Future of the FAA [Archive]

high spirits

20th Oct 2010, 19:53

Here is the elephant in the room........ There are now not enough spaces in cockpits for the Jungly/RAF SH community. Why? The promised 22 Chinook buy has not materialised (thanks for the pipe dream Labour Govt!). The Chinook buy of 12 is simply not enough to sustain 2 Sqns worth of Merlin pilots moving across to the green banana. The other elephant is that Puma 2 has been reduced in number (24 - ish). The future RW strategy was written with this assumption(with an RN Jungly 2* at the helm). Now that assumption has been kiboshed, CAS has simply reverted to an obvious standpoint. With 35 fully trained Mk3 RAF Merlin crews, most of whom have served in AFG this year, why should he make his own aircrew redundant just to save the RN Jungly force.....? Especially as the PM trumpeted helicopter lift as a highlight of SDSR.
The sheer amount of money to retrain the Jungly Force (42ish crews) with the RAF essentially footing the instructional and real estate bill at Benson for the next 5 years, (in addition to training it's own to fly the banana) are simply an expense we cannot afford. The geography alone makes it a nightmare for both Services. RN have to travel to and from Benson to undertake an heavily simulator based course and living in hotels due to no accn at Benson. The RAF trying to retrain to Chinook without the airframes or enough simulator support. This in addition to making some redundancies amongst his own, make this a no brainer for CAS, hence the wording in SDSR. Given the same situation in reverse, the RN would not think twice about denying the airframes to the RAF. The bottom line is that, this is not the fault of the RAF - the circumstances have simply changed beyond the control of both Services. Sadly, I did not even see the Jungly community mentioned in the RN section of SDSR. Why? Were they sold down the river by the fishhead community to save the 2 big boats?

Unchecked

20th Oct 2010, 20:00

Totally agree HS.

Where can I get one of these briefing pack thingies, by the way?

Spanish Waltzer

20th Oct 2010, 20:03

Soteria might be recruiting soon...:D

oh hang on.... junglies cant hover over water :ouch:

Type1106

20th Oct 2010, 20:20

Help!
For a thick ex truckie - what is a 'junglie' please>:confused:

sweep complete

20th Oct 2010, 20:25

If defence of the realm means best option is selling your blokes down the river, and you are brave enough to do it, do you expect your blokes to accept their redundancies and say, but he was a good bloke, he put country before his troops?

PN - that's my point; his job, all of their jobs, should be to offer sound advice to idiot politicians on how to best defend the UK and it's interests... keeping 'your blokes' sweet or looking to come out of it as a 'good bloke' in the eyes of your cronies, and sod the capability gap, is pathetic.

My opinion here (and I'm able to cope with the fact that's all it is!)... I believe it has been a long term aim of the RAF hierarchy to remove the FAA from fixed wing aviation and it looks like they've achieved it!

high spirits

20th Oct 2010, 20:33

Thick ex-truckie,
Jungly/Junglie = RN/RM Commando Helicopter Force Aircrew. Organic helo crew for the booties (Royal Marines - before you ask!).

MaroonMan4

20th Oct 2010, 20:46

This is brilliant,

I must be honest in that I was slightly embarrassed when the whole Torpy v RN Fixed Wing/Carrier debate was going on, but it now looks pure genius. Not only have we managed to 'slam dunk' the RN FAA fixed wing community (forever),we are about to do the same with their amphibious rotary community.

So far they have hidden behind an RN 2* at Cap ALM and an RN 2* at JHC, both I am sure good people and truly Joint. But what they didn't expect was the RAF light blue machine to very cleverly out wit and completely out play all of them to ensure the continuance of light blue control of things that fly.

When the next Comd JHC takes over (who is.....wait for it....RAF) then I give CHF 5, maybe 6 years (when does the Sea King go? When do we pull out of Afghanistan?) before it is absorbed into a 'Joint' Maritime Force at RAF Benson (under the already established RAF SHF HQ).

I will wager that CHF will never recover from this, and even with all of the best work that Navy Command and CHF can muster they will not be able to convince us (or the bean counters) to give up our Merlins.

Possession is 9/10 ths of the law, and tell me how many Jungly pilots for RWS transition instructors they have,one or two maximum I am led to believe - lets just call it quits and call them exchange pilots until they transfer.

My advice to any CHF pilot is to jump ship early - of course we are going to need a bit of maritime experience to get the Freaks up to speed for embarked ops, but we in the Chinook fleet do it well enough when required. But if you do not jump soon, then it will be too late, as we do not need all of the CHF aircrew to bolster our Merlin fleet that is for sure.

A well thought through and very clever method of ensuring our primacy of the air - my previous embarrassment is replaced by respect for some very astute and forward thinking work.

teeteringhead

20th Oct 2010, 20:49

MaroonMan

exactly so! And you are the first on this plethora of SDSR threads to have identified it!!

Per Ardua!

Junglydaz

20th Oct 2010, 21:28

Were you around when the Chinny took its rear undercarriage off by missing Ocean's flight deck (and that is a fairly big target!). :ugh:

Tallsar

20th Oct 2010, 21:43

A below the belt cheap shot JDaz!....I suspect a review of 55 years of CHF ship ops might reveal some very interesting reading! Point being of course, that we all know (those of us of any service who have done it) that decks are interesting and demanding places....and even with the most professional efforts, things can rapidly overtake anyone........so lets keep the stone throwing for our spin doctoring political masters who think grossly expensive Puma upgardes are worth more to the defence of the nation than very capable Maritme ISTAR platforms (£3.5 Bn already spent!) that also can deliver precision weapons over extreme ranges...RIP MRA4:{

PS The loss of the MRA4 was no doubt a great belowto the above mentioned "if it flies keep it RAF" strategy.....by default the FAA now is the sole possessor of an ASW and dedicated maritime ISTAR capability!

Something witty

20th Oct 2010, 23:19

Quote: Can we really justify a bespoke CHF? Seconded. CHF has been (apart from the odd amphibious exercise) a land-based SH force for the past twenty odd years.

How short (or selective) are some people's memories - GW1 (1991) GW2 - Al Faw assault? (2003) or maybe Sierra Leone (2000) So CHF should, by your reasoning, be sacrificed because we allowed ourselves, between amphibious OPS, and amphibious exercises, to stray ashore to assist the RM & Army?

It would be sad to see the end of the junglie ethos and spirit - but bigger sacrifices have already been made. Agreed, and dare I say it would be a significant loss to the UK's defence capability and to the RM and Army were it to go.

The FAA small-ships flights are an integral part of the ship's weapon systems and need naval aircrew - but that is not the case with CHF . CHF have striven to maintain an Amphibious capability over the last few years despite continuous Telic and Herrick commitment - The RAF would undoubtedly have had little interest in this were it holding the amphibious capability itself, lets face it, a certain service's RW units have routinely allowed themselves to go night uncurrent in the UK between Afghan tours - if they can't be trusted to maintain basic flying skills how can we expect them to maintain a complex Operational capability?

Whilst CHF is undoubtedly not at the peak of its ultimate amphibious capability, there is the depth of knowledge and the extensive background within the organization as well as the training that means that long periods of ops ashore, such as seen recently, do not jeopardise the amphibious piece as severely - the operational amphibious experience of the more senior a/c captains on CHF streaches back through Al Faw, Sierra Leone and beyond not to mention that of our engineers, chockheads and loggies - it's not just aircrew sh!t - its how the whole unit integrates, works with and understands the ship, how they understand and work with you. CHF can fall back on that knowledge, what will the RAF fall back on when they've been thrashed around the globe and suddenly we need an amphibious assault with them having never gained the experience or let what little was established fade to nothing?

It is interesting to note the RAF's take on the move of Merlin to CHF and the RN. I suspect that the RAF PR machine (there's something that could be cut for the common good) is furiously peddling this new line now that the carriers are secure but victory has been won on Harrier.

I don't love CHF per se - the work load is high and we have next to no support doing everything ourselves (very lean - no ops support staff for example - the RAF have got some good ideas... though maybe not in these times and it's so we can fit on a ship) - however, I will defend to the hilt the capability and Junglie ethos - the cunning and can-do spirit that is applied whenever anyone needs support - that is ingrained in us and we thrive on the opportunity to apply it on ops for the greater good. That Junglie ethos won't survive unless we are kept separate and it is certainly not something that can be replaced or transfered.

Quote: Can we really justify a bespoke CHF?

Pull back from the myopia of Afghanistan and you will realise that GW1, Bosnia, Sierra Leone, GW2 and the extraction of Brit Nationals from Beiruit all happened on, or very close to coastal waters and either involved the use of RN carriers and / or amphibious ships and / or the SK4, Lx7 and Gaz that now come under CHF, either based on board or ashore - so nearly every post cold war conflict bar Afghan
has either involved an Amphibious Op or has been in a location that would have made it possible. What have Iran and Korea got a lot of, dare I ask?! What's that statistic? 80% of the world's population live within 100 miles of the sea? Where does most of our oil come from? Not precise but the gist is certainly true.

Given that we have operated in a secondary role as SH for so long and have a pretty respectable reputation, surely, if it's a 'them or us' then the question should be somewhat different:

How can you justify keeping the RAF Merlin squadrons as they can only bring an SH capability to the party?

We should retain the battle proven Amphibious capability, expertise, Junglie ethos and spirit of an independent RN / RM Commando Helicopter Force as they are leaner than RAF Sqns yet more than capable of acting as SH in their spare time between Amphibious Ops and Ex. CHF's PR machine is well driven but small and as an organization and individuals we prefer to get on with the job in hand rather than shout about it. Unfortunately, this approach, which I have enormous sympathy with, does us no favours in this treacherous time. Forgive me then for this one quote, from a (RAF) head-shed in JHF(A) recently:

"The Sea King 4s are our least capable airframes flown by our most capable crews"

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather see there be an uplift in Chinook numbers so the RAF Merlin force could work Chinook instead - I see no justification in binning any SH Sqns, indeed I disagree with any of the cuts to any service - but I'll be buggered if I'm not going to defend CHF and our RN / RM heritage when we do all that any RAF SH sqn does on ops and yet still deliver a battle-proven Amphibious capability as well all with fewer resources.

LFFC

21st Oct 2010, 00:19

I couldn't help but wonder at this comment in the Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/spending-review/8062387/Spending-Review-what-it-means-for-Defence.html):

But the cuts to the Navy could have been worse and its worth bearing in mind if it does get enough Joint Strike Fighters to fly off the carriers by 2020 then it will once again carry considerable clout. In the meantime it is vital to keep the former Harrier pilots employed with either the US or French navies so they do not lose vital skills.

I suspect that the RN pilots who will fly JSF in the future are probably still at school.

Something witty

21st Oct 2010, 02:17

The Perfect Storm
This is brilliant,

I must be honest in that I was slightly embarrassed when the whole Torpy v RN Fixed Wing/Carrier debate was going on, but it now looks pure genius. Not only have we managed to 'slam dunk' the RN FAA fixed wing community (forever),we are about to do the same with their amphibious rotary community.

So far they have hidden behind an RN 2* at Cap ALM and an RN 2* at JHC, both I am sure good people and truly Joint. But what they didn't expect was the RAF light blue machine to very cleverly out wit and completely out play all of them to ensure the continuance of light blue control of things that fly.

When the next Comd JHC takes over (who is.....wait for it....RAF) then I give CHF 5, maybe 6 years (when does the Sea King go? When do we pull out of Afghanistan?) before it is absorbed into a 'Joint' Maritime Force at RAF Benson (under the already established RAF SHF HQ).

I will wager that CHF will never recover from this, and even with all of the best work that Navy Command and CHF can muster they will not be able to convince us (or the bean counters) to give up our Merlins.

Possession is 9/10 ths of the law, and tell me how many Jungly pilots for RWS transition instructors they have,one or two maximum I am led to believe - lets just call it quits and call them exchange pilots until they transfer.

My advice to any CHF pilot is to jump ship early - of course we are going to need a bit of maritime experience to get the Freaks up to speed for embarked ops, but we in the Chinook fleet do it well enough when required. But if you do not jump soon, then it will be too late, as we do not need all of the CHF aircrew to bolster our Merlin fleet that is for sure.

A well thought through and very clever method of ensuring our primacy of the air - my previous embarrassment is replaced by respect for some very astute and forward thinking work .

MM (& TH)
Ok, I'll bite.

Perhaps your first instinct should return?

I don't agree with interservice rivalry of the destructive nature, particularly in public, however needs must.

There is no more serious a matter than the Defence of the UK, our population and our interests, at home and abroard. Across the Forces we all have our beliefs in how well we do our job and how important our roles are - these are pushed up the chain, prioritised, and we continue to exist or we get scrapped; its an imperfect system in an imperfect world.

Where the system really falls down is when an individual service turns it's guns on the capabilites of another Service with the express and sole aim of empire building for it's own, single service benefit with no solid justification to satisfy the 'common good.'

The whole language of the RAF, their incessant PR spin and approach to the RN FW and latterly RW assets (AAC's assets too) has been to seek to deny the RN and Army of those assets and capabilities for the sole benefit of the RAF with no discernible benefit (and many severe disadvantages) for the Defence of the UK.

It's not just my job, it's the jobs of all the others, Engineers, loggies and Aircrew... but it's far more than that too - the lives of those who have already died and those who will die or be wounded, on the ground and at sea, because the RAF can not help itself from meddling in the well established and life-saving operational capabilities of the other Services.

So, think again - are you not embarrassed by the concerted and treasonous actions of your 'service' over the years to remove or reduce the capabilities of the other two Services at the cost of capability and lives or have you no basic morals?

