PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Will the Tories Axe the RAF?
View Single Post
Old 22nd Sep 2009, 23:47
  #99 (permalink)  
WE Branch Fanatic
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Devon
Posts: 2,840
Received 63 Likes on 27 Posts
Anyway, ignoring the knuckle draggers for a moment...

I'll have a Quarterpounder meal with a Coke please. All these Whoppers - it must be Burger King!

Jacko, I'm not picking on you but you perhaps ought to try a little more research, or perhaps you thought being pedantic a good tactic?

The Japanese are an island nation dependent on sea trade and exist without carriers and a blue water Navy, and so could we.

Officially Japan doesn't have a Navy, as Article 9 of the post WW2 constitution doesn't permit armed forces. However, the Japanese Maritime Self Defence Force is a Blue Water Navy in all but name. They have over fifty frigates and destroyers, something like sixteen submarines (why they don't have SSNs is beyond me as Japan has a major nuclear power programme), large numbers of minehunters, some amphibious forces, and guess what, new helicopter destroyers (sic) that seem strangely carrier like. Japan is of course due to get the F35.

More on the JMSDF here.

But we should now let the Admirals finally take their fair share of the pain.

You mean they haven't already? None under the 1981 Nott cuts, none in the rest of the 80s, none under Options for Change or other Tory cuts, none under the 1998 SDR or the 2004 SDR New Chapter? If there have been no cuts, then why did commiting HMS Northumberland to anti piracy operations off Somalia last year result in no frigate/destroyer in the vicinity of the Falklands for several months? Why are many ships deploying for six months or more per year for three or four years in a row?

Statistics are terribly dull, but these ones (from 1975 to 2000) may be of interest.

Let's consider three sets of numbers, those of SSN/SSKs (ie non ballistic missile submarines), frigates/destroyers, and Mine Counter Measures Vessels. In 1990 the RN had 29 Patrol/Fleet Submarines, now we're down to eight. In 1990 we had 49 frigates and destroyers, in a few weeks this will be down to 23. In 1990 we had a massive 41 MCMV's of various types, now we have just 16.

Both of the above are facts, not opinions. I could go on......

You mention Sierra Leone, but where fast jets really needed? What was needed was troops, helicopters, logistics, and command facilities. The Jags would have struggled to deliver them, but sending a CVS, a LPH and a couple of frigates provided them all. Additionally the frigates had the potential to shell the rebels, and the presence of big grey ships off the coast concentrates minds. As for the delay, I think Illustrious (with Sea Harriers etc) had to wait for Ocean (with Bootnecks and Junglies - but built to civillian standards with cheap propulsion) to catch up.

[CHEAP SHOT WARNING]

Incidentally, you once wrote:

Why are we closing airfields when there are still Army (and RAF and even RN shore-based) units based at places without a runway? If we need to draw down, any infantry battalion should be based at a modern airfield, whose runways, lighting and tower should be kept operational. Aldershot? Close it and sell the land!

You suggested it here. What was that about pursuing your own agenda at the expense of wider military capbilities?

The idea that the RAF could or should be disbanded is clearly idiotic, but many of the suggestions here are also clearly from the "Ignore the facts and hope for the best" school of thought.
WE Branch Fanatic is online now