Red Arrows for the Chop?

[Finningley Boy]

I've just had a wander over to UKAR and the latest buzz is a story in the Daily Mirror that the Red Arrows are now in Cameron's sights?

Mind you I don't think that Tory ex-Public School Types get along too famously with the Daily Mirror. A bit like a Neanderthal's Guardian or Independent really!:ouch:

FB:)

[Archimedes]

Aren't we about due the statutory 'Victory for [name of tabloid] as Red Arrows saved' campaign based upon someone seeing/claiming to have seen a document for the next PR? The Express won that campaign in the latter days of the Blair government, then again when Brown was PM, and then handed the baton over to the Mail, who failed miserably to claim victory in a story so badly handled (Reds banned from flying over Olympics because they'll upset illegal immigrants who've driven house prices down, or something like that) that it died a death very quickly.

I assume that after the Mail's inability to carry a made up story through to a successful conclusion, the cabal of tabloid editors stripped them of their right to have a second attempt and passed it on to the Mirror instead. I look forward to learning via these means that their campaign has been successful in due course and learning which organ has been tasked with fighting this essential campaign in the 2015 'crap defence related stories' season.

[Load Toad]

This rumour happens every year without fail.

[MTOW]

Am I the only one who thinks that the move to chop might have more legs this year than in the past?

I mean, if you were one of Their Airships and you were given the choice - the Arrows or something operational had to go, (as surely must be the case that's being put to them with the depth of the cuts being made), putting emotions aside for one moment - as you'd have to - what would you choose?

I hate to say it, but for the sake of the people in the field, I hope the answer would be an easy one.

A compromise might be one that works for other countries - maintain the Arrows, but in a part time capacity, with the members made up of pilots whose day job is instructing.

[Hilife]

Not that I have an inside edge, but as BAE Systems is a front runner with its Hawk AJT for the U.S. Air Force’s Advanced Pilot Training Platform, the winner of which will be chosen just next year and worth some $7bn, I would have thought it unlikely that the Red Arrows would be given the chop before a decision is made.

Any plans for a Stateside tour in the next 18-months per chance?

[CoffmanStarter]

Don't worry chaps ...

38 Squadron are doing a work up :E

A Swarm of Nano Quadrotors - YouTube

Just love that horizontal "figure of eight" :D

Coff.

[Courtney Mil]

That's brilliant, but slightly spooky, Coff.

I seem to recall, from my considerable time at HQ1 Gp, having to answer questions every year about why we shouldn't scrap the Arrows and why we needed to keep 100 Sqn and so forth. Same question each time. Same answer each time. Same outcome each time. So I suppose it could be said that the headline is true. Every time.

[neilmac]

I hope they are bloody staying just got my wee nephew mad about Red Arrows and he wants to see them he will never forgive me, secondly the best chance he will get to see them is at RAF Leuchars so slight thread drift any word about that airshow this year??

NM

[AtomKraft]

There's no date yey, so not looking good at all. Glad I went last year.

Most talk is about the Typhoons leaving.

Hope I'm wrong, but I think it's all over.

[Could be the last?]

You know a rumour like this has some credibility as they have just completed a JRs accom upgrade and work has just started on resurfacing the rwy at Scampton............!

[dragartist]

You can only sell the Crown Jewels once but these are not the Crown Jewels. I would hate to be the one to write up the Business Case for this. The Cost Benefit analysis would be very contentious. I have never understood how the RAFAT contributes to Defence. Is it really such a necessary recruiting tool? and would Waste of Space not sell other sharp pointy wizz jets if the tax payer did not fund the red stuff. Even if Waste of Space did adopt the team with 100% sponsorship the tax payer would still foot the bit through the overhead recovery element of their priceing structure.

In these austere times my vote would be to get rid!

If a choice had to be made between RAFAT and BBMF. it would be BBMF for me everytime.

[The B Word]

Re: USAF Advanced Jet Trainer competition...

Using ~40 year old T1/T1As doing display routines to sell T2s to the US? You'd be better off sending BBMF with a Lancaster, Hurricane and Spitfire!

The T2 must have made its final sale? With the T-50 being offered by KAI and Lockheed Martin:

http://www.flightglobal.com/Assets/GetAsset.aspx?ItemID=20282

And the Machi M-346 being offered as the T100:

http://www.flightglobal.com/Assets/GetAsset.aspx?ItemID=34688

I really can't see how the Hawk T2 is going to 'tickle the USAF's fancy'? I know the USN have the T-45 Goshawk but that was bought to train a different generation of pilots for the previous generation F-14 and F-18 and not today's F-15, F-16, F-22 and F-35 jockeys.

The US aren't stupid and sending the Red Arrows to the US on BAE's behalf would not make one jot of difference in my opinion.

The B Word

[SASless]

At the risk of upsetting folks....sending the Red's to the USA would just be a Warm Up Act for the Blues and T-Birds. Frontline aircraft with Afterburners get folks revved up.....classic trainers are well......uh.....old hat.

The Red's do a good show....but so do every other Team in the business.

Sending the BBMF would be a huge Smash Hit if done with the War Bird folks who show off the B-17, B-24, B-25's, 40's, 47's, 51's, 86's!

There is something about the sound of all those Merlins purring....but when them big piston radials go to barking.....we are talking Woody Time!

[CoffmanStarter]

SASless ...

It's only a question of time mate ... :ok:

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af162/CoffmanStarter/F407_F35A_Red_Arrows.jpg

© Clavework Graphics

Coff.

[Kluseau]

I hope they are bloody staying just got my wee nephew mad about Red Arrows and he wants to see them he will never forgive me, secondly the best chance he will get to see them is at RAF Leuchars so slight thread drift any word about that airshow this year??

NM

The airshow website still reads, as it has since shortly after the last one:

"A formal decision is yet to be taken on whether there will be an RAF Leuchars Airshow in 2013. We will provide more information as we have it."