Call me a bluff old traditionalist but I always thought that, aside from all the funny things that happen, ultimately we are trained on expensive machines not for our own benefit but for that of others, sadly a fact that appears lost on some members of the RAF - here's more of a Junglie perspective of the serious side to what we do:

Service flying (and thus for us, Service life) is about getting the very best you can achieve from your airframe whilst mitigating the risks in order to best assist those in need on the ground - everything you and your crew, engineers etc do is with that express aim.

You work for the blokes on the ground, - that means you log hours airborne, not additional hours sat on a refuel spot at BSN - you might have joined to get hours to go commercial but tough, you are NOT there for your 'BA Tokens' to log those hours is to rob them of their ammunition, water, food, bags to sh** in and perhaps most importantly the mail from their family that they've not received for weeks.

When blokes are seeing or hearing of their mate's blown up or shot in front of them on a near daily basis and yet still continue to patrol out of the gate or sit in a sangar every day for no other reason than not wanting to let down their oppos, you don't even think about getting or awarding a gong for the act of just doing your job.... even if its 'done well' a few times... he or she wont get anything for just doing theirs well for nigh on six months

It also means that, although the JHC FOB didn't state until recently 'thou shalt maintain night currencey' you don't take that as leave to sack off night flying between tours as that is dangerous and reduces capability and increases threat :mad:(not least because of subsequent Crab embarrassment that has in the past prevented them from allowing the Junglies (who have always maintained night currency and also continue to practice night dust landings to more severe light levels) to crack on to get the job done at night - further 'service' politics getting in the way of capability).

It means going to the RAF Armourer at BSN and requesting a refresher for door gunners and Aircrewman on the GPMG strip and clean so as to better understand the problems and ways we can ensure damage is recognised early or prevented so we preserve limited stocks of spares and give ourselves and our oppos the best chance should we need to fire. (he was surprised but pleased to see the RN/RM- the RAF just gave him dirty knackered weapons they kept breaking whilst continuing to ignore his advise)

Rant over.

high spirits

21st Oct 2010, 05:38

Something Witty/LFFC,
I agree with your analysis(and I am crab SH by the way). Slagging off night currency and the Chinny force just brings too much emotion into the arguement and we all know what a fantastic job each force does/has done on Ops. What we have now is the right mix of helos for the job. Maroon Man was simply goading you - and you both fell for it.

However, the elephant in the room remains, ............who takes the redundancies that are coming our way, the RN or the RAF; and who bears the enormous cost of re-training not one, but 2 helicopter forces, whilst trying to maintain Ops in AFG? I can tell you now, there is simply not the infrastructure/money to do this. Speak to most of the Mk3 community, and they will tell you that they don't want to go to the banana. What do you do with the sim post conversion. CAe and SerCo must be rubbing their hands with the number of zeros they are about to add to the bill if they have to move to Somerset. 35 RAF Mk3/3a crews into 25 ac does not leave enough hours for everyone at the moment, so how will 42 Jungly crews solve the problem. Marinisation will add a significant amount of weight to an already underpowered helicopter. There is no roping platform for MCT, the list goes on.

Bad blood between the Junglies and the RAF SH community does no-one any good. This is not an attempt to hi-jack SH by CAS, it is simply the stark reality of what we are both faced with.

MaroonMan4

21st Oct 2010, 06:08

High Spirits,

You were right, it was a tad unfair and I know that CHF and the Junglies must be feel very vulnerable at the moment.

But, Something Witty does nothing but rant - there is no solid evidence or well argued case that both he in his post or any of his brethren can do to save CHF. They should have seen the writing on the wall with the Newton Study (where they thought incorrectly as it transpires that a load of waffle about FAA deck hands and executive air appointments would save their Harrier/Fixed WIng community). As we can see RWS is still on paper, with virtually no quantifiable CHF input to any transition that is meant to start next year. Quite simply they missed the boat (forgive pun) with Harrier, and they are now staring at each other in disbelief as they realise that they have done the same with CHF.

As everyone recognises the CHF aircrew are probably one of the most well trained and broadly operationally experienced rotary crews that Defence/JHC has (hence why I suggested that the Freaks would benefit from a few of them 'jumping ship; (forgive the pun again). Sadly though, when we are in so much debt, lets get this fact clear - do the Treasury (or Land Budgeteers) care 2 hoots who flies the Merlin, they just want the cheapest option.

In the current economic climate (forecast out until at least 2020) the cheapest option by far to deliver amphibious rotary lift to the Royal Marines is RAF SH. based at Odiham and Benson.

Now, if Navy Command and/or CHF can forward a reasoned and rational argument for them to justly (and efficiently) take over our Merlins, then I am all ears, but Something Witty's post relying on the conceptual esoterics of 'jungly ethos' and nostalgia does not a well balanced or robust argument make.

All very sad - but lets now stop deceiving ourselves and do something with this elephant in the room before morale and more wasted effort is made. Lets acknowledge the drawdown of CHF and let JHC conduct a well balanced and well timed RWS transition ensuring that where possible those CHF crews, engineers and staff that add value are absorbed into the RAF to deliver defence an RAF SH lift capability across all environments.

Tourist

21st Oct 2010, 07:35

Maroon Man

The plan before the review was for the Merlin to come to the RN.

Where in the review do you see any mention of a change to this plan?

Before you start saying this is a fait accompli, perhaps wait to see what happens?

The Admiral who spoke to us yesterday certainly believes that we are still getting the Mk3s as planned.

Pontius Navigator

21st Oct 2010, 07:55

What do you do with the sim post conversion. CAe and SerCo must be rubbing their hands with the number of zeros they are about to add to the bill if they have to move to Somerset.
There is a tradition of leaving the sims in situ and for aircrew to go to the sim not the sim to the aircraft.

The F3 OCU move saw the studes travelling from Leuchars to Coningsby.

Another reason for not moving sims is that the instructors tend not to want to move either.

Type1106

21st Oct 2010, 08:10

Many thanks - I thought I knew most of the dark blue boy's slang but that one passed me by1
1106

WhyNavy

21st Oct 2010, 08:22

Maroonman is right. Well said.

orgASMic

21st Oct 2010, 08:24

Comd JHC announced yesterday that Merlin Mk4 ('marinised' Mk3/3a) will still go to CHF.

Vie sans frontieres

21st Oct 2010, 09:03

A distinction has been made by Something Witty between the capabilities of RAF SH and the Amphibious Capability of the CHF. RAF SH have been getting airborne off ships and dropping the troops and equipment on land for years. If that's not the route taken by an amphibian, I don't know what is. Someone please explain the difference because I can't see it. :confused:

NURSE

21st Oct 2010, 09:35

Given that most of the Joint helicopter stuff and future Helicopter stuff came in the Army fact sheets and the Chinook order was mentioned in relation to Army I wonder if maroonman4's triumphilism may be short lived?

Yes JHC is a land asset as is 3 Cdo brigade.

high spirits

21st Oct 2010, 10:08

Pontius,
I'm no subject matter expert, but the present Mk3 OCF is about 2/3rds sim based. That makes training 42 crews, and then sustaining an OCF and frontline very expensive in terms of transport and Hotels. The messes at Benson are slightly less chocka than Jordan's brassiere. The plan that I have seen will have the sim moving to Somerset.
Tourist,
What has changed? 12 not 22 chinook. Less Puma 2 than assumed in RW strategy. Not enough cockpits for all. Therefore, P45s for some. Asking CAS to tell some of the Mk3 community that they are to be made redundant so that CHF can take their ac is like getting a turkey to vote for Christmas.

JHC already have 35 trained Mk3/3a crews........

With every single desert exercise to prepare crews for Ops under some severe scrutiny, and the country's Defence Budget £38 billion sausage side, are we really about to embark(excuse the pun) on what is a costly re-branding exercise and re-train 77 crews whilst trying to sustain Ops?

Folly

TheWizard

21st Oct 2010, 10:13

To quote the Chief of the Air Staff:

•The requirement for, and the invaluable role of, the Royal Air Force Support Helicopter fleets is visible to all of us on a daily basis, particularly in Afghanistan and relatively recently in Iraq. The intention, therefore, is to enhance our SH capability with the purchase of 12 more Chinook and the significant upgrade of 24 Puma helicopters which, together with the extant Merlin force, will continue to see the Royal Air Force providing a critical and expanded element of Air Power to meet the wide variety of tasks/operations that will face us in this decade and beyond.

The Review will lead to a force structure in 2020 broadly based on the following:
Combat ISTAR capability comprised of:

• Typhoon and JSF
• E-3D, AIRSEEKER (Rivet Joint) and SCAVENGER (RPAS)
A modern, capable strategic and tactical airlift fleet of:
• 14 A330
• 7 C-17
• 22 A-400M
A strengthened battlefield lift capability consisting of:
• 60 Chinook
• 25 Merlin
• 24 Puma

Read into that what you will.

Tourist

21st Oct 2010, 10:44

Vie sans frontieres

"RAF SH have been getting airborne off ships and dropping the troops and equipment on land for years. If that's not the route taken by an amphibian, I don't know what is. Someone please explain the difference because I can't see it."

And that lack of ability to see it is exactly the reason why we need Junglies.

Phalacrocorax

21st Oct 2010, 11:51

Nothing new here, historically there have been many tries to sideline the FAA. Two main occasions in particular;
1. Mid 1930s RAF took over procurement and supply of aircraft to FAA, result, began WW2 with bi-planes;
2. late 60s excellent RAF staffwork resulted in cancellation of CVA01, loss of "Vic" and run-down of FW (hence Omega on F4 tails)
On both occasions subsequent maritime conflict proved value of organic air. Just hope it's not too late this time, perhaps something unexpected will come along to prove the point (viz Chris Parry's excellent article in Times last week)

Vie sans frontieres

21st Oct 2010, 11:54

:D
Great answer Tourist. That's helped clear it up. :rolleyes:

TheWizard

21st Oct 2010, 11:58

Comd JHC announced yesterday that Merlin Mk4 ('marinised' Mk3/3a) will still go to CHF.

Orgasmic, can you reveal where and to whom this was announced by the Commander?

Pontius Navigator

21st Oct 2010, 12:18

High Spirits, thank you, may be they will move the sims, but when did the MOD ever apply fact logic and reason.

oldgrubber

21st Oct 2010, 14:35

VSF,

FAA are sailors who fly/fix aircraft.
As such they are also the ships company and make up part of the crew of a ship whilst embarked. This is the difference between “getting airborne off ships” and being a CAG or embarked flight. The FAA keep all their men “current” to embark by completing BISSC and ISSC courses and ensuring that they exercise and work up with the ship.
Ships are lean manned, they can’t afford to carry a “passenger” who has no idea about firefighting or damage control and the best way to ensure currency is to do it all the time, which is what they do.
Each to their own is probably the best way to put it.

david parry

21st Oct 2010, 16:09

Oldgrubber.....:D Well put, the AED DEPT, Badgers and Chockheads would be proud of you

4Greens

21st Oct 2010, 16:17

Anything to do with the FAA can now be put into the Aviation History and Nostalgia forum!

Evalu8ter

21st Oct 2010, 16:54

Oldgrubber,
Before the current Op, when the Chinook force had the capacity, crews and engineers attended the RN courses you mention. Post 2015 they can again, and the RAF Merlin crews can attend in due course. As other say on here, in a time of austerity how can it possibly make sense to re-train 70+ crews whilst attempting to continue to induct new trainees in order to keep the training pipeline intact? Does ethos alone justify it? Probably not. As for marinisation, well Betty and Chuck are victims of their own success with deck edge elevators & hangar decks big enough for spread Chinook...and since a Chinook will carry at least 3 times as many people as a SK4 (and often much more) it's actually a more efficient use of deck and hangar space - though, of course you lose the concurrency piece.

I was stunned at a maritime nation giving up MPA, and surprised by the ASTOR decision - though it does tell you what you need to know of the severity of the hole we're in (god alone knows what a 20% cut would have been like....). I was saddened by the loss of Ark (having many fond memories and some fond memory-blanks when embarked) but feel numb at the thought of losing my Jungly breatheren, some of which are close friends. Guys, I'm sorry, but if you're looking for an area to pour your fire on then I'd suggest you look at the decision to retain Wildcat; delete the Wildcat and you could fund all 24 Chinooks and the Merlin transfer would go ahead as planned and it would be the AAC looking down the barrel (except AH/D4K) not CHF. I hate to agree, but this does look like the RAF playing the long game and betting that the Admirals would do anything for their carriers....

Comments about night currency are purile; crews do not go uncurrent because they can't be bothered to night fly, they go uncurrent due to a crippling lack of spares/serviceable ac as the effort is forward in Theatre supporting the boots on the ground.

david parry

21st Oct 2010, 17:17

Right ;) just for that 4 greens.... We are going back, to the good old days:DThe Navy Net: Rum Ration Forums Royal Navy Branches The Fleet Air Arm HMS Victorious R38 Procedure Alpha Subic Bay Jan 1965 (http://www.navy-net.co.uk/Forums/viewtopic/t=14657.html)

NURSE

22nd Oct 2010, 00:03

I would agree with Evalu8ter that RAF empire building strikes again wonder when they will start putting forward the argument the Nimrod electronic ops should go to merlin HMA fleet to get the foot through the door so they can "absorb" them to. And in 2015 their target will be AAC. In the mean time I think Dr Fox should learn from the experience and impose order on the 3 services not play them of against each other like Labour did.

Wildcat may however strike back if T26 or the Survey/Patrol/MCMV platform has a small flight deck

Occasional Aviator

22nd Oct 2010, 07:06

Hang on a minute....

