that the Front Line is at stake!

The Government will of course be embarrassed and so they should be!

Seems like a good plan to me.. :ok:

[Postman Plod]

Meh, its not a good plan. Its a risky plan! The good plan is to keep the Red Arrows, and properly fund defence, and get the banks who caused all this to cough up the money they've nicked from us!

[Flap62]

Winco,

Are you really suggesting that the entire cost of keeping 10+ ageing airframes servicable, the fuel costs associated with a year round programme, the manning costs associated with the entire pilot and ground-crew contingent, hotel costs etc is covered by what BAe, Ping and a few others are paying in a harsh commercial environment?

Oh, and don't bother with the PR and recruiting costs arguement. That cannot be justified when redundency and re-roleing looms large and the training system is clogged with pilots who will never fly. Do you really believe joe public has looked at the last few years of public equipment defficiencies, cuts to man-power and front line equipment but still thinks, "you know what, all's well with the world cos we've still got the Reds?"

I personally think they are fantastic but are looking increasingly like a luxury.

[Tankertrashnav]

I'm pretty sure that for the average Joe and his family at an airday/openday, the things that make an impression are the big noisy aircraft (eg the Vulcan) or showstoppers like The Red Arrows. Four single piston whatevers from the Royal Ruritanian Air Force aerobatic display team may appeal to the cognoscenti, but most people will be looking at their watches and waiting for the aforementioned.

Assuming the Vulcan's future is on a shoogly peg (Magnus B will translate) that just leaves the Reds. Bin them and you may as well bin open days.

Now there's an idea!

[NutherA2]

How about moving them to RAF Rhosneigr to join the rest of the Hawks, closing Scampton & keeping Lossie and Leuchars both operational?:)

[ShyTorque]

Might as well bin the whole Armed Forces now!

We haven't got enough left be credible anymore.. Sad but true!

Yes, let's bin everything and just be nice to everyone....so we don't upset anyone else with an Air Force. Or a Navy, Army......police force, NHS etc etc.

[N.HEALD]

As Winco correctly says binning the Reds wont mean any more money goes to active front line squadrons, but will IMHO opinion be a big loss to the service and Great Britain Plc. far more money is wasted each year by the MOD than the Reds cost, lets bin a few overpaid civil serpants and cut out the waste there. A large part of the Reds cost is covered by industry and display appearance fees etc, and they are still a great ambassador for the RAF and the UK world wide. IF binning the Reds did mean more money actually did go to front line squadrons then it could be argued that in these austere times it had merit, but anyone that thinks it would is dreaming.

[Winco]

oldgrubber

I'm sorry, I can't give you the figures, but the costs of the Red Arrows to the Military budget is minimal, it's tiny. Hotel bills are paid for by the airshow/display organisers. Fuel is very heavily subsidised by Total and BAe and others very heavily sponsor other areas. But as for the exact figures, then you will have to do some digging around - I'm sure they are all out there somewhere.

But the point I am trying to make is that just cutting them will not affect what gets to the front line at all. Does anyone seriously think that the savings made from disbanding the Red Arrows (or anything else for that matter) goes into the MOD bank account? Does anyone seriously think that is the case? The hard fact is that the savings will go to the treasury, and they will be spent on asylum seekers, benefit scroungers and the likes. IT WILL NOT GO TO THE MILITARY, LET ALONE THE FRONT LINE.

Flap62
I don't think that the public think that all is good with the RAF simply because the Red Arrows have not been disbanded. I doubt if there are many people in the country who haven't heard of the Nimrod debacle and they will have seen today that we said goodbye to Harrier. I just can't see them sitting at home thinking 'ah, all must be well with the RAF - we still have the Red Arrows!'

If we want to make some serious savings, then lets stop the wastage at Main Building on fancy chairs, original oil paintings, high quality TVs everywhere and God knows what else. At least most of the UK populus get the opportunity to see the Red Arrows, unlike main Building!!

[davejb]

It's not about actual savings, it's about the RAF saying 'you've cut beyond the bone' and doing something the general public will finally notice, and if it embarrasses the government then it's about time somthing did! Also, perhaps, it's about raising awareness that the RAF is a fighting service and that 'good PR' comes second to retaining capability...why retain the ability to do PR when you find it increasingly hard to maintain a semblance of what is probably referred to as 'core capacities' these days?

As for recruiting - forgive me for that snorting noise, but considering the number of people about to be chopped I find 'boosts recruiting' to be beyond belief.

Like Oldgrubber I enjoy watching the team, and I don't want them to go, but I think maybe they ought to.

[Flap62]

but the costs of the Red Arrows to the Military budget is minimal



I just have a HUGE gut feeling that that is horse but as I can't prove otherwise I shall retire and leave it at that.

[kokpit]

With a 'team' of just over 100 personnel, and looking at an average capitation rate of £30,000 (although I suspect it would be far higher), the yearly manning costs alone are £3 Million.

[Blighter Pilot]

Hotel bills are paid for by the airshow/display organisers


Not entirely true - both RAFAT and BBMF have their own UINs for which hotel bills and crew subsistence are claimed against.

Units supporting Tucano, Typhoon and Tutor display teams also have to cough up for most of the expenses accrued by their crews and support personnel.

Yes, some of the costs for RAFAT are met by industry, but not all.

Apart from the minimal cost of BBMF perhaps we should pull all our display aircraft and really let joe public and the airshow circuit know how bad it is.

[Postman Plod]

To say that the public don't believe that all is well in the RAF is being naive.

They know what they've been told in the mainstream media. Many of them aren't like us - they don't go looking at the REAL story, they don't encounter the military on a daily basis, they're not even vaguely aware of what the forces really do. Its all about boots on the ground in Afghanistan. They maybe see shiny red jets once a year and go Ooo. If they had a clue about the capabilities we've cut and are going to cut, and understood the real implications of it, then perhaps they'd take notice!! However nobody would take notice of the public anyway.

The Media aren't interested. They want gossip and glamour and scandal and sales. They don't want dull boring reality! The media have their own agenda, which may or may not match the political agenda or belief of the day, but certainly doesn't work in the public interest, or try to understand the REAL story. However cutting the Red Arrows would give them gossip and a "public interest" story that would get them a few more readers one day.

However they'll both be fed some nice polished politician who actually knows nothing and has no knowledge of their department, or of real life chasing their next expense claim and vote on the telly telling them it'll all be fine. They have some nice polished CGS/CAS/1st Sea Lord doing what they're told because thats their job and telling them that the services will cope like they always have and that its the right decision. The dissenters (I dunno, perhaps recently retired Admirals, Generals, Air Marshals, Security Ministers, etc - those who CAN now speak up) are dismissed as being out of touch (my arse they're out of touch!) and people believe it. You might even get a Defence Minister accidentally making it clear he thinks the cuts are going to far and that he DOES get it, and DOES understand the implications, but he gets spun and threatened back into line in fear of his career.

So why would the general public REALLY think anything differently?

Besides, they'll have a lot more to worry about when they get made redundant themselves and find the only "job" they can get is a voluntarily one running the council services they were getting paid to run 6 months beforehand. So maybe they don't actually even care... and nobody would take any notice of them anyway. Its been a long time since the polticians and the press actually gave a monkeys about who they're supposed to be representing!

So maybe binning the Red Arrows would make people sit up and take notice. My worry is that it might not have the effect we'd hope for!

[Lonewolf_50]

far more money is wasted each year by the MOD than the Reds cost

I'll offer the same observation in re the Blue Angles flown by the USN and the DoD.

Yes, the Blues aren't cheap ... which points to some serious issues at the Pentagon.

With a 'team' of just over 100 personnel, and looking at an average capitation rate of £30,000 (although I suspect it would be far higher), the yearly manning costs alone are £3 Million.

The money put into the Hawks (like with the Blues) is an investment in keeping the public engaged/happy with their armed forces, and in providing a non trivial PR function, which aids in recruiting, among other things.

They can also be folded into diplomatic endeavors, depending on what a given Secretary of State (or UK's equivalent ... Foreign Minister?) wishes to do in that arena.

Tip of the cap to the Red Arrows, who I first enjoyed at an air show, Andrews AFB, in 1983. The mostly American crowd loved them.

They are an excellent flight demonstration team, and professionals who represent the colors, overseas or at home, with grace and style.

[Siggie]

Binning them won't save money, but scrapping them may bring it to the attention of the public just how strapped we are (and cause huge embarrassment to the government.)

If morale in your section depends on the Red Arrows being in existence, then I wouldn't be too quick to criticize others.

[jindabyne]

PP

Yup, I'll go along with all of that.

[Herc-u-lease]

Forgive me for stating the obvious but I genuinely believe the Reds are way more than a PR and recruiting tool. The message the Reds send out to those nations who might consider tampering with us is far more valuable than the 3-5M quid that it may/may not cost. demonstrating to those nations that we have incredibly well trained pilots who are very disciplined and capable of excellent formation work goes a long way to being an effective deterrent. it conveys a message that we have the same crews that can formation fly to bomb you very well! If you think i'm wrong consider why the USMC has a drill display team - to demonstrate to potential adversaries that they have well disciplined soldiers who are exceptional at what they do - fighting as well as rifle drill.

one could argue that the FCO should bear the cost of the Reds for that reason, but personally i think they are a pretty good deterrent that should be borne from the defence budget. we may be shrinking as an air force but we still need to publicly send a message that we have some of the best trained crews and equipment in the world. I still believe we are a bloody good air force (despite the cuts and capability gaps) and if we were to bin the reds for the sake of no more than 5M we might as well call it day.

H-u-L

[vecvechookattack]

The Reds will continue to be put up as a savings option in each Planning Round, safe in the knowledge that they will not be taken.



Just like HMY BRITANNIA!

Not quite the same shipmate. HMY was in need of a refit which had been costed at aprox £chuffin' Millions.... Totally unaffordable ...hence it had to go.

The Red arrows will continue until the Hawk goes out of service.

[Rory57]

Bin the Reds, fund a Sea Harrier for the R.N.H.F. (And a shed full of spares to keep it going).

[oldgrubber]

Winco,
Thanks for your full and concise answer and I admit I wasn't really interested in the figures, we all know you can't make money displaying a military team, it would be nice if you could.
I also admit you're right about the money saved not being used for our servicemen and women, lets face it, how many times did we actually cut our navy to pay for the carriers, only to be told that we had to lose something in the SDSR to pay for them again!
The point is that despite wanting to keep the best display team in the world, there comes a time when the money just isn't available any more. I've seen (from my lowly vantage point) the difficulty getting budget holders to pay for something they consider "not theirs", so I can see what you mean about the money saved going into something else rather than the military. They've picked the MoD pocket in the past to fund all sorts of civvy related stuff so a few million quid from the Reds would soon disappear. None of that means the Reds shouldn't be got rid of, rather, it means that the only thing saving the Reds is emotion and flag waving, and that will only get you so far (ask the crew of the Ark).
When it finally happens and you hear the next day about a government incentive to help Guinea Pig breeders fight stress by providing respite breaks to Bermuda; just remember, you called it!

Cheers

[Always a Sapper]

Here's an idea for you....

Keep the Reds, but bin the frame they are currently zooming around in and give them the Harriers instead, there's a few spare now after all...

Result...
1. A whole new dimension to the display ... up 'n' down as well as just zooming around (even though they do it so well).

2. Keeps the Harrier in service and skills current which is no bad thing, you never know when an aircraft with it's unique abilities could be needed again in anger.

3. Less skill fade to cause upsets when the ships finally (if ever) come into service.

[The B Word]

Sapper

Harrier "full cost" is about £35k per hour and Hawk is about £10k - go figure!

Nice idea though!

[Postman Plod]

Well said oldgrubber! Always a Sapper - Never happen, but I'd pay to see that! :ok:

[Laarbruch72]

I wish some would stop going on about the reds being a recruitment tool. We don't need to recruit. There are currently at least 250 people applying for each pilot post. And the most pertinent point abutting that is that we currently have a large surfeit of pilots.

Being a 20 year RAF man I'm loathe to see the reds go, but if we're truly going to be down to single figures in FJ squadron numbers, then I'm sorry but they have to go. We can't afford a squadron of FJ who are there to bolster virtually non existent recruitment, non supportive industry, or good old fasioned PR. The PR role is doing us no good anyway, as argued in previous posts.

Herc-U-Lease: If you think a tight diamond 9 formation has the likes of say, Jong Il or Mugabe quaking in their boots, with nothing offensive to back it up, then you live on a different planet mate. The only formation they'd be afraid of is a wing of armed bombers overflying their capital, and we lost that capability a long time ago. Even then, these nutcases don't necessarily respect what you have. Nutcase is nutcase. Look at what North Korea are up to despite what the US are deploying in the region. You cannot face up to despots with a red painted flying circus.

[Finningley Boy]

Hey Laarbruch 72, don't forget that they keep the inflatable Red Arrow Hawk ballon business going! That's got to be worth something, look at how many young shavers race around at airshows, in all weathers, wielding a blow read arrow. You wouldn't deny them now... would you!?:ok:


FB:)

[Winco]

I think we all agree that getting rid of the Arrows will make zero difference to the guys and girls on the front line, or indeed anywhere else in our Armed Services. It will simply enable to government to say that they have saved another few million pounds and fund another crazy idea to save the Barking Toad or whatever (sorry - Derek & Clive!)

And whilst I can see that getting rid of them might embarrass the government significantly (or at least should do), that is not the way to do it. Once they have gone, that's it, they are gone for ever! Which is one of the reasons why I continually groan on about our VSOs doing and saying absolutely nothing in public about the cuts.

Has anyone on PPrune heard a single RAF VSO stand up in public and critisised the decision to get rid of Nimrod? or Harrier? or even made a faintest public statement about our Forces being at breaking point because of continuous cuts??

The answer is NO. The VSO's have done and said nothing at all, and it is for that reason I believe that Joe Public thinks all is well, certainly with the RAF. My colleagues in the civilian aviation world continually ask why the RAF doesn't have any leaders with ba££s enough to tell the public how it really is, and I think that is our biggest problem.

Getting rid of the Arrows will of course save money, but it will be negligeable in the overall scheme of things. It might embarrass the government for about half a second - but no more. If they are happy to get rid of the Ark, then they will have no shame or concern about binning anything frankly, including the Arrows. I suspect that even they might appreciate however, that getting rid of them will effectively achieve nothing.

[Postman Plod]

Problem is that VSOs are not allowed to get involved in politics, and questioning a political decision would be just that. So they're "fighting" with both arms tied behind their backs, and are seen as weak and only there for the pension.

Yes, they could have the courage of their convictions and speak out or resign, but the government of the day will spin themselves out of trouble by blaming the previous government and that all is well, and the media will miss the point completely or be dealing with some catastrophic celebrity scandal involving goats or something.

So I guess they have to rely on those already drawing their pensions to speak up for them. However they get shot down by the politicians for being out of touch, they get shot down by the press for being irrelevant, and they get shot down by the forces for speaking out when our job is to follow orders!

How can they win? How can the forces EVER have an effective voice?