As someone else has commented, this doesn't look good... If you are Scottish based, then your nephew's next best chance might be the East Fortune Airshow, where the Red Arrows have sometimes appared (but sometimes not) in recent years:
East Fortune Airshow Feature Page on Undiscovered Scotland (http://www.undiscoveredscotland.co.uk/northberwick/airshow/index.html)

[SASless]

More likely.....


http://hsfeatures.com/features04/images/vampirefb31bg_27.jpg

[Tiger_mate]

The Reds have a problem with aircraft attrition and not all of them are 'smokers' which is essential to their script. They are also flying legacy aircraft rather than front line contemporary so they are hardly flying the flag for the best of british these days. FWIW I think that air shows and display teams are the vital link between Joe Public; his family, and the Armed Forces. This year has seen Hawk, King Air, Tornado pulled from the air show circuit and Tutor is hanging on by a thread. The signal being sent from on high is that there is no appetite for public displays and it is reasonable to assume that RAFAT & BBMF are also highlighted on the austerity radar. Logic may suggest that they should go, but I suspect that the majority of the general public (and therefore taxpayers) would wish for them to stay. The Blue Eagles have gone and I believe The Army Historic Flight also; I suspect that at a time in the foreseeable future, display survival will depend totally on sponsorship and this is a rare commodity nowadays.

[GGR]

How many flying hours are the norm including training/positioning /display?

GGR

[orca]

Courtney,

Sounds like you're the chap to ask.

Every time this raises its head the argument gets bogged down mainly in myth and rumour. As the expert from Group can you give a data burst on how much the reds actually cost?

At about this time in the argument we usually get told that BAE pay for them, sponsors pay for them, defence sales pay for them...but no-one ever backs this up with any fact.

I'm thinking that fuel, actuals, LSA must be significant for the team as is pay, flying pay etc...which surely we still do pay for? How big a unit is RAFAT? Could we close a tower or airfield if we got rid of them, i.e. are there related costs as well?

I quite like the reds but I have to agree with SASless to be honest. Having watched a few Blue Angels displays recently - and the Thunderbirds last week - I certainly prefer the grunt of Hornets and Vipers to the reds' (perfect,elegant, flawless) airborne ballet.

[lj101]

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/42034/response/104203/attach/4/FebMar%2010%20FOI%20BBMF%20Red%20Arrows%20u.pdf

FOI question answer some of your questions as above

[GeeRam]

As much as the Arrows have been a part of the furniture for 45 odd years, I'm not sure theres sufficient an airshow industry left to support a full time team, let alone one flying out of date a/c that can't be seen as an industry promotion any longer.

In a much reduced RAF and with the demise of the USAFE base shows and even all but one RAF Battle of Britain at Home show, in my view you be better off axing the Arrows and reverting back to the old days of sharing it around the front line sqns as back in the early sixties.

A part time 4/5-ship Tiffie display worked up for just the remaining handful of big UK displays and the odd overseas display would be something new for the public and allow industry sponsorship possibly because of possible Tiffie sales pitch.
Rotate the team through the front line sqns each year, with some nice painted tails etc for a bit of bling, like the old Lightning Firebirds and Blue Diamonds schemes.

[orca]

I think you'd find it hard to justify aircraft hours and fuel burn for a Typhoon team. I think your idea has legs if a training unit could do something with the Hawk though - a fourship perhaps?

One thing's for sure though, once they've gone - they've gone - so defensible or not I for one am glad the reds are still knocking about.

[Double Hush]

It may not be the aircraft or the cost of fuel etc that's the driver in this case, it's the aircrew! Guess what? After SDSR the RAF is short of aircrew, esp fast jet pilots. There are front line and a lot of instructional posts that cannot be filled at the moment with potentially 10 'spare' aircrew based at Scampton.

[BEagle]

"Guess what? After SDSR the RAF is short of aircrew, esp fast jet pilots. There are front line and a lot of instructional posts that cannot be filled at the moment...."

Is that really true? Have more people had enough of things and left than were anticipated?

How do you obtain replacements? Trawl amongst the QFI world - oh, hang on, that's virtually collapsed now. Train more pilots? Well, first you need to find the non-existent QFIs, then wait for about 3 years until the ab initios make it from RAFC to the front line....

A bit like closing aerodromes. It might be an easy short term cost saving to further some multi-starred air wheel's chances of 'the third and the K', but becomes incredibly expensive when some dumb decision of the past has to be reversed and the aerodrome re-opened.

Why does today's RAF remind me so much of this:

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a341/nw969/jenga_zps319803ac.jpg

:uhoh:

[Uncle Ginsters]

"Guess what? After SDSR the RAF is short of aircrew, esp fast jet pilots.

I wouldn't necessarily agree with that; the RW world is hurting after the sustained Op Tempo and departure rates are ever growing. The ME world is down because of fleet extensions to C-130K, VC-10 and Tri* needing crews where there were none planned, on top of increase exit rates - it's only the state of the airlines preventing a total collapse.

I know of several FJ guys who can't find a seat right now and are stuck in desk jobs whilst the stream sorts itself out post-SDSR and Harrier's demise.

My personal view is that the "10 spare" aircrew wouldn't make any difference in the wider scheme of things.

[Heathrow Harry]

This is one of thsoe stories that "leaks" just before any cut-backs

The RAF will offer up the Red Arrows knowing it's not something any politician wants to cut - when they are saved its "Well Minister of course we need more cash as You stopped us from making savings"

oldest trick in the Sir Humphrey Appleby Book of Sensible Government

[Courtney Mil]

Orca,


Sorry I missed your question yesterday, but it seems to have been answered by the FOI post. I think the point is that it is, in my view, not that much in the big scheme of things. Compare that with cost of trying to do it with a number of Typhoons (and that's ignoring the incredible waste of front line assets) and it really has been a drop in the ocean.

To be honest, the bigger problem was (and I'm not having a dig here) that the team became dominated by Harrier pilots at a time when that force was getting a bit short - a relatively small force constantly tapped for pilots to go to RAFAT, CFS, etc. There was a lot of resistance to use more pilots from other forces; I was once told by one of the brethren that "If you start using Tornado pilots, you'll start having a lot of crashes."

We also had a bit of a dearth of Hawks elsewhere, but RAFAT was deemed such an important asset that the other Hawk fleets were always tapped for a replacement jet whenever needed - no matter how congested the training pipeline had become.

The one thing we could never measure was the effect on recruiting (not such a big deal at the moment) and (bigger) public image. No one can reasonably deny that the PR effect is huge - interestingly for all three services, not just the RAF.

My point is that money wasn't really the kicker - probably isn't the be-all etc of the argument now. But the team was a sacred cow to the chiefs so was repeatedly preserved.