The RAF is being cut just as deeply as the RN. It is losing a huge chunk of its FJ force, MPA capability, additional SH (which were badly needed anyway even without Afgh), and a similar number/proprotion of its people. I know people at MoD who were involved in the decisions (including a very good friend who's a RN officer) and it is clear that the final solution has been as capability-based as possible given the funding issues.

I am utterly fed up of people suggesting that the RAF spends its time scheming and spinning to do down the aviation arms of the other Services. Can anyone actually point me at an article in a paper, magazine or online publication that's an example of this alleged 'spin'? I have seen plenty of retired admirals, naval historians and the like writing stuff about how we should never cut the RN or RM, and Sharkey Ward's piece linked to from this forum a few days ago which basically just rubbished the RAF based on outdated hearsay and conjecture - but I'm not about to accuse the RN of having some secret PR/spin machine.

Could we all please stop blaming each other for the cuts and try and get on with sorting out how we're going to do UK defence please?

high spirits

22nd Oct 2010, 08:22

Yet more infantile musings from the Dark Blue. Been on the emotion liquid have we NURSE? I note that you still can't give me a good reason why we should spend a lot of money (that we have not got) re-training 77 crews when we can barely spare the cash to train our aircrew for current desert ops. The fact that they have run out of ACME Nato stock turd polish for the Mk4 SeaKing at the time of a large defence cut is not the fault of the light blue....

FlyNavy44

22nd Oct 2010, 08:36

I think that the RAF should be careful at the moment.

I am pretty convinced that the RN can demonstrate significant savings to Defence by demonstrating why the 12 new (RN) CH47s should not be based at RNAS Yeovilton to deliver a specialist and amphibious lift capability in the maritime environment.

Think about all those savings in training air/ground crew in embarked and sea going operations, think of the capacity freed up to the RAF CH47 force to focus on delivering Land lift, think of the savings in a Joint CH47 OCU and Joint RWOETU. Think of all that space South Side that is no longer for the RN FW, that can at zero cost to the tax payer house 12 RN CH47s. Thanks to SDSR we no longer have to worry about the constraints of deck size and hangar space when considering the Sea King HC4 replacement, as SDSR as given us a very large CVF in the LPH role, that requires full (political) utilisation and concurrent use with a future RN FW community - 12 RN CH47 will deliveR a very potent future defence option.

At last the customer (3 Commando Brigade RM) and CHF eventually get the capability that they have been asking for years, and as rightly identified why retrain RAF Merlin crews to CH47 or recruit extra CH47 pilots for an RAF CH47 force that is already running hot, when by 2016 the seamless transition to an RN CH47 force based at RNAS Yeovilton can deliver maritime trained and experienced personnel (CHJF is still undertaking amphibious exercises [B]and[B] delivering on operations in Afghanistan - now that is value for money to the tax .

In short, crack on and spin your single service Merlin piece - I think you will find that in so doing that an opportunity for CHF and amphibious capability enhancement will be fully exploited.

xenolith

22nd Oct 2010, 09:50

When its all said and done, I guess the real question is:

Why is the Navy contributing to an aviation forum?

Unchecked

22nd Oct 2010, 09:53

Well, I wouldn't say they were contributing...:ok::p

Tallsar

22nd Oct 2010, 10:15

While its always a bit of fun to knockabout amusing conspiracy theories and chat about hidden grand single service strategies......its never been my experience of how Main Building (and also Abbey Wood) really works. Sure there are always those who rightly try and be loyal to their Service as far as possible, but there has to be a solid (normally financial as well as task) driven argument behind what gets accepted at DMB level. Thats before the politicians stick their oars in of course and derail some of the sense in it all! I can also understand why consumate professionals feel real pain and have a tendency to lash out from loyalty and true concern as they see their life's work dismissively binned for unfathomable reasons and sadly, more mundane ones...like total lack of cash!

The reality of now is that all 3 Services have taken massive hits and the Nation at the strategic level has a new strategy but much less with which to back it up - we are much more of a Paper Tiger.

The RN no longer has dedicated amphibious forces (so why keep a dedicated CHF?), no dedicated carrier strike fleet or ac, even fewer smaller ships to do the jobs that still need doing, and of course no LRMPA capability to offer it an essential element of protection or attack either.......Whither Rule Britannia now.

Meanwhile the Army has lost considerable fire power...its rapidly becoming an infantry-only force (to be reckoned with?)..........but it is also loosing a considrable amount of supporting CAS and other airpower (half the tactical AT & Sentinel/ASTOR forces for example) to get those troops out there and properly supported and protected (Who said logistics is ever the cinderella of any war eh?)

As for the RAF.....well yes it would appear it is becoming a more SH biased force (whether it really likes it or not)...by the sheer numbers game alone......but the loss of Harrier and it versatile VSTOL capability is a real blow all round to it, the RN and the Army ...and our strategy over the next 10 years should we have no nearby major airfield to use for ops. The demise of its ISTAR capability is equally drastic.......and while a few UAVs and some rather elderly Boeings are on the way we should not under estimate what the UK has lost with this in an era of cyber and knowledge based warfare - MRA4 & Sentinel were key players in this (as was Sea King 7 ASAC). The loss of LRMPA capability is more of a tragedy and immense risk for this island nation (and our nuclear deterrent) than is believable. The hacking of the AT force - those rather modern C130Js, is equally drastic and tragic (for the untried A400M that costs more than even a C17!!!).....Ah logistics again eh.

All this adds up to the UK no longer being a real worldwide power of size and note for the first time in 500 years.....we are still willing in so many ways at professional level, and will still contribute...but lead it and determine the outcome we will not! The nation no longer has the will I am afraid....it would rather sacrifice its world beating defence industrial capability and areas of military expertise (some of the few we have left) than spend the cash which too many now want spent (often wastefully) on other home based stuff. They have forgotten after decades of peace at home that our military capability as seen by the rest of the world is still so signifcant in ensuring our influence and continued prosperity.

Lets not forget too that in cash terms, the recent decisions mean that the following has been wasted:

Nimrod MRA4 3.5 Bn. GR9 Harrier 1.5 Bn Sentinel 1.2 Bn C130J 800M SK7 ASAC 400M...now there is scandalous public waste....and all new stuff of top level capability that was apparently so essential to our success in the past few years....politicians...don't ya just luv'em.

Somehow, the esoteric ownership of some dedicated amphibious SH is minor beer in amongst these events......but then what do I know....

oldgrubber

22nd Oct 2010, 10:18

Xenolith,
Are you light blue types never happy? first our ships and aircraft, now you want our Pprune rights as well!!!

Cheers

xenolith

22nd Oct 2010, 10:25

Old Grubber,

Aircraft and FAA blokes (and girls) asap, the Ships no no no no no:O

All the best

Thomas coupling

22nd Oct 2010, 17:02

Anyone got a formal resolution on who will take possession of the RAF Merlin's. What is the future of the junglies after SeaKing, if no Merlin's?

Tallsar

22nd Oct 2010, 17:20

Check out CAS's statement TC....although my take would be that a future RAF owned Merlin fleet will take on board a bigger complement of FAA junglies to keep the Amphib expertise going.....and so it should...it is the JHC after all!!!:ok:

Occasional Aviator

22nd Oct 2010, 17:22

There was a clear statement that 3 Cdo Bde would have a (primarily) heliborne capability. So it will need to be either Merlin or Chinook that does it after 2014. As ever, the colour of the uniform of the guys flying is largely immaterial; you develop an ethos by doing the task. It's just a question of whether we'll resource the task properly - and with so few helicopters, I'm a bit concerned it will be smoke and mirrors. A bit like trying to generate a meaningful Carrier Strike capability with only 10 FE@R. Not a pop at carrier strike, just a sad reflection that if we are going to do it, we ought to do it properly.

Tallsar

22nd Oct 2010, 17:58

I feel sure you appreciate it was ever thus OA......right back to the 1960s it goes..when the total UK size of the tri-service SH fleet was "capped" at Brigade lift capacity.......never made it in those days particularly after the first UK CH47 buy was canned....but at least we have got a lot closer now. Its concurrent high tempo ops that screw us of course ......particularly when helo lift becomes so essential all the time tomnimise casualties- asymetric warfare was not thought of in those far off days......we never learn do we?

matelo99

22nd Oct 2010, 19:17

Over the last 3 days we at Yeovilton have received numerous briefings on what will happen post SDSR. A Brief precis is this:
1. The RAF Brief was a typo they will hand over Merlin by 2016. (Admitted by CAS after being questioned on wednesday)
2. Sea King 4 and 7 gone in 2016.
3. Merlin 3/3A flown by CHF from 2016.
4. Merlin 4 (Marinised) introduced in about 2018.

However, the caveat to all this is the final decision is still to be made, apparently yet another bun fight is to be had just before christmas. Oh the joys of interservice politics...

The Briefs were given by 1SL, CO CHF, ACOS(AV)

iRaven

22nd Oct 2010, 19:20

Blimey, that's some typo! Was the Puma mod program also a typo, otherwise Benson is toast! :eek:

TheWizard

22nd Oct 2010, 19:26

A lot can happen in 6 years (or indeed 6 months!) ;)

Vie sans frontieres

22nd Oct 2010, 19:27

No, the Pumas are tomorrow's claim by the CHF. Yesterday they were having the RAF's Merlins. This morning they were having Chinooks (until the thread was deleted) and tomorrow it'll be Pumas.

Trim Stab

22nd Oct 2010, 20:24

Inter-Service bickering about who does what between RAF and RN is really rather myopic and tiresome.

Any RAF/RN officer who is looking for a long career should be lobbying for an exchange with the AdA or Aéronavale, or start learning French privately, because whether you like it or not, that is where the long term future lies.

Torque limited

22nd Oct 2010, 20:59

I have just read this thread with interest, and wonder why it has degenerated so quickly into a willy waving competition?

SDSR has hit the RAF and RN particularly hard. I can't quite work out how the Army have got away so lightly in manpower terms? The Army are losing only around 5% of their workforce when the RAF and RN have lost more like 15%. With over 100,000 personnel, and only around 8,000 ever deployed at any one time, how did the Army pull this off? What do the other 95 odd thousand personnel do?!

The Truth

The truth is this: Ask ANYONE who has served on the ground over the last 50 years, who they would like, and who they could rely on to get them out of the :mad: when they needed it. The answer is the Junglies. Quite rightly so there is a lot of value on the 'can do' attitude they hold.

The RAF CH force have done a fantastic job in Afghan in the last few years, using a very capable aircraft in tough conditions, and they are building themselves a good reputation for reliability and willingness to go the extra yard.

The ME force are the 'new boys' in the Afghanistan theatre, and they are yet to earn their spurs. Unfortunately they have potentially written off 2 aircraft from the ORBAT already.

So what to do with the Merlin aircraft post SDSR?

If the decision is purely a financial one, then there appears some merit in keeping the status quo and leaving them at Benson.

However, if you dig a little deeper, it becomes obvious very quickly that the output from a CHF unit is exponentially higher than an RAF unit. For example a member (aircrew or engineer) of CHF will probably be deployed for, on average, 40% of their time, either on exercise, training, or in theatre. This compares with around 20% for their RAF SH counterparts. CHF personnel deploy one in four (one on, three off) for Afghanistan, and still have to complete non-operational commitments in their 'spare' time. An RAF member will deploy for perhaps 3 months in theatre, and then have 15 months 'off' (without having to maintain currencies post theatre)

Q. Which units from JHC contributed to Exercise Auriga at the same time as maintaining their enduring theatre commitment?
A. Commando Helicopter Force

This may well be down to RAF units quite rightly looking after their personnel, and having a far less rigorous deployment schedule, however on a value-for-money basis the RN personne deliver far more per person than their RAF SH counterparts.

SDSR was never a strategic review, merely a cost cutting exercise. However, as an independent observer, I think the idea of losing the Commando Helicopter Force, their experience, ethos, productivity and ability as the most competent operators of SH aircraft is absolutely incredulous.

Therefore this is probably what will happen.

Lets hope the Argentinians don't start heading towards Stanley again, as this time we will really be raiding a bare cupboard.

Unchecked

22nd Oct 2010, 21:52

What absolute twaddle.

15 months between dets for RAF SH ? Are you serious ? I think you need to get real, research properly and refrain from talking about an area you clearly have no idea about.

TheWizard

22nd Oct 2010, 21:59

An RAF member will deploy for perhaps 3 months in theatre, and then have 15 months 'off' (without having to maintain currencies post theatre)

Torque Limited knowledge
You are of course joking?? Aren't you??
Where on earth do you get those figures from??
(Most people on my Sqn are on their 2nd det within a 12 month period)

Given your location and words it seems obvious which colour uniform you wear so your bias is understandable. However, when you start out commenting on 'willy waving' and go on to state somewhat tainted information and inaccuracies surely you are just waving something around too?? And rather obviously to boot.:ugh:

LateArmLive

22nd Oct 2010, 22:05

An RAF member will deploy for perhaps 3 months in theatre, and then have 15 months 'off' (without having to maintain currencies post theatre

Not just "Torque" limited, I suggest.......

RTM

22nd Oct 2010, 22:17

I am willing to bet that I am among the many (both RAF Merllin force & CHF) who are fed up with this incessant bickering. I will state upfront that I am a member of the Merlin force and so of course want the Merlin to remain RAF - I am not a turkey thinking Christmas is a good time of year.

That said I don't subscribe to the conspiracy theorists who thing that the RAF has played a clever game to rid the FAA of aviation - if for no other reason that the majority of the RAF SH fleet did / do feel forgotten by the ME/FJ world. But what does really bite is the posts that seek to denigrate the efforts of the Merlin force. Yes we are (and therefore always will be) the new boys in Afghan, and yes we are learning, but comments stating we have lost 2 aircraft in theatre (apart from being factually wrong) is deeply misleading - look back over the last few years in both Afghanistan and Iraq and tell me that CHF (and RAF SH of course) have never made a mistake...

