DWARF BULKHEAD,
You throw out some wild criticism of the RAF in your post with absolutely no attempt to justify your remarks.
I am at a loss to work out how the RAF could possibly "give reasonable return on investment" or is there a modern way of counting returns by the flying hour or number of practise bombs on target? I have always thought that all money spent on defence was a dead loss unless there was a need to use the forces and then the only calculation that mattered was winning. I believe the RAF has been on the winning side for some time now so they must be giving a "reasonable return".
You also level the accusation that "work routines and productivity at all levels of the service are dreadfull" but how did you measure these and against what yardstick?
Please enlighten ppruners further or your assertions will be dismissed for lack of evidence.