GR7s for Kandahar

[micksmith]

MoD has just announced that we are sending six GR7s to Kandahar to support southern operations, the Yanks having pulled out some AD8Bs.

Not fishing, just informing!

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

The BBC has 315 personnel going as well. Bit embarrasing that, on average, 40-50 of these guys will be redundant by 2008.

[BikerMark]

"The BBC has 315 personnel going as well."

Blimey! That should scare the natives, 315 media luvvies fresh from Broadcasting House.



I'll get my coat...

[rimfireairburst]

Ah yes......reminds me of Bosnia circa 1995

RN: 4 SeaKings - 54 personnel, commanded by Lieutenant

RAF: 6 Chinooks - 250 personnel, commanded by Group Captain

[Low Ball]

Nothing new there figures from GW 1 much the same:

AAC 44 hels sub 500 pers (rate capped) comd by Lt Col
RAF less than 25 hels if memory serves over 1000 pers comd by Gp Capt
FAA 8-10 SK similar nos to Bosnia comd by Lt Cdr

Don't bother with the old 3 shifts 24 hours a day arguements I know for a fact that FAA and AAC managed 24 hours a day tasking with thier levels of manpower.

Plenty of headroom for a few cuts there

Low Ball

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

That includes a det of REs.

Out of interest (and certainly not in the cause of point scoring), how many personnel would it need to spt a similar det of 6 x Apache?

[DuckDodgers]

Think you will find after initiall set up the number will reduce to 250 persons for around 9 months at present...but again it is a large number of personnel compared to the rotary world and even what was at Incirlik......

[Spotting Bad Guys]

From my experience, this number (which is surprisingly large) will also include a Tac FP HQ (used to be called Tac STO), a flt of Regt Gunners, QRF etc. Ever the opportunists, the RAF Regt have cornered the market on this one and shout down anyone who disagrees....despite the fact that Khandahar has been an established base for at least two years...:confused: I was on a deployment where the FP staff numbered 1/3 of the total strength...self licking lollipop anyone?

I think you'll find that the actual flying squadron manning establishment is a fraction of those deploying.

SBG

[HOODED]

Looking at it a GR7 sqn has roughly 12 ac and around 150 people so I guess the actual squadron guys will number between 60 and 80. Not quite the 300+ mark but as has been said the you still need medics ATC supply etc etc.

[L J R]

How many did RAF have in Ali Al Salem to support 8 (approx..) Tonkas?

How many now at Al Udeid to support same??

.

[Spotting Bad Guys]

A lot less, I would guess! Not needing a Regt Field Sqn to defend the base at AUD would be a start, and all catering at AUD is, I believe US-provided (although there were RAF Chefs and stewards deployed there during TELIC Ph III).

Hard to compare the two because AAS was much more of a 'stand-alone' detachment whereas the det at AUD relies more heavily on life support from the US.

SBG

[LunchMonitor]

...Khandahar has been an established base for at least two years...

Got a nice air conditioned BX too.

[Filthy]

I have been there over a few months and since the MEU left, almost on mass, it has been a bit quiet. It'll be nice to get some company that speaks english!!!!!!

There is 1 RAF ac based at Kabul that manages to operate V well without any admin/ops support apart from a CP team,2 armourers and 2 engineers. Total pers less than 15. Does this tell you something?

The BX is good but the BK and the North Face shop are better.

Top buy - LED headtorch (£6)

Bon chance in the land of the poppy.

[EJ Thribb]

Could anybody tell me which GR7 Sqn is leading on this Det and how long the commitment is for?

[Archimedes]

Details here (http://www.raf.mod.uk/news/news_aug04_26.html)

[owe ver chute]

Whipping Boy's SATCO, ref your question how many men would be required to support 6 Apache. It depends how often you would like the aircraft to fly and how reliable you would like the weapons launch to be.
If you say not often and don't care, then roughly 10-15 tech's (greeny & blacky mix 60/40) 7 groundcrew between 2 a/c.
If you say fly when needed and weapons need to be 100%, then the AAC woould need as much support as a GR7 Sqn. Problem is they won't get, but the expectation won't be any less! Fatigue will be twice as much though!
Rip what you like out of the Crabs, cos it really is a great sport. I tell you what, they laugh last, and longest. They always have!

[NURSE]

yep will they have to do full tours to qualify for medals or will it be minimum period then rotate out with tick in box. They should have to match army tour cycles.

[HOODED]

Or maybe not! We're getting rid of people remember.:(

[Flatus Veteranus]

Perhaps WEBF or Navaleye could enlighten us on how much manpower would be involved if the GR7s were deployed on Invincible or the Ark in the Arabian Sea? Please include all ships' crews (not forgetting the attendant frigates, oilers, storeships, minesweepers) and the AAR support that would undoubtedly be needed to provide reasonable endurance over the operational area?

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Wondered how long it would take for that to be said.....

:rolleyes:

FV- Well done for NOT comparing like with like.

What if.....

1. There was no established base there and it had to be build from scratch, all the protection and infrastructure was the responsibilty of UK Forces, as well as the aiircraft. How many personel would THAT need?

Then we would be comparing like with like.

2. There were no land bases anywhere near?

3. What if Pakistan had refused use of there airspace post 9/11? Would the US just have accepted it, or would they have fought there way through?

4. If 3 had happened, and presuming there were air to air combats, would the destruction of the UK's air defence capabilities over the last couple of years (loss of two Tornado F3 units, early retirement of the Sea Harrier) still have taken place?

Why has this thread turne into another inter service slanging match?