As for the comments we only spend 20% of our time deployed compared to 40% for CHF, if my JPA adds up I (and most others on my flight) have spent over 40% of the last two years - as far as i could be bothered to be go back- away on deployment and exercises. Contrary to belief we do not spend our time not bothering to go flying unless we have a glorious hotel booked. Indeed CHF if/when the inherit a smaller number of green Merlin airframesthey may realise it is not quite the Christmas present they thought they were getting!

Seriously though this is not a whinge at any particular group - I have a great respect for the SK chaps and hope it is reciprocated. At the end of the day the situation we are in is not of our making and ideally both forces would be supported - wishful thinking says this might happen.

Vie sans frontieres

23rd Oct 2010, 07:25

Torque limited

Are you an estate agent or do you sell double glazing? Whichever, you're well trained and you've earnt the October PPrize for spouting the biggest load of drivel on the forum. Independent observer my @rse!

high spirits

23rd Oct 2010, 07:49

Torque Limited,
You are right, the decision will probably be driven by finance. That does not make it right, but we are stone cold broke to the tune of £38 billion. Your facts are very skewed but I'm sure you know that by now from some of the vitriol that has come your way. The serviceability and amount of tasking arguments are incomparable. 2 different aircraft from 2 different generations. The 35 trained RAF crews have, however, earned their spurs(as you put it) in theatre and have done a damn fine job.

If value for money is your argument then you lose aswell. The Merlin pilot is infinately cheaper to train. Sims are still expensive but compare the OCU costs. Approx 5% of jungly sim to 95% aircraft time on the course. Merlin, 2/3rds sim to 1/3 ac time. Compare hours flown per year in the ac versus the sim for both fleets and you will find that the established Merlin crews are much better value for money.

Incidentally, I don't believe in the willy waving. I think the junglies do a damn good job with limited resource. I don't however believe that the ethos is any different.

However, JHC already has 35 trained Merlin crews.....

Widger

23rd Oct 2010, 08:47

To be fair, he has a point. RN Harmony rules are far more rigorous than the other two services FACT. RN harmony is 660 days over a three year roling period which is why harmony is rarely broken. Both the RAF and Army have lower levels, which is why they are broken more often and also why, SDSR will almost certainly bring those two services in line with the RN. This is how a lot of the manpower will be saved, by deploying people for longer means you need less to support a campaign.

Army harmony guidelines are that individuals should not exceed 415 days of separated service in any period of 30 months. At unit level, tour intervals should be no less than 24 months. The decision on who should deploy is made by Joint Commitments in consultation with Headquarters Land Command, ratified by the chain of command.
Royal Navy harmony guidelines are that no individual should exceed 660 days of separated service in a three-year rolling period. Over a similar time span, ships or other units should not be deployed for more than 60 per cent. of their time.
Harmony Guidelines for the RAF are based on formed unit tour intervals rather than individual personnel, whereby formed units, or sub-elements within them should spend four months on deployed operations followed by 16 months at base.
The RAF Individual Separated Service assumption is that an individual should spend no more than 140 days of duty detached away from home in a rolling 12-month period. This allows for a four-month operational tour followed by three weeks of separated service due to routine tasks, unestablished commitments, unit assistance, pre-detachment training etc.
These are guidelines only and there will be shorter tour intervals where operational demands require it

Widger

23rd Oct 2010, 09:40

It is well acknowledged that Harmony rules are not the same. The 660/3 rule means that someone under RN rules, which I believe includes the RM, can spend over 600 days deployed in two years as long as the following year, they are at home. That is the subtle difference. It is also acknowledged that the Army and RAF are finding it hard to remain within harmony rules, so rather than spend money employing more people, just change the rules.

Unchecked, whilst you talk about spending half your year away, that is not unusual in the RN. I hope that in the changes it is recognised that spending your op tour in a ditch, warfighting is different to being sat in Butlins at KAF or the 'Deid" as applying 660/3 to the Infantry, will result in severe problems.

There has been lots of chat about platforms, arguments over Harrier, Carriers, Tanks but the real Alligator will be the New Employment Model. That is what people should be concerned about as those who are not fortunate enough to get redundancy, will be serving in a military, totally different from the one which they have been accustomed to. It will be all about getting more out of less and if someone is not deployable, to the maximum extent, then they will be got rid of in my very humble opinion.

Non Emmett

23rd Oct 2010, 10:04

Reading these pages is pretty sobering these days and my respect and regard for those still serving Queen and Country continues to grow. I've no wish to opffer up opinions as I value reading those far better informed than I can ever hope to be as a civvie but I have one question - there is much informed discussion on the squadrons but overall what is the likely impact on Culdrose and Yeovilton over the next few years ?

Unchecked

23rd Oct 2010, 10:37

A few years ago harmony didn't exist at all, but since the introduction of Fight By Flight, it's fair to say that harmony is now alive and kicking and, more importantly, it works.

So we're going to fix this unbroken system by doing what the Navy do?

163627

23rd Oct 2010, 15:42

Now that we are officially heading towards a "proper" cat and trap capability; what will the future be for martime AEW? Will it be stick with the compromise Merlin option? Borrow Hawkeyes from the USN or French (though with Flottille 4F only having three airframes not much scope there!), or hopefully dig deep and buy a few Hawkeyes ourselves? If we do go for a "buy" will the RAF bag them or will 849 NAS return to fixed wing flying? Or will we just kick it into the long grass and go for another capability "holiday":ugh:

Thomas coupling

23rd Oct 2010, 15:52

The 'Bags' are staying, I'm led to believe atleast until 2020. Buy Hawkeyes - get real:D

Matelo 99: thanks for the promising debrief. Fingers crossed the junglies will live to fight another day eh?

Ironic though, come 2015/16 there won't be a war to fight anyway.......:ugh:

So what will all these shiney new Chinooks and refurbished Puma's do all day?

high spirits

23rd Oct 2010, 18:06

Why didn't the Junglies look southwest instead of northeast when they coveted an aircraft to replace the Mk4 SeaKing? The Mk1 Merlin must be crying out for work now there has been a reduction in the number of ships - and there are 40 of them........ No ramp , but then neither has the SK4.

davejb

23rd Oct 2010, 18:19

Looking on the bright side, although it's more than slightly difficult to do that just now...

If the carriers actually end up with conventional jets on board, then they will also need to embark a helo capable of the widest possible area ASW (I'm an ex Nimrod siggie, and I know how large an area we could - at least attempt - to 'sanitise' around a surface group) - they will also need AEW embarked (not 'on call' from the RAF, who'd only need to turn up late once to turn 'HMS Talks to Plants' into razor blades....

So where is the embarked AEW coming from? I know there are folk on here who want to push Hawkeyes etc, there are probably even folk here who think SK EW is a goer... we used Searchwater for ASUW/ASW by the way, its anti air capabilities I won't go into the capabilities but the first sea lord would be a total prat to rely on Searchwater for AEW in my never so humble opinion.

That I believe one Nimrod to be better at quickly clearing a large area around a TG is immaterial and can be taken as read, my crew demonstrated that off Ascension almost 30 years ago, but ignoring that stuff (after all, there are few Nimrods that could dunk a sonar effectively...horses for courses, as the saying goes) what is actually going onto these carriers that will carry out - effectively (ie well enough to ensure the CV's don't get sunk 15 mins into WW3) - group ASW and AEW?

Helos don't fly THAT high (barring the odd record attempt) and when it comes to obtaining radar range there's little substitute for height.

Dave

FlyNavy44

23rd Oct 2010, 18:28

Vin Sins Frontiers

The post regarding the RN/CHF acquiring the 12 CH47 Mk6 was deleted because it contained information that was being revised. Just as the RAF attempt an opportunistic clutch on to the Merlin, SDSR has changed the factors and constraints that resulted in Chinook being discounted as the preferred (by both 3 Cdo Bde RM and CHF) Sea King HC4 replacement.

With the new carriers predominantly in the LPH role meaning that deck cycles, hangarage and lifts not being an issue, and given the RAF insistence to retain and posture for the Merlin, then in order to make real cost savings it now makes perfect capability and financial sense to train the RN crews directly onto CH47, with a Joint Force Merlin shared between the RAF and RN to ensure that the Merlin also retains a core of Joint maritime expertise for the future DPAs that require a force mix of Heavy and Medium amphibious lift and for Maritime CT tasks where the Chinook is inappropriate.

Close Benson (less MSHATF) and 'super base' all RAF equipment and personnel at Odiham, and do the same with CHF at Yeovilton. Savings all round, real estate, personnel allowances, efficiencies of scale - it makes perfect sense.

CHF will consist of 6 Chinook per NAS (located in the now empty, but recently refurbished hangars south side, freeing up the current CHF real estate for the Army WILDCAT (847 NAS doesn't have to move!), with the loss of 848 NAS mitigated by the formation of a Joint OCU (to include all Maritime CT tasks) and Joint RWOETU.

Inevitably having only 12 CH47 available for frontline operations will result in savings from a Joint CH47 reserve/Fleet management to ensure the frontline fleet isn't reduced/degraded, but initially this will not be the case as the RN retain Airworthiness for the Mk6 as post Haddon-Cave the RAF/MAA are concerned regarding fleets within fleets with JULIUS, HC2 and HC2a all potentially increasing risks to safety.

847 NAS will continue with its WILDCAT fitted with (not just for) FASGW which presents significant savings in costs and resources involved in the other alternative of having a rotary strike capability in embarking AH, and concurrently deliver Defence a less aggressive 'light' SSFI option if required in the National Security Strategy of the UK.

david parry

23rd Oct 2010, 19:02

No probs Dave this beaut can p off for 600nm and switch his APS20 radar and cover another 300 nm;) http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Gannet_AEW3_XL502_1988.JPEG/800px-

davejb

23rd Oct 2010, 20:29

I'd go for something a wee bit more capable these days Dave,
but from an artistic point of view I'm with you (you do, admittedly, have to have a certain degree of nostalgia operating to view the Gannet as something of beauty <g>).

CHF, Chinnys to naval squadrons, who is going to get the Merlins (which we'd probably have swapped for their weight in chocolate up to last weekend)...which bit of 'bend over, here comes the bat' are some of you struggling to comprehend? The RAF, bless their cotton socks, are going to give NOTHING to the RN from this point onward.... it isn't about capabilities or maximising anything, it has become a fairly direct fight between the RN and RAF for survival, so that the surviving service can go toe to toe with the bloody army once Afghanistan has been given up as a bad job.

The combined services had ONE chance to stand up together and be counted, and blew it - for the next decade or so it's a free for all and no quarter asked or given. Unless, of course, the service heads get a set of b@ll@cks between them and tell 'call me Dave' that this review was neither strategic nor defence based and he should get his head out of his a$$. Hornblower would be rotating in his grave....

Dave

Finnpog

23rd Oct 2010, 21:02

I had to smile at your post Davejb as well as FlyNavy44's above, but the point has already been made numerous times in this thread that as the RAF already has the crews trained for Merlin & have the sims etc then the green Merlin force should remain with the RAF in efficiencies sake...

And therefore having the new Chinnys 'Go Commando' is an effective way of replacing the SK without throwing away all of the Merlin experience needlessly.

No point having more RAF crews converting to the big beast of Odiham from other airframes when the CHF folks will need a new steed anyhow.

I take it that as this is still a rumour site that there is not any evidence of CH47 being planned to the CHF...is there?

davejb

23rd Oct 2010, 21:18

And therefore having the new Chinnys 'Go Commando' is an effective way of replacing the SK without throwing away all of the Merlin experience needlessly.

Indeed - but you are making the same mistake others have, you are assuming that commonsense will win out, and with inter service rivalry being at an all time high I don't think that is in any way a given any more.

The important point here isn't to think with the sensible hat on, the hat that allows one to see all sides of the argument etc., but to think with the 'all 3 services hate each other' hat on (that's ignoring the 'booties hate squids/fishheads' argument to simplify the matter). Chinook will go to the RN just as fast as they can be dragged, minus undercarriage, across the dead bodies of CAS's minions...unless the quid pro quo involves a few fast jets.....*

Dave

* Obviously not across CAS's body, however, as without him how else could we guarantee the future of the RAF? (Which is presumably the argument he has rather forcefully put to himself repeatedly since last Tuesday, the muppet).

Torque limited

23rd Oct 2010, 21:28

Unchecked

What absolute twaddle.

15 months between dets for RAF SH ? Are you serious ? I think you need to get real, research properly and refrain from talking about an area you clearly have no idea about.

As for value for money from CHF, I don't think the SK4 lifting 5 troops and a bag of mail in the Helmand heat qualifies. That's assuming they actually manage to stay serviceable. A merlin or chinook being tasked to pick up a days SK tasking because it's sat on Pegasus, when it's SH substitute could complete that whole day in half the time if the watchkeeper could adjust the program and allow it to, does not represent value for money.

I'm not devaluing the personnel of CHF because we all do the same thing out there, lifting stuff from A to B and we all do it bloody well.

Unchecked - have you ever been to theatre? In the heat of summer? If so, how many people can a Merlin carry at 45 degrees from BSN with three engines? Compare this to an ancient SK with 2 engines and actually, you wonder if there's much difference. The only UK SH asset that is any good year round out there is the CH.

TheWizardQuote:

An RAF member will deploy for perhaps 3 months in theatre, and then have 15 months 'off' (without having to maintain currencies post theatre)

You are of course joking?? Aren't you??
Where on earth do you get those figures from??
(Most people on my Sqn are on their 2nd det within a 12 month period)

Wizard - what are your roulement cycles, one on, four off? (1:5)? My point entirely.

