JFH
Bismark,
I take your points, BUT:
If you check the command arrangements, JFH is under full command of the RAF. 801 Sqn therefore would have been an RN-badged RAF Sqn.
It makes complete sense, not least from a safety point of view, that a sqn operating RAF aircraft under RAF command should work to RAF rules.
The RN agreed to move to the RAF system for a number of reasons - not least that this will be the most efficient way of operating JSF in future - one of the big drivers behind forming JFH was to build capacity for JSF.
I understand that the reason why the RN did not used to have JO QFIs on the Sqn was due to the way the RN ran its OCU (where I believe the JO QFIs would have been) - so not being able to generate a QFI for the sqn is merely a symptom of force undermanning. Although you could have manned the sqn under RN rules, it would not have had the support needed and would not be able to generate the FE@R required for its task - RN Sqns were structured around providing jets for embarked ops which are flexi serviced, then come back and go into the shed while the people take their end-of-tour leave. It works well if you can accept that dip, but JSF will be operated in the way the RAF always have - to keep the sqn on readiness all the time. I believe this is also how the French navy run things, and one of the reasons why they need more space below decks.
In answer to the question about who should fly the jets, I dont have a really strong view - but for me the question is why rather than why not. RN FJ pilots now and in the future go through exactly the same training as RAF harrier pilots (stand fast Dartmouth), and the end product in the JFH is interchangeable. Running a force of around 210 fast-jet pilots is difficult enough for the RAF, which has places to send people who aren't quite up to single-seat and a commensurate buffer in terms of a training margin and ground jobs. Oh, and a realistic career for flyers beyond SO1. Trying to run a small cadre of FJ pilots independently just seems like an inefficiency and not best value for defence - so for me the question is why bother rather than why not. Yes, you need some sea-mindedness but this will come with operating at sea, and the whole carrier strike thing is justified around Land Attack, not defending the fleet against air attack (which I think the T45 does rather well actually). If you really need to address the presentational aspect let's give some of the sqns RN numbers and get the pilots to wear gold braid rather than bar-codes when at sea. Having said that, if it comes down to a political need to keep some pilots as RN, then so be it.
Happy to be corrected about any of this, but I stand by my main point - tough things are happening to everybody in defence at the moment, and simply blaming all your woes on the RAF is neither accurate nor helpful.
Last edited by Occasional Aviator; 12th Dec 2007 at 08:08.