Mr Grim,
You say:
The other option is probably unpalatable for the RAF - just use Apache and Reaper. The TFH area is so small these days that Apache could cover it and Reaper could remain the UK's theatre wide CAS capable asset, supporting TFH if tasked. BUT no FJ in the fight?!?
You are technically correct on the landmass that is TFH, but the air and aviation assets deployed to the Theatre are not there for sole UK use and are there as part of the
coalition. So by removing the UK Fast Air, you increase the demand on the already too small (mostly US) fast air, resulting in even more reduced support to ground forces (of all nations). Apache and Reaper provide excellent support, but cannot provide all of the capability of a fast-jet (not just GR4 but any FJ).
We could try to get Typhoon cleared for a bunch of weapons asap but there are problems with that, not least the cost as we would have to go outside the multi-national programme. A choice of 1000lb class weapons really isn't going to be very useful. Gun, anyone? ANd then there are the other commitments such as QRA (perhaps we could lose a QRA station?)
You raise the key issue here - QRA. If we replace the GR4s in Afghanistan with Typhoons (which btw has all the necessary air-to-ground clearances - see the press from early last year) of the right tranche, it is my understanding that we could not then provide QRA in the Uk and the Falklands. See the Govt's SDSR quote on defence of national territory and their view of the Falklands: they are not going to increase risk in either area!
So, we lose GR4 sharpish, we don't back fill the capability we have provided the
coalition,ground forces (from all nations) go unsupported (haven't got enough Reaper or Apache) and troops suffer injuries/fatalities as a result. Difficult to prove but if guys are in contact and do not get any kind of air/aviation support to suppress the enemies fire......
Now I know politicians are weasels and would wriggle out of it with clever spin, but this is a real possibility.