Have things changed so much? I wouldn't think so, but we live in strange times. If it all goes wrong, we can always start a "Decision to axe the Arrows was Bonkers" thread and keep feeding it for the next 10 years.

[Lima Juliet]

Courtney

Wise words, old chum. However, money is tight and I personally don't believe the Reds meet the required 'value for money' mantra anymore. During my time on BBMF it always was a source of amusement that we were 1/3rd the cost and serviced over 3 times as many airshows, families'/at-home days, fetes, etc... In terms of "PR bang for Buck" the BBMF wins hands down (and I choose those words carefully as a FJ mate).

There must be a cheaper way to do what the Reds do and if it could be made more cost effective then I suspect the axe-sharpening would not take place every year. How about moving them to Leeming to blob up with the Tatty Ton? Or moving the Tatty Ton to Scampton and shutting Leeming's runway? Or something else? There has to be a way to make this cheaper (save for buying them some Cessna Aerobats equipped with smoke cannisters! :E). The idea of moving to Waddington was madness as it is rammed and thus needed a new-build HQ (and we all know that DIO get ripped off by their Regional Prime Contractors by at least 40% over the market rate!).

Here's a really 'off the wall' solution - why not put the Blades on contract to do something with some cheaper jest like L39s? :}

I also believe that BEagle's JENGA simale works as well. We are at crtitical mass in certain areas, although the use of FTRS QFIs or Sponsored Reserves under MFTS could plug the gap for a while to come. It's also cheaper, too.

LJ

[BEagle]

We are at crtitical mass in certain areas, although the use of FTRS QFIs or Sponsored Reserves under MFTS could plug the gap for a while to come. It's also cheaper, too.

If you'll allow another simile, that's like burning your furniture to keep warm....

A process needs to be sustainable. Using FTRS and SR mercenaries is not - whence cometh the next generation?

[Low Flier]

There has to be a way to make this cheaper (save for buying them some Cessna Aerobats equipped with smoke cannisters! ).

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c105/The_Forester/F150.jpg

[Lima Juliet]

BEags

I agree, but it would give us time to come up with the "sustainable plan". In future, if we retained the majority of those that used to go to the airlines in FTRS/SR jobs instead, then it might just work? If they got rid of the stupid pension abatement rules, I'm sure it would attract others?

Just like the Reds, we need to think of better ways of doing things.

LJ

[Lima Juliet]

Low flier

AAR and weapons firing might be interesting, but other than that, I like it! :ok:

LJ

[Evalu8ter]

Beagle,
Spot on. The plugging of gaps by FTRS only keeps you going for so long - enough for a couple of tour lengths (to enable the upwardly mobile to move on and up by delivering more for less....) but it cannot be self sustaining. It bites you down the line when the training providers can't recruit a plentiful supply of QFI/QHI types so salaries increase and guess who pays for that eventually......

[Courtney Mil]

You're so right, BEags.

LF, I always wondered if the big jets were wasted on Tremblers! :ok:

[Clockwork Mouse]

This is a very emotive topic. The simple question is, when money is so tight, why should the RAF keep the Reds? Well, here are the views of a Pongo.

Their costs seem to be the main argument for axing them. However, even in the current financial situation, the £6 million or so a year including personnel costs, quoted by HQ Air Command a couple of years ago as the annual budget for RAFAT, is a drop in the ocean. They attract considerable commercial sponsorship and public event organisers are happy to pay the going rate to attract them. Axing the Reds would make no noticeable difference to the MoD’s liquidity or effectiveness in the short term and would certainly bring no longer term financial benefit for the RAF.

So do the Reds provide value for money to the RAF? From reading the posts on PPRuNe, one must regrettably conclude that many Crabs think that they don’t. Why do they express that view? There are certainly some posters who have a chip on their shoulder and do so from envy and a dislike of a perceived elitism in the Red Arrows. Their views are irrelevant. Many more balanced posters find it impossible to justify spending scarce bucks in times of conflict on things that don’t actually go bang. Their views are valid and worth considering. What is the Reds’ PR value to the RAF? Probaly considerable, but does that translate into value for money? Impossible to quantify. What is their recruiting value to the RAF? Probably significant, especially to those interested in a flying career, but difficult to quantify and certainly not critical. Are there any other benefits to the RAF, such as encouraging professionalism, pushing boundaries etc? Probably to some degree but unlikely to be significant.

So do the Reds provide value for money to the country? This is actually the key question. The Reds had an unusually high profile nationally last year following the two tragic fatal accidents and with the Jubilee celebrations and the Olympics. No one who watched the spontaneous reaction of the public to the immaculately flown and timed, noisy and colourful flypasts by the Team thoughout the UK can doubt the huge esteem and affection they are held in. The displays flown at airshows were almost of secondary significance in their impact for the public.

That is the real significance of the Team. The RAF operate them but do not really own them. The Red Arrows are a national asset. They are loved, admired, held in reverance by, bring pride and pleasure to millions of our countrymen and at a time when we do not seem to have a lot to be proud of. That is real value. They are also enjoyed and admired by millions of foreigners whose perception and opinion of our nation’s qualities is thereby enhanced. That is of incalculable value.

As I have already said, I am a Pongo and an old and crusty one at that. But I have followed, loved, admired, enjoyed and envied the Reds for most of my adult life. I am sure that the public believe they are worth keeping. To hell with the bean-counters. It is not within the remit of their Airships to axe them. I hope that our publicity aware political leaders realise that.

[lj101]

Clockwork

Nicely put.

For what it's worth I agree with you.

[Genstabler]

Got it in a nutshell CM. With you 100%.

[teeteringhead]

keep feeding it for the next 10 years. ... just 5 I think. T1s just about sustainable 'til then, and a final final display for the 100th Birthday - or maybe RAF funeral.....:(

Extremely well put Clockwork Mouse big impact for small bucks. The senior Teeterette (despite her upbringing, a very non-service brat) was in T-Square when the success of the London Olympic bid was announced, and 'phoned me with the news. I heard the Reds overfly, and said senior daughter was talking about it for weeks - despite the overshadowing tragedy of the following day .... :(

[Jimlad1]

Just putting it out there, but why don't we recomission the Might SHAR to do the job for us - that way we'd not only have 'new' planes, but we might, for once, shut WEBF up :E

[Genstabler]

A sense of humour can be a dangerous thing, David Cameron learned after teasing hacks on board his plane during his North Africa tour.
Rebuking one paper for claiming the SAS faced the chop, he said: ‘It’s total rot. I suppose tomorrow there’ll be a headline Red Arrows To Be Scrapped and the day after, Trooping The Colour Abandoned.’
Sure enough, when he landed in the UK yesterday, one front page screamed: Red Arrows Face Axe. Sighed Dave: ‘I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.’