Vie sans frontieres

Torque limited

Are you an estate agent or do you sell double glazing? Whichever, you're well trained and you've earnt the October PPrize for spouting the biggest load of drivel on the forum. Independent observer my @rse!

Vie Sans la Verite

Enough said. Did any other SH outfit turn up for Auriga? If you ask around JHC who are the busiest sub-unit, what do you think the answer will be?

High spirits

Torque Limited,

You are right, the decision will probably be driven by finance. That does not make it right, but we are stone cold broke to the tune of £38 billion. Your facts are very skewed but I'm sure you know that by now from some of the vitriol that has come your way. The serviceability and amount of tasking arguments are incomparable. 2 different aircraft from 2 different generations. The 35 trained RAF crews have, however, earned their spurs(as you put it) in theatre and have done a damn fine job.

If value for money is your argument then you lose aswell. The Merlin pilot is infinately cheaper to train. Sims are still expensive but compare the OCU costs. Approx 5% of jungly sim to 95% aircraft time on the course. Merlin, 2/3rds sim to 1/3 ac time. Compare hours flown per year in the ac versus the sim for both fleets and you will find that the established Merlin crews are much better value for money.

Sim time is one thing, but there is a lot to be said for training on the actual aircraft you fly, and not a computer generated sim. However, you seem to forget that the RN brethren go straight from 660/705 at Shawbury to their OCU, without wastimg time and money on 60 Sqn and the Griffin. It has been proven by RN Pilots and crewmen that this 'year out' could easily be culled in order to save money. So a CH/ME pilot will have already spent probably a year, and a 60 Sqn course worth of money before even getting to the OCU. Meanwhile a RN pilot will probably be frontline...

RTM

I am willing to bet that I am among the many (both RAF Merllin force & CHF) who are fed up with this incessant bickering. I will state upfront that I am a member of the Merlin force and so of course want the Merlin to remain RAF - I am not a turkey thinking Christmas is a good time of year.

That said I don't subscribe to the conspiracy theorists who thing that the RAF has played a clever game to rid the FAA of aviation - if for no other reason that the majority of the RAF SH fleet did / do feel forgotten by the ME/FJ world. But what does really bite is the posts that seek to denigrate the efforts of the Merlin force. Yes we are (and therefore always will be) the new boys in Afghan, and yes we are learning, but comments stating we have lost 2 aircraft in theatre (apart from being factually wrong) is deeply misleading - look back over the last few years in both Afghanistan and Iraq and tell me that CHF (and RAF SH of course) have never made a mistake...

RTM - Read my first post again. I didn't mention anything about where the aircraft were written off, or indeed what the causal factors were. Stop being so defensive.

Unchecked

My 2010 will consist of

10 wks in theatre
4 wks PDT
Another 7 wks in theatre to end of Dec 10.

That's nearly half my year away. I'm not moaning, I just fail to see how RN regs are more 'rigorous'.

Unchecked - this is my point entirely. RN personnel will operate within their (stricter) harmony guidelines year in and year out. Other service personnel have much more relaxed guidelines, and so when they are reached or breached all hell breaks loose. So which rules are right?

When you join the serives you know you will be required to serve aboras/spend many nights out of bed. However, if makes clear reading when you see the difference between force elements 'nights out of bed' statistics...

high spirits

24th Oct 2010, 09:00

Torque Limited,
RTM has simply defended a point of view. Mentioning 2 accidents on the Merlin Force was perceived by him to suggest incompetence on behalf of the Mk3 Force. I assume that this was posted before the £1Billion Astute attempted it's hilarious impression of a lighthouse on Friday morning. The point being that accidents in the military happen to all who do the job that we do RN Army or RAF.

Secondly, 60 R Sqn and the sims exist to make it ultimately cheaper on the frontline by not fatiguing frontline stock so quickly. The OCUs on Merlin Puma and Chinook are embedded on the Sqn rather than a dedicated Sqn in their own right like 848(MCT role notwithstanding). You might not have run out of turd polish for the Mk4 SeaKing so quickly if you had trained in a slightly more intelligent way.....

Instead, having ruined your toy, you now want to bully someone else into giving up theirs and then push them firmly toward the dole queue. How morally repugnant is that? Taking the CH-47 for CHF would perhaps seem logical, but there would still have to be redundancies somewhere. 42 crews into 12 airframes, not even jungly cunning could solve that one. Embedding the junglies within the established SH Sqns would seem more logical. That way we don't have to spend a ridiculous amount of money that we have not got, and re-train half of the UK SH force.

Tourist

24th Oct 2010, 09:29

People keep talking about retraining from seaking to Merlin as if it has to be a huge deal.
It does not have to be.
It is only a helicopter change, not a role change for a Jungly.
A helicopter change can/could be done in a matter of weeks if people are being grown up about it. Role changes rather longer.
They all fly the same(ish)
Push stick forward - sheep get bigger/go past faster depending on the position of the collective.
Raise collective - sheep get smaller/go past faster depending on the position of the cyclic.
Job done, next question?
Oh, we have a ramp. Next question?

This go back to effects of controls pish is just that.
I know one RN Merlin bloke who went from RN Merlin to RAF Merlin and actually had to go through exactly that process.
Now that is a waste of money

Tourist

24th Oct 2010, 09:35

Now training the RAF Merlin crews to be properly Jungly equivalent.

Now that is expensive.

Real amphibiosity, not just lillypadding like the CH47 is a whole different ball game, and lets be honest, for all the 47's fabulous capabilities, the RAF's deck work was always an embarassment, and don't get me started on their ability to FOB ashore. I still remember on Aurora when they were bullied into proving their vaunted FOBing capability with the Junglies when the flew ashore for the night, unrolled their sleeping bags in the back and went to sleep. That is not Fobing, that is downbird in a friendly area.

high spirits

24th Oct 2010, 10:38

Tourist...
and now you seek to criticise the way the RAF sleep? You are fairly adept at destroying your own credibility. The most expensive bit of amphib training is the DLs. The CH-47 Force proved this to be no more expensive than training Junglies to do it, 8 day, 8 RNF and 8 NVD landings. I don't wish to sound like a spokesman for CAe but the sim already has CVS and LPH modelled, and so at least the procedural side of the exercise can be taught relatively cheaply. Not the same as flying a real time deck I agree, but cost effective as a starter before you move on to the real thing in the SCEXAs.

The rest of it is just lectures and then live exercises like Argonaut 2000 or Aroura to work up an ampib capability with the engineers and deck handling crews. Not rocket science and nowhere near the expense of re-training on a new ac.

shinyarseblunty

24th Oct 2010, 12:01

I wish my nights out of bed included being alongside in the Bahamas..

Tourist

24th Oct 2010, 17:04

High spirits

You make my point for me.

If you truly believe that 24 landings a junglie make then your lack of understanding is huge. And don't get me wrong, compared to Pingers, Junglies are mere amateurs at deck work.

Aircraft change is easy, especially when the change is to an easier handling and superior airframe in every respect, and especially when the role is handling skills and knowledge dependent like SH, rather than aircraft equipment dependent like Pinging.

I have changed aircraft and role many times, and the aircraft bit is easy. Learning a new role takes several tours to be competent, or in my case sometimes longer:ooh:.

And yes, I will give the Crabs crap for how they sleep if it directly affects their ability to operate.

TheWizard

24th Oct 2010, 17:34

"People in glass houses........"

Tourist

24th Oct 2010, 17:36

Wizard.

Do tell......?

high spirits

25th Oct 2010, 07:42

Tourist,
When I post on Prune, it is to make a coherent argument; not to spin below average dits about 'what i saw the crabs do on an exercise once'. I agree with you that the vast experience of amphib ops that the Jungly Force counts for a lot. However, unlike you, I have respect for other Services and the fine job that we all do for Defence PLC.

Deck experience counts, as does 8 years worth of corporate experience on an ac type. Granted, you could argue that the Jungly Force has decades of Amphib Ops experience, but not all of that is around at this present moment in time. If you take a snapshot of what we have today things look slightly different, as the Jungly Force have not had all the deck time that their muckers of yesteryear had; due to their hard graft in theatre. I simply tried to expand the argument by saying that (in terms of pure flying hours) it would take fewer flying hours for the RAF to build up to the average level of corporate experience in role, than it would the RN to build up the level of corporate experience on type. By that I mean the aircrew and engineering piece aswell.

I could have easily stooped to your level of inter-service slagging(as I have done in the past), but it is not you that needs convincing of the financial folly of this proposal to retrain 5 Sqns worth of aircrew - it is the bean counters.

As you say in the RN - 'Remember, crap dits sink ships......'

Vie sans frontieres

25th Oct 2010, 08:29

Real amphibiosity? It's not even a real word! You're making far too much of this concept. Deck landings can be practised for as long as is necessary. Fire fighting and ship safety courses don't take long and just because the RAF choose to go camping in a slightly different way to the CHF doesn't make it wrong. If their ration packs have fed them well, they've had a good night's sleep and are fit to go flying the next day, then what's the problem? When you look at the savage way other sacred cows have been slaughtered in the last seven days, I think you're going to need a stronger argument than being the littoral specialists.

Tourist

25th Oct 2010, 11:38

" I think you're going to need a stronger argument than being the littoral specialists."

It would appear not, judging from the silence from the "ha ha you lost we won" types that were prevalent earlier in this thread. What's wrong, guys? CAS talking ****e again?

Not_a_boffin

25th Oct 2010, 13:22

Perhaps the most important point is not "how many hours to get currency" etc, but how many of the squadrons want to spend two-three months embarked (as opposed to lily-padding).

Last time I was at BSN, I was asking this very question and to a man from aircrew to the maintenance troops the answer ended in "right off".

Unchecked

25th Oct 2010, 15:43

Not at all Tourist. It's just that all of your arguments appear to be based on opinion. And when challenged over a few statements made by your brethren concerning their blatant lies (such as the RAF having 15 months between dets) no answer was forthcoming. As for Ex Auriga, which you all seem to be getting in a tizzy about, I've never heard of it. But maybe the RAF SH were too busy supporting MRX, FTX, Jebel Sahara and Pashtun Lynx. You could also throw Clockwork in there as well. Not saying you guys weren't at any of them, just saying that we were!

Here are some facts :

The SDSR document states very clearly, (not a doc produced by CAS or a RAF doc) that in Future Force 2020, the RAF SH force will consist of the following..

60 chinook
25 merlin
24 puma

Someone quoted the Navy as saying that merlin will move to CHF as fragged but we're still to see anything other than your word on this, whereas SDSR seems pretty clear to me.

The fact also remains that retraining 35 crews to a deck qualification is infinitely cheaper than reroling 2 fleets of crews, and probably can't even be done against the backdrop of afghan deployments.

Please, unless you have any hard facts to give us, please stop trying to look silly.

Unchecked

25th Oct 2010, 17:01

Thanks for that JTO, finally, an answer!

So, still no mention of merlin mk3 for the CHF then?

Finnpog

25th Oct 2010, 17:11

And the irony is that there is more detail about the hocoploctors in the Army fact sheet - including the detail about reducing the SK fleet.

They are more of a briefing note to red top journalists than detailed fact sheets though. At least they are future facing showing A400M, JSF & the Carrier Strike bits.

At least the Green & Maroon Brigades are name-checked - as are the Rocks

Tourist

25th Oct 2010, 18:51

Unchecked

"The fact also remains that retraining 35 crews to a deck qualification is infinitely cheaper than reroling 2 fleets of crews, and probably can't even be done against the backdrop of afghan deployments.

Please, unless you have any hard facts to give us, please stop trying to look silly. "

You keep using the word "fact", like the use of it makes something true. Children do that on forums. To esablish a fact one would normally give an example that provides some kind of support. My crap dits may be just that, but at least I was providing justification for my opinion. Your suggestion that Junglie training is nothing more than a "deck qualification" is disingenuous, as is your use of the word "reroling" to describe an aircraft swap. The reality is just the opposite. Training RAF SH to Junglie is a "rerole" and expensive.

Re the documents produced, lets just see how it all pans out shall we?

Just this arse

Defending the Baggers was always going to be impossible. If the fleet has no Fast Jet to defend it, then why bother to warn it of it's impending doom? The situation is insane, but then so is buying a carrier without aircraft. The ultimate chocolate teapot.

On a lighter note.......

http://i404.photobucket.com/albums/pp121/Tourist_photos/sodnavy.jpg

Made me chuckle.

Unchecked

25th Oct 2010, 19:15

You can pick holes in my wording, which could have been better. But I still believe, even without the benefit of seeing any figures, that even if deck qualifying is expensive (I'm sure it is too) that binning merlin to the chf will be even more so, in every respect.

"Re the documents produced, lets just see how it all pans out shall we?"

Amen to that. But they're all we have to go with, for now and I do think they appear fairly explicit in their intent.

Like the poster, too.

Torque limited

25th Oct 2010, 19:41

There has been no answer to the question: What is the worst afghan roulement cycle the RAF work to...

If you haven't heard of Ex Auriga, then you probably haven't heard of Taurus or Aurora either. This begs the qeustion - how can you make such ludicrous statements when you are clearly not aware of major exercise that the ground, sea and land forces are involved in.

MRX/CFX/FTX/Jebel Sahara/Askari Commando/Clockwork (you tag along to this one), etc etc. The 'fact' that CHF do these, as well as theatre, as well as major Exercises that you are unaware of is proof in itself that they are more productive then their light blue counterparts - 'FACT'.

Tourist

25th Oct 2010, 20:42

Come on, admit it made you chuckle..........

