PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Decision to axe Harrier is "bonkers".
View Single Post
Old 20th Mar 2011, 19:57
  #361 (permalink)  
WE Branch Fanatic
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Devon
Posts: 2,812
Received 19 Likes on 15 Posts
Is it just me - or is Lord Dannatt missing the point in this article?

Those countries further away, such as the United States and the United Kingdom must, self-evidently, forward deploy to host airbases but many participants can operate from their home bases. This calls into discussion the role and utility of aircraft carriers.

Does it? What about transit times, or the possibility of HNS being withdrawn? And how suitable is flying missions over a range of 500+ miles for time critical close air support, or policing the skies against sudden MiG activity?

Even mention of those two words can become emotional, but logic has a place here. Many types of aircraft are required to conduct a no fly-zone.

There is a requirement for ground attack and air to air combat aircraft and they can, and will, be flown by the United States, and perhaps from France, from aircraft carriers.

Yes, perhaps Italy and Spain too, using the AV8B+? In fact, isn't the US Marine Corps operating the AV8B+ there from an amphibious vessel?

But many of the aircraft such as AWACs command and control and surveillance aircraft can only be flown from land bases, as must the air to air refuelling tankers that will need to sustain the smaller fast jests on combat air patrol.

Of course carrier based ones are nearer to the area of oprations and need less AAR support. And carriers do contribute to command and control, and survellience.

So the UK's contribution of some 24 Typhoon and Tornado aircraft, both with longer endurance and a heavier weapons payload than Harrier, does not make recent decisions in the Strategic Defence and Security Review look as silly as some would have us believe.

Errr well surly the point is that the Harrier can operate from a ship (or just about anywhere) and therefore range is not really an issue?

Of course, the presence of HMS Ark Royal and a complement of Harriers would have been useful, but are they essential? In this case, the short answer is no, but whether we can wait nearly ten years for their replacements – only time will tell.

Time will indeed tell. What are the chances that other things will happen in the next few years?

Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 29th Apr 2011 at 12:09.
WE Branch Fanatic is offline