[anotherthing]

If we want to make some serious savings, then lets stop the wastage at Main Building on fancy chairs, original oil paintings, high quality TVs everywhere and God knows what else. At least most of the UK populus get the opportunity to see the Red Arrows, unlike main Building!!
What a ridiculous argument - it's almost childlike in its quality. it is basically saying 'other people waste money so why should I do something to save it?'!!!

Whilst I totally agree that there are savings to be made elsewhere, that does not mean that until they are made, the RAF (insert any agency in here) should overlook The Reds (again insert any 'surplus' item here).

As mentioned above HMY Britannia was binned as she was coming to the end of her life without a huge, expensive refit. Yet everyone harps on about the good PR that The Reds do, almost as if it justifies the cost. The UK is a sea-going nation first and foremost. We are an island that relies on the sea for the majority of its trade lines, yet we binned Britannia, something that was a symbol of our heritage as well as a great bit of PR and a projection of our will and ability to be a force on the seas.

The Reds are not indespensible!

The Navy will be announcing swinging cuts in personnel in the New Year, I've heard some of the figures being bandied about and it is frightening.

As much as I think The Reds are good at what they do, I'm afraid that in light of what is happpening across alll three Services, their position is untenable.

[Samuel]

Don't all national military aerobatic display teams claim to be "the best in the world"? They can't all be right, so at the risk of being judgemental, on what basis is the criterion set?

[Winco]

anotherthing

'it is basically saying 'other people waste money so why should I do something to save it?'!!!'

What utter tosh! I'm not saying that at all.

The Red Arrows display to and are seen by millions of people throughout the year - how many get to see the original oil paintings in main building?

The Red Arrows contribute millions to the British economy throughout the year - What do the fancy chairs in main building contribute?

Lets cut waste and save money by all means, but it needs to be waste, and the Red Arrows are NOT waste, far from it. Fancy paintings, outrageously expensive chairs and a TV in every room in main building I would suggest IS waste.

[F3sRBest]

The CAS is running the RAF

Actually he doesn't!

We don't need to recruit. There are currently at least 250 people applying for each pilot post

Typically aircrew ego-centric view.... clearly the RAF only needs pilots!

[Laarbruch72]

^^ That was my quote. But I'm a Sergeant in a ground trade, so I can't be accused of being typically aircrew centric.

Like most ground tradesmen I didn't join the RAF because I'd seen the Reds. I joined because I was in the air cadets and really enjoyed my visits to RAF stations, plus the work experience days that went with that, so I suppose you could argue that the spaceys are in fact an important recruiting tool in their own right... as effective as the reds? More effective? Who knows, it's a difficult thing to quantify.

[F3sRBest]

Laarbruch,

My apologies, but you therefore must be aware of how difficult it is to get good quality recruits in the tech trades and the RAF needs to keep recruiting at the bottom end even if it is are reducing, otherwise it will be in the same shambles it was in the 90s

[Postman Plod]

Arguably saying the Red Arrows are a recruitment tool is just as aircrew-centric than giving an example of applicants to aircrew posts!

I'd also agree that the ATC is the public face of the RAF now (There are more Air Cadets than regular RAF - I'm sure you don't like the fact, neither do I!), and probably likely to become the main focus for recruitment efforts (if they're needed). So recruiting into the RAF is never going to be a problem, whatever the trade, particularly given the reducing numbers.

[Sideshow Bob]

I think we all agree that getting rid of the Arrows will make zero difference to the guys and girls on the front line

As the money to run them comes from the 22 Gp budget COST HERE (http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/42034/response/104203/attach/4/FebMar%2010%20FOI%20BBMF%20Red%20Arrows%20u.pdf) If disbanded, this could be redistributed. I think £6ish million would actually make some difference whether it remains in 22Gp or is passed to 1Gp or 2Gp.

The Red Arrows contribute millions to the British economy throughout the year This is only perceived, it is a PR tool and there is no concrete evidence to this. If it boosts BAe profit then BAe should pay for it not just sponsorship.

[Blighter Pilot]

So RAFAT Budget = 3 x BBMF Budget (£6.1M vs £1.9M)

I know what I'd rather keep!

BBMF aircrew also hold front-line and/or instructional duties - not a permanent 3 year post to the Reds.

BBMF seem to be a lot more value for money:ok:

[Red Line Entry]

Sideshow,

Nope - if there is a Stage 3 Option run on the Reds and it is taken, then the AIR Control Total is reduced.

In other words, the money saved by binning the Reds goes to 'Defence', and is not spread around the rest of the Gp or the Cmd.

[Herc-u-lease]

Herc-U-Lease: If you think a tight diamond 9 formation has the likes of say, Jong Il or Mugabe quaking in their boots, with nothing offensive to back it up, then you live on a different planet mate. The only formation they'd be afraid of is a wing of armed bombers overflying their capital, and we lost that capability a long time ago. Even then, these nutcases don't necessarily respect what you have. Nutcase is nutcase. Look at what North Korea are up to despite what the US are deploying in the region. You cannot face up to despots with a red painted flying circus.


I agree to some extent with what you said, especially regarding the likes of Kim Jong Il. You cannot just have the Reds and no real air force to back it up - that would be all mouth and no trousers. A display only team would be akin to the royal Jordanian Falcons - great display but not exactly known as a military power. But as a counter to the argument of the Reds as a flying circus, you can have the best hardware in the world but if you are unable to demonstrate your ability to use it effectively, then what is the point? (think Saudi Arabia; great kit, questionable pilot abilities).

I maintain my opinion the Reds are the single biggest peacetime air deterrent we have. I can think of few other peacetime efforts which show the capabilities of our crews. What other methods do we have to very publicly demonstrate the aviation capabilities of the RAF's finest FJ pilots on the world stage? Kim Jong Il may not think twice about the Reds, but if we came to blows with NK I'd be willing to bet his CAS at least recognizes the quality of our pilots.

[cazatou]

Laarbruch 72

The Air Cadet Organisation has played an essential part in keeping the RAF in the Public eye over the last 70+ years. As you will know the ATC was preceeded by the Air Defence Cadet Corps prior to WW2. That Organisation was adopted by the Air Ministry to give pre-conscription training to male youths aged between 14 and 18 years- hence the change of name.

I can foresee the Air Cadet Organisation being forced to return to being a non sponsored organisation in the current economic climate. Recruitment to the Armed Forces will be severely curtailed over the coming years and it will be extremely difficult to justify expenditure on a large Air Cadet Organisation rather than on a contracting RAF.

My old ATC Sqn (1107) no longer exists; nor does the RAF Unit with the same number - that was a Marine Craft Unit which disbanded more than 40 years ago; helicopters could do the job faster and with a smaller crew.

[Sideshow Bob]

Red Line,

At least it stays in defence and not back into the public purse thus can be used for front line options.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

I'm a great supporter of the Reds and appreciate that they do great things for the Country and Services in particular. They are also a great motivator and source of pride in the Air Force. I also think that any Defence money saved would amount to bugger all.

That said, I'm now beginning to think that CAS should give (not just offer)them up as an, albeit mythical, "saving". Why? because for as long as they exist, the Great British ballotbox fodder will continue to believe that all is well. They currently seem to have no grasp that the Air Force (and the Navy) currently has its a**e hanging out of its trousers. It is up poo creek and everybody outside is pretending we will muddle through as we (OK, I'm not light blue) always have.

Make a serious statement; gash them. Similar with ARK; let the Name die with her. Let the Public know that their comfort blankets have gone to the ragbone man.

It grieves me to have written that.

[Out Of Trim]

GBZ - That's pretty much along the lines that I'm thinking and it grieves me too!

The General Public do not realise - just yet.. that the cuts have now gone too far and capabilities have been lost; maybe for ever.

You can only cut the forces so far, before their existence is just a facade with nothing holding it together.

Maybe they can still talk the talk, but thats about as far as it goes unless you start threatening the use of Nuclear Weapons at a much earlier stage!


It's enough to make you weep.. :{

[Q-RTF-X]

The General Public do not realise - just yet.. that the cuts have now gone too far and capabilities have been lost; maybe for ever.

You can only cut the forces so far, before their existence is just a facade with nothing holding it together.

There can be little doubt that present circumstances require a BOLD STATEMENT drawing attention to the present sad demise of capability. Top management should junk the Red Arrows as a means of bringing the realities of the present situation home to roost with the general public. I have the greatest respect for the Red Arrows, the big picture however is in serous need of a dramatic message;that being, under the circumstances WE HAVE BEEN DRIVEN, BY REPEATED FINANCIAL CULLING OF CAPABILITY, to RETIRE THE RED ARROWS. Such a move needs be clearly announced, by every means necessary. It may just open a flicker of focus on what is really going on and, at the same time, it is quite possible there will be political intervention to retain RA that may just open a chink of light on other issues. Have we anybody bold enough to make this statement ???

[stuckgear]

As Winco correctly says binning the Reds wont mean any more money goes to active front line squadrons, but will IMHO opinion be a big loss to the service and Great Britain Plc. far more money is wasted each year by the MOD


Funny you mention it N.HEALD....


MoD 'wasting £6 billion a year'

The Ministry of Defence is wasting £6 billion a year on bureaucracy and overspending, it has been claimed. Inefficiency at the organisation is responsible for inadequate supplies of equipment that have led to the deaths of dozens of servicemen, senior officials allegedly complained.

Overhauling the way the department is managed could save up to £4 billion, or 20 per cent of its operating costs, according to a report by Deloitte, the consultants.

A further £2 billion a year from its annual £43 billion budget is wasted through overspending on equipment orders, causing equipment to reach troops late, or not arrive at all, an internal report found.

MoD 'wasting £6 billion a year' - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/8200304/MoD-wasting-6-billion-a-year.html)


Side Note:

The General Public do not realise - just yet.. that the cuts have now gone too far and capabilities have been lost; maybe for ever.

You can only cut the forces so far, before their existence is just a facade with nothing holding it together.


RAF Dropping to 6 Fast-Jet Units - Defense News (http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=5211718&c=EUR&s=AIR)

Britain may halve its fast-jet fleet by 2020 or so, according to the commanding officer of the Royal Air Force's No. 1 Group.

"It will be a six-squadron world; that's what's on the books."

[F3sRBest]

So recruiting into the RAF is never going to be a problem

Actually it's been a problem for years in certain areas, issue is not quantity but quality.... and reducing size doesn't necessarily make that any better!

[BEagle]

What a defeatist bunch of crap has been written on this thread.

The Reds are about the only contact the Great Unwashed has with the RAF; take that away and there'd be absolutely no presence in the public eye, apart from ever more TV news items about sad repatriations from Bliar's Afghanistani meat grinder...

It's more important than ever that the RAFAT should present a 'Business as usual' front to the GenPub, so would all the Uriah Heap handwringing defeatists, whingeing baldricks and others please sod off and moan elsewhere.

I'm very happy to pay my taxes towards RAFAT; long may the Reds continue!

[jindabyne]

BEags,

Sorry, can't agree.

[gareth herts]

The Reds are about the only contact the Great Unwashed has with the RAF; take that away and there'd be absolutely no presence in the public eye, apart from ever more TV news items about sad repatriations from Bliar's Afghanistani meat grinder...

It's more important than ever that the RAFAT should present a 'Business as usual' front to the GenPub, so would all the Uriah Heap handwringing defeatists, whingeing baldricks and others please sod off and moan elsewhere.

Hear hear. The Reds, along with the other RAF airshow performers, do at least remind the general public that we actually have an Air Force.

I think it's more important that they do this and personnel are given the opportunity to meet with the general public and engage with them at airshows rather than just withdraw in to a hole to make a point of some kind.

Scrapping The Reds would indeed have a hugely negative impact with the GP - but possibly not in the way that those of you advocating might think.

[jindabyne]

BEags,

Have you written to your MP recently, expressing your alarm? Perhaps you could also pass on our concerns

And your answer?

[airpolice]

Beagle, as always I bow to your knowledge of facts relating to all aspects of aviation.....however, this is more of an opinion and oddly enough I disagree with your view.

I think that the time has come for the Reds to go. We can't really have any sacred cows anymore.

Given the money that it costs to run the team, how do we get everyone else to tighten their belt? Inside and outside the RAF, we need to be seen to be taking the same hit as the rest of the world, particularly the public, who fund the whole thing.

The RAF don't need elitist recruiting tools, and as for them being a showcase for British Industry, yeah right. The same folk who made the A380 engine and the Nimrod? The people who "launched" a Submarine today but due to "technical issues" it failed to get wet.

The farce of a contract that makes it cheaper to buy the carriers than cancel the contract, and the huge amount of money paid up front for the MRa4 that the customer walked away from.... I think that tells the potential international customers more about British Industry than watching the Reds will.


The RAF could save the cost of the Reds many times over by just stopping all the waste, but how do we get anyone to take a hit on SSSA when they see the circus staying in top hotels?

Helicopters stored at Shawbury for the want of a dashboard, Tornados with holes drilled in the wrong bit of the spar, MRa4, Valley producing Pilots at a fantastic rate for years and yet the number of planes decrereasing all the time. Leeming gets resurfaced in time for their F3s to retire.

There's nothing difficult about seeing where the money is wasted. Over four years training to get an F3 Pilot CR and then he leaves at the end of his first operational tour.

The loss of the Reds would be a bit of a statement, their continueed absence would be a loss to the general public. However, I think the time has come to take such a hit.

Mostly, since we would all feel strongly about it, when we were missing them we would all find it easier to focus on finding examples of waste to put in Wikileaks or Private Eye, to highlight exactly what the RAF are funding with the savings from having given up the worlds finest aerobatic display team.

[Q-RTF-X]

airpolice

Your views and sentiments are similar to mine though expressed more eloquently; well delivered :D

BEagle

What a defeatist bunch of crap has been written on this thread.


I think you will find more than a few who advocate sacrificing the RAFAT do so as a possible means of drawing the attention of the General Public to the sad plight of the Armed Forces in general and the Royal Air Force in particular, thus is a deliberate strategy in the hope of drawing attention to a serious issue; I would not consider such to be defeatist.

The Reds are about the only contact the Great Unwashed has with the RAF; take that away and there'd be absolutely no presence in the public eye

It's more important than ever that the RAFAT should present a 'Business as usual' front to the GenPub

In effect, you suggest following a path of what amounts to highly expensive public deception. Things are far from ‘Business as usual’, why pretend otherwise? That sort of activity is better left to the politicians who are much more proficient in attempts to hoodwink the “Great Unwashed”

[Rigger1]

What about combining the reds with 100Sqn? You could close a unit, big cost savings, and also 'protect' the reds as they would have a valuable day to day role.

[tmmorris]

Helicopters stored at Shawbury for the want of a dashboard, Tornados with holes drilled in the wrong bit of the spar, MRa4, Valley producing Pilots at a fantastic rate for years and yet the number of planes decrereasing all the time. Leeming gets resurfaced in time for their F3s to retire.

The sad thing is that the Great Unwashed, of which I am very nearly a member, don't understand anything about the scandalous political interference in defence procurement and think the reason it's crap is that the forces can't get it right - so they deserve to take a hit. Operating as I do on the fringes of the forces (cadets) I am amazed by the waste and inefficiency - the Army are worse, as far as I can tell, at lots of small losses here and there.

