Allthenick/Bismark,
Individuals have their opinions, but as a crab who keeps up with internal briefing notices, I can assure you that the RAF are NOT briefing against the carriers.
The carrier programme may have been questioned, but this is called SCRUTINY and it happens to every major project. Do you not think that some cutting questions have been asked about Typhoon?
JFH is an interesting one, as if you are close enough to it to know the facts you will know that the RAF harrier force feel pretty stitched up about it too. Don't forget that in the interests of political correctness we had our force slashed to try and get a force of 2 RAF sqns and 2 RN sqns out of basically a 3:1 ratio of people and jets. You can try to blame the RAF but in the end the fact is that 801 did not stand up because the RN couldn't man it under the system that had been agreed jointly. That isn't a good thing and is probably cold comfort for the RAF harrier pilots now unable to get a flight commander tour, but it
I sympathise about AOC 3 Gp, but don't forget it was always going to be a rotational/competition post anyway, and that the vast majority of the Gp was RAF.
Also I don't believe that the SHAR was binned because of a devious crab plot. The decision was taken against the following background:
1. UK policy at the moment is to take risk against air defence in all environments and current operations are crying out for CAS.
2. The SHAR was an air defence aircraft and the GR7/9 is a CAS aircraft.
3. The IPT has to pay for both.
4. The SHAR was seven times as expensive to support as the GR7.
What decision do you think you would have reached? And before you suggest that the RN was targetted, remember the RAF lost its jaguar fleet following a very similar logic path.
Also I think you must be confused about 'sidewinder-armed Nimrod'.
I am not having a pop at the RN, I actually admire the senior service. I would also like the UK to have carriers (although I have to admit that nobody has yet given me a convincing reason why the RN need to fly any of the jets).
How about this for a compromise: we all agree to support UK defence in the best way we can. This, to me means:
- asking pertinent questions about equipment programmes so that when the MOD is in a financial hole to make sure we're buying the right kit.
- accepting that our own programmes will come under scrutiny and not getting precious when someone questions them.
- understanding that sometimes things don't go your way and that just might be the way things are, not that someone else is out to get you.
- not leaking to the press or dripping to journos about what you perceive other services are doing to yours.
How about it?