Read more: Dave sees red at Arrows 'axe' | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2272482/Dave-sees-red-Arrows-axe.html#ixzz2Jr5nCBOe)
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[Courtney Mil]

Jimlad. Ah, the "Might SHAR". Is that a "Maybe Fighter"?

[Jimlad1]

I was thinking we could always use the deck trials versions down at Culdrose and have the worlds first non airborne aerial display team?

[November4]

The RAF will offer up the Red Arrows knowing it's not something any politician wants to cut

the trouble with that is .... someone will eventually think it is a good idea. Just look how ridiculous the thought of having just one transport base is....:mad:

[chopper2004]

There was a question I was going to pose on here a week ago and would the Reds upgrade to the T2, considering the T1's days would be numbered somewhere I read (maybe in AFM recently regarding the 4 Sqn article)

I agree with Clockwork that the perceived saving of 8 mil per annum is a drop in the ocean considering the amount that has been perceived to be wasted and still is on not necessary projects and stuff and consultants.

On a social scale look at this

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2072888/1m-rooms-paid-housing-benefits--costing-taxpayer-500m-year.html

In theory, solve the above and may (a very big 'may' or 'if; ) help out the economy of the UK in its present state.

When I was at school, over 2 decades ago :sad:, one of the debating societies from the different boarding houses , had a topic which was "Should we keep the Monarchy or not" and one question raised was it worth all that money and what does the Monarchy do for us and value for money.

The point is if you scrap the Reds, might as well make this a republic and get rid of the Royal Family. They're both great Ambassadors both foreign and domestic and morale boosters. For example not so fortunate, bringing a smile to someone who for example is young and terminally ill who gets a chance to visit the Reds at an airshow and sit in the Hawk cockpit (real or mockup for the recruiting team) or have a visit from Kate to a hospice or ward will boost morale and hope.

IMHO, the Reds would be even better if they could upgrade with the T2 and it be great for promoting BAe and I think someone said on here that its the likes of BAe contribute towards the costs of overseas tours (?)

In terms of cost effectiveness, the immediate re equipping of the new T2? Perhaps as the Valley set up is half from Ascent, so maybe run the Reds with Ascent's help could help economically?? I may be blowing hot air from the Adour :mad::ugh: here but if the threat to bin the Reds is seen to be very real then any method of saving whats left of the family jewels should be considered

Cheers

[modtinbasher]

In my pre-life, when I worked in one of the places where "the staff who are not at the pointy end" do nothing, there were always questions about how money could be saved. This process went under the heading of....Alternative Assumptions. Of course I can't say anything:mad: about the process, indeed, I'll most likely be boiled in oil in my next life, but it was based upon the premise "that nothing is sacrosanct".

So, every year, someone would propose that the Reds should be disestablished. How far would the proposal get? Probably not much further than 500 yards from the DGs front door,:eek: but who knows? Does the process still occur?

[Lima Juliet]

If we want to look at PR, for £8M we could offer 6x 30 minute air experience flights in small aircraft like a Grob Vigilant (which can be operated at around £100/hr at most flying/gliding clubs) to every single one of our ~25,000 schools each [U]year[/U ]in the UK. Now how's that for PR?

For £8M we could do sooooooo much more than a bunch of 40 year old jets burning red, white and blue kerosene for 10 minutes over a crowd's heads. As for the Olympics, we could have used Typhoons (without all the worries over single engines flying over London). Even a four ship arrival followed by a 90 nose up zoom climb in full burner over the Olympic Stadium would have been a great spectacle as well (IMHO). Also, for HM Queen's Jubilee, the best thing I thought was the "EIIR" formation and that didn't cost £8M.

Genuine question: Other than flying 9x Hawks and a spare in formation, what else would anyone else do with £8M to provide a PR spectacle for the RAF?

LJ

[Genstabler]

LJ
Perhaps the purpose of the Reds is not just to provide a PR spectacle for the RAF. May I recommend Specsavers?

[Justanopinion]

Ah, the "Might SHAR". Is that a "Maybe Fighter"?

Thread drift

SHAR
1982
1435 sorties , 20 (+3) kills, 6 lost

Not bad for a "Maybe Fighter"

Back to thread

[500N]

"Genuine question: Other than flying 9x Hawks and a spare in formation, what else would anyone else do with £8M to provide a PR spectacle for the RAF?"


Probably a few adverts of a quic fly buy at a few shows.

Easily forgotten until the next advert comes on.


With the Red Arrows, the people at the actual event see and remember them,
they then get coverage in the local newspapers and on local TV (and maybe national).

So in terms of exposure as advertising people would say, the RAF
probably gets good bang for it's buck.

Putting 8 mil back into the pot would just be a small drop, hardly noticed
- that is IF the RAF kept it once they were gone, surely more likely that
the money would be cut from the budget ?

[typerated]

The RAAF have a line squadron flying a 4 ship Hornet display for the big shows and very good it is too.

The first part of the display is formation work, reminds me of the old French Mirage F1 and Jag 2 ships displays - very slow but very close formation and impressive to watch

The second half of the display is a role demo with lots of high speed passes and flash bangs - again very impressive and a good contrast to the earlier formation work.

Of course the RAAF also have the Roulettes - 6 PC-9s - I think but don't know that they are part timers.

Also both the Hornet and Super Hornet have solo displays.

Not bad for a far smaller airforce than the RAF.

[500N]

typerated

Aren't the Roulette pilots the instructors from Sale ?

[typerated]

I am amused that the American bloke thinks the Arrows would have been a warm up act for the T Birds or Blue Angels.

I know they are a little better these days but the displays are surely a victory for (commentator ) hype over substance.

[typerated]

I think you are right - the Roulettes are instructors from East Sale.

I think they do a good show and are good value - but must cost a forntune to transit them around Aussie!

