Originally Posted by
Bob Viking
T
I don’t understand why people always pick on the RAF as the one service that could be subsumed into another. Is it simply because we’re the youngest?!
The 103 year experiment!
I think it's because the RAF has roles that you could see under another service (and, in other countries, are under those services). There is less logic in the RAF operating ships nor armoured battalions.
So, for example, the RN could operate long range MPA, the Army could operate the Support helicopter fleet (no other RAF helicopters these days), tactical airlift and close air support. However, it's on the strategic level that the need for an Independent Air Force comes in. Air Defence and Dominance, Strategic airborne ISTAR., strategic transport and long range/ non-battlefield attack capability are all elements that you couldn't comfortably place in the other Services, or if you did I suspect they would be seen as adjuncts to the main role. Which brings us full circle as to why they created a separate Air Force in the first place.
And once you have those as a separate force, it makes sense for the other things to be in that too.