Originally Posted by Jimlad1
However, you have to understand that the decision has been taken, and its not going to be reversed. There is no money out there to reverse the decision, there is no will on the part of the politicians to make yet another U turn, and its not going to happen.
JimLad1 has made some excellent points all of which hit the proverbial nail right on the cranium but I guess the title of this thread is still valid and I have not read ANYTHING that from a pure military stand point would suggest otherwise.
I can fully understand and agree with the RAF stance of opting for the Tornado option rather than the harrier...
The RAF have the luxury of thirty miles long strips of concrete with nice football pitches, volley ball courts, McDonalds, and countless other take away outlets, plus sports facilities and other home comforts to while away their off duty periods.
The Harrier is not an aircraft that was designed to fly from these conventional resorts,
they were designed for a different role where short take off, vertical landings where the order of the day. This was at the expense perhaps of not having the range, speed or carrying capacity of other fixed wing, fast jets. If I were in the RAF and I had to make this decision then it is a no brainer.
The no brainer however is this is a short sighted decision that comes with a huge cost... It is 'bonkers' to suggest that aircraft operating from the UK or Italy can respond or react as quickly as any aircraft stationed just 50 miles from the required scenes of the current action. (which was a known event when this decision was made) It is 'bonkers' to try to suggest otherwise, it is bonkers to have an expensive aircraft carrier that is fully functional, fully operational and not have any aircraft to operate from it. It is 'bonkers' to suggest that this one single carrier could not get supplied and remain on station for its tour of duty.
Sadly and finally I guess it is 'bonkers' to think for one millisecond that our politicians will do another U-turn. They were advised to scrap the harrier and that advice was given with the best of motives but my position is that as the cold war evaporated, the harrier should have been handed over to the Royal Navy lock, stock and smoking barrel and that force should have been then used to its full potential.
I am no fan of the through deck carrier and not really a big fan of the harrier but we were where we were and could only play with the toys we were given and if we still have a Royal Navy when the F-35C is purchased then we will be back to becoming a proper deep water navy.