Unchecked

25th Oct 2010, 20:56

There was an answer somewhere, but I'll clarify.

2 1/2 months away, 8 months at home. 1:5 I think you called it. But then you also said we were at home for 15 months, going out of currency and just not trying hard enough. Get over yourself, we do as much as you.

MaroonMan4

26th Oct 2010, 12:41

FlyNavy,

I have seen no evidence of the 12 new Chinooks being allocated to the Fisheads in any briefing note and there is absolutely no word on the street suggesting that the RN are working on such an option.

If anything there is a deafening silence as hopefully this issue gets kicked into the long grass for a re-attack in 2014-15 when you are are not on current Ops and just about to say 'bye bye' to your faithful stead of too many years and common sense will prevail.

Keep dreaming and my advice remains, if you want real job security then transfer to us early (before the rush) and pass on some of your so called specialist amphibious knowledge.

Do you really think that the wider RN (or in fact anyone!) really cares 2 hoots who flys Merlin/Chinook off their beloved boats?

vecvechookattack

26th Oct 2010, 17:13

12 Chinooks to CHF?
FlyNavy,

I have seen no evidence of the 12 new Chinooks being allocated to the Fisheads in any briefing note and there is absolutely no word on the street suggesting that the RN are working on such an option.

If anything there is a deafening silence as hopefully this issue gets kicked into the long grass for a re-attack in 2014-15 when you are are not on current Ops and just about to say 'bye bye' to your faithful stead of too many years and common sense will prevail.

Keep dreaming and my advice remains, if you want real job security then transfer to us early (before the rush) and pass on some of your so called specialist amphibious knowledge.

Do you really think that the wider RN (or in fact anyone!) really cares 2 hoots who flys Merlin/Chinook off their beloved boats?

Of course they do..... The RAF won't fly without having a diversion which is pretty useless when you are on a ship

Seldomfitforpurpose

26th Oct 2010, 17:50

Of course they do..... The RAF won't fly without having a diversion which is pretty useless when you are on a ship

At least under the current plans they will be flying something, which unless I miss my guess is what is hurting you the most.

Bismark

26th Oct 2010, 19:51

Unchecked,

I have no influence over allocation but nowhere in either the SDSR Doc or the factsheets are helicopters actually allocated. All that is said is the SH force will comprise etc. The simple fact that Seakings are discussed in the army section indicates the calibre of the author of these documents.....as I understand it they were written on the other side of Whitehall to MoD.

oldgrubber

27th Oct 2010, 08:33

Oldnot bold posted this link on the Future Carrier thread. A bit more interesting than the Monty Python sketch that this has become.

COMMANDING CARRIER AVIATION The Phoenix Think Tank (http://thephoenixthinktank.wordpress.com/2010/10/20/commanding-carrier-aviation/)

Thomas coupling

27th Oct 2010, 09:45

Can I bring it smartly back into focus gentlemen: The future of the FAA.

Can I confirm the following assumption based on what's been said so far:

2 x Carriers, one of which will probably never get past the dockyard entrance.
Carriers due in about 10 yrs time ish.
No Harriers.
No JSF for ? years.
No FW, full stop.
No SeaKings post 2016. The end of 771 and all commando SeaKings.
No junglies.
No baggers.
No amphibious boats.
Mk 2 Merlins only.
Less frigates to fly off.
Less Wildcats.

Which leaves:
3 Brigade. Several Lynx. Several Merlins.

QED: won't this mean the closing of some FAA bases?

oldgrubber

27th Oct 2010, 10:07

TC,
This is doing the rounds. We have the spare airframes now.

Merlin ASaC unveiled: key.Aero, Military Aviation (http://www.key.aero/view_news.asp?ID=2240&thisSection=military)

Unchecked,
Not my facts, I'm not the author(s)

Unchecked

27th Oct 2010, 10:07

Please click on the links to the SDSR factsheets in Just This Once's post #107 on page 6 and all will become clear.

Junglynx

27th Oct 2010, 13:47

Out of interest I cannot find any links to official harmony guidelines for RN or RAF.

Does anyone have a current link to a correct set of harmony guidelines please?

alfred_the_great

27th Oct 2010, 14:48

2SL's latest Personnel Functional Standards. Just been re-issued, your UPO (or DII) will have a copy.

FlyNavy44

27th Oct 2010, 17:20

Thomas Coupling,

Unless you are privvy to some high level decision, then your assumption is incorrect.

I have seen no formal document cancelling or re-defining the Rotary Wing Strategy, and therefore the assumption is that it is still endorsed. With the exception of a reduced CH47 buy, everything is according to the strategy agreed by all 3 services last December. The status quo is still very much intact as the 12 new CH47 can easily accommodate the RAF Merlin crews, and the whole transition has been de-geared as it was widely recognised that the manning and training 24 new CH47 crews between now and 2016-2018 would have been a big ask whilst concurrently conducting a sterling job on ops and a major fleet upgrade.

Of course both services are seeking to explore the art of the possible with the current ambiguity presented by the incoherent briefing notes and lack of clear policy direction by those that should be nipping this damaging willy waving competition in the bud.

I suppose that once bitten, twice shy, and after witnessing what has happened to FW FAA that the RN will present a coherent argument for the ownership of the new CH47 Mk6s, including a Joint OCU and Maritime CT Flight (plus a Joint Force Merlin for Maritime Tasks), just as the RAF will deliver a solid case for the retention of the SH Merlins.

All of this petty banter could be stopped in a heart beat by a clear and unequivocal statement at the CDS/VCDS level, as sadly it appears to those on the shop floor that much of the manoeuvering (I cannot think of a more suitable word?) is going on at the ACAS/ACNS level, which urgently requires 'mum' and/or 'dad' to bang their heads together and tell them to stop squabbling as many of the current pprune threads highlight it is causing some real unnecessary hostility within the 'Joint' helicopter community.

Rakshasa

27th Oct 2010, 17:44

Oversimplistic devil's advocate time:

Best all round solution?

Bin a Puma squadron. :eek:

Shift the bods around to Odious and the other Puma Sqn!

Stand the old Puma Sqn up as a new Wokka sqn.

Dump a Naval Sqn of Junglies in the vacated space at Benson and let them squat on the Mk3s! :eek:
(This should help the CHF eek out the SK a bit longer, too.)

Finally: Cross fingers and hope someone finds a few mil down the back of the sofa and buys more Merlins for the Junglies at some future point!

I'll get me coat. :}

TheWizard

27th Oct 2010, 17:46

From the 'Think Tank' article at the top pf the page:

Whereas the RN remain open-minded to services, RAF and RN,

Well, that's a turn around from a few months back then!!

vecvechookattack

27th Oct 2010, 17:48

It would make perfect sense to close yeovilton and move the Wildcat to cornwall..... Closer to the sea would save a fortune in transit costs... I've a spare house down here if anyone needs some accomm

Torque limited

27th Oct 2010, 19:14

Unchecked/not checked/never checked

Correct. The RAF are reporting that their theatre roulement schedules are 1:5, which is one period in theatre, followed by 4 periods not in theatre (this clearly includes PDT and any other exercises etc that go on).

CHF has been, since its inception into Afghanistan, either reporting 1:4, or in many cases 1:3. That is one on in theatre, followed by three off, or (especially for engineers), one in theatre, two off. This has been our enduring commitment, and it continues to be.

Therefore you will understand why I have a bee in my bonnet when RAF types claim that they are working as hard as their Junglie colleagues, and that they are more productive. We are on a busier roulement schedule, as well as carrying out PDT/MRX/FTX/CFX and any other exercise that comes along. Like Ex Auriga which the RAF clearly haven't heard of as they didn't show up.

Any one in the RAF heard of Ex Cougar?

UNCHECKED

As for value for money from CHF, I don't think the SK4 lifting 5 troops and a bag of mail in the Helmand heat qualifies.

Has anyone answered how much a Merlin carries in the Helmand heat? Answer - Maybe 6-8 troops, and probably not the bag of mail. Que difference?

I quote from an ex RAF JHF(A) CO - The SK det operate with the most capable personnel with the least capable airframe.

End of.

TheWizard

27th Oct 2010, 19:26

I quote from an ex RAF JHF(A) CO - The SK det operate with the most capable personnel with the least capable airframe.

End of.

Perhaps he was making two separate statements. One being about who they work alongside??

Just a thought!;)

Bismark

27th Oct 2010, 20:55

Unchecked,

Please click on the links to the SDSR factsheets in Just This Once's post #107 on page 6 and all will become clear.

I did and it is not at all clear....according to the fact sheets both the Army and RAF are claiming ownership of SH - if anyone is right it is the Army factsheet as they own JHC who own SH.

Pongoglo

28th Oct 2010, 19:01

SDSR - JHC Narrative (an open source doc) states categorically:

The review has endorsed the Rotary Wing Strategy (RWS) as the most cost-effective and efficient method to transition to a future force structure which is based, ultimately, upon four core platforms across Defence: Chinook, Merlin, Apache and Wildcat, with Puma as a critical enabling capability until 2025.

and

Merlin Mk4. Ship optimisation within the Merlin Life Sustainment Programme (LSP) and transfer to the Commando Helicopter Force to enable the delivery of the LitM Air Assault package.

So no change to plan then..... :ok:

Junglydaz

28th Oct 2010, 19:35

That should keep the RAF quiet for a while. Until they find something very tenuous to come back with at least.:D

RTM

28th Oct 2010, 20:44

Unfortunately I don't think the JHC Narrative (I've only read the excerpts above at the moment) provide a definitive answer any more than CAS or CinC Air's statements and briefings. Indeed it is what I would expect from both a currently dark blue led JHC and an RAF who are being presented with a significantly different RWS to that they had accepted last year. At the moment there is obviously disagreement / infighting / negotiation going on that none of us will be privy to, probably meaning a long period of uncertainty for those involved and, even worse, the possibility of bickering on this thread going on for another six months...:eek:

Evalu8ter

29th Oct 2010, 06:28

Well said RTM. We have a 4* HQ pronouncing one future and a 2*HQ saying something different. The sooner the head-sheds are locked in a room until they make a decision the better for all concerned. The current situation undermines the credibility of both organisations.

Bismark

29th Oct 2010, 08:17

But what prats we are beginning to look....

...French fighter jets could be stationed on Britain's new aircraft carrier as the two nations' navies become "interdependent," the French defence minister has said.

..er sorry but due to decisions by the then CDS (RAF), CAS (RAF) and PM (fooled) we will not be able to accept your jets until about 2025 at the earliest(if then), as the capability was debunked in 2010.

vecvechookattack

29th Oct 2010, 17:28

The Fleet Air Arm is sadly now on its knees. With the Harrier gone, Sea Kings going and not to be replaced... CHF to close in 2016.... AEW gone..... SAR gone.... That just leaves Merlin Mk 2 and Wildcat. Prestwick will close in 2016...Wildcat will be moved to Culdrose in 2018 to fill in all the spare space left by the Sea King fleet and Yeovilton will close in 2019. Leaving the FAA museum a sad legacy of what once was....

airborne_artist

29th Oct 2010, 17:43

The Fleet Air Arm is sadly now on its knees.

I'm very glad Ms Artist went to uni rather than trying for the FAA straight from sixth-form. Perhaps by 2013 the FAA will be recruiting?

vecvechookattack

29th Oct 2010, 17:56

Maybe it will but I'm led to believe that it may be later than that..... Sources close to the man who knows suggest it may be spring 2014 before the gates open again....

airborne_artist

29th Oct 2010, 18:05

it may be spring 2014 before the gates open again.

Is that to say that they are already firmly shut until then?

alfred_the_great

29th Oct 2010, 20:35

FAA is recruiting now. Indeed, the Jan intake will be made up primarily of Engineers and WAFUs.

LateArmLive

29th Oct 2010, 21:13

That'll be a lot of disappointed WAFUs then :(

alfred_the_great

30th Oct 2010, 12:20

Because the one, maybe 2, who had realistic fast jet ambitions will now in all likelihood qualify on the F18 with the USN instead of GR9 and JFH?

And the rest will still be flying Wildcat or Merlin, just like they were supposed to be 2 weeks ago.

God help me, but the RN doesn't consist solely of the FAA.....

vecvechookattack

30th Oct 2010, 14:21

God help me, but the RN doesn't consist solely of the FAA.....

Yes it does...The fishheads are merely there to drive the flightdeck around.... Without WAFUs there is no need for any fishheads....

Charlie Time

30th Oct 2010, 16:52

Wildcat HMA is still at least 4 years away for the ab-initios.

LateArmLive

30th Oct 2010, 18:48

God help me, but the RN doesn't consist solely of the FAA.....

What else is left? I thought the RN had got rid of pretty much all of its surface fleet to guarantee two (impotent) carriers?

davejb

30th Oct 2010, 18:58

Latearmlive spotted the flaw,
and God help me but having read

God help me, but the RN doesn't consist solely of the FAA.....

Yes it does...The fishheads are merely there to drive the flightdeck around.... Without WAFUs there is no need for any fishheads....

...I find myself agreeing with VVHA, which is surely a sign of madness!
Since 1939 offensive ops have been carrier centred - now some of us think that the SSN probably trumps a carrier, and is a lot less vulnerable, so we maybe don't quite understand why the RN wants to end up as two carriers with a dozen jets on board, limited AEW to make things 'frisky' - nothing like a pop up contact within ASM range to speed the day up - supported by two fisheries protection vessels, 6 RIBs, an SSN that the computer insists is landlocked, and an urge to retire the only helo that did anything useful (from a force protection point of view).

