First - lets have only one Army (sorry Rocks and Bootnecks); then only one naval service (bang goes the RLC Port Sqn etc) and only one air force (sorry FAA, AAC, JHC, RA UAV Regt, and the Royal Marine Air Wing or whatever they call themselves)
…Every so often a thread like this comes up saying “get rid of the RAF” or such. Usually what happens is all non RAF types cite operational and cost efficiencies. Pro-RAF will cite the same and usually continuity of air power doctrine.
Cost efficiencies can be achieved by common support and training systems which the military already have in place.
Operational efficiencies – well can someone tell me what is so efficient about an RN Frigate Captain having to signal CINCfleet who then in turn goes to the relevant Air Group in the RAF to get MPA Assistance? How many people does that involve? And if was so efficient then why was coastal command put under the direct control of the admiralty during WW2?
Air power doctrine would probably be maintained and indeed expanded upon as the other to air services will bring their own practices.
But despite the above I would still argue strongly for the retention of an independent air force for 1 reason only -
PEOPLE
Some RAF personnel are not motivated by going to sea for months at a time. Do this and these people will leave the service and also long term there will be a recruitment problem. Also if The RAF were to take over the FAA as some have suggested then at a conservative estimate I’d say 1 in 7 RAF personnel would have to serve at sea and both RAF and RN would end up with recruiting and retention problems. This would cost money – serious money, people are by far the most expensive asset that the military have, forget equipment its people.
When in 1918 the RNAS became the Fleet Air Arm of the Royal Air force. Squadron personnel consisted of 85% to 15% light to dark blue by 1921 in sea going squadrons that ratio had reversed – why do you suppose? At the time the admiralty could send a man to sea for up to 3 years, I’ll wager that it was the unpopularity of long stretches away from home, Not just Trenchard’s narrow minded views on seapower.
Some smaller countries that have only an Air Force still have flyers from the other two services.
RNLAF – Apache – Flown by Army Aircrew. Orions (when they had them) Flown and maintained jointly by RNLAF but with naval back seaters on board also seen as Naval assets
RDAF – Amalgamated all helicopter squadrons into the RDAF, except it didn’t work with the Navy, They still operate with naval air and ground crew
RNZN – Seasprites – operate 5 of them, come under No 6 Sqn RNZAF – operated by RNZN Aircrew and RNZAF ground crew.
Brazil – Used to have Air force personnel operating Trackers from their carriers but now all Carrier Air squadrons operated by the Navy.
Only 4 countries independent Air forces in the world that I know of operate naval aircraft. Oman, South Africa, and the Philippines, though I’m sure there are more.
Sorry for rambling on - I suppose what i'm trying to say is for the sake of recruitment and retention then lets keep all thre services plus their air wings. Why not place the equipment - whatever it is - where it will be most operationally and cost efficient to do so and try and preserve peoples asperations within their own service.