How to destroy the Royal Air Force (?).

[Al R]

‪How to destroy the Royal Air Force.‬

‪https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2020/07/29/a-guide-to-destroying-the-royal-air-force/‬

[Chugalug2]

Hi Al, hope all is well with you. ;)

As to the article :-

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2020/07/29/a-guide-to-destroying-the-royal-air-force/#4e4bf5fe3ee9

I'm tempted to say that the MOD needs no lessons in that, thank you! :(

[Al R]

I’m good thanks matey, hope you both are as well. 👍

[Gypsy]

Shhhh
Keep it a secret - oh?

[Out Of Trim]

‪How to destroy the Royal Air Force.‬

‪https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2020/07/29/a-guide-to-destroying-the-royal-air-force/‬

Indeed, a good point! Our aircraft should be much more dispersed around the Country. The phrase keeping all your eggs in one basket comes to mind. Reopen RAF Wattisham and RAF Lyneham for starters...

[trim it out]

The phrase keeping all your eggs in one basket comes to mind. Reopen RAF Wattisham and RAF Lyneham for starters...
All the Apache eggs are already in the Wattisham basket :E

[NutLoose]

And the Carriers and the erm fleet for what it is at Portsmouth. Couple all this with a strike on Sunday morning during church to take out the senior officers should do it, drop one on Brize would also rob the UK of the ability to move anything. A farce in the making.

[Al R]

As was pointed out on my Facebook page - we responded by ridding ourselves of all ground based missile defence when the Cold War was won and our enemies couldn’t even fly a kite - let alone host a hypersonic first strike capability.

[jmmoric]

Let me think.... oh yeah.... it's totally not possible having military aircraft operating out of civilian fields and roads.

Sorry RAF, you're doomed.

[NutLoose]

and roads.


https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/100x74/animated_laughing_image_0072_75d888b7d0c8734076fa49b4e4e1665 6308101b8.gif

[Ken Scott]

A good case could be made that the RAF ceased to be a force a long time ago, unable to prosecute a genuine war but just about able to manage peacetime activities such as exercises and patrolling UK airspace against infiltration by Russian aircraft. It could also manage a bit of bomb dropping on tribesmen and insurgents provided there was no credible opposition.

I long ago came to the conclusion that the Defence budget existed primarily to support industry (see Aircraft carriers, Typhoon etc) and that the RAF (and presumably by extension the other 2 services) existed to give people a good career (see the proliferation of jobs for senior officers despite the ever reducing capabilities of the front line).

If along the way the RAF could move a load of pax/ freight from A to B or drop a bomb on C, that was considered something of a bonus.

[Runaway Gun]

I thought that fight had almost concluded, from within.

[Old-Duffer]

OOT Post 5: Lyneham is now a solar panel farm!

[jmmoric]

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/100x74/animated_laughing_image_0072_75d888b7d0c8734076fa49b4e4e1665 6308101b8.gif

Yeah I know, but the swedes do it.....

https://www.blogbeforeflight.net/2020/04/swaf-gripen-pilots-train-on-highway.html

[Sideshow Bob]

just for information onlyhttps://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/931x662/raf_04f821c5640b9b531cc38fb5f59411970c61da7a.jpg
Not to mention all the other capabilities we've killed off too, short/medium range SAM, ADGE Radar coverage, Tankers, the list could go on and on.......

[rolling20]

When the Wall came down in 89, I was working in the City. I remember one of the defence analysts saying that he wouldn't fancy a career in the services now as the main reason the services in their then form existed, had itself ceased to exist.
Today we cannot stop so far this year, 3,000 illegals crossing the channel.

[Finningley Boy]

I was always at a loss to understand the military logic of reducing the airfield infrastructure and cramming what little was left onto just three air bases. As all I'm sure have concluded, successive British Governments have invariably refused to let go of 1989 and the post cold war peace dividend. The same problem persists to varying degrees among all western democracies. However, the British establishment have a very special knack for arguing the case against its defence posture. Does any other nation have on going debates forcing their air force to justify its existence?

FB

[bigsmelly]

I might be missing something here, but surely this is why the UK has Trident. No mention of that in the article.

[Just This Once...]

Trident??

So if we had a minor conventional skirmish with pro-Russia or Russian forces on the fringe of Europe that lead to a small but precise retaliation of conventional cruise missiles against 2 or 3 RAF bases you would suggest reaching for thermonuclear weapons?

The threat of a small-scale, limited but precise conventional attack by stand-off weapons is a credible threat because of the increased likelihood of the use of such a tactic. Indeed, it is one we have exercised ourselves a number of times in various conflicts post-1990.

[cxorcist]

just for information onlyhttps://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/931x662/raf_04f821c5640b9b531cc38fb5f59411970c61da7a.jpg
I would love to see parallel spending graphs for the NHS and other nanny state spending over the same period. Not to worry, the US has your back. They’ll just pop for a few hundred billion more to keep their military forces in Europe, and somehow the US taxpayer benefits. Same team, same dream... more Africans and Middle Eastern refugees on the dole! Not to worry, the printing presses are running at full afterburner...

[Rheinstorff]

As was pointed out on my Facebook page - we responded by ridding ourselves of all ground based missile defence when the Cold War was won and our enemies couldn’t even fly a kite - let alone host a hypersonic first strike capability.

Not quite. We halved our GBAD capacity in 2007/8, long after the Cold War ended and just when some of those less friendly to us were starting to develop capabilities that now worry us. We still have 16 Regt RA, the half that survived and which required those that didn't (RAF Regt Rapier sqns) to bring them up to an acceptable standard. Oh, the irony.

[Out Of Trim]

All the Apache eggs are already in the Wattisham basket :E

I know! The Apache eggs could move to Abingdon instead...

[LincsFM]

I do find it funny that the only Airfield with a permanent SHORAD capability is 8000 miles away facing an almost non-existent threat!

[reds & greens]

Just make one sweeping statement that "all who do not fly, get no pay rise for 5yrs".
A mass desertion which ensues would destroy the RAF.
Money saved in manpower, fuel, assets sold abroad before they rot, then unused real estate etc...
Great saving for the Treasury.
Touché
And for those still not sure "absolutely no reversion to a better Pension scheme"
Better days behind.

[ORAC]

Nothing changes.

The Russians pretend they’re a threat - we pretend to defend against it......

[NutLoose]

Said it before and will say it again, we should never destroy airfields, put pongoes on them by all means or anyone else, but leave the airfield infrastructure complete, you can build a camp if you need to house pongoes almost anywhere, but try to find a site and build an airfield where Mr and Mrs not in my backyard will not fight it tooth and nail. and the cost compared to a fenced in accomodation plot for pongoes will be staggering.

Yeah I know, but the swedes do it.....

Flogging the Harrier off for spare parts put that more or less to bed, when they did the Jag take off PR stunt I seem to remember they struggled to find a straight enough stretch, long enough, clear of obstacles and without bridges over it to use., fast fwd to today with poor road surfaces and aircraft no longer built to operate in such conditions you would struggle.


I would be interested to know how long people think the RAF would be able to put up a defence to a credible threat to this Country from an Air Force we might face today. dependant on the build up to hostilities and the ability to disperse, Couple of days if lucky.?

No wonder the likes of China over Hong Kong and Russia laugh when we rattle our sabres at them these days.

[Jackonicko]

Yes, yes, but you're forgetting the vital thing. They couldn't knock out all the diversity and inclusion initiatives that have been so successfully rolled out recently. And looking at the Twitter output of senior officers that's got to be the important thing nowadays.

[trim it out]

I know! The Apache eggs could move to Abingdon instead...
You could be on to something there, keeps the generating force, the generated force and the Boeing depot at Boscombe all within easy reach which would be good for boys and girls that don’t want to have to move house...too much common sense, will never happen :oh:

[Asturias56]

" if we had a minor conventional skirmish with pro-Russia or Russian forces on the fringe of Europe that lead to a small but precise retaliation of conventional cruise missiles against 2 or 3 RAF bases "

Does anyone REALLY believe that this is likely? Its a fantasy........

And TBH what effect would that have? They're not invading the UK, we can retaliate by taking back their bank accounts, their houses, football clubs and all their wives, mistresses and kids in London - which would just about pay for the shiny new jets we'd order from BAe.

[Deltasierra010]

Never mind a skirmish with Russia. If there Is no fisheries agreement we might need our Navy and Airforce to defend territorial waters against the EU incursions as well as stopping migrants.

[possel]

The article doesn't mention WHEN. I heard it said in the 1980s that the best time for a Soviet strike would be late on the Friday evening of a bank holiday weekend, when nearly everyone would be miles away. And of course there was that hushed-up event (70s or 80s) when all the high price help were at a Strike Command dining-in, and they got food poisoning...

[Always a Sapper]

OOT Post 5: Lyneham is now a solar panel farm!

Swindon's local Pikie's would have that lot stripped out and away in a weekend!

[Finningley Boy]

Said it before and will say it again, we should never destroy airfields, put pongoes on them by all means or anyone else, but leave the airfield infrastructure complete, you can build a camp if you need to house pongoes almost anywhere, but try to find a site and build an airfield where Mr and Mrs not in my backyard will not fight it tooth and nail. and the cost compared to a fenced in accomodation plot for pongoes will be staggering.



Flogging the Harrier off for spare parts put that more or less to bed, when they did the Jag take off PR stunt I seem to remember they struggled to find a straight enough stretch, long enough, clear of obstacles and without bridges over it to use., fast fwd to today with poor road surfaces and aircraft no longer built to operate in such conditions you would struggle.


I would be interested to know how long people think the RAF would be able to put up a defence to a credible threat to this Country from an Air Force we might face today. dependant on the build up to hostilities and the ability to disperse, Couple of days if lucky.?

No wonder the likes of China over Hong Kong and Russia laugh when we rattle our sabres at them these days.

Regarding retention of airfields, surplus or otherwise, it would seem that the logic behind maintaining Kinloss and Leuchars appears to follow your logic NutLoose. However, I don't think dispersal for any true military requirements are the reason. They were both retained in tact to provide reasonable diversion airfields for Lossiemouth and, of course, we're seeing right now the demand on both to maintain any kind of operational RAF presence north of Yorkshire. By rights, as with Abingdon, Cottesmore, Finningley etc, Kinloss and Leuchars would have been abandoned for any such operational use. It isn't beyond the realms of possibility to imagine the mandarins overruling the air staff and perhaps the other service boards by leaving us in a situation today, with nothing in Scotland while airfield works went on at Lossie.

FB

[Phantom Driver]

NutLoose--

No wonder the likes of China over Hong Kong and Russia laugh when we rattle our sabres at them these days.

Sadly , the days of gunboat diplomacy are long gone . The sooner people wake up and embrace this simple fact , the better . This not to say the ability of UK plc to Project Force are over . Far from it . Just means there is a need for that well worn phrase --" thinking outside the box " from those at the top making these policy decisions .

Carriers ? Trident ? F 35 ? Nice technology , nice "toys" to impress the natives/"enemy" , but not the way future wars will be fought in the 21st century and beyond . China and Russia know that . Destroy your digital infrastructure with cyber and it's all over without a single bomb being dropped . Fact .

[Finningley Boy]

NutLoose--



Sadly , the days of gunboat diplomacy are long gone . The sooner people wake up and embrace this simple fact , the better . This not to say the ability of UK plc to Project Force are over . Far from it . Just means there is a need for that well worn phrase --" thinking outside the box " from those at the top making these policy decisions .

Carriers ? Trident ? F 35 ? Nice technology , nice "toys" to impress the natives/"enemy" , but not the way future wars will be fought in the 21st century and beyond . China and Russia know that . Destroy your digital infrastructure with cyber and it's all over without a single bomb being dropped . Fact .
So what do they need their TU-160s, Flankers, Fencers, Surface Ships, Tanks etc for?

FB

[NutLoose]

Don't start me off on that one, have believed from the start that energy, water, transport, communications and our digital infrastructure are just as important as our military and we should have none in foreign ownership.

I am also a strong believer in built in Britain, Phantom was about the start of the rot, buying in means UK Plc loses the ability to design and build in the UK, that then sets you on the slippery slope of being dependant on other country's for your military assets, as you lose your ability to come up with the goods, fine while friends but something that's never guaranteed.

[fltlt]

The article doesn't mention WHEN. I heard it said in the 1980s that the best time for a Soviet strike would be late on the Friday evening of a bank holiday weekend, when nearly everyone would be miles away. And of course there was that hushed-up event (70s or 80s) when all the high price help were at a Strike Command dining-in, and they got food poisoning...

Hit Russia the week before Christmas through the week after New Year, the vast majority will not know what is happening.

[mahogany bob]

EGGS IN ONE BASKET

If - heaven forbid - we are ever forced (even as part of NATO ) to take on an enemy ( China / Russia ??) possessing the latest state of the art surveillance and hypersonic missiles even Sharkey and Dr Marc Cambell-Roddis must agree that it would be foolish to risk our F35B assets on board a highly vulnerable carrier which would not be THAT difficult to locate and sink! Particularly as it would already be tracked by satellites (or a James Bondski tracking device planted on board !?)

If such a situation were to arise our best course of action would be to fly them off ASAP and operate them from a variety of less vulnerable ,heavily disguised ,land locations - just like the Harriers used to!

All our fixed wing 'heavies' should immediately disperse away from their vulnerable main bases to anywhere which would give them a chance of surviving day one - just like the Vulcans used to! One Voyager is already cunningly disguised as a civvy airliner!

This would at least hopefully cause an aggressor to think hard before blackmailing us with the threat of a limited strike and give us the opportunity for a limited response before being forced to bring our nuclear submarine ( doomsday) deterrent into play!

PS The carriers could then have white crosses painted on deck and be used as hospital ships!

[staircase]

Oh the myth of ‘dispersal’.

I did 14 years in the RAF and never made it to an operational unit, so what would have happened to the sharp end I don’t know about.

However, arriving at Linton as a QFI. War and we would take all the aeroplanes to West Freugh.

10 Months later I arrive at Cranwell to QFI and in the event of war we would take all the aeroplanes to West Freugh.

6 months later I arrive at Leeming to QFI, and in the event of war we would take all the aeroplanes to West Freugh.

1 year later I arrive at Finningley, and guess where we take all the aeroplanes in the event of war? You only get one guess.

I often wondered what W.F. were going to do with a few hundred aeroplanes and the aircrews.

[PapaDolmio]

Oh the myth of ‘dispersal’.

I did 14 years in the RAF and never made it to an operational unit, so what would have happened to the sharp end I don’t know about.

However, arriving at Linton as a QFI. War and we would take all the aeroplanes to West Freugh.

10 Months later I arrive at Cranwell to QFI and in the event of war we would take all the aeroplanes to West Freugh.

6 months later I arrive at Leeming to QFI, and in the event of war we would take all the aeroplanes to West Freugh.

1 year later I arrive at Finningley, and guess where we take all the aeroplanes in the event of war? You only get one guess.

I often wondered what W.F. were going to do with a few hundred aeroplanes and the aircrews.

That is one of the funniest posts I've read for a long time.

Maybe there was a secret hangar at WF filled with JP to Strikemaster conversion kits? Use the 3's as the first wave as decoys and then hit em hard with a second wave of 5's armed to the teeth?

That would teach em.......provided they were in JP range.

[Arclite01]

and isn't West Freugh closed now anyway (as an airfield) ?

Arc

[medod]

Such an odd article.

I’m sure that if Russia attacked a NATO member state, NATO might have something to say about it.

[Chugalug2]

Staircase, brilliant post Sir! It underlines the need for a PPRuNe 'like' button. In the absence of which, I have great pleasure in awarding it (and you) Chug Post of the Year! :ok:

[Barksdale Boy]

Mahog B

Good to see that you are still alive and kicking. Hope to see you here again one day!

[Martin the Martian]

The idea behind a lot of these articles is that the United Kingdom is the only nation to have pared back its forces since 1989. Show me a NATO air arm (or a former Warsaw Pact one for that matter) that is not a shadow of its former self. And everybody has consolidated their forces in a much smaller number of locations. Even the Russians.

[roger4]

Isn't the UK one of the few NATO members to be spending >2% of GDP on defence? If so, the military forces of many of our European neighbours must be in an even worse state than us.

[Pontius Navigator]

Even 30 years ago we were running out of runways. Come tea time it became a very difficult to book diversion airfields. If you didn't book Marham by 1700 they would stack.

We could not get two sqns out of 3 to nightfly on the same night. We often held Manchester with the assumption, use it once and they would say never again. At least today civil airfields might be happy with the landing fees.

[toratoratora]

That is one of the funniest posts I've read for a long time.

Maybe there was a secret hangar at WF filled with JP to Strikemaster conversion kits? Use the 3's as the first wave as decoys and then hit em hard with a second wave of 5's armed to the teeth?

That would teach em.......provided they were in JP range.

Best laugh I have had for ages-just imagining the JP3 constant thrust/variable noise special in combat..

[Finningley Boy]

The idea behind a lot of these articles is that the United Kingdom is the only nation to have pared back its forces since 1989. Show me a NATO air arm (or a former Warsaw Pact one for that matter) that is not a shadow of its former self. And everybody has consolidated their forces in a much smaller number of locations. Even the RuINssians.
Indeed Martin, but its all relative, Russia has long since reversed its move to a smaller military force. Under Putin, the last five years or more have seen increased orders for new assets, among which about 1,300 aircraft and 1,800 Drones. Since 1990 and Options for Change, most NATO countries have continued, to various degrees, trying to find substantial savings in their respective defence budgets. This is perhaps one explanation for why British Governments have long since entered into the realms of capability holidays. Pre Tony Blair I don't think I'd ever heard such a phrase. Wallace will make all the usual verbal tributes to our wonderful servicemen and women. Then Cummings will look for savings as a priority, it will be impossible for anyone to make their case for anything other than Cyber Space etc. Interestingly, I believe the Dutch have actually quite recently increased their purchase of F-35s. They had cutback their original requirement to 37, this has now been increased to 46. Norway, given its tiny population of scarcely 5 million, has on order 56.

FB

[r0nin15]

Have we checked Ascent haven't done this with MFTS?

[fitliker]

Space Port infrastructure and investments will become more important in the future as the full capabilities of the X-47 program become known .
Space defensive systems will be more important in a missile exchange scenario against hypersonic weapons .
Everyone else is getting a space force and improved missile capabilities. The new Mitsubishi rockets that launched the Mars probes look promising for space payloads and delivery. The new missiles will have a bigger payload than the Mars rockets.
New Big Rockets are being built by the Russians , Chinese , Japanese , Americans , Not counting the smaller contributions of North Korea , Iran to Global threats . Threats that can only be countered by creating a balanced space capability for the RAF .
The big danger to the RAF in space would be how flammable brylcream is in a oxygen rich environment. The first task is to find hair care products that would allow them to do their job and look good doing it .

[Finningley Boy]

Space Port infrastructure and investments will become more important in the future as the full capabilities of the X-47 program become known .
Space defensive systems will be more important in a missile exchange scenario against hypersonic weapons .
Everyone else is getting a space force and improved missile capabilities. The new Mitsubishi rockets that launched the Mars probes look promising for space payloads and delivery. The new missiles will have a bigger payload than the Mars rockets.
New Big Rockets are being built by the Russians , Chinese , Japanese , Americans , Not counting the smaller contributions of North Korea , Iran to Global threats . Threats that can only be countered by creating a balanced space capability for the RAF .
The big danger to the RAF in space would be how flammable brylcream is in a oxygen rich environment. The first task is to find hair care products that would allow them to do their job and look good doing it .
Perhaps the manufacturer could find a way of making a Brylcream which isn't flammable in an oxygen rich environment? Or perhaps hair coverings like a bathing cap or something? Certainly I can't see the RAF being hauled out of the Space defence game just because Brylcream could prove to be dangerous under certain conditions!

FB

[racedo]

Isn't the UK one of the few NATO members to be spending >2% of GDP on defence? If so, the military forces of many of our European neighbours must be in an even worse state than us.

Yet another con, include the cost of pensions for long retired members of the services so they not out of general pensions but MOD budget, keep adding in any "potential" expenditure that "looks" military so get to the number. It wouldn't surprise me that the resurfacing of roads close to a base get lobbed into defence spending.

[Phantom Driver]

Yet another con, include the cost of pensions for long retired members of the services so they not out of general pensions but MOD budget, keep adding in any "potential" expenditure that "looks" military so get to the number. It wouldn't surprise me that the resurfacing of roads close to a base get lobbed into defence spending.

That brought a smile to my face . A bit like the supposed funding going into the UK space launch facilities . Europe (ESA) , India , Japan , China et al are going full steam ahead .. Meanwhile , the UK spaceport program is stuck in a political time warp . ( Yes, I know , we have a great micro satellite industry . Pity they have to be boosted into orbit by other players .)

[Phantom Driver]

So what do they need their TU-160s, Flankers, Fencers, Surface Ships, Tanks etc for?

FB

Same reason that drove the West to ramp up defence expenditure during the Cold War only to find they had grossly over estimated the numbers /capability of the opposing forces . Money needs to be spent on defence , but please explain what exactly you are going to be doing with 80 million quids worth of F 35 in a typical combat environment these days where the low tech guy in the field with his bog standard AK or SAM could quite easily ruin your day . . Ok , this subject has been beaten to death in other threads , so enough of that .

But as I say , nice toys for the boys ( and I have enjoyed playing with them in bygone times ) ; great technology ( essential for future progress ) . The question now is how to get good value out of those tax payer dollars/pounds.to meet the new threat , which is inevitably going to be high tech cyber .

The problem is, Joe Public want to see fast jets / heavy bombers blasting overhead even though history has shown these assets often do not perform as effectively as advertised .
But they do impress / terrorise the "natives ", even though the cyber hacker can do far more damage . Silently .

[PPRuNeUser0211]

Yet another con, include the cost of pensions for long retired members of the services so they not out of general pensions but MOD budget, keep adding in any "potential" expenditure that "looks" military so get to the number. It wouldn't surprise me that the resurfacing of roads close to a base get lobbed into defence spending.

2% GDP is an excellent example of Goodhart's law - as soon as a metric becomes a target it ceases to be a useful metric.

[Xmit]

Isn't the UK one of the few NATO members to be spending >2% of GDP on defence? If so, the military forces of many of our European neighbours must be in an even worse state than us.

In my experience, increased spending doesn’t necessarily mean increased capability.....

[teeteringhead]

Europe (ESA) , India , Japan , China et al are going full steam ahead .. I wonder how much of our foreign aid goes to Indian and Chinese space programmes??

[racedo]

Same reason that drove the West to ramp up defence expenditure during the Cold War only to find they had grossly over estimated the numbers /capability of the opposing forces . Money needs to be spent on defence ,

The problem is, Joe Public want to see fast jets / heavy bombers blasting overhead even though history has shown these assets often do not perform as effectively as advertised .
But they do impress / terrorise the "natives ", even though the cyber hacker can do far more damage . Silently .

Any politician who refuses to sign up to the mantra of we need billions more on Defense spending is called a traitor, as supposedly the enemy has way more than this.

Polaris / Trident debate is a case in point.

Just who wishes to invade the UK ? and for what purpose ?

[Finningley Boy]

Same reason that drove the West to ramp up defence expenditure during the Cold War only to find they had grossly over estimated the numbers /capability of the opposing forces . Money needs to be spent on defence , but please explain what exactly you are going to be doing with 80 million quids worth of F 35 in a typical combat environment these days where the low tech guy in the field with his bog standard AK or SAM could quite easily ruin your day . . Ok , this subject has been beaten to death in other threads , so enough of that .

But as I say , nice toys for the boys ( and I have enjoyed playing with them in bygone times ) ; great technology ( essential for future progress ) . The question now is how to get good value out of those tax payer dollars/pounds.to meet the new threat , which is inevitably going to be high tech cyber .

The problem is, Joe Public want to see fast jets / heavy bombers blasting overhead even though history has shown these assets often do not perform as effectively as advertised .
But they do impress / terrorise the "natives ", even though the cyber hacker can do far more damage . Silently .
Sir, who are Joe public? I thought they wanted to see every last penny spent on the NHS? And the rest spent on Furloughs for everyone. What do you think should happen for the best? Do you think that every F-35 is a waste and has no purpose? How does that explain the current defence planning across NATO and other allies across the planet? Should we be contributing to the defence of Baltic Airspace with Typhoons? And what about the expansion in conventional arms pursued by countries like Russia and China? Don't tell me that it is all for show and not for blow and that the only threat at all that we need concern ourselves with is that one day a Russian cyber hacker will get lucky and shut down the Work & Pensions Department's department dealing with attendance allowance payments. If a serious cyber attack on our software reliant systems is comprehensively successful, then what happens? Does it mean that Russia, for example, will have one the war? If so then what?

FB

[Phantom Driver]

Sir, who are Joe public? I thought they wanted to see every last penny spent on the NHS? And the rest spent on Furloughs for everyone. What do you think should happen for the best? Do you think that every F-35 is a waste and has no purpose? How does that explain the current defence planning across NATO and other allies across the planet? Should we be contributing to the defence of Baltic Airspace with Typhoons? And what about the expansion in conventional arms pursued by countries like Russia and China? Don't tell me that it is all for show and not for blow and that the only threat at all that we need concern ourselves with is that one day a Russian cyber hacker will get lucky and shut down the Work & Pensions Department's department dealing with attendance allowance payments. If a serious cyber attack on our software reliant systems is comprehensively successful, then what happens? Does it mean that Russia, for example, will have one the war? If so then what?

FB
I am definitely not arguing for an end to military hardware expenditure . Far from it . My argument is that there should be a balanced approach and value for money in what the military buys. It is my personal opinion that the F 35 is a waste of money for the conventional air war role it may ( or may not ) have to fight . Typhoon , Gripen , Rafael are great aircraft and much cheaper . But politics (for whatever reason ) has dictated that countries fork out exorbitant sums to the USA for the F 35 . So be it .

What I do know , from personal experience , is that , oftentimes , some of the fancy ( and expensive ) kit on board did not perform quite as well as advertised in front line use . There were some times when I felt a WW2 Mosquito could do as good a job putting iron bombs precisely on target ( which of course they did , lobbing stuff through windows to free prisoners in Amiens and Copenhagen).

The term "Joe Public" simply refers to those who are not well informed in the precise nature of military matters . It is not an insult . But information is out there for one to be better informed . " The Limits of Air Power "-(Mark Clodfelter) does a good job of explaining why the greatest military force the world had ever known was still unable to win a conventional war against a basically peasant Vietnamese army . Worth a read .

[Phantom Driver]

Racedo

Just who wishes to invade the UK ? and for what purpose ?

Good question.

[Phantom Driver]

Don't start me off on that one, have believed from the start that energy, water, transport, communications and our digital infrastructure are just as important as our military and we should have none in foreign ownership.

I am also a strong believer in built in Britain, Phantom was about the start of the rot, buying in means UK Plc loses the ability to design and build in the UK, that then sets you on the slippery slope of being dependant on other country's for your military assets, as you lose your ability to come up with the goods, fine while friends but something that's never guaranteed.

Never ceases to amaze me why this point is not getting more attention . Why weren't more questions asked earlier on about the alternatives to Huawei , for example . Instead , the drive for cheaper ( and therefore more profitable ) alternatives has led to the demise of British industry , be it in aviation , shipping , car manufacturing , trains , you name it . It is all outsourced / foreign owned and UK is reduced to assembling products designed and manufactured abroad . Some point to the excellence of UK service industries (financial); true , but surely a desire for homegrown technological innovation is equally important . The brilliance of the Victorian inventors seems a distant memory .

A nuclear power station being built in the UK by China ? One wonders what questions were asked in the House when this decision was taken . Maybe there are different perspectives on what constitutes "Global Britain" , but it is a rather sad state of affairs when media personalities generate more interest than technological achievements amongst many of the younger generation upon whom lies the nation's future .

So back to the original topic , it is easy to see why the RAF ( and other military entities )are shadows of their former selves . Something is missing . Let's hope it's not too late to address some of these issues.

[Finningley Boy]

I am definitely not arguing for an end to military hardware expenditure . Far from it . My argument is that there should be a balanced approach and value for money in what the military buys. It is my personal opinion that the F 35 is a waste of money for the conventional air war role it may ( or may not ) have to fight . Typhoon , Gripen , Rafael are great aircraft and much cheaper . But politics (for whatever reason ) has dictated that countries fork out exorbitant sums to the USA for the F 35 . So be it .

What I do know , from personal experience , is that , oftentimes , some of the fancy ( and expensive ) kit on board did not perform quite as well as advertised in front line use . There were some times when I felt a WW2 Mosquito could do as good a job putting iron bombs precisely on target ( which of course they did , lobbing stuff through windows to free prisoners in Amiens and Copenhagen).

The term "Joe Public" simply refers to those who are not well informed in the precise nature of military matters . It is not an insult . But information is out there for one to be better informed . " The Limits of Air Power "-(Mark Clodfelter) does a good job of explaining why the greatest military force the world had ever known was still unable to win a conventional war against a basically peasant Vietnamese army . Worth a read .
PD

We've been at cross purposes, I now comprehensively agree, all facets an the whole spectrum has to be available, at least as far as the Politicians and Advisors (Cummings) I suppose, can be convinced. The F-35 I'm afraid we're stuck with, and the runt of the litter in terms of ordnance, range etc. Its really disappointing to think that the whole exercise started out as a simple cheap alternative to the F-22. To think we we're only looking at a Harrier/Sea Harrier replacement. It has ended up as about the most expensive project of its kind.
In fact, I read somewhere the most expensive project to mass produce anything. I certainly used to hope our leaders would eventually see sense when the F-35 appeared to be heading toward the buffers, hence the early thread title on pprune, and look at Rafale, Super Hornet or something else ready and available. Then there is our tier one participation etc. But I'd rather we'd bought a lot more of the former than a tiny handful of F-35Bs.

FB

[Ken Scott]

Back in the 1970s Time magazine published an interesting article which has stuck with me ever since. It stated that for each new generation of combat aircraft (with respect to the USA as I recall) one aircraft had cost roughly the same as a whole squadron of those it was designed to replace. The article postulated that eventually the entire defence budget would be required to purchase one new aircraft although I cannot recall the timescale it applied!

[NutLoose]

I remember about the time Tornado came on line, people were saying we were getting less and less aircraft taking on more and more roles, that eventually we would end up doing everything with firk all.

[dead_pan]

Racedo

Good question.

Apart from the occasional decrepit Cold War relic from Russia, there's precious little to trouble the homeland's skies. I do struggle to see what more we need, certainly nothing like the numbers we had even a decade or so ago. Personally I think the balance is more-or-less right nowadays.

Someone mentioned the two carriers. On a side-note, I saw both in dock in Pompey a couple of weeks back, v impressive and all that, but it struck me how incredibly vulnerable they looked in such a setting. I understand there are police vessels on patrol when they are tied up, but it really wouldn't take that much for a determined attacker to disable one or both in a 'spectacular'. It reminds me of the AQ plot to send IEDs from the ME to Europe using international couriers, subsequently mocking our security services for missing this fairly obvious means of attack.

[Asturias56]

Back in the 1970s Time magazine published an interesting article which has stuck with me ever since. It stated that for each new generation of combat aircraft (with respect to the USA as I recall) one aircraft had cost roughly the same as a whole squadron of those it was designed to replace. The article postulated that eventually the entire defence budget would be required to purchase one new aircraft although I cannot recall the timescale it applied!


That's paraphrasing Augustine's Laws = - Norman R Augustine CEO of Martin Marietta published them in 1983
In the book, Augustine states 52 laws, one for each week of the year. - I quote:

"I will start with the cost of performance. Lord Kelvin once observed, “Large increases in cost with questionable increases in performance can be tolerated only for race horses and fancy women.” It seems that we have forgotten this advice when purchasing military hardware, new cars, and the latest electronic toys. In the days of advancing technology, it always seems to be that by waiting a little longer we can design, produce, or buy a product that is a little bit better. So the way to get nothing is to insist on waiting for everything. The high cost of performance is illustrated by Law Number XV.

Law Number XV. The last 10% of performance generates one third of the cost and two-thirds of the problems.

Managers are well aware of a similar law. Twenty percent of your employees will cause 80% of your problems.The cost of new systems follows a very predictable pattern. The per-unit cost of tactical aircraft is plotted as a function of time in Figure 1.
The cost has increased by a factor of four every decade. There is no ceiling in sight. Figures 21 and 22 in the book show a similar trend for commercial aircraft and bomber aircraft. This leads to Law Number XVI.

Law Number XVI. In the year 2054, the entire defense budget will purchase just one aircraft. The aircraft will have to be shared by the Air Force and Navy, 3.5 days each per week except for leap year, when it will be made available to the Marines for the extra day"

[Martin the Martian]

Apart from the occasional decrepit Cold War relic from Russia, there's precious little to trouble the homeland's skies. I do struggle to see what more we need, certainly nothing like the numbers we had even a decade or so ago. Personally I think the balance is more-or-less right nowadays.

Someone mentioned the two carriers. On a side-note, I saw both in dock in Pompey a couple of weeks back, v impressive and all that, but it struck me how incredibly vulnerable they looked in such a setting. I understand there are police vessels on patrol when they are tied up, but it really wouldn't take that much for a determined attacker to disable one or both in a 'spectacular'. It reminds me of the AQ plot to send IEDs from the ME to Europe using international couriers, subsequently mocking our security services for missing this fairly obvious means of attack.

Proponents of the ditch-the-RAF theory like to champion the aircraft carrier with its ability to sail anywhere in the world to defend Britain's interests yadda-yadda. Now while I do admit that the aerial threat to the UK is quite low, and agree that what we have is about right, neither would I agree that the defence of our nation is best served by sticking 24 jets on a ship and sending it out to the back end of nowhere to do some willy-waving while the combined air groups of three or four USN supercarriers undertake another urban renewal project all by themselves with us looking like the little kid running after the bigger kids shouting "wait for me!". Particularly when the rest of the surface fleet has been sold off or is short of personnel to enable such a deployment to go ahead in the first place.

[Mechta]

" if we had a minor conventional skirmish with pro-Russia or Russian forces on the fringe of Europe that lead to a small but precise retaliation of conventional cruise missiles against 2 or 3 RAF bases "

Does anyone REALLY believe that this is likely? Its a fantasy........

And TBH what effect would that have? They're not invading the UK, we can retaliate by taking back their.................... their wives,.................and kids in London.

Asturias56, you're supposed to be discouraging them!

[Rheinstorff]

" if we had a minor conventional skirmish with pro-Russia or Russian forces on the fringe of Europe that lead to a small but precise retaliation of conventional cruise missiles against 2 or 3 RAF bases "

Does anyone REALLY believe that this is likely? Its a fantasy........

And TBH what effect would that have? They're not invading the UK, we can retaliate by taking back their bank accounts, their houses, football clubs and all their wives, mistresses and kids in London - which would just about pay for the shiny new jets we'd order from BAe..

A little over 30 years ago, few thought the invasion of Kuwait very likely... The armed forces don’t exist just for what’s likely, nor are the Nation’s defences organised this way. Strategic shocks are also usually difficult to predict, otherwise they’re not shocks!

I would question the likelihood most people would have attributed to the Litvinenko and The Skripal attacks. Our judgement of the strategic value of radiological and chemical weapon terrorism by Russian elements in the U.K. against their tactical value was undoubtedly different from Russia’s. No rational government would pursue these courses of action, at least by our standards.... But then we wouldn’t have invaded Georgia, blown up our own apartment blocks to justify a war in Chechnya, annexed Crimea our sustained a conflict in Eastern Ukraine, just to cite a few examples of Russian behaviour. The Russians don’t think the way we do, and we’d be daft to believe their strategic calculus is anything like ours. When regime survival trumps everything else, all sorts of wise stuff becomes more likely.

Mirror-imaging our values and standards on the decision-making of others just makes strategic shock more likely.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

The most credible retaliation from Russia is one they think they can get away with.

If they arrive in a situation where they think they can get away with a cruise missile strike, they might. But more likely is "an accident at an RAF base" resulting in loss of assets - a bunch of burning petrol cans in the back of the AT fleet at Brize would be "implausibly deniable" enough for the Russian MO.

[henra]

.
But then we wouldn’t have invaded Libya Georgia, annexed Iraq Crimea our sustained a conflict in Syria Eastern Ukraine, just to cite a few examples of American/European Russian behaviour.

You don't have to rely on 'crazy Russia' to see that on internationjal level military power is used regularly to forward own interests (however justified they might even be from our perspective). China is massively starting to do the same. Sadly it is still part of human behaviour. If you have the power you (ab)use it. If you are too weak someone will understand this as an invitation for bullying.
And in that regard it is not only about really using Military Power but often the mere existance of an imbalance is used to do things you wouldn't do to a militarily massively superiour counterpart.
Deterrence is still THE most important capability of the Armed Forces. That is what makes me so angry about the downsizing and focussing of (all) the European Armies on asymmetric conflicts against peasant states of the last three decades. Everyone around (Russia, China, India, also the US) changed course >10 years ago. Just Europe kept sleeping.

[Fonsini]

Didn’t the Russians announce today that they would launch a nuclear missile down the bearing of any ballistic missile on a track towards Russian territory.

Russian Attack Response (https://www.aa.com.tr/en/world/non-nuclear-attack-could-trigger-nuke-response-kremlin/1934555#)

One more of these and our immigration problems would be over Norwegian Rocket Incident (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_rocket_incident#:~:text=The%20Norwegian%20rocket%2 0incident%2C%20also%20known%20as%20the,Rocket%20Range%20off% 20the%20northwestern%20coast%20of%20Norway.)

The problem isn’t invasion, it’s paranoia and a convenient button.

[henra]

Didn’t the Russians announce today that they would launch a nuclear missile down the bearing of any ballistic missile on a track towards Russian territory.
Russian Attack Response (https://www.aa.com.tr/en/world/non-nuclear-attack-could-trigger-nuke-response-kremlin/1934555#)

Hmm, I don't see what's really changed here. Incoming ballistic missiles e.g. from US to Russia (and for sure before to Soviet Union) would surely have raised the question of response probably not waiting until a nuclear mushroom arose from the Kremlin. The same applies in opposite direction. I'm quite sure the US doesn't have to wait for the Mushroom over White House before considering firing back should there be ballistic missiles incoming from a state posessing nuclear weapons.

[Asturias56]

""A little over 30 years ago, few thought the invasion of Kuwait very likely..."

well Iraq had threatened for long enough ' and of course they were right next door ' Russia is someway from the UK.......

[pr00ne]

""A little over 30 years ago, few thought the invasion of Kuwait very likely..."

well Iraq had threatened for long enough ' and of course they were right next door ' Russia is someway from the UK.......


And Iraq has claimed Kuwait as being territory belonging to it ever since the countries gained independence. As referenced earlier they had rattled swords in 1961, so there was a historical precedence.

Can't see any reason whatsoever why Russia would launch a cruise missile attack on a NATO nuclear weapon state that also has cruise missiles.

[Rheinstorff]

""A little over 30 years ago, few thought the invasion of Kuwait very likely..."

well Iraq had threatened for long enough ' and of course they were right next door ' Russia is someway from the UK.......

I’m not suggesting invasion by Russia and the notion that there is a close parallel is not implicit in what I wrote; to interpret it that way is wrong. I was merely highlighting that things which seem unlikely can happen, particularly when we choose or neglect to see situations through the potential adversary’s eyes.

The fact that Iraq had ‘threatened for long enough’ points to a habituation to the threat and a consequent failure to recognise it was real and imminent in 1990. Sometimes, what seems like sabre rattling is actually more threatening. Sometimes, risks actually materialise, and sometimes the worst case scenario - often conveniently categorised as completely implausible - becomes the reality. Two instances of Russian CBRN terrorism in the UK - and the pre-event plausibility judgements associated with them - speak for themselves.

Post-WW2 history is replete with failures to see surprises that seem a lot more inevitable with hindsight (with due regard to the fact that hindsight is 20/20, etc).

As to Russia‘s proximity to the UK, surely what that means in effect terms depends on the context? Yes, it’s always physically going to be some hundreds of Km away. That would take a lot of time for a ship to traverse, but very much less for an aircraft (or cruise missile). Does Russia feel more proximate when its ships, submarines and aircraft are close to our territory? I’d suggest it does, and we should be clear-eyed about why they are there, and so frequently, and what it tells us about the underlying motivations of the Russian regime. Its primary motivation, regime survival, which it wraps up into the domestic-audience-pleasing recovery of great power status and historic victimhood neurosis, makes for strategic calculus that does not easily align with western risk management thinking.

When we find ourselves asking questions like ‘why would a country like Russia act so obviously against its own economic interests?’ (the sort of thing that sits at the heart of western thinking), we assume that prosperity is more important than, say, national pride. Nope. There are plenty of examples where that assumption has proven wrong in other places in the past. What we see as a rational or irrational choice might appear different to someone else. Add to that the perennial risks of strategic miscalculation (Iraq did not believe an international coalition would form to eject it from Kuwait (and Saudi Arabia - let’s not forget that it seized Al Khafji too)) and things look less certain.

Additionally, when it comes to geographical proximity and claims on the territories of others, we shouldn’t lose sight of Russia being very close to some allies who probably feel Kuwait-esque, and who we are treaty-bound to assist were things to ‘go noisy’...

[Asturias56]

I'm still having trouble in visualising any meaningful scenario where a cruise missile strike against the UK on its own would make any sort of sense to the Russians??

You could convince me they might take a pop at the bases in Cyprus for example but the UK itself?? - and they'd have to be damn sure they didn't hit Fylingdales..............

[Rheinstorff]

I'm still having trouble in visualising any meaningful scenario where a cruise missile strike against the UK on its own would make any sort of sense to the Russians??

You could convince me they might take a pop at the bases in Cyprus for example but the UK itself?? - and they'd have to be damn sure they didn't hit Fylingdales..............

I too have trouble visualising it, but the point really is whether the Russians have less trouble visualising it than you and I.

[Lilaccruiser]

A former Secretary of State for Defence of my acquaintance told me that the MoD had fixed the 2% figure by including pensions and a chunk of the intelligence budget in defence spending. Whether it’s right or not to do so, his point was that in 1997, the defence budget had been 3% of GDP without them.

[POBJOY]

Its not all doom and gloom. The RAF still have a base at Kenley in good old 11 group. Poised to rise again and defend the realm as it has done twice in the past. Quite capable of operating the jumping beans, and all easily dispersed in the woods around the common. The bonus is the use of the local Surrey pubs for excellent R&R and all within striking distance of the City night life. Nothing changes in 11 group. its business as usual. Stop press NAFFI building still available for tea and buns after a sortie (as seen in Reach for the sky)

[ACW599]

Its not all doom and gloom. The RAF still have a base at Kenley in good old 11 group. Poised to rise again and defend the realm as it has done twice in the past. Quite capable of operating the jumping beans, and all easily dispersed in the woods around the common. The bonus is the use of the local Surrey pubs for excellent R&R and all within striking distance of the City night life. Nothing changes in 11 group. its business as usual. Stop press NAFFI building still available for tea and buns after a sortie (as seen in Reach for the sky)

Ah yes, but you forgot to mention reinstating the mighty Vigilants of the ATC to strike the fatal blow...

[POBJOY]

Don't tell everyone its supposd to be a secret, Vikings at Kenley (still) and drones can share the new hangar Win Win.
Wait for a special on Aug 18th !!!.

[treadigraph]

It's August 18th...

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1163/kenley_8e57e47fe1faddf4bb07ba7d5a7cc23896a7e9bd.jpg

[Rheinstorff]

It's August 18th...

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1163/kenley_8e57e47fe1faddf4bb07ba7d5a7cc23896a7e9bd.jpg
...when AC2 David Roberts won the Military Medal. Whilst under fire he downed a Dornier 17 at Kenley using the Parachute-and-Cable rocket system, its first ever successful use. He won the Military Medal for the action and ended his career as a group captain.

[Video Mixdown]

...when AC2 David Roberts won the Military Medal. Whilst under fire he downed a Dornier 17 at Kenley using the Parachute-and-Cable rocket system, its first ever successful use. He won the Military Medal for the action and ended his career as a group captain.
Indeed. This remarkable painting shows the rockets just after launch.

[POBJOY]

...when AC2 David Roberts won the Military Medal. Whilst under fire he downed a Dornier 17 at Kenley using the Parachute-and-Cable rocket system, its first ever successful use. He won the Military Medal for the action and ended his career as a group captain.

As depicted in the painting. He certainly judged it right the Dornier fell on to a cott in Golf lane but amazingly the occupants inside the cott survived, the crew did not. 111 squadron who intercepted the raid lost F LT SDP Connors (poss due to AA fire ) who was leading 111 on that day. His Hurricane came down near Biggin Hill. The Observer Corps had tracked the raid from the coast, and the Kenley station commander put the station on alert and ordered 111 off from Croydon. Being a 'very' low level raid (below 100ft) the defenders would have had little time to sight the Dorniers and David Roberts only had one chance to decide when to fire his rockets. 80 years ago today and Kenley still an RAF Station for the Cadets, with the 18th still remembered every year (plaques about individuals around the airfield this year).
One of the results of the raid was Kenley got a 'Flack Tower' south of the airfield, it is still there.

[Maxibon]

How to destroy it? Politicise it.

[Islandlad]

‪How to destroy the Royal Air Force.‬‬
Why was it formed in the place?

[pr00ne]

Islandlad,

Read some history around 1917 to 1918 and educate yourself!

[Ken Scott]

I think it’s safe to say that had Fighter Command in 1940 been part of the RFC and the RAF didn’t exist, then more fighter squadrons would have been committed to the battle in France by General Dowding or whoever was in charge, and the outcome of the BoB been slightly different.

[Timelord]

How to destroy the Royal Air Force?

I saw an official slide a while ago that stated “ Less training is better and quicker”. That seems like a pretty good start!

[POBJOY]

I think it’s safe to say that had Fighter Command in 1940 been part of the RFC and the RAF didn’t exist, then more fighter squadrons would have been committed to the battle in France by General Dowding or whoever was in charge, and the outcome of the BoB been slightly different.

Once the Germans had gone down the route of producing the Luftwaffe it needed a complete change of direction to actually defend our country. The ADGB needed a dedicated service and radical thinking to enable new technology to be incorporated into what would be a new way of waging war. Although the emerging RAF reached across the globe to assist with protecting our interests the Air defence of GB was a major part of its business hence the need to design a complete system that was ahead of its time. With experienced former Army officers looking after the tactical side, both the aircraft industry and the 'boffins' rose to the challenge of producing the tech products that would be needed. It just so happens that the RAF got some very capable leaders that put effort in to preparing for a 'new war' as opposed to what they had experienced themselves. That was the game changer that made the difference, and it had to work straight of the box so to speak as there would not have been a second chance. The fact that the system coped with a major change in circumstances shows how lucky we were to have had the best people in charge at the time.

[POBJOY]

Indeed. This remarkable painting shows the rockets just after launch.

Indeed the rockets are just getting airborne and will hit one of the damaged Dorniers in the second wave. This very expensive system has serious limitations and was used on very few occasions. Its main limitation at Kenley was the target machines would have already bombed and be on their escape route, plus it only covered one direction. Of course this was a problem for all of 11 groups airfields as they were former WW1 fields that had not been designed for defence, and had little or no underground or bunkered facilities or approach AA installations.
The hangars were the classic Belfast sheds with wooden beams and tar felt wooden roofs. It did not take much to set them ablaze and then they went up like the proverbial roman candle. The all important Ops room was basically a bungalow near the O mess and was evacuated to Caterham after this near miss event. Luckily the Luftwaffe thought Kenley was finished, but in practice its flying ground, fuel store, and ops room were serviceable and the station was never put out of action, unlike the strike force which was decimated.

[NutLoose]

https://www.kenleyrevival.org/content/new-contributions/bravery-rewarded-ac-david-g-roberts-and-kenleys-secret-weapon

shame the other guy wasn’t recognised too.

[treadigraph]

Apologies to Pobjoy for these not being posted on 18th - out all day, then was getting error messages with the uploads, how I wish I still had a copy of Photoshop available!

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/846x540/picture1_6f0e98705131ce70ae7f9f364addf458df90d670.jpg
Kenley now, seen from the SE as the Dorniers would have seeing it on their approach - albeit rather lower!

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1688x1125/picture2_d5c77dbbf4affc8ad16632578063398e50c9302f.jpg
Modern Kenley with position of buildings indicated, hangars in black

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/810x540/picture3_91783c2062accc3ac630122d56db0dd9ac4ee704.jpg
Preserved flack tower structure, above the Caterham roundabout on the A22

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x507/picture4_70c2af4b47036b481a76ac58d443b49e60556976.jpg
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/810x540/picture5_3a32cd5a73fe339a56d9c38430da8739533781e3.jpg
Type of hangars Kenley had (double Belfast), these at Old Sarum - note internal wood structure

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/811x540/picture6_cc5512bf22e8f33b40222b7321bd672558659776.jpg
Rolls Royce Derby where all the BoB Merlins were made
​
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/840x540/picture7_dbff5ed79263c25c41df05abf979924749ded8df.jpg
Rebuilt Golf Lane cottage (PAC Dornier fell on original)

Living History in your back yard! Kenley, the Surrey common that became a modern battlefield.

[POBJOY]

Well done Treads
Images 1&2 show how the Dorniers would have seen Kenley although at a lower height. The PAC installation was along the straight part of the peri track above the runway intersection.
Image 2 gives an approx. idea of what original buildings were there before the raid.
The main damage was inflicted on the left hand side of the station although one hangar survived. This side is where the medical centre was situated.
The right hand side escaped quite lightly, but suffered from authorised demolition in later years.
The parade ground and NAFFI building is still complete, and well preserved for us in scenes from Reach for the sky.
The officers mess (listed) survived the war but has been badly damaged since by arson attacks.
The original BoB ops room (behind the O Mess) also survived the war only to be demolished post war together with the main barrack blocks near the station entrance.
RAF Kenley was quite small and never extended for Jet operations (unlike the nearby Biggih Hill). The surviving double Belfast shed continued to give good service for the Cadet Gliders until 1978 when it went up in flames with all of the 615 GS equipment. However Kenley and 615 VGS are great survivors and together with 450 ATC continue to serve the Cadet movement to this day. One would not expect anything else. Pobjoy