[ORAC]

I can just see it now, 6 SHARs fighting their (sic) way through the PAF to Afghanistan, and back again, without support.

This wasn't, and isn't, about interservice rivalry. At the time of the war it, perhaps, made sense to use carrier based aircraft ( I say perhaps because alternate, better, land bases were available, but politics came into it.) but now, with in country strips available, it would be totally foolish in terms of cost, fuel, hours etc.

As to why GR7? You may, or may not, have seen the recent change of heart of the USAF towards their mix of F-35s variants - because the only aircraft they have capable of operating out of the FOBs in Afghanistan is the A-10 ,which is reaching the end of it's life, and the only other option is presently the AV-8B.....

[WE Branch Fanatic]

No, but it was about trying to compare two completely different things. Since there's a base there already.........

Therefore comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges.

[Jackonicko]

That's the point, WEBF.

There's usually a land base available. And if there isn't, then there probably won't be the overflight rights and political consensus required to mount a carrier op either. And you'll need a land base for the tankers and other assets anyway.

If a carrier only makes sense when the alternative would be for the RAF to build and protect its own base, then it doesn't make sense.

And actually, looking back to Cold War days, an 'in-the-field' deployment by a Harrier squadron to use road strips required less manpower and less investment than a carrier group - and a Jag or Gripen deployment would be even cheaper.

[Unmissable]

If the Army had woken up to what it really takes to operate flying machines (especially ones that fight), then they wouldn't have most of their Apaches wrapped in klingfilm in a big hangar, with zero hours on the clock.

[Navaleye]

Does 6 a/c require a Group Captain or a Wing Commander? At the end of Corporate the RAF sent out 400 ground crew with three Wing Commanders and a Group Captain then rotated them every three weeks. I'd be surprised if we could manage three months now.

[rivetjoint]

WEBF, Are you suggesting that had Pakistan refused overflights then every strike package from Diego/the Indian Ocean/etc to Afghanistan would've had F-15s, F3s and SEAD platforms with it??

Every enemy country has a neighbour where overflight rights or FOBs can be bought for dollars these days it seems. Those that don't have neighbours the "allies" own anyway.

[Navaleye]

It may have been in the past (pre-80s) but AFAIK these days you stop regular flying duties when you when you reach Cdr. I guess the nearest would be Commander (Air) on a carrier, but although but he does not have any squadron speciific duties apart from making them do what they are told :confused:

[Spotting Bad Guys]

On my time on a certain puffer-jet squadron, the Squadron Boss who regularly led the table of 'hours-hog' of the month!:ok:

SBG

[Flatus Veteranus]

Navaleye

I was closely involved with the planning of deployments to Port Stanley at the end of Corporate. Various packages were provided for, including up to a squadron of F4s and Buccs. Serious tests were done at Boscombe to see whether the "tin strip" (bought at vast expense from the USMC) could stand the racket of Nimrod take-offs and landings. And of course there were the Hercules tankers and transport to Ascension. A number of AD radars were set up and had to be manned. I think that Gp Capt was about the right rank for the commander of such a package. I am surprised that the detachment was rotated every three weeks. Such a roulement would have filled most of the available seats on the weekly Hercules shuttle, which was restricted in auw despite operating in the "red" (war emergency) section of the ODM, I believe. 400 blokes could have supported a much heavier punch than Hermes, Invincible, Old Uncle Tom Cobleigh and All!

[Oggin Aviator]

Deliverance is right. The majority of Sqn Bosses are now Commanders, the Sea jet community taking the lead to provide a par with the RAF sqn bosses whilst embarked. It is not fully implemented yet but it is getting there.

We also have the 3 rotary type commanders (Lynx, Merlin and SK) in the rank of Commander. Wings of Air Stations and CVS's are Cdrs as well, the reponsibilities between them and the type commanders having been reorganised post Fleet First.

Oggin

Good luck and safe flying to 3 Sqn out east.

[WE Branch Fanatic]

FV

Very interesting, but what about DURING the conflict?

Before you come out with the line about the Sea Harrier not achieving a "favourable air situation" think how much worse the attacks on the Task Force would have been without it? Apart from shooting some down, they forced the Argies to fly low, causing them fuzing problems which saved many ships and lives. According to a USAF study, it deterred 453 attack sorties?

Maybe this helps explain why carriers are so popular with up and coming Navies?

All this bickering is digression from what this thread should be about - wishing Good Luck to the people being deployed.

[Navaleye]

Thank you for the information gentlemen. Its good that the RN is getting value for money out of its senior officers.

Flatus: I have a couple of questions for you on the Sea Jet thread.

[MaroonMan4]

I see that Apaches were mentioned in this thread. Just trying to match capability to effect required in theatre (ISTAR, convoy protection, escort and AH CAS etc), I would have thought that the UK Apaches would have been top of the list, especially as they now have an Operational Squadron.

I am not saying that the Apache replaces the GR7 Strike capability for one moment but if we really are going to 'effects based targeting' then I would have thought AH would be there.

[Spotting Bad Guys]

If you read the news, the problems within Afghanistan are not confined to one geographical area. Clearly the CAS asset has to be 'on-call' (XCAS) and arrive quickly at the scene - I don't think you can do that with an Apache in a country the size of Afghanistan.

SBG

[ORAC]

GCAS. I would have thought.

[Spotting Bad Guys]

Sorry ORAC, I was a little unclear in my reply. GCAS, of course, if holding ground alert but more likely in this scenario would be XCAS assigned to a specific working area.

SBG