LIMA 13

[Robert Cooper]

I see that 4 Typhoons from 29 Sdn arrived in Malaysia for the LIMA 13 Air Show. Anyone know what route they took?

Cheers, Bob C

[lj101]

Typhoons reach Malaysia (http://www.raf.mod.uk/news/archive/typhoons-reach-malaysia-25032013)

This one ?

[Kluseau]

Photographs:

2 Typhoons from 1(Fighter) Squadron trail accompanied by an Italian KC-767 tanker aircraft from 8 Squadron, Italian Air Force.


Er... The aircraft in the second photo are obviously 3 Sqn not 1 Sqn; and though it's less obvious, I think the same is true of the Typhoons in the first photograph. If so, then only one out of three photos accompaying that article actually show what they are meant to show...

[salad-dodger]

Number 1(Fighter) Squadron successfully complete Typhoon trail to Malaysia

I think we could regard it as a real achievement if the tanker had been an A330 with a RAF roundel on the side instead of having to rely on another nation's asset.

How embarrassing!

S-D

[TheWizard]

Why? NATO co-operation is there for a reason!!

Throughout, 1(F) Sqn were not only supported by an Italian Air Force KC-767 tanker, but also made use of the RAF’s new Voyager transport capability to deploy the main party.

[salad-dodger]

NATO co-operation
A handy term used by MoD apparatchiks to deny the major shortcomings in the UK's defence capabilities.

S-D

[clicker]

As well as using the Italians for AAR I thought I heard some Mildenhall KC135s bringing back some Tiffys from Red Flag the other day.

[lj101]

As S-D said; we use them (foreign tankers) because we don't have the capacity to support our FJ AAR requirements. It's very expensive too Wizard - especially the use of USAF tankers. The European Agreement is;

https://www.mcce-mil.com/Pages/default.aspx

[BEagle]

How humiliating that the RAF no longer has adequate capacity to support its own FJ AAR requirements....:mad:

Is Voyager anywhere close to getting AAR clearance for routine RAF AAR with Tornado or Typhoon yet?

[TheWizard]

Sorry, but the days of us 'going it alone' died shortly after 1982.
Unfortunately there is no room for nostalgia as we are where we are (not getting into why or how).

I am sure the French were not embarrassed to have to rely on the Royal Air Force to transport it's large vehicles into Mali earlier this year ie co-operation.

At least a Voyager was used to move the personnel for this exercise. Pretty sure it wouldn't get authorisation to do combined pax and AAR trips for that distance. (Happy to be corrected)

[BEagle]

Pretty sure it wouldn't get authorisation to do combined pax and AAR trips for that distance. (Happy to be corrected)

It wouldn't be much use as a Multi-Role Tanker Transport, were that to be the case.

[dat581]

How different are the RAF A330s from the Australian tankers (besides the lack of a boom)? The RAAF's aircraft have only just reached IOC with the baskets for AAR and i'm pretty sure they are fully operational as a passenger and cargo aircraft.

[cessnapete]

A friend at a big Oxfordshire Airbase tells me that at present the Voyager is still not cleared for AAR, ETOPS, or 'In Theater ' operations.

[Whisky_Ffox]

Beags...

Is Voyager anywhere close to getting AAR clearance for routine RAF AAR with Tornado or Typhoon yet?

Any minute now... but 'we' were told that a couple of weeks ago:confused:

DAT...

How different are the RAF A330s from the Australian tankers (besides the lack of a boom)? The RAAF's aircraft have only just reached IOC with the baskets for AAR and i'm pretty sure they are fully operational as a passenger and cargo aircraft.

The aircraft are almost identical. The AAR Pods are the same apart from some software differences, and the Drogues - 'Baskets' - are different. I understand the RAAF are generally quite happy with availability and reliability of their system.

[TheWizard]

It wouldn't be much use as a Multi-Role Tanker Transport, were that to be the case.

Doesn't necessarily mean it has to be doing all of the roles at once, just be capable of more than one role.

[BEagle]

For an MRTT to be of any use, it must be able to fly in both roles at the same time.

As did the VC10C1K and to some extent, the VC10K. Receiver squadron support personnel were frequently carried on AAR trails.

If you have an accurate mission planning system you can calculate the fuel required to support an AAR trail, based on the highest assumed ZFW and statistical meteorological conditions, together with prudent fuel reserves. Provided that it doesn't impinge upon performance limits or MTOW, the resulting available payload may then be released for cargo / passenger purposes.

I understand the RAAF are generally quite happy with availability and reliability of their system.

I'm reliably informed that they most certainly are NOT!

[TEEEJ]

The use of the Italian KC-767 will be a good work out for them after the recent clearance trial.

The European Defence Agency (EDA) will in the next months organise a European-wide collective air-to-air refuelling (AAR) clearance trial for Italy’s Boeing KC-767 military aerial refuelling and strategic tanker aircraft. The trial is part of EDA’s efforts to address Europe’s AAR capability shortfall.

Aerial Refuelling Clearance for Italian KC-767 (http://www.eda.europa.eu/info-hub/news/2013/02/08/aerial-refuelling-clearance-for-italian-kc-767)

[TBM-Legend]

Europe needs to wake up to itself and create more multi-national support operations like C-17 pool, E-3 pool. Why not a tanker pool?

[Arty Fufkin]

Beagle old chap,

I think you'll find that one of the sqns at Brize has been doing trails while carrying a considerable tonnage of support personel and equipment for quite some time. I must have had a very accurate fag packet back in the day.

[newt]

What a complete waste of time, money and flying hours!

When will we learn that we are no longer a global power and should concentrate our meagre forces in the defence of the UK!:ugh::ugh::ugh:

[BEagle]

...one of the sqns at Brize has been doing trails while carrying a considerable tonnage of support personel and equipment for quite some time.

If their a/c are ever serviceable, that is.....:p

[lj101]

while carrying a considerable tonnage of support personel and equipment for quite some time

On average 20 crew
20 support crew
3t of freight

That's over the last 7 years.

I would say it would cost too much for hotac etc to carry circa 150 people on a trail as pax. It would limit where we could go too. Lajes, peak season. Forget it.

[BEagle]

Lajes, peak season. Forget it.

You're forgetting '10% Carlos', lj101! "I fix, I fix....!!".
I presume the RAF still uses him? Idiots if they don't - he never let me down. His crowning glory was allocating me to the rather palatial rooms at the Nasce Agua normally used by the president of Portugal. "Best room for Commander" was always his aim. He once organised a bus to take us to a restaurant out in the sticks run by a friend of his where we stuffed ourselves on ginormous sea monster prawns laced with garlic at a very reasonable price. Superb!!

Your point about the pax numbers on trails is well made. Hundreds of people milling around waiting for a FJ to be fixed, or for the abort aerodrome weathers to come into limits would indeed be rather costly, even if such a situation could actually be managed.

However, some role support personnel and a couple of spare receiver crews, plus maybe a couple of others would be reasonable.

I once had to look at the feasibility of a PR9 detachment to MPA in the MPs and Air Wheels' visits season - they'd invariably want to come and 'support the troops in far-flung places at Christmas'...or do some fishing/wildlfie spotting. We expected that the PR9 mob would want to send a spare crew and some groundcrew/tech specialists to support their single jet. But when the figure grew to 40 just to operate a single PR9, we told them that they'd have to think again as there was no feasible way we could find accommodation for that many. My suggestion that they could bring some tents fell on rather stony ground...:\ In the end it was all TFD and they cancelled their trip.

[lj101]

Carlos is still employed :ok:

[BEagle]

Were the KC-767Is also used to recover the Typhoons from LIMA? Or were there some serviceable RAF tankers available....??

:\