Lord Digby Jones on the BBC

[Geehovah]

Am I the only one disturbed that someone as distinguished as LDJ can stand in front of a camera and spout such clap trap, particularly when he talks finance?

Disband the RAF and concentrate on the FAA and the AAC? Has he looked at the roles of Air Power that are being exercised at present?

Would either service fund MIDS? Would the Navy fund Sentinel. Would the AAC fund JSF or UCAV? I could go on but......

Of all the times to spout such rubbish, now is not one of them!

[Archimedes]

You mean Lord Digby Jones, sometime beneficiary of an RN University scholarship, and perhaps not quite as free of service bias as some people would probably like us to believe?

[PPRuNeUser0139]

Digby Jones... I was there when he spoke at the annual prizegiving at my wife's school and he used a standard speech he'd obviously given before.. Nothing wrong with that you may think except he should have read through it beforehand to see if it was suitable for 11-18 year old girls. Which it wasn't. Very adult material and he came across as a complete buffoon.

[Tourist]

You must be aware that this forum is almost entirely light blue centric, and that other people outside the RAF do not hold the same views as most of those on here.
It may be comforting to believe that the views on here are normal, but they aren't.
His views, whilst I do not by any means agree with all of them, are not quite as far from many of the rest of the military's views as those on here would like to think.

Geehovah
"Would the Navy fund Sentinel"
Well it appears that neither will the RAF after 2015.....

[anotherthing]

Geehovah,

whilst in no way agreeing with LDJ, it is not as simple a question as "if the RAF were disbanded would the RN and AAC fund X,Y and Z (being RAF tasks)"

If those roles were needed then the answer would be 'Yes'. What you would do though is streamline the services by getting rid of one of the sets of countless adminers that are currently employed by all 3 services, thus potentially making more money available for the Front Line.

The RAF is an easy target because the RN already have a Fixed Wing capability (talking pilots, maintainers etc, not airframes) and the AAC have a rotary capability. Therefore from a very simplistic point of view, the RAF is possibly the easiest of the 3 services to amalgamate with the other two.

[Ken Scott]

The RAF is an easy target because the RN already have a Fixed Wing capability (talking pilots, maintainers etc, not airframes) and the AAC have a rotary capability. Therefore from a very simplistic point of view, the RAF is possibly the easiest of the 3 services to amalgamate with the other two.

By that logic the RAF have aircraft, both rotary & fixed wing, and the RAF Regiment. Expand the latter, bring back the boat squadrons & disband both the army & the navy, keep only the RAF!!

What you would do though is streamline the services by getting rid of one of the sets of countless adminers that are currently employed by all 3 services,

Go one better, get rid of two sets of adminers, get rid of horses & bands etc, lots more money for the front line!

[Clockwork Mouse]

UAV trial shows non-pilots 'equally skilled', says RAF.
You're all doomed! The geeks shall inherit the skies.

[thunderbird7]

The geeks shall inherit the skies.

Well they've inherited the engineering branch already :rolleyes:

[davejb]

As in 'The meek shall inherit the Earth (if that's okay with the rest of you)'

To suggest that the RN's experience of fixed wing equates in any way with that of the RAF is risible - the RN has a kernel of knowledge and experience that is stupendously less than the RAF's (although, admittedly, the ratio is shrinking daily). For RN to take over the RAF for air tasking makes as much sense as the RAF regiment taking over the land war and absorbing the army.

Whether our brain dead leaders decide to do it or not is another matter, frankly I'm surprised Barabara Windsor or Jordan hasn't been made CDS by now.

[Clearedtoroll]

It'll never happen, not because of tradition (which counts for nothing today), but for good financial and operational reasons.

Unless we cut capabilities (which is an often mixed up but entirely different argument), nothing will get saved by merging the Services but it would cost a lot to do... There is very little duplication anymore: most stuff that can be merged to save money has been made 'Joint' a long time ago. The 3 Services, for better or worse, are essentially already 'brands' (cringing at using that word, but it makes sense) of one organisation a lot more integrated than most outsiders seem to think.

Additionally, the competitive tension between the 3 Services (each with a slightly different perspective and collective expertise) is arguably a positive driver to efficiency. Certainly each of the Services is quite quick to hammer the others for perceived inefficiencies or outdated doctrine.

Digby Jones and many others will continue to talk... But I would be confident that any independent review would disagree with him.

[Justanopinion]

To suggest that the RN's experience of fixed wing equates in any way with that of the RAF is risible

Really Dave? I guess from your comments that you have actually flown the Harrier and are in a postion to make such a statement? My guess is, as a Nimrod mate - probably not.

Anyway - when the German Navy wrapped up their last Tornado wing the Navy aircrew were told that they were now in the German Luftwaffe. In the unlikely event that the RAF was disbanded i guess the same sort of cross over would occur... nicer uniform too.

PS I am light blue

[ghostnav]

Didn't take long for Tourist to raise his head and start spouting off!

It is interesting that some other Service personnel have little positive to support Air Power. Fortunately, they do not count when it comes to understanding the capabilities and utility of an independent air force.