Tim

[Q-RTF-X]

Laarbruch / cazatou

I agree that a significant number of recruits have been raised from the Air Training Corps, perhaps more that some would realize. My old squadron (1196) is still chugging along very well and over the years delivered a broad spectrum of recruits to the Air Force. My era alone (around 50 years ago now) produced three Boy Entrants (two technical trades one into catering) two pilots, one of whom ultimately served a tour as OC Queens Flight, plus several direct entrants one who kicked off as an ATC assistant ultimately becoming a Master Air Loadmaster on ASR duties; not forgetting another who failed his RAF medical and became a civilian Air Traffic Controller. The ATC is a low cost recruitment and pre-selection tool that also figures in molding young people and providing a good moral framework thus providing a social service without which some may be at risk of drifting into less desirable activities. I was one of the Boy Entrants mentioned above, I had my direction more or less mapped out with the help of the ATC, and transition into the Air Force was little more than a formality. For sure, they lack the dramatic impact of the Red Arrows, but certainly they help the recruitment process. Long may they continue.

[oldgrubber]

BEagle,

The thread is "Time to bin the Red Arrows", surely you can get your point across without ranting, if you are indeed a "writer". Don't spoil an otherwise polite thread please.

Cheers

[Winco]

The point you are all missing is that the £6m that may get saved, WILL NOT EVEN STAY WITHIN THE MOD BUDGET, let alone get to the front line. Why do you think there always the panic to get airborne before the end of the financial year? So we could burn up all the fuel that we had saved otherwise it would be taken off next years' allowance. This money will go to Mr Osborne and he will decide who gets it, NOT AOC 22Gp.

Get real for goodness sake.

Just because things are pretty sh1t at the moment, lets not make it worse by offering up the one thing that shows us in a good light. And lets not forget the 100's of thousands that go to airshows every year, many just to see the Arrows. A huge amount of the revenue that those shows generate goes to the likes of the RAFBF. Do we really want give them a kicking also?

I accept that the problems need highlighting to the public, but getting rid of the Arrows is NOT the way to do it. Before the public even get a chance to kick up a stink it will be too late, and they will be gone forever.

airpolice
I agree with your sentiments Sir, but why do you feel it is appropriate to punish BAEs by getting rid of the RAF Red Arrows?? Punish BAEs all you want, but I don't see the point of the nation having to take a hit for their incompetance.

[airpolice]

Winco.

With the holiday season almost upon us you may have time to do some research.

The RAFBF is not making much out of the Arrows as the Airshow Business, it is indeed a business, has to pay the cost of the REDS and others attending and sometimes staying in very expensive hotels. As part of the spin about "the airshow will not be costing the RAF/MoD anything", the business that runs the airshow need to charge and pay for all sorts of stuff.

I was told that a major show only just broke even last year and was expected to lose money this year. I don't think that service charities are gertting much of the admission price. The huge charges to commercial ventures participating in the shows will put them off, and the public get double stiffed for big ticket prices and £2.50 for a bag of chips.

Lots of people contributing to this debate are saying that saving the cost of the Reds is not money the RAF can spend elsewhere. I am not seeing it that way. The MoD have given the RAF an amount of money, Would you rather see it spent on keeping operational crews current on their aircraft or keeping the Reds?

In human terms, would you give money to a homeless drunk, or would you think that if he can afford to get pissed he is not in need of anymore money?

Disbanding the team will be a symbolic gesture, and perhaps that is what is needed. A line in the sand, if you like.


There is a new Royal Air Force in the making, but that's (going to be) another thread.

[Winco]

Airpolice,
No Sir, I believe you are wrong. The money saved will NOT go to the front line or even stay within the MOD. It will be a saving FROM the MOD budget, not something that will be re-distributed elsewhere within the RAF. If you have proof that the money saved will go to the front line, then I might feel different, but you will not have such proof and I have no doubts whatsoever that it will NOT stay with the RAF or even the MOD budget.

I don't know where you get your figures from re Airshows, but certainly Waddo must have made some significant money this year, as the gates were closed I understand on both days. RIAT was sold out well before the show as it is an all ticket event. The proceeds from these events are then distributed to the service charities (not an insignificant sum) So which airshows are you refering too?

There may well be a new RAF in the making, (I can't see it myself) but that is not a reason to bin the better elements of the old one we still have is it? What's next for you, get rid of BBMF maybe so we can buy some new boots for the guys and girls in 'stan? or do you think that will be another line in the sand?

BEagle is right, you are all a defeatist bunch. Don't give up - stand and fight.

[cazatou]

Q-RTF-X

I would totally agree with you if we lived in an ideal world where sufficient Public Finance was available to fund all the activities deemed necessary by the Armed Forces. History tells us, however, that such funding is only made available following the onset of hostilities. The RAF I joined as a trainee Pilot in 1965 had a Far East Air Force, Middle East Air Force, Near East Air Force and RAF Germany (in addition to Home Commands) and it maintained 6 Basic Flying Training Schools to produce a steady supply of Pilots.

Those days are long gone and the UK is in hock up to its eyeballs. The current conflict in a part of the World that several previous generations of British Service Personnel learnt to detest is but the latest episode in a conflict of Cultures for which there is no practical solution. I just hope that those in Command are aware of what happened when a British Force had to retreat from Kabul in the 19th Century - there was one survivor (Surgeon Reynolds).

One must also remember that HMG Policy is that the UK does not become part of the Eurozone but retains the Pound Sterling. This means that the UK is liable to suffer currency fluctuations on a greater scale than other EU members because the "strength in numbers" is not there. Before the Eurozone had even been thought of the Pound Sterling was the Currency of Empire and the US Dollar/ Pound exchange rate was 2:40 dollars to the Pound. As there were 240 pennies to the pound that meant 1 penny was the same value as 1 cent.

Apart from a few Overseas Territories the Commonwealth Countries all have their own currencies these days so the value of Sterling is determined by the actions of HMG as the underlying asset values of the Commonwealth no longer bolster the value of the Pound sterling.

If UK PLC was a private Bank Customer it would already have been invited to a one sided interview with the Bank Manager, had its credit cards withdrawn and its overdraft facility cancelled.

[Jabba_TG12]

I hate to say it but I think it is time. Yes, I see what Beags and Co are getting at, but to keep the Reds going at such a time would indeed be tantamount to deception that all is well when it is evident to all that it is not.

One last season then thats it. One can only hope that enough of the great unwashed give a t*ss. Chances are, almost certainly not though and it may in the end prove to be the hollow gesture that HMY was.

Winco, maybe it is defeatist. But what else do we have left to fight with when those who were meant to be our leaders of the last 15 years sold their backbones for their goldplated pensions with nary a whimper? Stand and fight? For them? After what they have done? Sorry, cant do it. :(

[Clockwork Mouse]

To disband the Reds because of the current financial situation would be a futile, peevish and meaningless gesture, would bring no benefit to the Defence budget and would make our already greying nation even more colourless. They are a national asset, not an RAF toy to be chucked away as a gesture. They cost the Defence budget peanuts, are a rare source of genuine pride and a symbol of excellence which this country and its Armed Services needs more than ever in these dismal times.

[draken55]

"If UK PLC was a private Bank Customer it would already have been invited to a one sided interview with the Bank Manager, had its credit cards withdrawn and its overdraft facility cancelled."

However, as were not, the Bank Manager (whoever he/she is) instead seems happy for us to lend £ 7 Billion (that we don't seem to have in the first place) to support to EU friends in need:confused:

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

Beagle, Sir, it's rare that I find cause to disagree with you but the point I am trying to put across is far from defeatist. On the contrary, it is a counter attack by other means to the current political assault on the Air Force. In spirit, I agree with you and Winco to name but 2. I do find, though, that the financial argument of cazatou does qualify as "defeatist". My argument is not financial.


The Reds are the finest the World has and the benefit in Service morale, public awareness, national pride and promotion of British industrial capability is out of all proportion to the tiny element of the Defence Budget absorbed. So tiny that a MoD beancounter would identify it as "noise". Leaving aside how disbandment would affect the "great unwashed", it is the effect it would have on the parasites that infest Westminster and Whitehall. They would probably have to admit that they have reduced the 3 independent Services to the level of a "self defence" force.


Imagine the President of Bongoland asking His Excellency the British Ambassador "what's happened to the Red Arrows"? His Excellency then asking the FCO Sec who in turn asks the Def Sec to be told; "our Forces are now so pared to the bone we have no capacity to field a team to an acceptable standard". How would the Def Sec, FCO Sec and the PM like that? Answers on a Navy Form S118B please. Yes, it would be peevish but it seems that is the only language such people understand. Talk to them of Capability and Skill Fade and watch the glazed expression.


The Red Arrows are an impeccable and professional display in the British Armed Forces' (it's only a matter of time; BAF) shop window. The genuine worry is that the shop shelves behind are all but bare; and, yes, the cost of the window display would buy sod all stock.


Now, does the Arrows and any war canoe called ARK ROYAL give the workers and Benefit scroungers of UK PLC the fortitude and spirit to pull their weight and work us out of Poo Creek? That is a whole new argument.

[Out Of Trim]

It's not about being "defeatist." It is trying to draw that "line in the sand" to make HM Government realise they have already gone too far! I still love watching the Reds as much as anyone.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I fear that one-day we are going to need a strong Armed Forces again and we will be very badly placed to deal with anything.

OK, so now roll on to the next Defence Spending Review, What are they going to cut next time round.. Things must still be OK. "Look they've still got those Red Arrows displaying up and down the country." I'm sure we can make do with cutting a little further all-round.

BEagle, What would you offer up to cut next time? Not the Reds then!

When the truth is really, that the Country needs to actually Re-arm and not cut further!

What is the point of building two aircraft carriers and not having any fixed-wing aircraft to put on them?

Why bin Nimrods we have already paid for? Make Baes deliver them!

Why scrap Harriers that could be used on the New Carriers before F-35 arrives.

I know the Country is financially embarrassed these days but, there are plenty of areas where savings can be made without cutting fundamental capabilities.

[airpolice]

Jabba, no need for one last dance. End of season....end of story.

The great unwashed, and everyone in a blue suit as well, have no hope of having any influence on HMG. They will do what suits them and unless we vote in the BNP or a Muslim Government, they will continue to do so.

I'm not convinced that showing the public how tight things are for the Military will help anyone. However, showing the public we can take the cuts like they have to, and showing the troops that there are no wasted quids will surely help to get things back on an even keel.

In short, nobody who matters cares if the Reds get binned.

However those who serve do care if the Reds continue to be funded from a pot which the rest of us are being told is empty.

Beagle, why not ask the people at ISK who are in fear of losing their jobs if the Reds are so important to the nation? Hardly an objective viewpoint but like the freshly binned Harrier people, nobody suffering cuts wants to see other people being spared.

On the other hand, maybe we should keep the Red Arrows and leave it at that. They can fly from Finningl...sorry Robin Hood Airport and use the rear seats to train their own replacements. Helicopters to the Army & RN with all the airfields sold off, the Reds might be all that the RAF has after another ten years of this.

[FODPlod]

As our armed forces are slashed yet again and more combat-capable aircraft and their pilots are deleted from the ORBAT, isn't it incongruous to retain the Red Arrows as a proud symbol of our national prowess?

I concede that the Reds are iconic. Maybe their disbandment will bring home to the GBP just how severely Defence is being affected by SDSR. Otherwise, it all looks too much like 'business as normal'.

[airpolice]

Facts and figures about RIAT.


Royal Air Force Charitable Trust Enterprises
Accounts for 2008-2009

From an income of over 8 Million pounds, the charity got 300 thousand.

Of which, less than 200 thousand pounds was given to the people we all expect to be getting the money. Still, the expenses were right up there in the good figures, so nobody missed out.


If that was a business the bank would pull the plug.

http://www.airtattoo.com/Files/reports%20and%20accounts%202009.pdf

[Jabba_TG12]

"How would the Def Sec, FCO Sec and the PM like that?"

I think AirPolice got there before me... answer is:

"...within the following 24 hour news cycle, they almost certainly wouldnt give a sh*t."

Auntie Beeb wouldnt give a sh*t.. Sky might for a couple of days. ITV wouldnt give a ****. The Mail would get steamed up about it but then forget it inside 5 days and then no longer give a ****. The Grauniad would throw a street party.

Life would carry on, as it always does.

The only people it would matter to would be those who have served, and the few who continue to serve. Most of the rest of the population probably wouldnt even notice.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

My argument moved on from "the great unwashed" and the various bollox factories that feed them. We are now into the realm of Government embarrassment, particularly overseas. The Reds attract respect and kudos from Overseas and provide the sort of warm glow that governments love to bask in. Now if you mean they perform a decoy function like the Fort Guard in Beau Jest or McAuliffe's "Willy's tanks" in Bastogne, that's another argument and, I would suggest, that might be clever at the tactical level but dangerous folly at the Strategic. I believe that Out Of Trim grasps that point.


One of you (sorry, can't find it now) made a fair point that if the Reds are disbanded, we will never have another aerobatic display team. Well, when the Black Arrows re-equipped, we had a gap that was eventually but briefly filled by the Firebirds (and the Blue Diamonds? I forget). It wasn't until 4 FTS formed the Yellow Jacks did we really get a display team back. I suspect that the same would happen again, in due course. Having said that, there might not be a 4 FTS or CFS in the future and I can't see the Contractor (or is it Partner?) being that interested.

[GeeRam]

It wasn't until 4 FTS formed the Yellow Jacks did we really get a display team back. I suspect that the same would happen again, in due course.

A similar 4 or 5 ship Hawk display team from FTS, with reduced display commitments, would I feel be the solution more in line with the forthcoming size of the RAF...they wouldn't even need to paint them..... and they could call themselves the Blackjacks :E

Having said that, there might not be a 4 FTS or CFS in the future and I can't see the Contractor (or is it Partner?) being that interested

That's true :rolleyes:

[Sideshow Bob]

No Sir, I believe you are wrong. The money saved will NOT go to the front line or even stay within the MOD.

That would depend on whether it is offered up as a saving to the government or a re-allocation of funds within the TLB. You can just make that sort of sweeping statement. £6 million is by no means a small amount.

[BEagle]

BEagle, What would you offer up to cut next time?

Nothing. Apart, that is, from ripping up PFI contracts for MFTS, FSTA and SAR - all of which should be 100% military owned and manned.

[Prangster]

Lets see if we actually delivered an aerobatic team generated as a % front line/Hawk availability, sense suggests a cut the team to 6 aircraft. Would that help the pennies? Or would the admin/ eng tail still be an issue?

[anotherthing]

BEagle, What would you offer up to cut next time?Nothing. Apart, that is, from ripping up PFI contracts for MFTS, FSTA and SAR - all of which should be 100% military owned and manned.

With all due respect, the above statement indicates that you are not living in the real world, and would rather just bury your head in the sand

[Peter-RB]

Gentlemen,

this entire debacle of cutting and scrapping what to the majority do seem like really good aircraft and assets, rests firmly on the shoulders of the top brass of the variouse branches of the Armed Services, self serving individuals who have had more of an eye open for themselves rather than the Service branch they represented,

They have fawned and agreed with the past government in such unison as to sound almost as part of that bunch of thieves and deadlegs,

Gordon Brown looked with his one nearly good eye at the reporters camera and stated to us, the members of the public, that he would always keep our defence's in tact,....well as we can all see what he did and agreed to has all but shutdown our ability to see off the enemy almost at the Door.

Sadly Cameron, still wet behind the ears from the last Bullingdon Club p--s up, has no idea what his schoolboy approach is doing to our country or to the once held pride of the entire population in being once regarded and classed as the best fighting force in the world.

Peter R-B

[mmitch]

Surely the 'Reds' are safe until after the Olympic games opening ceremony? :hmm:

mmitch.

[cazatou]

GBZ

The Red Arrows may be the "Best in the World" however, in the 1950's their task was performed by front line Fighter Sqns such as 111 Sqn and later by 92 Sqn. I very much doubt that anybody who witnessed "Treble Ones" 22 Hunter Loop at the 1958 Farnborough Display will ever forget it.

The problem with RAFAT is that the Public see them as purely an Aerobatic Display Team and nothing else. Yes, they enjoy the displays - but question why they should be spared when SAR is being privatised, the Air Defence Fighter force decimated and SH Crews deploying for yet another spell in Afghanistan.

I see that it is "rumoured" that 1 Gp will become "a 6 Sqn Group" in the coming years - if true, where is the need to drum up potential recruits at vast cost in manpower, fuel and servicing requirements to keep such a display Team in the Public Eye?

[draken55]

anotherthing

With all due respect, PFI equates to buying through the equivalent of mortgage finance. Longer term it's unlikely to save the Government money. If anything it will cost more, especially after the loading for a profit margin to a Contractor and their bankers is factored in.

Thanks to PFI we have a wad of schools and other building projects entered into on pre crash terms, the future costs of which will now be a millstone round the neck of Councils and other Public bodies for decades. Post crash and with the slump in certain business sectors, these contracts and the income stream they generate are big factors in determining the market value and even viability of the Company's that own them. Is that what defence spending is for?

PFI allowed Government to spend without this being reflected on the PSBR as would have direct spending. Post crash and with the banking bale out, it's a busted flush. We would be ill advised to carry on as before in thinking PFI is any alternative to a properly funded and well managed defence budget. The latter remains the real issue to be confronted by this Country which seems to spend a lot on Defence but gets too little to show for this.

[Herc-u-lease]

Facts and figures about RIAT.


Royal Air Force Charitable Trust Enterprises
Accounts for 2008-2009

From an income of over 8 Million pounds, the charity got 300 thousand.

Of which, less than 200 thousand pounds was given to the people we all expect to be getting the money. Still, the expenses were right up there in the good figures, so nobody missed out.


If that was a business the bank would pull the plug.

http://www.airtattoo.com/Files/repor...nts%202009.pdf (http://redirectingat.com/?id=42X487496&xs=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.airtattoo.com%2FFiles%2Freports%2520and %2520accounts%25202009.pdf&sref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pprune.org%2Fmilitary-aircrew%2F436770-time-bin-red-arrows-5.html)


apologies for the thread drift, but you seem to be confusing the term "expenses" with those incurred by MPs. I know Tim Prince (RAFCTE) personally and I can assure you that he and rest of the permanent and volunteer team work exceptionally hard to ensure as much money goes to charity as possible. Waste is frowned upon and i've lost count of the number of times Tim has reminded people RAFCTE is a charity. Operating costs are still high; think wages, facilities costs etc. agreed that the profit/charitable donation is samller than one would expect from a civilian corporation. It didn't make a loss though and as long as it is making money and paying its taxes why would any sensible person pull the plug? plenty of civvy businesses that make annual losses and still operate! [Rant mode off]

[Roger D'Erassoff]

Maybe one way to extend the interest in their disbandment would be to hold an X-Factor style phone in competition over 9 weeks...

No 6, you were sh1te, you're fired... :E

[barnstormer1968]

There was mention above of the possibility of the BNP or a Muslim government getting into power. I can't help but be amused of the thought of these two having to form a coalition government. Sorry it has nothing to do with the reds, but I do find it funny.

While we are on the subject of whether the reds cost the taxpayer a lot of money, or are good value for money, it may be worth remembering that the 'cones hotline' cost us £26.000.000!

[Fareastdriver]

I have never known a thread like this to creak and groan with so many chips on so many shoulders

[davejb]

Beagle,
normally I find myself at least a little in agreement with yourself (mind you I only read selected threads <g>)... but I agree with Airpolice. Several folk on here are arguing that the saving wouldn't affect anything - quite right - it isn't about saving money, it's about making a very public statement (probably the only thing the public MIGHT notice) that the overstretch has now snapped.

Hear hear. The Reds, along with the other RAF airshow performers, do at least remind the general public that we actually have an Air Force.


No, they do not - the Reds remind the general public that all is well with an RAF that can still do this stuff... and allows everyone to believe that the rest of the RAF is as s**t hot... when that is no longer the case. It tells the room temperature IQ'd general public that everything is actually still just fine, we can spare jets and time for airshows and nice videos. It's papering over the cracks, and while the RAF is determined to present a shiny public face nobody is ever going to see the grunge underneath.

What is the point of the Reds? Present something like a genuine business case, a reasoned argument why we should have them....not all this fake accountancy tosh - they're paid for by BAe...yeah, right...a company we should be distancing ourselves from in my view, bearing the main responsibility IMO for our current lack of an MPA, rather than having them sponsor our aerobatics team. Failing that let's sign up a few drug cartels for the T shirts!

While we had an airforce they were a nice shiny bit of it that we were all proud of - now we're approaching the point where we have a world class aerobatics team but no airforce. We're the RAF, not ****ing Red Bull!

PR? Not needed, we should produce damn good PR about CAS in our current war theatre - did the RAF send out display teams in 1940, or did we rely on the 'real live PR' of contrails overhead? Recruiting - don't make me laugh, we don't need to recruit, we employ whole units simply to weed out the unsuitable! 'Getting the right type of recruit' - bolleux, and anyway it'd be cheaper to run a central London office and dine out candidates with impressive CVs...

Sorry, I think those reacting in horror to the OP (and I, initially, thought it was the bi monthly Reds basher initially, so I'm a convert) are being a tad Colonel Blimpish, in this climate survival should be a solid reason based on military capabilty, not showbiz. This is life, not X factor.

Discuss.
Dave

[airpolice]

Dave


Red Bull Air Force, I love that bit!




Herc, my concern is the public being led to believe the money is gong to good causes, but with the charity getting just 20 pence out of every 8 quid at the gate, maybe that could be made a bit clearer on the ticket.

Have a read at the accounts and you will see that they spent loads of that money on doing "stuff" as well as buying fuel. Some people will be doing rather well out of that. I don't object to companies making a profit but this smacks of being a bit close to a well known scam involving the Fire Service and books for schools.

Let's say I come up with a heart rending story. You get a million people to give us a quid each, I pass on all of what's left after we have paid the costs of generating that money. £123.45 ends up with the good cause since we had to pay (my mate) to build a website and advertise in (my other mate's) magazine and then we had to rent office space from the office rental company (run by my sister in-law) to have somewhere for the staff (our kids & their friends) to sit.

My cousin who has a classic car restoration business gets a chance to show off his stock and have his customers bring their cars along as an attraction for the punters to come to our open day. Obviously we agree to cover the costs of bringing the classic cars along as we will get money for the charity at the gate, based on punters coming to see the cars.

Cousin gets the business from the car owners who want to see their car look its best on the day, and everyone's a winner. Even the bloke next door to me who has a car transporter. He can charge the car owners whatever he wants, since the event organisers are picking up the costs of running the show.

Everyone is happy, even the "Target" as they have £123.45 more than they would otherwise have.

Any of this sounding familiar? I have no idea if any backs are being scratched in relation to RIAT and I am not suggesting that they are. I just wish to point out that it looks like some folk are doing very well out of the charity not getting much of the money.


Waste is frowned upon and i've lost count of the number of times Tim has reminded people RAFCTE is a charity.

Actually, it [Royal Air Force Charitable Trust Enterpises] is not a charity. It is a limited company. The Charity [Royal Air Force Charitable Trust] is funded by the "available profits" of the Limited Company. By the time they have paid all the fuel bills, hotels, caterers, aircraft operators and marketing people, the profits left are quite slim, and then a third of what they do pass to the Charity gets swallowed up in yet another layer of expenditure.



Winco, where did you get the idea that "the proceeds" from the events would be serious money?

I don't know where you get your figures from re Airshows, but certainly Waddo must have made some significant money this year, as the gates were closed I understand on both days. RIAT was sold out well before the show as it is an all ticket event. The proceeds from these events are then distributed to the service charities (not an insignificant sum) So which airshows are you refering too?

Read the accounts from the link I posted earlier.

They got over 8 Million pounds in and disbursed £196,997 to Charitable causes. Perhaps you are right, maybe Waddington did make significant money, RIAT certainly did.

Less than 20 pence out of every 8 quid was distributed to service charities.

AP

[Willard Whyte]

I'd pay 1/40 of 2 days wages to get the Waddo A/S W/E off for something more interesting, without a doubt.

[airpolice]

Right then Willard, get this sorted out for next year.

We need to beat £300,000 from an £8 Million turnover, so if we have five airfields with four spotters a day paying £20 each for unlimited access, five days a week, that brings in over £100,000 in a year. Give them an old Runway Caravan (now called TRC) to sit in and take pictures from.

Ask any of your local spotters if they would pay £20 to get inside the wire and see how quickly they produce the cash.

No admin cost, dick someone with it as a secondary duty, advertise on UKAR & fightercontrol.co.uk to save money and get the "right" people.



Better still, how about.....

Every weekday we let 3 spotters pay £255 for a ridealong in an aircraft.
260 weekdays * £255 * 3 = £198,900

More money than the charity gets from the current setup. No leave block, no fod plod, no resentment towards those on nights who can wriggle out of the day duties in a blue suit.


Oh ****, wait a minute...No jobs for the boys, oh well, back to the drawing board.

[RumPunch]

The red arrows will continue to mess the minds of many military people for years to come. In 3 years there will be no military as we all watch re runs of top gear as each force tries to look cool in front of the BBC . Each getting attention to try and increase the budget for ones own need , with no concern for the people on the front line.

Im not cool , I just try to care

[Tourettes_Guy]

The cuts are a disgrace. However, disbanding the Reds is not part of the answer. Funded by industry (largely) they also play a major recruitment role. Would be a shame not to hear them over Lincoln plus, why allow these penny pinching, self sustaining politicians another opportunity to make further cuts? Unless of course they need to further expand upon their own expense accounts!

[Foghorn Leghorn]

If you all want to save some money and put it back in the 'FL pot' (if thats where you honestly believe it goes), as is the crux of many an argument, then why don't you ask the Royal Navy to bring back the 18 aircrew they have in the USA at the moment, flying the Hornet? Not much point in those guys being there.

[A2QFI]

In the current situation what trades are the RAF recruiting for? We have a large number of Harrier pilots with nothing to fly as of 15th Dec. They probably don't need to put that many pilots throught the training system in the next 12 months and there will be scores of applicants for every place. There are probably shortages in some trade groups but seeing the Red Arrows displaying their undoubted skills isn't going be that helpful IMO.

[Winco]

airpolice

I was commenting after the post that there was effectively no money being made at airshows this past year. I know that there were huge crowds at RIAT and waddo, so I assumed that there must have been some serioous money made, and your figures for RIAT concur that.

What a disgrace however, that such a paltry sum ends up to charity. I have long complained abouot the management of RIAT and how pathetic the final amount of money handed over is. I hope that someone from the charity commission takes a look at this and asks some searching questions about where £7.8 Million went. But thats another thread.

Foghorn Leghorn
I think that you make a perfectly valid point, and i would expand it further to looking at Wg Cdrs et al doing 'staff College' exchanges in such places as Australia. The cost is phenominal and is a waste. peopole will of course say that it is important that we broaden the minds of the future VSOs and I would have agreed with that once. However, there seems to me to be little point in broadening minds, exchanging military etho views and god knows what else with our military colleagues, if politicians are, at the end of the day, going to ignore the advice of our top brass, and I make direct reference here to Nimrod MRA4 which, allegedly, was faught for by the admirals and the CAS, ACAS, AOC etc. What is the point of having these experts at the top of our armed forces if those with the money completely ignore them??

Anyway, if anyone is interested, its snowing like stupid down here at HRW and I'm sat in my office with nowhere to go and no aircraft to fly!! Looks like i might be doing a lot of posting today!!

[Rigger1]

Fellow PPRUNERS, Let’s face it how long are the Reds going to last realistically? Not just in our current austere climate, but with the OSD of the Hawk T1 rapidly approaching it can only be 5 years max.

With the Hawk T1 due to be replaced under a PFI, there aren’t going to be sufficient aircraft to run an aerobatic team at weekends. So why don’t we face reality and pull the plug early, maybe rename the BBMF to the RAF Display Team and give them a couple of Hawks to keep going for a while, close Scampton and be done with it?

Also, once the bungling baron stops actively pushing Hawk sales will he carry on sponsoring the Reds ... no chance. The Hawk production line is effectively closed, we only build bits and India puts them together and yes I know they are chasing a big US contract but what are the chances of Uncle Sam buying an underpowered 40 year old design with a few computers put in? And with their recently announced job losses what’s the possibility of any sponsorship drying up rapidly?

The writing for the Reds demise is on the wall for all to see and although it maybe a few years off it is coming.

PS - I actually like them, just looking at the facts.

[airpolice]

Rigger1 that all sounds quite sensible up to the point where you suggest closing Scampton.

We can't close it, the Dog's buried there!

[Martin the Martian]

"Right then Willard, get this sorted out for next year.

We need to beat £300,000 from an £8 Million turnover, so if we have five airfields with four spotters a day paying £20 each for unlimited access, five days a week, that brings in over £100,000 in a year. Give them an old Runway Caravan (now called TRC) to sit in and take pictures from.

Ask any of your local spotters if they would pay £20 to get inside the wire and see how quickly they produce the cash.

No admin cost, dick someone with it as a secondary duty, advertise on UKAR & fightercontrol.co.uk to save money and get the "right" people. "


This spotter certainly would.:8

[brakedwell]

Rigger1 that all sounds quite sensible up to the point where you suggest closing Scampton.

We can't close it, the Dog's buried there!

Are you referring to the sun tanned Labrador ? :E

[airpolice]

Do you know of another dog buried there?

[Justanopinion]

If you all want to save some money and put it back in the 'FL pot' (if thats where you honestly believe it goes), as is the crux of many an argument, then why don't you ask the Royal Navy to bring back the 18 aircrew they have in the USA at the moment, flying the Hornet? Not much point in those guys being there.


There are currently 3 RN pilots flying the Hornet - 2 just started training.... with more to follow. We have commited to buying the F35C - (carrier variant.... get it?), therefore we not only need to build conventional carrier experience, but also 4th generation multi role experience on a war proven platform. A current example of this 'proven platform' is current ops in Afghanistan.

