Capt P U G Wash,
The Newton Study. Not something you will see many from a service oft quoting due to the repeated conclusion that didn't say what was required.
The change to F-35C has changed the dynamic and isome take the view that F-35C is more of a 'computer game' that is suited more to the Observer/Navigator mind than the mandraulic motor skills required to keep a Harrier away from the ground. Combine that with the belief that stepping on and off a carrier is a couple of sim trips and you're current again actually suggests the future JCA force could happily cope with a chap/chappess who has straight B's at GCSE. I don't subscribe to those views for what it's worth and I know that they are only at the extreme end of some people's views.
All that said, on your point it concluded that both services would struggle to fill such a small force (JFH and the JCA force of the future) because the 'accumulator' of pilots in the RAF couldn't simply swap across to a STOVL aircraft from, say, a Tornado cockpit. Bad example. Typhoon cockpit.
Does that change now? Not really. The size of the entire fast jet fleet in the 2020 timeframe and the requirement to be 'single seat or bust' will not make it that much easier to populate a cockpit whichever side of the recruiting fence you sit on if the metrics of today are still used. The French Navy doesn't seem to struggle to filling its cockpit seats sat alongside the bigger FAF brother. Even Belgium manages it.
Who knows what MFTS will look like once we realise what we're actually going to train and if we have the concept configured correctly to meet the training requirements of future aircraft types.
There were many aspects of Newton that did ring true but some read those with Nelson's eye or made differing conclusions on the same statement (both sides by the way.)
I wouldn't in any way suggest that the RN is trying to take back fixed wing aviation in exactly the same way the RAF isn't trying to eradicate the Fleet Air Arm (fixed wing) because neither of those 2 outcomes were concluded by Newton nor are they endorsed policy.
As for the inherent risks and additional costs of delivering against a small force, maybe the lack of a RN requirement to deliver a 4* from such a cadre might actually be an efficient way to man that part of the RN and therefore the JCA Force?
The US mans its naval and marine air forces at less than 2:1 so we can clearly follow suit can't we? Oh, hang on....
But you are of course spot on. Defence really does need to see the manpower structure costs of delivering such a small total force of UK fast jets in the 2020+ timeframe.
Last edited by FB11; 29th Aug 2011 at 14:18.