I (honestly) wish you the best of luck, despite being crabair in my former life, as ex maritime I spent 100% of my study time looking at ships (mainly, it must be said, with a view to sinking them). You need CAP, you need a better AEW platform, and then you need something that's good at bombing people. As best I can see, this defence review and your leadership did very little to provide any of these.

I think you've been stuffed - and like many maritime blokes this gives me no joy at all.

Dave

*Edited repeatedly due to problems with the quote function <g>

Junglydaz

30th Oct 2010, 22:15

Quote:
God help me, but the RN doesn't consist solely of the FAA.....

Yes it does...The fishheads are merely there to drive the flightdeck around.... Without WAFUs there is no need for any fishheads....

Dear oh dear......:ugh:

process monkey

31st Oct 2010, 06:57

Well it's good to see that this has descended into the usual childish antics of the worst elements of our services.

I can understand why people are so emotive about this topic - let's face it jobs are on the line and most of us joined because we felt a calling to one service or another and, having spent more than a decade serving HMQ, unsurprisingly I for one feel rather attached to my particular shade of uniform.

I'm genuinely sad to see the swingeing cuts being applied to all three services and I can see quite easily how the government have been led into the decisions they have taken (not wanting to cut the Army dramatically while we are in Afghanistan) - bar one; the loss of JFH and a total loss of Capability is a little odd, not to say stupid. But underneath this Capability Gap are real people - pilots, maintainers, chockheads - maybe even ATCO and Fighter Controllers. People with families, lives, mortgages etc. I think that needs to be put into perspective - whatever side of the fence you are on.

As for this debate about 'who gets what' I feel it is time to put a little information in to the mix. The RN (who, when I joined had over 40 Frigates (FF) and Destroyers (DD) and a whole lot more other stuff (3 CVS, lots of Patrol Boats etc)) are now forced into a situation where we have, rpt, have to service our commitments with 19 FF/DD rather than the 23 we currently possess. The fact that it is incredibly hard on materiel and people to generate these platforms for real, operational tasks, globally appears to have been lost in all this - fish-heads we may be but don't lose sight of the fact that the RN is deployed world-wide doing the same jobs we always did (maritime counter-narcotics, anti-piracy, maritime interdiction, defence diplomacy - all of those MT that were there years ago and are still here today (stand-fast the change in nomenclature)) but as per usual we do them with little fuss and bother. The loss of the Harriers (both light and dark blue) is a devastating blow to our ability, as a country, to project power around the globe. Hang on to that thought. The current 'Maltese Breaststroke' being conducted by CAS/ACAS in order to ensure the RAF keeps all the toys has been a piece of Staff-Work to behold, perhaps proving that the brightest (but perhaps morally bankrupt) 4* indeed work in the RAF. Losing CHF will be so non-sensical; chopping another Capability just so everyone flies wearing the same bar-codes? Why is that supposedly a 'saving in efficiency'? CHF have long prided themselves on their ability to fly off anything in pretty much any climate - backed up by real-world exercises in real-world temperatures - anyone who thinks that modelling/simulators can replace actually operating the kit is a fool - plain and simple. And I'd be happy to stand up and debate it before you think that's an empty statement. There are so many examples and the money poured into 'Versatile Training' is eye-watering - enough to have funded JFH until 2016 I would hazard a guess at.

This review has been cost-led. End of. I hope no-one here would challenge that. After the mess the CoS and DE&S have left us in (ministers come and go, the MoD Civil Servants and Senior Officers are to blame, IMHO) we need to make what we do affordable. As a committed, dark blue fan of FW Ops of a CV I would rather have seen us bin QELZ and PWLS and Harrier forever rather than the way we are going; this continuing, hollowing-out of Capability - don't forget there is still Planning Round 11 to finish and then 12 to look forward to - not forgetting any further In-Year-Savings.

I realise that I might be said to be harking on about 'RN-centric' stuff but I really feel for everyone in the next 6 months - redundancies will be upon us in Q2 of 2011 and one suspects the marketplace isn't the healthiest it has ever been.

I will leave you with one thought; can you picture the conversation with CDS/CAS vs the PM if our friends in the South Atlantic decide 25 May 2011 is a good time to re-take Los Malvinas? Let's not kid ourselves that APT(S)/Typhoon is a credible defence to a well planned, well executed, multi-axis attack. Like it or not, GR4 and Typhoon won't be tanking their way from Ascension to save the day - any hope of doing that again will have been shuffled off into the hands of the bean-counters at the behest of the 'One Nation, One Air Force' crowd. I'm 99.9% sure I'm talking bolleux. Let's hope I am.

ORAC

31st Oct 2010, 09:04

I have repeatedly seen the comment, from many dark blue types and their supporters, that 'we couldn't do the Falklands again" due to the present hollowing out of the navy.

So the argument above is specious, as keeping the Harriers wouldn't have enabled another campaign to recover the Falklands, and it would take too long for a CVS to get their to stop one - whilst rapid air reinforcement could - and is the established plan for doing so, otherwise the government wasted a lot of money on MPA and the garrison.

Meanwhile, keeping 6 GR4 sqns, with spare airframes for rotation, provides a force able to maintain the Afghan campaign, plus other exercises and operations, till their planned OSD, something 3 GR7/9 sqns could not.

4Greens

31st Oct 2010, 09:34

The Falklands keep getting a run in this debate, however......

One lesson from the Falklands that doesn't appear to be have been learned is that the entire Argentine surface navy stayed in port. This included an operational fixed wing carrier.

The reason was the presence of two UK nuclear submarines which emphasised the threat by sinking the Belgrano. The Argentine navy didn't have this capability hence the UK carriers survived.

The UK still has that capability.

White paper

31st Oct 2010, 10:20

A very eloquent and insightful post from Process Monkey. He alluded to the future in his post. THIS IS NOT OVER YET. PR11 has yet to complete, it appears PR12 may be even worse and SDSR 2015 is yet to come. The RN has been mauled yet again and some valuable RAF capabilities have been lost but, lets be clear, there is worse to come. It is likely that in the next 10 years, GR4, Sentry, Puma and a whole host of other capabilities will go. Anyone who is not "special" or operating UAVs will be a financial liability. Those left in after the upcoming round of redundancies, will be working in an RN/RAF/Army, totally different from the one which they joined. Allowances will be squeezed, Harmony will be more strict, Redundancy (don't forget there are 3 tranches) will be less valuable etc etc.

IMHO, JCA will never fly of CVF. The government quite clearly does not want it and the RAF will fight to kill it off in SDSR 2015/2020. The very existence of CVF with Dave is in itself a threat to RAF based around Typhoon. The RN will consist of DD/FFs and a few Submarines and the RAF will be based around Typhoon/Dave with a growing number of UAVs. Only Truckies and SH will remain manned after 2020. The Army will be smaller, much smaller.

Those who get out now, will be the lucky ones, those who stay, will be wishing they had gone earlier. Defence is not a vote winner and the next general election will be very interesting. Once the UK has left AFG, then the big cuts will come. Even with the 'lunatic' decisions that have been made already, there are still £Billions left to save and the New Employment Model will have these pages alight with rage!

Am I being over dramatic or realistic? Time will tell. For those of you who are still left in, I wish you well and hope you make the right decision based on the evidence.

WE Branch Fanatic

31st Oct 2010, 10:43

ORAC

The focus on a future Falklands scenario is indeed a bit odd, but since the retirement of the Sea Harrier, many have said that Harrier GR9 + Sea King ASACS would be as capable as Sea Harrier FRS1 with no AEW.
Also surely deterring future agression consists of showing political interest/will, have forces to defeat a suprise attack, and have the means to reinforce/send a task group?

What about future events in the Gulf of Aden (targets in Yemen or Somalia) or perhaps the stand off with Iran over their nuclear programme? From the border with Iraq to the one with Pakistan, Iran has something like 1400 miles of coast - all of which us next to busy shipping routes. Now imagine that Srael has attacked and all the Gulf states are refusing to let their airfields be used by the West, or possibly the UN security council has voted for sanctions, enforced by maritime interdiction operations. Iran vows to strike at the forces stopping and searching vesels. They've threated some mining.

Because of the length of coast, and the sheer number of ports, the forces doing MIOPS are spread thinly. A small UK, consisting of a frigate, a destroyer, and some MCMVs, is operating some distance from the nearest allied air base, but only a few minutes flying time from an Iranian airfield. Strict ROE are in force to prevent a Iran Air 655 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655) tragedy.

What appears to be a large aircraft is approaching the group, which has no way of intercepting it or getting a positive ID. Minutes later, a salvo of anti ship missiles is inbound. Has this been a good day for the "no unexpected events are predicted for ten years" defence policy?

They can also no longer drop LGBs on hostile vessels, and helicopters can only operate under the protection of ships' weapons.

process monkey

31st Oct 2010, 10:45

Ah, the old "We'll reinforce using the Air Bridge" gag......and if they take MPA? Oh, appears your argument fell over at the first hurdle. I'm gob-smacked some of you actually will run this tripe. Did you get through ACSC just gaffing off the whole idea of Theatre Entry and lack of Host Nation Support?

As I say, it's the 0.1%..........:ugh:

ORAC

31st Oct 2010, 11:27

Numbers talk. There aren't enough GR7/9s to support 2 campaigns. If the force is committed to support Afghanistan then the possibility of a second combat capable force at the same time is zero. So forget any fantasy of a carrier force in the Gulf or anywhere else. I repeat - THERE AREN'T ENOUGH AIRCRAFT.

The only possibility of the UK supporting the Afghanistan campaign plus having a small, and I mean small, extra force able to cover any emergency such as having to reinforce MPA was by keeping the GR4s.

If one force had to go, binning the Harrier was the right, and only, choice.

So weep for the FAA and their future if you wish, but please look at the facts and don't let another generation of Navy staff go forward with a chip on their shoulders about how the RAF "did in" the Harrier just to spite them.

process monkey

31st Oct 2010, 17:03

Right. Let's talk FE@R shall we? For the uninitiated, that's Force Elements at Readiness. Go ask the RAF how many Typhoon they could get serviceable on any given day last week. Serviceable and 'operational'. Ask how many GR4 were serviceable and operational, including in KAF. Might be sobering for all the money the taxpayer has spent.

Harrier may not have been a panacea but last time I checked it only had one person in the cockpit, they were operationally experienced in Afghanistan and ........they can fly off an aircraft carrier. Which is the only reason why the RAF wants rid of them. And any of you who don't believe that are utter fools. Sorry but there it is - and the CAS/preceding CAS and CDS are all ex-GR Tornado.........at least have the good grace to admit a game well played. But don't try and dress this up as Capability led because that would be an insult.:mad:

ORAC

31st Oct 2010, 21:45

Ask how many GR4 were serviceable and operational, including in KAF. Might be sobering for all the money the taxpayer has spent. Ask the same about the GR7/9 force.

Harrier may not have been a panacea but last time I checked it only had one person in the cockpit, they were operationally experienced in Afghanistan and ........they can fly off an aircraft carrier. Which is the only reason why the RAF wants rid of them. And any of you who don't believe that are utter fools. I despair, another generation going forward with a chip on both shoulders...

Finnpog

31st Oct 2010, 22:23

Which I suppose will make a pleasant change, handing over the relay baton (or should that be chip?) to the RN.

After all, for a whole career generation of Light Blue sharp and pointy ("no one who is not an FJ pilot has the mental wherewithall to make it at Flag / Air / Field rank" IIRC) drivers - Op Corporate must sit in the corporate memory as a burning reminder that they weren't invited to the party and not necessary to victory.:eek:

Let's not forget the heavy RAF commitment from the Nimrod, AT, AAR, Canberra, Vulcan, Harrier & Chinook fleets, plus Rocks with Rapier - together with all of Ascension...

...but without intending to decry any individual - it was after all a command decision - where were the Phantom, Buccaneer or Jaguar fleets?

(PS - I do appreciate the commitment to RAFG strike & NATO).

I'll just transition to Bikini State Amber now, and await the incoming.:(

engineer(retard)

1st Nov 2010, 14:22

Allegedly, there was an alternate plan that had Buccs and Phantoms on standby and that fleet limitations due to weather prevented that plan being actioned. Alternatively, if you have a chip on your shoulder you could claim it was the RN trying to buy the show that prevented their deployment.

LateArmLive

1st Nov 2010, 17:38

After all, for a whole career generation of Light Blue sharp and pointy ("no one who is not an FJ pilot has the mental wherewithall to make it at Flag / Air / Field rank" IIRC) drivers - Op Corporate must sit in the corporate memory as a burning reminder that they weren't invited to the party and not necessary to victory

There were an awful lot of RAF FJ pilots flying FRS1 as well as GR out there in 82.

vecvechookattack

1st Nov 2010, 17:42

The reason that the Harrier was cancelled is because of RAPTOR. It was an entire toss of a coin with the decision made at the last minute... The Tornado has RAPTOR and so won the vote

LateArmLive

1st Nov 2010, 17:44

And it's established in HERRICK today. And if you got rid of the GR4 force then there would have been 3-4 times as many people to re-train/pay off/chop.

It's a tough decision, but it's been made. Some dark days ahead for the FAA :(

oldnotbold

2nd Nov 2010, 10:50

BRITAIN’S FAST JET FORCES – NATIONAL INTEREST VERSUS VESTED INTEREST.