[Navy_Adversary]

I would love the Sparrows to stay, but; there aren't very many air shows nowadays compared with 15 years ago.It seemed that 15 years ago there was an air show most weekends of the summer at a military airfield.

Personally I miss the RAF Cottesmore TTTE Families day most with many a rare visiting aircraft, 2nd was RAF Mildenhall, for the ice cold beer from the paddling pools and also the BBQ burgers which I can still smell now, the flying was pretty entertaining as well.

As a UK taxpayer I second any proposal to keep the Reds, but.......

[Dryce]

I would love the Sparrows to stay, but; there aren't very many air shows nowadays compared with 15 years ago.It seemed that 15 years ago there was an air show most weekends of the summer at a military airfield.


Diminishing number of airfields at which to host airshows.

If RAF Leuchars goes than that's a regular Reds venue off the calendar.

[Non Emmett]

It's a lovely day, the sun is shining and we have had almost no snow - what more could you ask. Then I read this thread, RIAT is going to the dogs, not making money and the concensus seems without doubt to bin The Reds. I've attended all the Air Tattoos apart from last year when I went to Old Warden and Duxford and thought it far better value I have to admit. I've also enjoyed seeing The Reds over the years but accept many of the conclusions put forward here.

All a little depressing, I'm off to haul out the gin bottle.

[4mastacker]

In a way, I'm pleased that some of the more celebrated posters have identified the misnomer in the 'charity' side of the airshow business. I had always suspected that the main beneficiaries of these so-called 'charity' occassions was never the people whom the charitys' aim was to help. That was amply confirmed when I had the mis-fortune to be stationed at a location where a major airshow was temporarily re-located for a couple of years.

I doubt the true cost to the public purse will ever be known, but an awful lot of public money was spent on "projects" and "urgent requirements", the cost of which should have been borne by the show's organiser. The number of times I was told to wind my neck in when I challenged many of the LPOs that were submitted went well into double figures and might even have made triple! It wasn't a good career move on my part but I wasn't prepared to put my signature to a falsehood and place myself in the same position that former elected representatives now find themselves.

That, coupled with the exhorbitant profligacy by the organisers who did not seem to adhere to the simple principle keeping their costs down, really showed who the beneficiaries of that charity really were. Was it really necessary to hire a fleet of brand-new, high performance cars to do the general running about on base? Was it really necessary for the very expensive corporate lunches and dinners? Was it really necessary to be accommodated in the best hotels, some many, many miles from the venue?

I was disgusted to see such waste and greed when it seemed that the main aim was to feather (quite) a few nests and encourage new levels of 'sucking-up'.

Back to topic. Much as the Reds provide an exciting and impressive display, I don't think that they are sustainable in their current form. The bean-counters rule the roost and it's "the cost of everything, value of nothing" brigade that will ultimately seal their fate. If money is to be saved, then the axe should fall on the work-shy (there's plent of snow to be cleared- give'em a shovel!) and stop paying benefits to young girls who see their mission in life as a single-handed attempt to re-populate the world!

[Spit the Dog]

Never mind the 'reds'.. its the piggin' Falcons that are a complete waste of time and money !

[cazatou]

The Falcons are PJI's.

PJI's train the Para's

The Para's have a significant War Role in all Theatres.

The Red Arrows do not have a significant War Role in any Theatre.

[downsizer]

And the last time the Paras were operationally dropped was?

[cazatou]

When I used the term "Para's" it included the "Hooligans from Hereford".

[iRaven]

And the "Pirates of Poole" - Ooo Arrr Jim Lad!

[BEagle]

...and also the BBQ burgers which I can still smell now...

Whilst the minced beast is simple enough to recreate, perhaps this thread might well advise you about the proper means of cooking same: http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/223303-my-beautiful-weber.html

Enjoy!

:E

[Justanopinion]

The Falcons are PJI's. PJI's train the Para's.The Para's have a significant War Role in all Theatres.The Red Arrows do not have a significant War Role in any Theatre.


The red arrows hawks are flown by fast jet pilots
These fast jet pilots have come from front line squadrons
These front line sqns have a significant war role in theatre
The Falcons do not have a war role in theatre

[davejb]

And the last time the Paras were operationally dropped was?

Actually immaterial as long as the UK govt deems it necessary for the UK to have a parachute assault capability. In pretty much the same way that (to shamelessly drag another issue into the mix) it's about 65 years or so since a UK MPA sank a sub, but we still could use the capability.

Until it is decided that paras aren't needed then we should maintaint he ability to train them - that's commonsense. (which, amusingly, is often neither common nor sensible).

I take much more issue with the number of people on here claiming the Reds serve some recruiting function, when we are turning people away and looking to decimate the people already wearing the uniform. Smell the coffee, and so forth, we DO NOT NEED TO RECRUIT, so that's a complete non-starter.

Just for fun, and no doubt to foster much aggro, think how you'd answer these questions:

What percentage of the UK public in the 12-30 age range (approx) go to airshows.

What percentage of these people aren't already committed RAF-philes who would give their right arm to be an FJ pilot anyway?

How many of those who do not go to airshows ever see the Arrows live, and then go on to join the RAF?

Could we replace the Arrows, as a recruiting tool, by CGI'ing some inspiring stuff on Youtube - Spits shooting BF109's down while the theme from 633 Sqn plays in the background, etc. ?

- I'd argue that the Reds 'recruit' people who were already sold on the idea anyway, and that these people are a small part of a generally uninterested public who, reds or not, will never go near a CIO. In other words the Reds have no real effect on recruiting, even if we needed to recruit, which we clearly do not. So what is their actual purpose?

Reds should be completely sponsored by BAe, as they are the only people who gain anything from their performances.

Dave

[Entaxei]

With all the comments/calls on here to dump/drop/disband the Red Arrows, one major point is being totally missed - the miserable and defeatist elements will have won because ..........

We will have nothing left that we can show
the world and be proud of any more.

We have a magnificent Army fighting its heart out in Afgan, despite the lack of support and funding that has gone on in political circles - but even they lost their Royal Tournament, in the name of political correctness. We have an emasculated Royal Navy that is only just hanging together and a Royal Airforce that can't really reduce any more without vanishing. In the current environment it's surprising
that our entire defence force has not been subcontracted out.

If a cause is needed to fight for, reduce the foreign Aid subsidiary by
50% and revitalise the Armed forces but still cut the MOD.

[davejb]

No,
we're making the point that there is no sensible reason to do PR when we can't do the stuff the armed forces were created to do. The display teams help maintain the myth of our capability, they are counterproductive as far as the services go, in that they allow the general unwashed to think all is well when it clearly is not.

Sorry, but apart from keeping spotters happy and giving old f**ts a warm nostalgic glow I still can't see what purpose any of the display teams perform today - so maybe, just maybe, there's a 1/100 chance that if we actually pulled them all and said 'sorry, can't attend' some miniscule part of the public might realise the cuts have gone too far.

Apart from 'they are a great recruiting tool and help BAe sell to the Middle East', both of which would appear to be redundant functions, I have yet to see a single 'pro' post on here that suggests a valid role in 2010 for the Reds. We want them to continue because we're RAF or ex RAF, they've been the RAF display team since most of us joined, and we feel a great deal of affection for them... none of which constitutes a good reason to keep them going. The demise of the Hawk will, I imagine, settle the debate anyhow... perhaps by pulling them sooner than Dave would choose we might get a few more headlines that would allow the state of the Royal Defence Corps (Air company) to be publicised.

Dave (not THAT Dave)

[Entaxei]

OK Dave - lets just try National Pride - its worth fostering, if only to try and incalculate an element of respect for something in the younger generations. :)

[phil9560]

I grew up watching the reds-I've got a vague memory of watching gnats .I thought they'd be here for ever in one airframe or another.they should be considered part of our heritage by now .

[Chronic Snoozer]

The Reds and other teams around the world provide the great 'unwashed' and aviation enthusiasts alike a tangible link to the days of yore when stick and rudder was the order of the day. It is sheer skill that overcomes the elements, the precision reached using the brain, the eye and motor skills that will eventually die out in aviation to be replaced by automation and button pushing.

Lose them and its watching UAVs for the rest of your life.

[SRENNAPS]

When you read some of the posts on this thread you start to realise why the Royal Air Force (and the country for that matter) has gone down the tubes.

So many here with negative, half glass empty, defeatist, role over and kick me more, type attitudes. Those same people hide behind their armchairs and computer screens and blame the top leaders for not standing up to the politicians. Can’t you see that some of you are part of the problem? In fact many of you are the problem. No, I don’t think some of you will ever see that!!

What has happened to the Royal Air Force in recent times is absolutely criminal, but to loose Red Arrows is just total madness. Whether some of you like it or not, The Red Arrows are a unique identity in the face of the world of what the Royal Air Force and this Country is. To loose it, is the equivalent of removing your house name or number from your front door. It is like removing the Daffodil from Wales, the Rose from England, the thistle from Scotland and the Shamrock from Ireland.

It should be irrelevant how much it costs to run the Red Arrows and it should not matter how small the RAF becomes. (Lets face it; money saved would not be redirected to the frontline anyway!!).

Loose the Red Arrows and you loose a unique and world recognised symbol of all that was, and still is, great about this nation. Never forget that there is only ONE Royal Air Force in the world.

I stand ready for a barrage of incoming, but I will never bow down to defeatism.

[cazatou]

SRENNAPS

You completely miss the point. We do not need a "Royal Air Display Force" - but we do need to ensure that the Military Budget primarily supports current Operational Commitments.

The Royal Navy has lost its Carriers - thus Air Defence for the Fleet becomes yet another task devolved to the RAF. As that was a cost cutting measure there is no extra funding for the extra task.

The UK is just about bankrupt - there is no money and the gold reserves were sold off years ago by Mr Brown at a rock bottom price.

HMG has already signalled UK withdrawal from Afghanistan and there will be further financial retrenchment (and doubtless redundancies) once that has happened.

SAR has effectively been "Privatised" and doubtless what remains of the Comms fleet will go the same way.

The purpose of the Royal Air Force is Defence of the Realm - not to provide entertainment for Air Display customers.

[FireAxe]

Absolutely bang on target!!!
If the reds went then we would see NO benefit at all. It is the attitude 'scrap them so everyone will see how bad it is' that is maddening. It will change nothing and just deprive those who will notice, the ones going to the shows, of enjoying a great spectacle. This kind of attitude has made this country what it is, 'poor us we can't, shouldn't do anything any more'! We can do it if we want but our defeatist attitude conquers all. Why not think that at least we still have something to show the world!!! Oh and by the way whilst BAE may not be the best it is providing more high tech engineering jobs for THIS country than any other, yes I said THIS country. Or would those complaining about free ad for the Hawk prefer that we fold up that success story and let another country take the orders and jobs as well.
Remember they are there for the enjoyment of our most vital supporters, the general public and they are worth every penny! Some thing are worth paying for!

[anotherthing]

The RAF should have a fast jet display capability, however it should not be a stand-alone squadron. There is no longer a place nor justification for The Reds in this respect.

The display team should be formed by jobbing crews on fronline aircraft. This would be much better PR for the RAF, and could be further emphasised by the commentator who would be able to state that Flt Lt XYZ has just returned from/is just about to go to Afghanistan etc.

The public would also be able to appreciate that the RAF is rammed full of highly skilled personnel, and that is not just some cherry picked supposedly 'best of the best' that are so skilled.*

The Army and RAF manage it with their display teams. The argument that the skills learned whilst with The Reds make a better pilot for the frontline are invalid.

The RAF has scores of highly skilled pilots (amongst the best in the World) on frontline squadrons who do not need the skills of flying fancy manoeuvres in training jets... they just get on with their jobs on the frontline, and do it bloody well.

Anyone who honestly believes that a politician is clever enough to see past The Reds when people will try to talk about overstretch come the next review is delusional I'm afraid.
Rightly or wrongly, as long as The Reds are around, the general public and politicians will to some extent, dismiss the dire position that the RAF and the wider UK Armed Forces are in.

Keep a jet display team, but make it relevant to what a diminished RAF is doing today. Reduce the commitments and cherry pick the events, make it relevant to frontline and ram that message home. The RAF doesn't really need a recruiting tool like this in the current climate, but I bet any money little Johhny would be more impressed with a nice frontline aircraft doing the display, and also being told about the heroics of the display team in their real, day to day job.

People talk about 'national pride'... I'm afraid if the public don't have that in abundance when they see the news and hear what our Armed Forces do fur us, then a few shiny red jets won't instill it. You are talking aobut a bunch of people who are already believers. The Reds will not sway people who do not already have a passing interest.

A few frontline aircraft displaying would, however, help highlight exactly what the RAF is about, in a relevant manner.

[Rigger1]

FireAxe let another country take the orders and jobs as well. Yes it was a success story, but the chances of it winning another order ... bugger all. The only reason the RAF bought the new one was politics,

And sorry SRENNAPS I feel it is you who is doing the country a disservice, let’s fiddle as Rome burns! Try telling the serviceman coming out of Headley Court without his limbs that the country will do it’s best to help him but most of his future support will come from charity whilst we can afford to have 9 aircraft entertaining the masses.

[Winco]

cazatou

Good to see you having an input here. As an ex member of the famous (TR) sqn, and your comments about savings at displays etc. what is your view on your old sqn providing a 146 and/or 125 to take the CAS to the Leuchars airshow each year?? Would you say that was a serious waste of money?

[Squirrel 41]

Guys,

As far as I can see, no-one, including me, who adovcates binning the Reds is doing so because we hate the Reds/didn't get into the Reds/is defeatist/hates the UK/hates the RAF.

Rather, it is recognised that to the extent that the majority of the public see the RAF at all, it is in three forms: SAR in yellow helicopters, commemoration in brown, green and black props and formation aerobatics in red trainers.

In other words if there are helicopters to collect Joe Public from a cliff, the BBMF to bring a tear to an eye, or the Reds to make them go wow, then the working assumption is that all is right with the RAF. So, in publicly binning the Reds, the very clear message is that this isn't the case and that we need to a national discussion about what we want to do internationally, and how we intend to pay for it.

Bottom line: Binning the Reds will have a greater political impact than the binning of the Harriers and the binning of Nimrod combined. Do it, CAS, and do it with maximum publicity after Christmas. And settle -by saving the Reds - only in exchange for the reinstatement of some actual capability (like MRA4 - which was allegedly a red line resigning matter until it wasn't).

S41

[downsizer]

The poor sods working Future Brize are being forced to make some really daft decisions that will hurt the AT fleets for a generation for the sake of a few extra £m here and there.



Best post in ages.

[cazatou]

Winco

Your post 144

The facetious answer would be that:-

1. It's CAS's "Trainset" and his budget.

However:-

2. It provides another Aircraft for the Public to look at.

3. It ensures the instant availability of transport back to London should a situation arise that requires CAS's presence.

4. It enables him to talk to the Officers and NCO's of the crew in privacy about their opinions as to what is happening in the RAF - something which ALL CAS's and CDS's took advantage of in my 14+ years on the Sqn.

PS. Are you suggesting that CAS should not attend the Airshow?

[Runaway Gun]

Eh? None of them have ever talked to me. In private or otherwise.

[cazatou]

RG

Then you have never had to say No to them - or to Mrs T - have you?

[davejb]

Remember they are there for the enjoyment of our most vital supporters, the general public and they are worth every penny! Some thing are worth paying for!

Yes, quite right, the primary job of the RAF is to entertain spotters....

...something about that statement bothers me, in some subliminal manner, now what might that be?

The glass, by the way, is WAY lower than half empty!
Dave

[SRENNAPS]

cazatou

The UK is just about bankrupt - there is no money

There is still plenty of money to be able to send millions of tax payers money, as aid, to countries that are far richer than us, there is still enough money to bail out other countries not too far away because of gross economic incompetence, there is still plenty of money to look after every tin pot, loony left organization that is ever increasing in this country, plenty of money to provide legal aid to criminals who run over 12 year daughters and leave them for dead, plenty of money to provide health and support to thousands of illegal immigrants, plenty of money to have court case after court case on absolutely ridiculous things in the name of human rights, need I go on…….

There is still plenty of money around, it is just where and how it is disturbed that is wrong!!!!

Rigger1

And sorry SRENNAPS I feel it is you who is doing the country a disservice, let’s fiddle as Rome burns! Try telling the serviceman coming out of Headley Court without his limbs that the country will do it’s best to help him but most of his future support will come from charity whilst we can afford to have 9 aircraft entertaining the masses.

I was very disappointed to read that comment. The binning of the Red Arrows and the savings that would come would have no impact on what would happen to Servicemen and women leaving Headley Court. The sad fact is (and I think it is wrong) that since the Armed Forces were formed, anyone injured in conflict has had to rely on charity and support from the ordinary person in the street. Isn’t it ironic that vast sums of charity money, collected in bins by ordinary people trying to “do their bit” is collected at shows and events where the Red Arrows participate?

And as for me doing the country a disservice, what? For trying to protect our pride, for trying to prevent every aspect of our British heritage being destroyed in the name of saving money and political correctness……I think not!!!

You completely miss the point.

No, I don’t think so. Some of you need to open your eyes and start to understand the bigger picture of where this is all going……before it is way to late.

anotherthing

The display team should be formed by jobbing crews on fronline aircraft. This would be much better PR for the RAF, and could be further emphasised by the commentator who would be able to state that Flt Lt XYZ has just returned from/is just about to go to Afghanistan etc.

I really like that idea. :D:D

[Winco]

caz

I have absolutely no idea what planet you are living on anymore! I can only think that all that French wine has completely pickled you brain to extent that is is malfunctioning out of control.

'It provides another Aircraft for the Public to look at' Have you ever been to Leuchars?? They park it well away from the public to view

'It ensures the instant availability of transport back to London should a situation arise that requires CAS's presence' I would have hoped that if there was something iminent in the offing, CAS would know about it, and wouldn't be at an airshow. Unless of course he wanted to ensure getting back in time for something on TV maybe?

'It enables him to talk to the Officers and NCO's of the crew in privacy about their opinions as to what is happening in the RAF - something which ALL CAS's and CDS's took advantage of in my 14+ years on the Sqn' Even by your standards, that is the biggest load of rubbish I have ever heard. Perhaps you could enlighten us all as to what the average pilot on 32 Sqn knows about anything on any other sqn or a/c type, other than his own? And are you really suggesting that the average Sqn pilot, SNCO or anyone else on 32 Sqn is going to tell CAS whats going wrong with his own 'trainset' as you put it?? Now that would be something!

Did you Caz? Did you tell CASs and CDSs where they were going wrong and what they needed to do to put it right??

'Are you suggesting that CAS should not attend the Airshow?' Not at all, on the contrary. I think he should attend every major airshow and I think he should see how proud the great British public are of their Armed Forces, and especially the RAF, and that very much includes the Red Arrows. I also think he should use the opportunity to tell the public that things are bad. Infact that they are seriously bad and that there is a serious risk of loosing the likes of the Arrows unless things change. He also needs to educate people, many of them on this forum, that the £6m saved on the Arrows will NOT go to the front line or anywhere near it.

[Rigger1]

SRENNAPS,

My apologies, it was not my aim to disappoint or upset you in anyway, nor was I advocating that any money saved from binning the red’s would go to Hedley court. What I was trying to point out, as a larger number are in this thread is that Joe public thinks all is well in the forces whilst they see the likes of the Reds flying round. The public on the whole are happy for money to go to out in overseas aid and rescue loans etc, because things can’t be that bad ... can it? Once the cuts start to bite into their local hospitals etc they may well call for the Red’s to be chopped.

In the meantime how long do we hold on to what is a luxury, shortly the RAF will be down to frontline aircraft numbers that were last seen in 1914, as good as the Red’s are can we really justify them. Now as for Anotherthings comment The display team should be formed by jobbing crews on frontline aircraft, now that does deserve looking at – One of the best displays I saw this year . . . the GR4 attack on RIAT.

[SRENNAPS]

Rigger1

Thank you, but honestly no need to apologise. It is a very emotive subject in extremely emotive times. It is just a sad shame that things have come to this. It will all come back to bite us one day, but what really grips me is that the people who have allowed this to happen will never, ever be held truly accountable. If they were, mankind would not keep making the same mistakes!! How they can sleep in their beds at night amazes me. Sorry, I am rambling now…….:{:uhoh:

[cazatou]

SRENNAPS

The Country "not too far away" provided some 250,000 volunteers for the British Armed Forces during WW2, although their Country remained neutral. You should also consider the Knock-On effect to the economy of the UK should that Country default in respect of its financial obligations.

Staying with Finance - the National Disaster which comprised the last Government has left the UK with a Financial Hangover which will haunt the UK for generations. The coffers are bare and the light at the end of the Tunnel is the train on the other track.

The RAF of my youth had numerous Aerobatic Teams and what today are the "Red Arrows" were the "Yellowjacks" of 4 FTS. There were also the Red Pelicans, Macaws, Vipers, Blue Chips, Cocks of the North, Poachers, Linton Gin, Gemini Pair, Swords and Blades. There were 6 Basic FTS,s as well as CFS and the School of Refresher Flying at the RAF Manby.

We do not need, nor can we afford, to attract the number of would be Aircrew that filled those Units in those days. Those days are gone - never to return. I would suggest, however, that just 10% of the annual cost of RAFAT would make a significant difference to the Air Cadet Organisation and would significantly help to provide a pool of dedicated young people who would look upon the RAF as a career and not the last port in the storm.

[The Hairy Monkey]

cazatou

Can you explain please why you think that another £600k for the ATC will make a significant difference?
Why do we need to encourage more kids to join the ATC? There are currently in excess of 40,000 air cadets, how many do you think are needed to form this 'pool' of people for a future RAF which will be down to less than 20,000 soon?
Don't you think it is slightly premature to suggest that these kids can have a career in the RAF? There are lots of people in the RAF at the moment who thought they had a career in the RAF but are to find soon that they do not (eg 150+ AEOps from Kinloss)
As you state, there used to be 11 display teams in the RAF, there is now just the 1. Let's not get rid of it simply so that we can provide a load of free weekend flying for children.
Thank you

[SRENNAPS]

cazatou

I must admit I actually agreed on the bale out to that country. I was merely trying to point out that there is money around and we are not as bankrupt as some try to make us believe. Perhaps I should have made that particular point a bit clearer.

........numerous Aerobatic Teams and what today are the "Red Arrows" were the "Yellowjacks" of 4 FTS. There were also the Red Pelicans, Macaws, Vipers, Blue Chips, Cocks of the North, Poachers, Linton Gin, Gemini Pair, Swords and Blades.........

Yes and I saw most of them practice their diplays, sat on the edge of the runway, in the days when St Athan held the Battle of Britain event. Another reason why I feel strongly about this. I agree that we could not possibly keep them all but we have to keep something at the very least. If we don’t fight for our beliefs, our heritage and our pride then we may as well give up.

Those days are gone - never to return

History would suggest that you will be wrong with that assumption.

I would suggest, however, that just 10% of the annual cost of RAFAT would make a significant difference to the Air Cadet Organisation

A good suggestion, but how long before you chopped that element as well to save a bit more money when “times get tougher” in the future?? Lets face it “times” never seem to get better!!

[Martin the Martian]

I've been following this thread with great interest. I am one of those spotters that have been referred to in less than glowing terms a couple of times in the last few pages. I have lost count of the number of times that I have been at an airshow or another event far away from runways and once the Red Arrows have displayed a huge chunk of the audience pick up their chairs and coolboxes and leave. My work colleagues know of my spotting status and, once they have asked me if the local airshow is on for next summer, inevitably ask whether the Reds will be there. Inevitably, they are disappointed if I say no. Many people attend events just because the Reds will be there, and they are willing to spend money, including putting it in services charity boxes.

It has been remarked that the Red Arrows are not needed as a recruitment tool because those who attend airshows are already going down that route. But what sets them, at an age where they are aware of an army and a navy, but only have a hazy impression of what an air force is, on that route in the first place? Some of my earliest memories of attending airshows are of the Reds. many others will say the same, and the inspiration provided to many youngsters is huge.

Yes, the country is in a big financial mess. So are France and Italy, and I cannot see either of them ditching their national teams any time soon. I won't add Spain to that list, despite their problems, as I believe the Eagle Squadron are a part time team.

So CAS ought to make a 'statement', although I remind people that all news will become tomorrow's chip wrappers. But, let's do that. And while we're at it all the bands can go, and the Falcons, and the QCS. The BBMF can be contracted out to one of the Duxford organisations. We can stop having solo aircraft displays, or even sending aircraft to attend the static park. Waddington, Leuchars and Cosford can stop holding their annual shows. Once the decision to bin the Reds is made, the other decisions will be easy. Oh, and as we don't need to recruit, as some say, all of that can go as well. The Exhibition Flight (or whatever it is now called) can go. We can save heaps of money that way, not that any of it will end up being spent on the front line. After all, as some have said, the RAF isn't there to provide air displays.

Of course the RAF will keep needing to have taxpayers' cash, and most taxpayers will suddenly start wondering what the hell we have an air force for. After all, those green helicopters are flown by the army, aren't they? And rescue helicopters are run by the coastguard. Jet fighters? Oh, yes, they land on aircraft carriers, so the navy flies them. And on we go. The RAF is already invisible to great swathes of the British public, so let's make it disappear altogether.

So yes, maybe the Reds could be flown as a part time team from Valley, at least until MFTS is on line. Or maybe we could have a new PFI set up, to run an aerobatic team for the next 25 years. Pilots would be supplied by the RAF, and everything else by the contractor.

I understand why people want the Reds ditched. But to argue that, and then accuse others of knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing, is somewhat hypocritical, in my view. The Red Arrows and the SAR force keep the RAF in the public eye much more than anything else. One of those is already scheduled to go, and I would hate to see both of them disappear.

Just my opinion. I am sure many will disagree with me, and will be forming their arguments and shooting me down in flames. But, as a final point, as a taxpayer who is not in the RAF, who does not have relatives or friends in any of the armed forces, I am more than happy to keep funding those red aeroplanes. Like the rest of the armed forces, they are something to be proud of.

[Entaxei]

The basic principle behind the idea of scrapping the Reds, seem to be one of 'If we scrap the Red Arrows, the Government will be shamed into providing more funds for the RAF/Armed Forces'

Does anyone honestly believe that the collection of 'politicians', currently comprising the Government, Opposition and Others, including the House of Lords, would have any other reaction then saying 'thank you' we have just the niche for this money - which will have nothing to do with the Armed Forces. When has 'shame' been in their vocabulary.

Given their history of theft by stealing money under false claims for expenses, using a rule book they wrote for themselves and fighting any attempt at trying to legally recover the money. Given also their history of featherbedding each others nests and career, there would obviously be no feeling of guilt or shame on their part. You are talking about the self declared elite here - 'poly' does = many & 'tics' = lice.

The only net effect that I can see from such a gesture, is a further reduction in funds and the RAF and you will have done their job for them. They may of course, in exchange, offer you a referendum for some time in the future. ;)

[glad rag]

We have nothing left that we can show
the world and be proud of any more.

EFA.

Apart from our glorious contributions to EU membership of course :(

[cazatou]

Winco

Did I tell AOC's & CinC's what I thought. YES!! In fact a lot of them actively sought our views. I can remember one CAS nominating the Captain (myself) the Navigator (the Flt Cdr) and the senior MALM for a 5 day task so that he could actively seek our views. It had to be me because he wanted to pilot the Aircraft and I was the Instructor/Examiner/IRE.

A CinC STC did the same on another 5 day task. Anybody who served on 32 Sqn in the 80's and early 90's will tell you the same. It is, however, the Politicians who hold the purse strings.

PS I've also said "No" to Mrs T and lived to tell the tale.

[Evalu8ter]

It will truly be a sad day when the Reds disappear, but it seems the luxury of a full-time display team is approaching unaffordability. If the £40m figure for providing new buildings at Waddo is true then it's obscene. So I suggest a few options:

1. Merge the Reds with 100 Sqn and give the Reds a "real job". Yes, the complexity and perhaps size of the display would need to be toned down to befit a "part-time" status but it would enable airframe hours to be husbanded. There's plenty of infra at Leeming so it would save another £40m gin-palace. Reds disappear when the Hawk goes OSD, 100 Sqn role (if required) contracted out.

2. Part time from the front line. Plenty of Typhoons lurking in the UK FIR, put a sqn 4-ship up. Compete it between the sqns every year to give them a taste of competition and a source of pride/rivalry. Winner displays for a year. Probably a simple show but 4 very noisy jets would be an impressive spectacle to see/hear. Twin-engine aircraft also provide a better safety margin for displays over built up areas and we do still want to export these ac for the next 10 years so there's a high chance of strong corporate sponsorship. Oh, hang on, might get in the way of the exercise plot......

3. Bin them now. The RAF provides role demos from front line types. The airshow world is not the same as the 80s/90s. Sad but true. The BBMF provide the core of RAF representation with the role demos (both FW and RW) to back up.

4. The RAF invests in a small fleet of Extra-type ac and recruit from across all of the pilot branch to man them (AT/RW guys with UAS/AEF time would be eligable - that way you'd get the "war story" angle and perhaps the odd DFC..). Cheap to buy and run - paint them in a striking RAF display scheme and move them abroad in a C17 if required. Might p*ss off the Blades though...

5. Carry on funding the Reds as is, splashing out on some swanky new Sqn buildings at Waddo and pretending that all is well in the RAF budget.

Joking aside, tough choices ahead methinks....

[Hueymeister]

I've watched them since I can remember, some 37 yrs in fact. the Hawk is getting on and must be more expensive than the Tucano to run. Given that both types are due for retirement, may be a Grob team? I think they do a marvellous job, but surely it's time to think about alternatives.

Does anyone have any info on costs of RAFAT through FOI etc? If so please post it so we can have some proper discussion?

[SRENNAPS]

PS I've also said "No" to Mrs T and lived to tell the tale.

Sorry cazatou, can’t resist:

Did she ask the question “Cazatou, shall I bin most of the Navy Ships and keep the Red Arrows”……..or was it “Should I be No 48 and the Red Arrows No 47”:

Fish and chips voted no 1 in the Best of British poll - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2186214/Fish-and-chips-voted-no-1-in-the-Best-of-British-poll.html)

And before anybody says “only” No 47, at least they are there, listed in a light hearted poll about the best of British. They mean something to many people.

[cazatou]

SRENNAPS

There was no need to ask such a question - Mr Brown had not, at that stage, been let loose to create havoc with the nations finances. You do remember his Mantra don't you?

"A Pound spent on Defence is a Pound wasted."

Do pay Attention!!

[cazatou]

Hueymeister

Estimated Cost of RAFAT 2009/10

6.1 million Pounds of which fuel costs were 1.2 million Pounds.

That was the projected costing which does not take into account any required rectification following such events as birdstrikes or other mishaps.

[FireAxe]

Where else could you get world over coverage for the RAF/UK brand at only £6 mil. How easy can that be squandered on something with no appreciable result or benefit. If you are happy to bin the Reds over just 6 mil then God help anything else worth keeping just for enjoyment, I know let's get rid of bank holidays as they must cost the country millions in lost business tax revenue! Or how about life is not just about money it's about enjoyment I mean who wants to go and watch an airshow with a taxpayer funded team better still scrap airshows all together think of the millions saved then!

[SRENNAPS]

Cazatou,

Not sure I fully understand your reply. Maybe you cannot remember the cuts made to the Royal Navy in Maggie’s first year. (I think you would have been about 15 and I admit I was only 19, but I was serving at the time and the cuts sent shock waves everywhere). Ironically we had the Falklands war shortly after that and suddenly we needed a Navy again.

Assuming that you are an intelligent man I am staggered that you seem to hold Gordon Brown responsible for the state of the Nations Finances. Every country in Europe and even the USA is facing the same difficulties. It is down to incompetence and greed in the economic world, not the PM who just happens to be in post at the time. It would have happened if any PM or party had been in power.

"A Pound spent on Defence is a Pound wasted." Yes, in words he did say that but I think those words need to be looked at in the full context.

Estimated Cost of RAFAT 2009/10

6.1 million Pounds of which fuel costs were 1.2 million Pounds.

That was the projected costing which does not take into account any required rectification following such events as birdstrikes or other mishaps.

Please do not take this the wrong way or as a personal attack on your good self and maybe I am being paranoid, but you seem to have a lot of figures about the RAFAT and use them to support your argument to bin them. I prey to God that you are not in a position to influence any decision on the Red Arrows or even worse the RAF as a whole.

Anyway, I think me and you will always agree to differ on this argument so why don’t we just knock it on the head and let time take its course.
Regards

[Trenchard Brat]

Firstly, with apologies to Lord Trenchards Brat, with there being over 30,000 users of this site i am sure that there must be some near naming on profiles, but when you pick your name there was no conflicts, any way, the cost to the MOD every year to keep the Reds in the air is £80m upwards, , as i said before, for every hour flown now requires 24 hrs maintainance, the Airframe is tired out, tailplanes have to be removed every 25 hrs for NDT checking, this takes 4 men 3 hrs at a time to carry out, along with the NDT specialist being brought in from Waddo every day, then there is the functionals and duplicate (independent) inspections, the continual problem with the Hyd 2 system airiating causing the R.A.T. to pop in flight, the rising cost of jet fuel as well as deisel,the wagee bill for a squadron of 130 people is neaely £5m, Bea Systems no longer sponsor the team, every one who wants to buy Hawk have done now, the hotel bills are hardly covered by the Airshow fee,s Ping may throw in a few golf clubs every year and thats about it, people may think i am anti Reds, let me tell you it was one of the highlights of my Military Career being one of the "Blues"...............but i also spent many years on the Harrier and Nimrod force....and to see the decimation of the RAF i love being carried out at the moment, i cannot justify a squadron of 13 jets being used purley to display for 4 months of the year when you are getting rid of the only Close Air Support jet we had left (Typhoon and Tornado are IDS a/c)
The Reds have even lost their role as secondary air defence fighter in the Mixed Fighter role, the weapons boxes have been removed and replaced with GPS............i dont want to see them go but i would rather see every Guy/Gal on the ground with the full protective kit they deserve instead of just the second hand kit they have to hand back at Kandahar Air base when they are repatriated...left for the next set of poor buggers coming in on Timmy Tristar.......sorry boys but its time to go

[longer ron]

I am staggered that you seem to hold Gordon Brown responsible for the state of the Nations Finances

Broon and his cronies (mandy etc) were squandering public money right up to the last minute of their term in what I view as financial sabotage...sure the world bankers screwed us as well (they still are btw).
Easy to blame cameron etc for cuts that I view as scandalous but Broon and co left us in dire straits financially.

As somebody else posted on one of the recent threads - MOD has not exactly helped by also squandering billions over the years.
I also do not believe that the reds are self financing (see TB's last post) and I never thought I would ever say that we should bin the reds - but our air force is now too small to retain a full time display team !!

[airpolice]

The cost of the Reds would seem to be somewhere between the 6 Million and the 80 Million pound figures quoted.

How nice it would be to have the truth, facts and accurate figures with explanations for them. No more hiding things behind the idea that the engineers and pilots are in the RAF anyway so their salaries don't count.

[davejb]

Where else could you get world over coverage for the RAF/UK brand at only £6 mil. How easy can that be squandered on something with no appreciable result or benefit. If

WTF do we need to get 'world coverage for the RAF/UK brand' for? It's a fighting service, not an aftershave.

[Squirrel 41]

Davejb

Yes. And moreover, if the Reds' rationale were solely:

Where else could you get world over coverage for the RAF/UK brand at only £6 mil?

Then if it was such great value, then Foreign Office would be banging on the MoD's door to stop the Reds getting binned with a big bag of unmarked £50 notes. :hmm: Not sure that we're going to see the FCO dashing across Whitehall anytime soon.... :=

S41

[pasptoo]

somewhere between the 6 Million and the 80 Million pound

This seems to be a common problem with the MoD, no one really knows how much things have truly cost and now troops on the ground have inadequate kit or are losing their jobs!

The military are being decimated by the misappropriation funds from too many years of 5* hotels and 1st class travel, not to mention wasted funds on the inability to write a proper contract!

Yes, the Reds are a great "future" recruiting tool, yes they do sell UK PLC, however I have a feeling that no one will be buying into UK PLC as we no longer have anything to sell!

God help those left behind - no prospects, no promotions, no pensions!

[Trenchard Brat]

The Hawk is not rated as a "Complex" aircraft its realitivlly easy to service, but lets look at some number crunching shall we and work out how you can only spend £6m a year on 13 jets. Adour 15101 Engine, £250,000 to overhaul, (at least 7 done in a season) Canopy refurbs £750,000 (at least 2 a year)....remember now that the RAF have cut back on its 3rd line support everything has to go to industry, at least all 13 will have a primary or primary star servicing every year at some point, maybe even 2 each, at least 3 will be on a Minor servicing and one will have a major servicing. Now the RAF operate a half life system on most components fitted to its jets, when it reaches half its safe working life its refurbished or replaced, a set of 4 filters for the oxygen system £25,000 is one number that springs to mind, all 13 jets will have them replaced in a season, the Hawk is notorious for the Airframe guys as a drill out not screw out jet, Triwing fastners fitted to all panels you may have to drill out 10 per large panel due to the slots in the head ripping when you turn them, they can cost about £1 each, thousands are replaced over a year.
All of you who operate your Cessna 150s and Cherokees baulk when you have to have an annual done to them....the cost is huge as you all know, well multiply what you pay by about 1000% and you will get a fair idea of the cost then times that by 13 and tell me £6m is a realistic number. The Officers wage bill alone is £250,000 a year before adding the SNCOs and other ranks on top, and yes that does come out of the defence budget.....so your £6m is looking a bit thin now isnt it, are they worth it anymore when you look at the hard facts of what they produce and at what cost..................i leave that open to discussion

[cazatou]

Srennaps

I am flattered by your opinion of my age, but I first flew Mrs Thatcher on the 5th/6th September 1979 whilst serving with 32 Sqn when I was 33 yrs old and in my 15th year of Service; the destinations were Dounreay and Aberdeen.

PS
Having also flown Mr Brown I am afraid that there is little point in expressing my opinion of that person as the Mods would have no option but to delete such a post.

PPS
I Googled RAFAT operating costs.

[BEagle]

Having also flown Mr Brown...

George Brown?


.

[F3sRBest]

too many years of 5* hotels and 1st class travel, not to mention wasted funds on the inability to write a proper contract!

Care to elaborate or is this just random speculation?

[cazatou]

George Brown?

Back in 1969 I did - but it was on a different Squadron. An affable person.

The Money Counting Mr G Brown was a different proposition altogether.

[SRENNAPS]

cazatou

I am flattered by your opinion of my age, :O:p:rolleyes:

That certainly made me chuckle when I read your post and then realised that I had looked at France 46 and misread it as your age; Sorry:eek:

I bet you have some great stories from some very interesting jobs that you have obviously done over the years. It would be fascinating to sit and have a beer with you, I am sure.

I enjoyed the “discussions” that we had over the last couple of days and I totally respect your views, even if we have slight differences on them.
All the very best to you.

Kind Regards

Srennaps

[goudie]

George Brown?
Back in 1969 I did - but it was on a different Squadron. An affable person.

Affable? Drunk usually! Story about him (by A.N. Wilson) attending some foreign embassy function or other, and asking someone in brightly coloured dress if they 'cared to have this waltz with me? Person replies 'it is not a waltz, it's my country's National Anthem and I'm the Archbishop!

I think it's been said already but before we bin the 'Reds' should we not bin Foreign Aid and benefits to illegals?

[airpolice]

The point that Goudie makes is exactly why the Reds need to go.

We can all point at things that should go before our own pet area is chopped.

Mostly the Reds are what is being pointed at. While we still have them protected at the expense of the front line, nobody else will offer any meaningful sacrifices.

[4mastacker]

If the Reds are binned, would it not also be time to bin all the Army's horses, and their associated paraphernalia, that prance around Horseguards and which, as far as I am aware, do not have a front-line role (apart from providing a source of food if times get really bad!). They may have historical/heritage value, but that's no saving grace - I do believe that Liam Fox did say something about "no place for sentiment or emotion" when the SDSR was announced.


ducks down really low for inevitable incoming from the khaki side!

[cazatou]

4mastacker

A cheap shot which merely shows your ignorance about the Armed Forces. Yes the Horse and Foot Guards have a ceremonial role - but they are also Front Line Fighting Units.

The Bands have a Ceremonial Role as well - but the Bandsmen and Women have a secondary role as Paramedics.

PS This "incoming" is from the Light Blue side.

[draken55]

What about the horses?

I guess the concern is not simply the fact the Army has horses but that it owns around 4000 of them. The annual cost to "maintain" these cannot be insignificant, so it's not unreasonable to ask if such a large number can continue to be funded within a shrinking Defence Budget.

With the Navy having to pay for the Trident replacement and it and the RAF and RN losing capabilities, can we afford if you will pardon the expression, any sacred cows:ooh:

[4mastacker]

Cazatou, read my post again. I said the "horses"...not the blokes who ride 'em.! I'm fully aware that the troops have a role in the front-line using much more modern equipment. And I'm no more ignorant about the Armed Forces than yourself. I spent my time serving on a variety of front-line units, unlike some I could mention who seem to have spent their career ensconsed in their own little comfortable bubble in the leafy suburbs.


4ma ---out!

[airpolice]

Front line horses? When did they last see some action?

Apart from ceremonial duty, when did a horse last get into action? I know that the QRA shooting down aircraft is not an everyday thing either, but they do get launched to go take a look.

When did the horses last earn their keep?

As for the Band, I think that to call them Paramedics is a stretch, if you'll pardon the pun.

[cazatou]

draken 55

It would be interesting to compare the overall cost of maintaining the horses to the cost of maintaining the RAFAT Fleet.

[cazatou]

goudie

Please enlighten me - how many times did you fly Mr Brown?

[airpolice]

I don't see them filling a role as Paramedics; stretcher bearers and essential operational support in medical stations yes, but not Paramedics. A proper full time Paramedic is closer to a Casualty Surgeon than to a GP or a First Aider. The members of the band seem more like the old job of Ambulance Driver rather than Paramedics.

This bit below comes from the Horse's mouth, as it were.


Our primary role is to supply first class music for any military event, State event or for any event that requires musical support and raises the profile of the Army and associated charities throughout the world.




The Corps also has an operational capability, and at present this is in support of the Army Medical Services. This includes chemical decontamination of casualties for the field hospitals and general duties. This general duties could be guarding key installations to guarding prisoners of war. A number of CAMUS personnel have served or are about to serve on Op Herrick - Afghanistan - in general support roles.




What a career in Army music can offer:

Bursary scheme for students enrolled on performance based courses in both further and higher education
A structured career with employment potential to 55 years of age
The opportunity to gain diplomas and degrees, subsidised by the Army
To play alongside some of the world's best musicians, in 1 of 22 Regular Army bands, based throughout the United Kingdom
Extensive travel opportunities with the chance to play in some of the worlds greatest concert venues and arenas
The chance to perform in a variety of musical ensembles playing varied musical genres
The opportunity to participate in a wide range of sporting and adventurous training activities
Free medical and dental care
A full time salaried and pensionable career, as a professional musician


How much a week does it cost to feed a horse? I'm asking because 1.2 Million quid a year for fuel to feed the 13 Jets compared to 4,000 horses is how much week per horse?

From the most recent figures I could find:

Red Arrows
13 Jets using £1,200,000 in fuel.
is £92,307.69 per jet per year
or £23,076.92 a week
at £1,775.15 per jet.

Horses, let's say the Army spend what the RAF spend on "fuel" for the horses.

4,000 Horses
£1,200,000 for food
£23,076.92 a week
£300 per horse per year
is £5.77 a week

Can you really feed a horse on less than £6 a week?

So how much more is the Army spending on horse food than the Red Arrows are spending on aviation fuel?

[goudie]

Please enlighten me - how many times did you fly Mr Brown?Question is irrelevant Cazatou, and my apologies if you thought my intention was meant to distract from your personal view of George Brown.
Affable he may have been, in your presence. I was merely quoting from a book by
A. N. Wilson, 'Our Times', in which he describes Brown, among other things, as a drunken buffoon. The anecdote I quoted was intended to illustrate this.
True or not, it's a humorous story IMHO.

On Look East News tonight, they said the Government has ditched a Centralised Fire Fighting Control Centre at Waterbeach Cambs, having spent £4.5 million on it!

[BEagle]

How much a week does it cost to feed a horse? I'm asking because 1.2 Million quid a year for fuel to feed the 13 Jets compared to 4,000 horses is how much week per horse?Well, I'm sure that it costs more than £5.77 per week to keep a horse....

£1200000 / 52 = £23076.92
£23076.92 / 4000 = £5.77

(Not allowing for the recycled value of ex-pongo dobbins for dog food)

[If all else fails]

4000 Horses! Crikey! That does seem an awful lot of horses.

I have....sorry had.. a foot in both camps, as it were, spent many years in the Line Cavalry (but sadly we existed on our own horses) regardless, the ceremonial duties conducted by the HCMR significantly reflect the precedence - that the Nation was built from the back of the horse, the Soldiers boot and endless dollops of rum sodomy and the lash. That 'The Few' once saved us, is without doubt - but I'm afraid that 300 or more years of history and tradition set against a hundred years of some, quite frankly, dubious habits should not be the measure of the Nations pride in the Armed Forces.

It seems to me that 4000 horses is indeed far too many, when the number of tanks is (or about to be) 1/10th of that or even less...so how about ..say 400 horses (surely that should be sufficient for the ceremonial duties...it really does take a long time to get a horse to that standard and keep it there...that irony won't be lost on the pilots of course) and a commensurate reduction on the part of RAFAT .....so....er...0.9 Red Arrows then...but I think we could round that up?

This is of course the lunacy of such a thread, I wonder if all those on ARSE are doing the same? Some how I think not.

There are so very many measures that are availible to reduce the Nations real 'costs' and all it will take is for our leaders (and voters) to see that.

Sadly though, I think this thread should be discontinued - for fear of giving them too many 'good' ideas.

[4mastacker]

If all else fails wrote;

.............This is of course the lunacy of such a thread, I wonder if all those on ARSE are doing the same? Some how I think not.Oh yes they are!! (Seeing it's the pantomime season.) ;)

Scrap Red Arrows (http://www.arrse.co.uk/royal-air-force/139150-scrap-red-arrows.html)

[If all else fails]

No No No ......I mean about their bloody horses!

[airpolice]

Now that we have all had a laugh....back to business.

Draken55 wrote:
I guess the concern is not simply the fact the Army has horses but that it owns around 4000 of them.

However, I did a wee bit of digging and.......

This is from Hansard, 1st March 2007

Mr. Maples: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) how many horses are stabled at the Army’s expense but not owned by them; and what the total annual cost of keeping them is; [121904]
(2) how many horses the Army owns; and what the total estimated cost is of keeping them. [121905]


Derek Twigg: The number of horses currently owned by the Army is 626.
The total estimated cost of keeping these horses is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Similarly, information on the number of horses stabled at the Army’s expense, but not owned by them, and the financial arrangements for keeping them are not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.


So, either they bought an average of three horses a day since that statement was produced.....or they do not in fact own 4,000 Horses.

Draken55, your source of the 4,000 horses figure, if you please?

Beagle will correct me if I am wrong but I think £36.86 a week might still be a bit short of the mark.

[cazatou]

airpolice

You should know better than to let facts get in the way of a sincerely held prejudice!!

[draken55]

Air Police

My sincere apologies The figure I quoted was from memory and I should have checked the source article first before posting. I was planning to do that this morning anyway. My source was an article in the Yorkshire Post of 21 October:-

"The Army still seems incapable of deploying more than 10 per cent of its
strength on a regular basis. We are told that it is losing 7,000 personnel from its inflated numbers, half the proportion of people that the far more efficient Royal Navy is losing. One wonders what fraction of the Army's 3,000 horses, each the cost of a lieutenant colonel, is being cut."

This article was written by Prof Eric Grove and the figures do disagree with those from Hansard in 2007. The reply in Hansard appears a little strange mentioning Horses "stabled" by the Army but not "owned" by them. It avoids giving a more detailed response by claiming it could only be done at "disproportionate cost"! So the Army "owns" 626 but could be paying for the upkeep of a greater but unknown figure.

Prof Grove can be contacted by e-mail. We may need to contact him for his source of information to try and resolve this issue!

[airpolice]

I'd be interested in hearing his story. Are we in on the ground floor of Horsegate where we uncover lies in the house?

I doubt it, but let's hear what he has to say anyway.

[Basil]

could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Here's my guess:
We keep our chaps horses for them and charge no livery fee and refuse to tell you how much it costs you.

[draken55]

Air Police

Do like the Horsegate quip:D

I have now sent an e-mail to Prof Grov requesting further details. Just have to wait and see if we can resolve this nagging doubt over the figures!

[Could be the last?]

Airpol'

How many horses are stabled, that don't belong to the Army.......etc etc.

Maybe the ac that don't belong to the MOD/RAF (private/club ac), which are taking a great deal of hangar space at various stations should be charged a more realistic price for the privilege. Moreover, when they are having subsidized fuel into the bargain, maybe a percentage of the fees should be taken and given to fund the Reds/BBMF etc.

Example: The old 'Reds' hangar at RAFC. Astounding that I had to seek out the Flying Club OIC (non-mil) to ask to move his ac, so an 'Op' Sqn could park one of theirs!!!!! Priorities:mad:

That said, I did hear that the cost of the new hangar at RAF W for the reds was astronomical i.e. 10mil plus. Why not move them back into RAFC where their original hangar ( the one now occupied by said flying club) could be made available, or is that too easy? Don't go into the airspace issues, very shortly there will be very few ac flying around RAFC!!!!!!

Just a few thoughts........:ok:

[Clockwork Mouse]

I suspect that the horses designated as stabled by the Army but not belonging to them could include some officers' chargers privately owned but used for military ceremonial and the odd stallion and brood mare passing through for equine nooky.
Unless one of them is descended from Pegasus I fail to see what this fascinating divergence from the original thread has to do with military aviation!

[cazatou]

airpolice

Professor Eric Grove is Professor of Naval History at the University of Salford.

[airpolice]

Could be,

I must declare a potential conflict of interest there. I have, to a great extent, benefitted from just such an arrangement.

I may however, quite easily be prepared to "see the light" and publicly condem such "benefit in kind" that comes from being a member of one the RAF Flying Clubs.

There are real benefits to the servioe of having the clubs and they don't cost much, but it seems wrong that they should get priority over operational issues. I've not seen any evidence of that happening, and I would notice it, but it may well be going on.


Perhaps someone else might like to chip in here..........

[airpolice]

Caz, the man gets about, but I don't see any evidence of him ever having had a proper job or doing any kind of military service. Pich of salt and all that.

[cazatou]

airpolice

We share completely the same view in that respect.

[glad rag]

SRENNAPS

There was no need to ask such a question - Mr Brown had not, at that stage, been let loose to create havoc with the nations finances. You do remember his Mantra don't you?

"A Pound spent on Defence is a Pound wasted."

Do pay Attention!!

Actually, taken in it's correct contex, the above quote the mentalist said WAS actually spot on.:E

[BEagle]

Could be the last?, Service Flying Clubs most assuredly do NOT get priority over any Service need - neither do they receive 'subsidised fuel'. No Service resources (e.g. empty hangars) may be used unless they're not being used for anything else. The rules governing navigation, landing, parking and housing fees are very specific, so there should be no 'free loaders' these days.

We used to have to move our aircraft out of the Air Movs hangar every time the aux movers needed to conduct any training -which was a complete pain. So we managed to buy an old canvas hangar.

One of our civilian members (who did subsidise servicemen's flying) once tripped over when pulling an aeroplane out of the hangar and clouted himself on the door anchor. So we asked the RAF trauma truck to take a look at him...."You're a civilian, 'smorethanmyjobsworth" was the helpful comment.

[cazatou]

glad rag

In its correct context Neville Chamberlain's statement "I believe it is Peace in our Time" was accurate from his viewpoint. That viewpoint was far removed from reality and that quotation haunted him until his demise.

[glad rag]

Caz Hi.

He was on about the waste in Procurment, I think we can agree on both that and the fact that I ain't defending him or his parties destructive reign.:oh:

GR

[airpolice]

Beagle, perhaps "subsidised" is not the best word there. With your knowledge of such things, can you explain the "Entitled" bit that we put on the voucher when we sign for fuel. Is that not in order to get a better rate?

As for landing fees, you quite rightly state that the rules are clear, but you fail to mention ( for the benefit of those not familiar with the system ) that the clubs do not pay any landing fees or hangar charges for club aircraft or aircraft owned by club members.

This makes flying at an RAF club substantially cheaper than the civvy airfield a few miles down the road. In some cases, half the price of doing so.

For retired service people with their own aircraft, this can make it viable, or even attractive as opposed to it being out of the question on cost grounds.

I would just like to add that having a busy flying club on a station can help to keep some units in current practice. With the reduction in operational flying, there can be days where the only action that ATC get to deal with is the flying club.

It would be a shame if the facilities afforded to the clubs were to be withdrawn, but if they were taking money away from front line work (which they are not) then nobody would be able to argue the point.

As I see it, the RAFFCA setup is worth the money, but I suppose the Reds say that about their bit, as will everyone else.

[Winco]

airpolice

Are you bonkers??

If what you say is correct, and you guys are able to benefit from some little 'perk' that is available to current and ex service members, then why are you effectively offering it up on here?? Before you know it, the next thing that will happen is that you will have the journos telling Dr Fox that you are getting 'free' hangarage, 'free' landing fees et al and it will stop.

Just because it might be cheaper than the local flying club is probably because it isn't being run as a commercial business, and it doesn't need to make money.

I think it's great that some stations can offer such facilities. It must be one of the few things left I would think, in this ever-dwindling, cost-cutting Air Force thati is open to all, even ex servicemen.

For Christs sake man, keep quiet about such things, unless you want to loose them that is.

[Range Rat]

Yes. Aipolice is Bonkers. Read some of his old posts. Complains that a serving individual going through a gender change does not have a grip on reality. Talk about people in glass houses!!!!!! I wouldn't trust him to make me a nato standard nevermind share a foxhole. Threw His toys from His pram on more than one occasion. How about sharing Your tales of going AWOL more than once. Come on Airpolice, spill the beans. Keep the Faith! Never crossed his mind.

[langleybaston]

too late by far

[Toddington Ted]

"Caz, the man gets about, but I don't see any evidence of him ever having had a proper job or doing any kind of military service. Pich of salt and all that."

Airpolice, I must disagree.

Professor Eric Grove was my tutor when I was a student (Acting Sub-lieutenant) at BRNC Dartmouth in 1978. He was a civilian and, as far as I know, always has been. He inspired me to work hard to achieve a good mark in my Naval History exams (pity I couldn't do the same when I tried aviating!) and, as he was also a Great Western Railway enthusiast, the chap could do no wrong in my view!:ok:

[4mastacker]

Went missing for 8 Days in 1977, found at home, returned via the Leuchars guardroom at the weekend and back to work on the Monday morning.Thread creep - 'on'

airpolice -- You might have been my guest when I was O/Cpl. Brought in by one of the local P&SS heavies and released by the Orderly Officer "without prejudice to re-arrest" on the Sunday night??

Thread creep - 'off'

[tmmorris]

Flying Club OIC (non-mil)

No comprene. How is he an Officer In Charge if not an Officer...? That certainly isn't the way RAFFCA is supposed to work.

RAFFCA is in principle no different to e.g. The Order of the Buffalo (or whatever) having a spare building in Wiltshire, or a squadron taking over a spare hut for a bar. If the buildings were needed for military purposes they would of course have to be given back - as half of our hangar was (indeed, all of it for a time, and the aircraft were turned out on the grass). The other resources used - ATC, taxiways, runways - are there anyway and our impact on them is negligible, and we are lowest priority traffic and often have to wait out to get out of the way of rightfully more important traffic (e.g. the civilian police or Air Ambulance helicopters also based there).

Tim

[airpolice]

Ted, by "proper Job" I meant earning a living in a commercial environment, not just getting by on what the taxpayers contribute.

He's still not explained the three thousand horses bit.

[Lightning Mate]

We will have nothing left that we can show
the world and be proud of any more.

Oh yes we have.

We have bands 'an trumpets 'an ceremony 'an drums 'an beating the retreat 'an other pompous :mad: rubbish.

Sing after me - "...there'll always be a trumpet, there'll always be a drum....."

To the tune of Britain never never will be some kind of :mad:......

[Toddington Ted]

Airpolice. Oh I see. Well you won't want to know me then, I haven't done a proper job either, 32 years in the Military and now an MOD Civil Servant. I've enjoyed it all. Happy New Year!

[airpolice]

Happy New Year to you too, Ted (two pensions) Toddington.

[Herc-u-lease]

Air police,

by definition of a proper job, do you include military as a proper job? - after all the taxpayers contribute to that. I had the pleasure of listening to Eric Grove at a seminar a few years ago. Very knowledgeable chap, immensely clever. He has probably contributed more (albeit indirectly) to the defence of this nation than you or I will certainly ever achieve.

I kind of got board with the RIAT bashing, but while i'm on here; if you were to look at the dividends that listed companies pay, as a percentage it is approximately similar to that of RAFCTE charitable output. I too would like to see more of the revenue go directly to those who need it, but in the commercial world RAFCTE's numbers are comparable. the costs of doing business and investing enough money to stay relevant are enormous. I just hope RAFCTE's accounts for the future are more promising than the current set.

Happy new year

[langleybaston]

There was a Colonel at JHQ c. 1980 who, on marching out, had no difficulty and no embarrassment in explaining turd-marks on the carpet: "It was m'orse".

Never mind stabling in stables.

[typerated]

Does anyone know what is the situation with fatigue life for the Hawk fleet?

I presume lack of the above may well kill the Arrows before any political decision.

There certainly will not be money in the coffers to buy T2s as a replacement

TR

[grandfer]

Why not use the Harriers at Wittering & Cottesmore , there's loads of them available for display flying !:ok::ok::mad:

[Shell Management]

Time to seek sponsorship for each aircraft. Win-win.:ok:

[TurningFinals]

Why bin something that is such great PR for the RAF? They also attract crowds to air shows (well, to the few air shows we have left) who then spend money.

[PFMG]

Sorry, but we are supposed to be in the business of providing air power not running air shows to make profits for various stall holders and fairground operatives......and on the other point why do we need positive PR when we are binning 5,000 perfectly good people in the next few years?

[Justanopinion]

When in actual fact I joined as Aircrew because of the promise of:

Girls
Pop-star wages
Work hard play hard ethos
Jollys to exotic locations
Hotels on Det
Rates
A great bunch of mates who don't take life too seriously
And more Girls

my biggest moan is that I don't get as much as I used to
(except for the wages....PA Spine) :}

Really PFMG? Projecting airpower doesn't seem to be on your list of reasons why you joined up.

[Tourist]

Justanopinion

If "projecting airpower" was on your list when you were a teenager, then it's probable and lucky "girls" and "a great bunch of mates" weren't.

But that's just an opinion

[Justanopinion]

Tourist

I had no list - just happy to get a job that turned into a career.

[PFMG]

Justanopinion

You seem to be confusing my job (what I'm paid to do) with the reason I joined (what I hoped to get in return).

It's not my job to provide the public with a jolly day out - that said, I would never try to suggest that I've not taken part in a few and reaped some of the fringe benefits. :E

[Justanopinion]

PFMG

Thanks - got it that time. Back to the Red Arrows.............

[airborne_artist]

Red Arrows on standby for No-Fly Zone Grand Finale spectacular ;)
(http://www.newsbiscuit.com/2011/03/30/red-arrows-on-standby-for-no-fly-zone-grand-finale-spectacular/)