[500N]

I haven't seen the Roulettes for a while - except the odd snippet on TV
but yes, if they do shows in outside of Victoria, the $$$ would be huge.

I'll have a look to see where they do shows. I wonder if it is confined to
Adelaide, Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane ???

[Lima Juliet]

Reds is not just to provide a PR spectacle for the RAF

Excusing my myopia, what else is it for? :confused:

LJ

[typerated]

I saw them in Townsville!

[typerated]

Maybe worth a thread of its own but seems the US might beat us to it!

Congressional Budget Inaction May Kill 'Angels' - US News and World Report (http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/01/30/congressional-budget-inaction-may-kill-angels)

[Courtney Mil]

Justanopinion,

I'm suprised at you. When I said:

Ah, the "Might SHAR". Is that a "Maybe Fighter"?

I was making a little joke at the fact that Jimlad had accidentally written "the might SHAR" by mistake instead of "the mighty SHAR."

I thought I'd make a little joke out of it, I was not attacking the sensitivities of those that did great work in the jet. But thank you for reminding us of how good the jet and those that flew her were.

[BEagle]

Whatever happened to the plan which allegedly existed for Breitling to operate 4 x AV-8As as a formation team?

I heard about it over 10 years ago, but it seems they went for the L-39 instead.

[oldgrubber]

Fred's Five and Simon's Sircus spring to mind as examples of an operational squadron producing a display team, not to mention the Sharks and the 706's Whales from Culdrose.
The Navy can't even fund or man the Field Gun display team (and that was sponsored) now so while I'd like to say it's not fair and stamp my feet, what I will actually say is good luck to the RAF, at least your command know how to do PR.

Cheers now

[Hummingfrog]

Leon Jabachjabicz

If we want to look at PR, for £8M we could offer 6x 30 minute air experience flights in small aircraft like a Grob Vigilant (which can be operated at around £100/hr at most flying/gliding clubs) to every single one of our ~25,000 schools each [U]year[/U ]in the UK. Now how's that for PR?

I think you will find this is already being done:D with the ATC Gliding Squadrons and AEFs (when the props aren't flying off:()

HF

[chopper2004]

Oldgrubber, 815 Black Cats gone???

[oldgrubber]

Chopper,

My bad as the youngsters say, I saw them display and they were good.
I remember watching a German "Green Giant" type helicopter doing a fantastic display at Culdrose and my jaw hit the ground when a rather attractive young lady climbed out of the pilots seat, took off her helmet and did a "swish" with her hair as she walked in.

Cheers now

[Mick Strigg]

Chopper 2004, the Black Cats were from 702 Sqn, not 815.

They have not gone, but are down to a singleton this year due to the drawdown of Lynx in the transition to Wildcat

[Ivan Rogov]

Quick thread drift -


SHAR
1982
1435 sorties , 20 (+3) kills, 6 lost

Not bad for a "Maybe Fighter"

There is no denying the superb effort and results obtained by the FRS1 in 1982, but......... how much was down to the platform and how much was down to the weapons and drivers?

Would they have achieved similar results in contemporary aircraft types or opposition types like Mirage III/V or A-4?

[lj101]

Thread drift partial answer

Ivan

FI conflict
A-4 Skyhawk 133 sorties by the A-4B and 86 by the A-4C. They flew with unreliable ejection seats due to the US embargo placed from 1977. Naval A-4Q performed 12 sorties. They were highly dependent on the two available KC-130 tankers, limiting the number of aeroplanes that could attack simultaneously.


Mirage IIIEA Argentine sources indicate they made 58 sorties providing decoys for the strike units with particular success on the June 8 attacks against the British landings ships. Their lesser internal fuel capacity, compared to the Daggers, prevented them from being used in their escort role.

Source; Argentine air forces in the Falklands War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_air_forces_in_the_Falklands_War)

Having watched the documentary on the conflict a few weeks ago: massive respect to all involved.

Back on topic.

[SOSL]

When I was in the RAF I thought the Arrows were great fun and I really enjoyed watching them at airshows all over the world.

When I retired and moved into an intensely civilian environment I discovered that a strangely large number of people (probably taxpayers; but I didn't pry!) really loved them.

It seems to me that the British people pay for, and therefore own, the Red Arrows. The continued existence of the RAFAT shouldn't be dependant on the Defence Budget.

If the people want them they should keep them and RAFAT should be provided with the best aircraft for their role.

Rgds SOS

[Ivan Rogov]

SOSL, I think that was suggested in a very similar thread which seems to come around once a year.

It isn't that we don't want/need the Reds, BBMF and other similar things, but funding shouldn't come from the Defence budget. While it does most will still think the UK Defense pot is fat enough (Looking at the 'PAS offer and FRI's' thread would probably reinforce that!)

By all means use the appropriate service establishments, infrastructure and personnel but create a budget for it (UK Heritage?).

[Justanopinion]

As a point of interest, if automatic budget cuts come into effect on March 1 in the States, the Blue Angels will cease to display for the third and fourth quarters of this year.

[Courtney Mil]

that makes this discussion look purile

Wow. It must be bad. :eek:

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

By all means use the appropriate service establishments, infrastructure and personnel but create a budget for it (UK Heritage?).

Put that way, maybe he has a point. The problem is though, would Billy/Betty ballot box fodder appreciate the subtle difference? A Pound GB to a pile of pooh, the empty (Government directed) defence budget bucket still wouldn't be appreciated.

[SASless]

The CNO of the US Navy has announced the planned grounding of the Blue Angels Display team due to budget cuts.

Times are bad over here guys.....going to be a lot good surplus hardware up for sell.

Sequester Cuts: Navy to Ground Blue Angels (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/02/06/Navy-Plans-To-Ground-Blue-Angels-When-Obama-s-Sequester-Cuts-Set-In)

[814man]

A rather parochial view from the local MP.
"I hate to see any of our brave soldiers, sailors and airmen made redundant and to see our defence capability cut, but I draw the line when it comes to scrapping our national aerobatic team," said Mr Leigh.

Gainsborough MP Edward Leigh receives assurances over the future of the Red Arrows | This is Scunthorpe (http://www.thisisscunthorpe.co.uk/Gainsborough-MP-Edward-Leigh-receives-assurances/story-18080737-detail/story.html#axzz2KFFYMPtE)

[Tinribs]

SOSL is entirely wrong, the British people do not own the Reds any more than they own nuclear subs or fylingdales; they simply provide the cash from which they are purchased and maintained

The British people gain certain rights over the services by reason of the tax support, they may demand the services defend them and their interests at home and abroad and if required die in the attempt but the services, guided by the government, will decide how this should be done.

The British public may exercise their opinion of this at the next election

[Genstabler]

Nor do the British people own the Falkland Islands.

[Twon]

Genstabler,

Wrong thread, wrong statement, wrong audience. Incredibly tenuous to say the least!

[Genstabler]

Twon
Correct thread, correct statement, correct audience. I was replying to Tinribs. Think outside the box. Must I spell it out?

[aviate1138]

In 1776 Britain claimed sovereignty [having first occupied in 1590?] over the Falklands 34 years before the Spanish [Not Argentina] made a similar claim........

Britain returned permanently in 1833.

The RAF need pilots now don't they? The Reds must have persuaded many a young air minded type to volunteer.

Scrap all Wind Farm/Solar subsidies and keep the Reds flying with the proceeds!

Money better spent and many raptors and bats saved too.

[BEagle]

So grounding the Blues, who display a mere 4 aircraft, will save $20M for 30 airshows?

Yet the Reds, who display 9 aircraft, have a budget of about half that for the entire year.

It seems that we have a much better deal for the taxpayer in the UK!

Grounding the Blues would be an anti-Obama redneck "Here's what that dumbass y'all voted fower has gon' and made us do" political statement, in my opinion.....

[SASless]

Beags.....old Son....you are getting Senile in your old age.

The Blues display Six F-18's plus a C-130.


http://www.keithcarter.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/blue-angels-formation-02.jpg

You may have forgotten it but the logistics required to cover a country that is about 3,000 miles across and over 1500 miles from top to bottom....not counting the short hop to Hawaii and Alaska, is just a wee bit larger than the UK.

Likewise when you have Front Line Fighter aircraft that have two huge After Burner equipped engines as compared to an obsolete single engine trainer....the fuel burn is slighter higher.

As you may recall....though from your post I doubt you will.....the USAF Thunderbirds replaced the F-4's with T-38's for a while due to cost issues. The Blues went from the F-4 to the A-4 about the same time for a while.

They too went the small Trainer route as has the Reds for so many decades.

[Heathrow Harry]

" an obsolete single engine trainer"

USN- The T-45 is to be in service until 2035 or later.

and coming from a country that still is dependent on the T-38 Talon (first flight over 50 years ago) to train its Air ForceI think that's a bit much TBH

[SASless]

Harry....you know exactly what I was saying.

Your Reds fly old kit, a trainer, and do not fly frontline FJ aircraft.

They are darned good, put on a good show but their aircraft just are not that impressive anymore.

The aircraft they fly gets the job done, usually any way....but they are not Golly Gee Whiz rides they have.

Put them in that new thingy you have over there....Typhoon is it....now that would change the whole ballgame!

[Courtney Mil]

Yes, I don't think anyone could argue against the extra wow factor the Blue Angels have because of their aircraft. And their crazily tight formation, of course.

[SASless]

Best Blue Angels Music Video: "Pump Up The Angels" - YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nM_ZB7jqxz8

[CoffmanStarter]

SASless a question ...

I know displays are performed at Low Level but why no full Ox Mask kit ? ... OK boom mics are more comfortable but if you fly FJ's the standard rig should be worn ?

Cheers

Coff

[Sand4Gold]

SASless,

I remember seeing the Red Arrows in Cyprus (1972) doing their work up (final) display and I thought "Not bad." Then a Lightning came onto the scene, smashed the place up; at the end of his display - with 8/8s Blue - the guy flew his jet halfway along the display line and then went vertical - simply disappeared - and I thought "Wow."

Good point, well made.

S4G

[BOAC]

why no full Ox Mask kit ? - ah, but then you would not see their faces............................

[Courtney Mil]

Coff, I can only imagine it's to let the camera see the pilot's face. Or so that the adoring crowds can see the pilot's steely smile during taxy.

Obviously no need for O2 at low level, but stupid not to have the O2 mask in the event of fire, fumes, ejection (part of helmet stability). Presumably they would have to put the masks on for transits - who knows what altitude you'd need for various reasons. Also the mask helps cut out cockpit noise when using RT and offers some (not much) protection against injury from birdstrike.

Seems pretty silly to me.

[CoffmanStarter]

Thanks Courtney ... agreed ... wear the right kit for the job :ok:

[oldmansquipper]

I first saw `Bin the Reds` as a serious cost saving suggestion in `85 when I started my first Eng Authority job...I guess its been going ever since in the annual staff blood letting exercise..

However - this time I have the answer! Try this lot on contract!

:ok:

gliderFX - Home - Aerobatic displays in the world's most exciting aerobatic gliders (http://www.gliderfx.com)

[SASless]

I cannot answer the question re Mask/No Mask but I would assume they go without during displays as O2 is not required, reduces the head weight during their High G maneuvers, allows for easier head movement with greater range of motion. Listening to the intercom conversation in the two seat aircraft shows the boom mikes work just fine with the noise level.

The Navy has a tradition of using both mask and boom mike setups in their Operational flying perhaps that is a carry over from the old days.

Court....your opinion is noted however I would have to assume the USN Aviation Safety folks studied the issue and decided it was the better way to go for the Team. As they are Professionals in this kind of business I would think you would grant them some respect.....or is that reserved for the Reds only?

I am sure when they transit between shows and get to normal cruise heights they wear the standard gear.

Looking at Thunderbirds stuff....it appears they wear the Mask.

[Easy Street]

The no-mask thing is to allow full-face camera shots. Masks don't impinge on communications in any way, in fact they reduce the ambient noise into the mike. I think the Blue Angels 'no mask' thing is one of these classic bits of commander's risk analysis:

Option 1 - Keep the boom mic. During my 2- or 3-year period of responsibility, there is a small (perhaps less than 1%) chance that a serious incident will result in me being charged with negligence, for perpetuating an obviously risky PR benefit at the expense of safety.

Option 2 - Mandate the mask. Approximately a 100% chance of attracting disapproval from old + bold admirals (who aren't themselves in the airworthiness chain, but definitely have a say in my career). I don't really want to be known as a stickler for health and safety, do I?

Less than 1% chance of being caught out? 100% chance of attracting criticism from above? No-brainer. Risk tolerated!

[PGFlight]

Well, I for one very much enjoyed seeing my tax dollars at work today practicing over Scampton. Really brightened up a long journey home. And despite my shaky phone camerawork, my four-year-old lad thought it was brilliant too. I hope some of the air+ground team frequent this forum - thanks, guys/gals.

:ok: :ok:

[SASless]

The no-mask thing is to allow full-face camera shots.

The source for your definite statement of that being the reason is?

You have some official reference that confirms that or are you just offering a personal opinion based on mere supposition?

[Easy Street]

I don't have an official source. It is a supposition, albeit one based on years of fast-jet flying.

If you can offer any official evidence that there is any reason other than PR for the Blue Angels to dispense with the oxygen masks worn as standard by fast-jet crews the world over, whether on display or on normal duties, then I will gladly retract my previous post. Until such time, I stand entirely by my comments, which I reckon to be based on firmer ground than any of these personal opinions based on mere supposition:

reduces the head weight during their High G maneuversOxygen masks weigh practically nothing and don't stick out as far as a boom mike.
allows for easier head movement with greater range of motionIf the mask hose is the right length then the helmet touching the collar of the lifejacket is the most limiting factor on range of movement.
O2 is not requiredBecomes a questionable assumption as soon as smoke or fumes are encountered.

I don't need to produce a reference to suggest that the flying kit designed for use in the F/A-18, an aircraft easily capable of 7g and a renowned close-in dogfighter, might be designed specifically with freedom of head movement in mind.

[SASless]

So an impasse....you pose an opinion but not based upon any knowledge of the Blue's basis for doing what they do. Sounds fine to me.

I certainly don't know but clearly stated that my comment was just a guess.

Small but definite difference don't you think.

[Heathrow Harry]

TBH an AIR DISPLAY is not about carting some super jet around the scenery at max speed and noise - it is about precision flying

I always felt that the Lightning was dreadful display aircraft - it made a lot of noise but it disappeared from sight for well over half the time - compared to the Hunter it was grim to watch. The Hawk is a pretty good aeroplane for display flying - you can always roll out the heavy iron for a few passes (or very slow ones if you are Russian) to show what you've got but for a display give me something that can turn inside a 4km circle

[SASless]

Like the F-16 perhaps....or the F-22 or the F-35, Harrier, Typhoon, A-10, perhaps the Tornado?

Air Shows are not just some airplanes flying close together....one small for instance.... the Spitfire, Lancaster, Hurricane, B-29, B-17, B-24, Corsair, Mustang.

When the Huey and Chinook show up...it is a complete Show!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53RL4u9JSvc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kwziysZidQ

[dash2]

I had the pleasure of watching the Blue Angels do their thing recently at their winter training ground. They were very impressive and always made the effort to wave whilst taxiing past. They also came to visit my unit, in preparation for a display, a couple of months ago and the crew came wearing boom mikes for the transit.

There can be no reason other than aesthetics for not wearing a mask. This is just a case of risk analysis (or not) resulting in a course of action. There is no reason why a mask could not be worn for this stuff and not wearing one brings risk both for ejection (low probability) and smoke and fumes (low probability). Imho suggesting that it's for range of motion or weight is (imho) misguided. We do defensive BFM with masks and JHMCS very often which requires greater range of motion; max available G; and greater weight on the old head. It's no big deal.

[Onceapilot]

Recentish film on the Blue Angels showed how totally focused on "show" they are. Looks are everything, they don't wear g-suits to spoil the cut of their uniforms.
Good luck to them, couldn't face that environment myself, let alone cut the mustard.

OAP

[Genstabler]

Not wearing G suits or masks is frankly irresponsible. There have been several fatal accidents in jet display teams due to G forces within memory. With the G the BAs pull the risk is not worth taking for the sake of bull****.

[Neptunus Rex]

Having instructed on jets, both with and without 'g' suits (Macchi with, Jet Provost without) I reckon that the major difference is not so much in 'g' tolerance, but in how knackered you are after two or three high 'g' trips in a day.

Either way, it's amazing how quickly one recovered after some hop enhanced rehydration!

[Courtney Mil]

The question was why (or why not) O2 masks. Both sides of the argument have been expressed, same with g-pants. I'm absolutely sure the Blues have aleady thought of anything we have to offer. So it is, now, their choice. Their job is to look good and professional - not to other aviators, but to the public. And their act is top notch.

Safety wise, they are taking a risk. But they are US Navy aviators. And they are flying their flag brilliantly.

I stand by my safety aspects of wearing a mask. I respect their reasons for nor not so doing.

Anyway, what was the point of all that teeth whitening if no one ever sees it?

[SASless]

They have to look good for the Girls....and errrr....the Guys now don't they?

[Easy Street]

OK465,
Mucking about at 500k, at times hurtling straight at the earth and at times directly toward each other for effect, occasionally even impacting one or the other....

and not wearing a mask is.....risky? Is it fair to summarise that argument as "small risks are not worth bothering with if there are big, unavoidable risks present"? That goes against a foundation principle of risk management, which is to eliminate risk wherever it is reasonably practicable to do so. It is not reasonably practicable to stop an aerobatic display team from pointing at the ground or at each other from time to time - but there are a whole host of mitigations in place for that, not least training and supervision.

Perhaps the easiest test to apply is the good old CNN test. A Blue Angel has crashed and the pilot is dead. The investigation has been published and a senior naval officer is taking questions at a press conference:

Journalist: So this aircraft hit a seagull, which entered the cockpit, hit the pilot in the face and incapacitated him. Why was he not wearing a mask?

Admiral: Because viewers would not have been able to see his face on the big screens.*

* my supposition.It wouldn't pass the test, would it? Heads would roll.

[SASless]

ES,

Let me get this straight....you are saying after a Sea Gull flying at 500 knots hits the windscreen of Handsome Young Blue's F-18, some Admiral is going to look silly explaining why HYB was not wearing an O2 Mask?

Just how much protection does an O2 mask really provide when something strong enough to pierce the Windscreen of an F-18 at 500 KT's comes smashing into the Pilots lower face?

[oldmansquipper]

"Anyway, what was the point of all that teeth whitening if no one ever sees it?"

Love it!

:ok:


.....BTW the Reds were the driving force behind the procurement of "prestige" Flying suits now worn by anyone & everyone...

Much easier to roll up the sleeves on..& not just for cocktail parties....;)

[TSR2warton1966]

Just to be clear, 2018 is the last season.

[aw ditor]

Why?

AD'

[LateArmLive]

Just how much protection does an O2 mask really provide when something strong enough to pierce the Windscreen of an F-18 at 500 KT's comes smashing into the Pilots lower face?

Having seen my buddy's face after exactly that happened (although not in an F18), I'd say quite a lot.

[Just This Once...]

+1 for the benefit of have my mask on when I met the wrong kind of bird.

As for my boyish good looks - well far too many on the forum worked out who I was years ago!

[Wander00]

And until the late 80s the red suits were provided by a businessman who supported the Team, until in RAFSC Command Accounts we lobbied for them to be publically funded - eventually they were paid for from non-public funds until the argument was advanced that it was flight safety issue and the public finally coughed up. I am proud to have played a part in getting the "right" decision.

[ORAC]

Sign of the times, and the expense of modern aircraft.....

Defense News: Swiss Outraged Over Plan To Cut Aerobatic Team (http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130213/DEFREG01/302130014/Swiss-Outraged-Over-Plan-Cut-Aerobatic-Team?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE)

GENEVA — Many Swiss were outraged Wednesday after hearing that the country’s beloved aerobatic red planes with their characteristic white crosses, the Patrouille Suisse, will be cut from the Swiss air force by 2016.

“We will no longer have planes simply for folklore,” President Ueli Maurer told a parliamentary security policy commission meeting on Tuesday, according to the Basler Zeitung daily. The commission had been discussing Switzerland’s pending purchase of 22 JAS39 Gripen fighter jets from Sweden when a member reportedly asked about the future of the Patrouille Suisse, which have been a fixture in Swiss skies since1964.

The Swiss president, who is also the country’s defense minister and a member of the populist right Swiss People’s Party, told the gathering that as of 2016, the cherished aerobatic team would cease to exist. The revelation sparked outrage in Switzerland, with politicians leading the way.

“Maurer is underestimating the symbolic importance of the Patrouille Suisse,” Martin Landolt, head of the Conservative Democratic Party of Switzerland, told the 20Minuten.ch website. The head of the Christian Democratic Party, Christoph Darbellay, agreed and described the decision as “a provocation.”

A former pilot with the aerobatic team, also quoted by 20Minuten.ch, denounced the move, stressing that the Patrouille Suisse had never had an accident since its creation in 1964.

“The Patrouille is the best business card Switzerland has,” pilot John Huessy said, insisting, “It is unacceptable to say that what they do is about folklore.”

[Mick Strigg]

Had the Patrouille Suisse at yeovilton a few years ago - Brilliant! Much better than the Reds and they were a credit to their country in the way they acted and interacted.

[Courtney Mil]

Am I right in thinking the PS don't do their display job full time? I think they fly real jets as well. Top notch team.

[chopper2004]

Problem is, is anything can happen between now and 2016 still got 33 months for the Swiss. Or a miracle can happen and have the world's first Grippen display team. Who knows maybe Saab / BAe may sponsor them along with Breitling.

Speaking of which the Breitling team with their Aero L39 jets are still going strong (yes I know they're a private enterprise). Had the privilege of looking at their Blue Angels style paintwork copied jets on the static at le Bourget 2 years ago parked by the Lockheed Constellation.

Back to topic at hand - whats going down with the Reds, any more updates?
If all goes well then would we be looking at an all T2 equipped by 2015?

Cheers

[Double Hush]

The RAF barely have enough T2s for the trg role let alone an acrobatic team. There's even doubt that there are enough for a singleton display in '14.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

I think they fly real jets as well.

I think your picture just made it onto the Reds' dartboard, Courtney

[longer ron]

Slight thread drift LOL
I spent a very pleasant 3 weeks with the Swiss AF in 1986,out on the apron there were 2 Venoms parked...The 2 pilots about to strap in were chalk and cheese...one was a 'mature' gentleman (and he was a gentleman) - the other was a youngster !
Chatting to the 'mature' pilot - he was chuckling and saying ''only in the swiss AF could you start and finish your career on the same a/c'' :)
One day there was a sound like a fast vacuum cleaner and (I think) 19 two seat Vampires did a stream landing...fantastic :)
Most of the aircrew came to look at the 2 Hawks parked on the apron and did not believe me when told that one of them had 1200 hours on the clock,ISTR that the highest time Vampire had (at that time ) just over 2000 hrs.
The moral of this story...The swiss do not fork about and really look after their a/c (the Hunters and F5s were immaculate :)) and yes most of the aircrew are part time ...you could tell by the way Swissair a/c were flown...the turns always seemed a little steeper than other airlines :)
The Hawk T1 is a tough little a/c...I love em :)

[Courtney Mil]

I think your picture just made it onto the Reds' dartboard, Courtney

Another of my life-long dreams realised at last, Fox3:ok:. Actually, it was a genuine question; I seemed to recall that the PS team fly front line ac as well as their display aircraft.

I'll bet I don't get invited to the Reds' Christmas party this year either. Come to think of it...

[cokecan]

“The Patrouille is the best business card Switzerland has,” pilot John Huessy said, insisting, “It is unacceptable to say that what they do is about folklore.”

i would have thought that Switzerlands best business card was the fact that its a wealthy, mature, law-abiding, secure and business friendly democracy with superb infrastructure, not that that it has an aerobatic display team who make people go 'ohhhhh' and 'aaahhhh' at air shows.

but what would i know...

[neilmac]

So for me wee nephew only one date in Scotland and that's Leuchars, no East Fortune. "Gulp" what do I tell the 5yo. Chances of me getting to Leu at that date eh zero....

Im so in the S**t

NM

[Heathrow Harry]

Ask wee Eck to form a Scots team - you can get a bunch of Cessna-172's for almost nothing..............................

[Steve the Pirate]

HH, PM for you.

STP

[CoffmanStarter]

The Team have just arrived at Akrotiri ... Hope they've got enough Beer Money :ok:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BGH4P7PCUAA1BkB.jpg