BRITAIN?S FAST JET FORCES ? NATIONAL INTEREST VERSUS VESTED INTEREST. The Phoenix Think Tank (http://thephoenixthinktank.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/britain%E2%80%99s-fast-jet-forces-%E2%80%93-national-interest-versus-vested-interest/)

Admiral Woodward & Sharkey Ward Petition to save the Harrier

After the Prime Minister made public the appalling decision to withdraw the Harrier from Naval and RAF service, my son Kris managed to raise the issue with him and in doing so hit the headlines. We wish to put pressure on the Prime Minister and the government to reverse this dreadful decision and I am now writing to you with some urgency to ask your assistance by signing the petition online at:

Saving the Harrier (http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/primeminister/)

If we do not retain the Harrier in service we shall lose all the expertise that is so necessary for operating from an aircraft carrier (over 90 years of dedication, huge combat success and the loss of countless lives in peace time and in war will have been in vain). Such expertise cannot be “reinvented” overnight. It would probably take decades to achieve this.
Hopefully, you will feel it appropriate to help publicise this petition request as a matter of urgency and pass it on to all your friends and colleagues and ask them to do the same.

http://www.uknda.org/plugin_news.asp...=732&catid=-1&

Wrathmonk

2nd Nov 2010, 11:00

oldnotbold

Isn't that the same article that you linked to yesterday on one of the many other Harrier / Carrier threads? You may also need to post it on the Future Carriers thread.:ugh:

Perhaps its time to merge all the carrier / Harrier threads ....

teeteringhead

2nd Nov 2010, 15:42

eng(ret) ..Op Corporate you could claim it was the RN trying to buy the show that prevented their deployment. ... not in any way like 847 instead of 72 then ........:ugh:

orgASMic

2nd Nov 2010, 16:50

My apologies for not referencing my int way back on page 2 earlier.

Comd JHC penned a letter to JHC on the outcome of SDSR detailing what it meant to the Command. In it, he said what was going where, the gist of which was 'no change other than only 12 new CH47 , not 22'. It is linked from the JHC homepage on DII. It is Restricted, which is why I only confirmed that there was no change to what was already on open source. Some of the detail precluded me from linking it or 'copy and paste'-ing it here.

St Johns Wort

2nd Nov 2010, 20:53

teteringhead,

You may also recall that even though the Pumas had been fitted with their very smart one peice sea going suits, the RN wouldn't embark them because 'They are open line refuel' It was then that 72 was offered up, the rest as they say........

charliegolf

2nd Nov 2010, 22:03

St J's W:

because 'They are open line refuel'

And that the average windspeed was regularly a bit tasty for starting the bugger up!

CG

teeteringhead

3rd Nov 2010, 10:02

And a rolling deck not too clever when the Pume wasn't started.

And as Moggie stated on this forum recently, 847 was so well organised that he got 6 hours Wessex flying helping them disembark....

And of course he was a Flight Lieutenant then ......

St Johns Wort

3rd Nov 2010, 11:20

CG & teteringhead,

Difficult but not impossible. The Argies managed it!

handysnaks

3rd Nov 2010, 17:05

and the gazelles and scouts that went were also open line refuel only!!!

Thomas coupling

4th Nov 2010, 11:17

Refocus on to the thread.
still no answers then: What will happen to all the junglies?
Merlin Mk2 and Wildcat - because that's all we will have left in the FAA (for the next 10+ years). This accounts for, what....20 -25 helicopters..and that's it. :ugh::ugh::uhoh:

Any dissenters?

Obi Wan Russell

4th Nov 2010, 17:38

TC:

Merlin HMA 2 is still scheduled to cover 30 airframes, and wildcat is expected to be around 28 for the FAA alone. Bit more than the '20-25' total you suggest. Merlin HC3 still scheduled to join the Navy. there's another 25+ right there. Don't forget we also have 12 FJ pilots training with the USN, and 800NAS are due to join them next year...:ok:

Tourist

4th Nov 2010, 19:46

Plus don't forget the bizarre rumours from a usually very reliable source that the RAF is considering a Naval Typhoon sqn?!

F3sRBest

4th Nov 2010, 19:59

Naval Typhoon sqn?!

Ah that old chestnut, the navalised Typhoon.....recycled rumour for the nth time.....

Tourist

4th Nov 2010, 20:06

No No No.

That would be silly.
I am talking about the RAF allowing the RN to have some normal typhoon to fly until JSF comes along for the carrier.

Sounds astonishingly unlikely, I know, but the source is impeccable

Wrathmonk

5th Nov 2010, 08:56

Tourist

the source is impeccable

I do hope so and if correct it's a shame this couldn't have been signed, sealed and delivered before the SDSR announcement. Would have saved acres of bandwidth and multiple Harrier/Carrier threads if nothing else! Be interesting to see if it is aircraft (i.e Naval sqns) or just spaces on RAF sqns. Either way it offers a glimmer of hope for FW/FJ FAA.

Now all we need is for your impeccable source to say we are leasing a MPA platform or two and PPRuNe can return to normal and discuss important aviation issues such as weber BBQs, CEA, fitness tests, samsonite suitcases and asthma:E

Jimlad1

5th Nov 2010, 09:20

"Now all we need is for your impeccable source to say we are leasing a MPA platform or two and PPRuNe can return to normal and discuss important aviation issues such as weber BBQs, CEA, fitness tests, samsonite suitcases and asthmahttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/evil.gif"

Hows this for starters - does anyone else get asthma attacks lugging all their fitness testing gear, stacks of CEA application forms and BBQs around in one samsonite suitcase? :ok:

david parry

5th Nov 2010, 10:40

:{ Ark sails for the final time (http://www.navynews.co.uk/news/958-ark-sails-for-the-final-time.aspx)

Thomas coupling

5th Nov 2010, 11:02

Thanks guidedweapons for your constructive input. I think you'll find the thread had wandered off somewhat. Chill out sonny.

It seems there is some serious in house jostling for position. Decision makers in the RAF and the RN are making these decisions without government approval.

Speaking to a flag rank last night, I was told the following:

RAF Mk 3 Merlins will not be marinised or sent to the RN.
The brit exchange pilots on the marine JSF course were sent home last week. The lot of them. How many does that leave over there now?

If the carriers are another 10yrs off and there is a further delay to reconfigure the launch system, what might the annual throughput be for FAA FW jocks. Thanks.

ORAC

5th Nov 2010, 11:21

The brit exchange pilots on the marine JSF course were sent home last week. Well they'll only be a few weeks ahead of the USMC pilots heading home. Time for at least another tour of duty before anyone gets the aircraft (http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/asd/2010/11/04/01.xml&headline=Gates%20Briefed%20On%20JSF%20Delay)do do any F-35B flying - if it lives through the inevitable review........

ORAC

5th Nov 2010, 17:40

Further to the above...

Ares: JSF Friday Roundup (http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3ad67c9192-e8dc-4aa2-8c71-41f627f14f30&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest) .........Meanwhile, Inside Defense (cited by Bob Cox) is reporting another change in the JSF program (http://blogs.star-telegram.com/sky_talk/2010/11/yet-another-f-35-delay-reported.html): the two LRIP-1 F-35As will be instrumented for tests, delivered to Edwards AFB in April 2011 and used for further testing.

Two very important points: They will be flown by USAF Test Pilot School pilots - presumably faculty, not students - rather than the JSF integrated test team. Also, until now they weren't supposed to go to Edwards at all. They were due to go to Eglin, where they would start training Marine instructors in the basics of the jet, an event that was on the critical path to Marine IOC.

Justanopinion

5th Nov 2010, 18:44

Thomas coupling

The brit exchange pilots on the marine JSF course were sent home last week.

There is currently no such unit in the USA called a Marine JSF Course - was he perhaps referring to the British Harrier pilots that were sent home from the United States Marine Corps?

ORAC

6th Nov 2010, 07:24

There is currently no such unit in the USA called a Marine JSF Course Semantics about the name apart, the USMC JSF training sqn stood up on 1st April 2010.

Following this link (http://www.dvidshub.net/video/73095/f-35-lightning-ii-program-package) from their web site, dated 16th Nov 2009, the first pilot course was due to start this month. "501 (VMFAT-501) will officially stand up as part of the Joint Integrated Training Center located at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. The work done at Patuxent River will enable the Marine Corps to start training Marine pilots and maintainers at this time next year."

Anyone know if any UK pilots were assigned to the staff or as students?

2nd April 2010: History in the making: First JSF training squadron stands up (http://www.defencetalk.com/first-f-35-jsf-training-squadron-stands-up-25775/)

A small squadron of Marines marched toward the future of military aviation, April 2. Marine Fighter Attack Training Squadron 501 (http://www.marines.mil/unit/2ndMAW/mag31/vmfat501/Pages/default.aspx), currently only 37-Marines strong, stood up as the Marine Corps’ F-35B Lightning II training squadron in a ceremony at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. The squadron is the nation’s first training squadron for the new Joint Strike Fighter, making the ceremony not only a first for the Marine Corps, but for the entire Department of Defense......

Justanopinion

6th Nov 2010, 09:22

ORAC

Anyone know if any UK pilots were assigned to the staff or as students?

No, there were not.

chinook240

18th Nov 2010, 16:55

Capt Jon Pentreath, CO CHF:

Heli-Power 2010: CHF commander reveals challenges ahead | Shephard Group (http://www.shephard.co.uk/news/rotorhub/heli-power-2010-chf-commander-reveals-challenges-ahead/7739/)

airborne_artist

18th Nov 2010, 17:01

Is Captain JP the son/nephew of David Pentreath, late RN?

vecvechookattack

18th Nov 2010, 17:11

Son I think. And a Blomin top bloke

Charlie Time

18th Nov 2010, 17:11

Son, I believe. Top man is JP.

airborne_artist

18th Nov 2010, 17:17

DP was a good friend of Pere Artist. He drove Plymouth during Corporate, and PA was by then back in the central staff of MoD, and being the immediate past Captain of Endurance, was a tad busy with the planning. Pretty sure I must have met him, somewhere.

vecvechookattack

18th Nov 2010, 17:19

Heli-Power 2010: CHF commander reveals challenges ahead
November 17, 2010
The commander of the UK's Commando Helicopter Force (CHF) says his organisation is facing a challenging time over the next decade.
With heavy commitments in Afghanistan and the need to provide a contingent amphibious assault capability ready to be deployed anywhere in the world, Capt Jon Pentreath told delegates at the Heli-Power 2010 conference in London that the force would soon have to start making plans to introduce two new aircraft models and have to prepare crews to operate those types.
'We face huge uncertainties,' explained Pentreath, 'We are heavily committed to Afghanistan, and training for deployments there. Paving the way for new aircraft and training crews for those types will provide us with a real challenge.'
Based at RNAS Yeovilton in Somerset, the force is made up of three squadrons operating the Sea King Mk4 – 845 and 846 Naval Air Squadrons are front-line units while 848 NAS is the training squadron. A fourth unit, 847 NAS operates the Lynx Mk7 flown by Royal Marine aircrews.
However, under current plans in 2020 the look of the force will be very different. The current plan is for the unit to be equipped with 25 Merlin Mk4s - marinised Merlin Mk3s, which are currently used by the RAF's 28 and 78 squadrons. The Merlins would replace the Sea King, and four Wildcats will replace the six Lynx currently in use.
The four Wildcats will come out of the Fleet Air Arm's allocation of 28 aircraft and will be equipped like those to be operated by the British Army Air Corps.
'In an ideal world we would retire the Sea Kings after the new fleet of Merlins is ready,' Pentreath told Rotorhub.com.
So far no clear plans have been made about the Merlin Mk4 programme. Pentreath said the aircraft would ideally have a folding rotor head, but a folding tail rotor might not be necessary as the aircraft would probably fit onto the deck lifts being developed for the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers the CHF is likely to operate from.
Cost is another issue, however, and although it’s common for naval aircraft to be converted for operation on land – take the Royal Navy's F-4 Phantom and Buccaneer strike aircraft which were handed down to the RAF during the 60s and 70s – it’s quite another to retrofit a land-based fleet for naval operation.
The entire UK Sea King fleet is due to exit service at the end of 2016, which means the first CHF Merlins would have to be ready to begin training in 2015.
By Tony Osborne, London

I thought that training had already begun.....or is that just the Instructors?

airborne_artist

18th Nov 2010, 17:27

Joint Integrated Training Center located at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida

Anyone know if any UK pilots were assigned to the staff or as students? No, there were not.

Pity, Fort Walton Beach and Destin are superb runs ashore, and if you don't trap during Spring Break then you must be ... :}

TheWizard

18th Nov 2010, 17:53

.........happily married??:}

airborne_artist

18th Nov 2010, 18:04

Funnily enough the last time I was there was a couple of days after I'd first met the current Mrs AA, but about 30 months before we were married. Close run thing - I could very easily be in Austin, Tx, now if I'd stuck with the young lady I met in FWB :ok:

Tallsar

18th Nov 2010, 18:20

There still seems to be a major divergence as to what exactly is happening to those RAF Mk3/3as, Whilst the Sheppard brief by JP seems to set the seal on it..there does seem some wriiggle room in the script - certainly about timings and any modification plans. I would assume he cleared the script with Cdr JHC.....so it would apear to have credibility. On the other hand, there have been occaisons in the past when such briefs have become "kite flying" exercises in the hope of maintaining momentum (possibly from desperation & frustration). If so then JP has no doubt come close to Hari-Kiri.
What I do know, is that an unmodified Mk3 has little resilience or performance for regular/continuous use in the maritime environment....and thats before you look at essential mods such as a folding head which only adds a dollop of mass and reduces payload noticeably - many know little of how low the payload margins are in a battle ready Mk3 despite the recent MAUW changes. The Mk1/2 was built with all sorts of engineering type tweaks and anti-corrosion measures that were never applied to the Mk3 build standard. A study not so long ago showed that it would be more cost effective to buy new cabs rather than properly upgrade the Mk3s for marops...Mmmm??. So there must be some real head scratching going on at the JHC given the lack of cash.

This issue seems to have quite a bit of traction yet!:ugh::confused::hmm: