Orion 08
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Hampshire
Age: 62
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Orion 08
The RN is sending HMS Illustrious to the Indian Ocean and Far East this month leading a small RN task group. This will form the core of a multi national deployment with French, Spanish and US ships joining in.
My question is- with the "Naval Strike Wing" in Helmand since October, whose Harriers will fly from Lusty? Are any of the three RAF squadrons going along, or will she be showing off Spanish Harriers again?
cheers
Sunk
My question is- with the "Naval Strike Wing" in Helmand since October, whose Harriers will fly from Lusty? Are any of the three RAF squadrons going along, or will she be showing off Spanish Harriers again?
cheers
Sunk
This deployment was also discussed on this thread.
If the Sea Harrier was still in service (discussed here) we wouldn't be in this situation where we struggle to find jets to embark. It would also make the task goup more impressive.
At least they will have six Merlins, the first time that number have been deployed together.
If the Sea Harrier was still in service (discussed here) we wouldn't be in this situation where we struggle to find jets to embark. It would also make the task goup more impressive.
At least they will have six Merlins, the first time that number have been deployed together.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Red Red Back to Bed
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hardly a Jolly ......
F n F ...... If you knew anything about the deployment, which I doubt, you would realise although not directly in the line of fire as so many others are, it will still be hard work for all concerned.
When she returns Lusty will have done something like 240 days away over the preceeding year, which I would hazard is at least on a par if not a lot more than any of our light blue bretheren. As for L J R's comment, just shows how naive he or she is
.
Details of which Squadrons are embarking and when should not really be discussed here Sunk, unless they are released in the open press. I notice you are involved in a similiar thread on the warships forum.
When she returns Lusty will have done something like 240 days away over the preceeding year, which I would hazard is at least on a par if not a lot more than any of our light blue bretheren. As for L J R's comment, just shows how naive he or she is
.Details of which Squadrons are embarking and when should not really be discussed here Sunk, unless they are released in the open press. I notice you are involved in a similiar thread on the warships forum.
Suspicion breeds confidence
Oggin,
I think the question was more along the lines of "Are their going to be any UK Harriers?" than than which ones.
Don't expect much of a fixed wing airgroup if she's away for 6 months.
I think the question was more along the lines of "Are their going to be any UK Harriers?" than than which ones.
Don't expect much of a fixed wing airgroup if she's away for 6 months.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oggin, when someone joins the Navy don't they expect to spend lots of time away on ships/boats, isn't that a fundamental aspect of job?
I'm not realy interested in interservice sniping, granted 240 days for one deployment sounds tough, but most of us are breaching harmony figures and have been for many years.
I'm not realy interested in interservice sniping, granted 240 days for one deployment sounds tough, but most of us are breaching harmony figures and have been for many years.
Pointless thread by a PR obsessed RN.
But it was started by SaN, not the RN! As for pointless, you could say that about most PPRuNe threads if they don't interest you!
Illustrious and her group will be taking part in Maritime Security Operations, which ARE part of the war on terror.
But it was started by SaN, not the RN! As for pointless, you could say that about most PPRuNe threads if they don't interest you!
Illustrious and her group will be taking part in Maritime Security Operations, which ARE part of the war on terror.
I spent 11 weeks on illustrious as part of the 'war on terror' several years ago.
As far as I could tell, we floated a round a bit showing willing. Not exactly war winning stuff.
As soon as British Military assistance was requested (by that point aboard Ocean) The CH47 flew off, and the RM were disembarked at the nearest port that would accept them.
Ocean and the CHF contribution floated home. Only the RN would send a Naval task force to a landlocked country....or is Singapore getting a bit out of hand?
As far as I could tell, we floated a round a bit showing willing. Not exactly war winning stuff.
As soon as British Military assistance was requested (by that point aboard Ocean) The CH47 flew off, and the RM were disembarked at the nearest port that would accept them.
Ocean and the CHF contribution floated home. Only the RN would send a Naval task force to a landlocked country....or is Singapore getting a bit out of hand?
"If the Sea Harrier was still in service (discussed here) we wouldn't be in this situation where we struggle to find jets to embark. It would also make the task goup more impressive."
The reason that there wouldn't have been a struggle is that you'd have had surplus jets floating around that didn't have a real job of work to do. A jet that might have been worth keeping on 'just in case' and for contingencies, but that could not be justified in today's harsh financial climate.
Today's naval aviators don't have time for pointless, lengthy, flag waving jollies on the boat just at the moment, any more than do their RAF colleagues in JFH, because, having binned the Jag, failed to exploit F3's A-G/SEAD/recce capabilities and failed to bring forward Typhoon's A-G capabilities quickly enough, the Harrier force has a real war-fighting job to do - a job which is, incidentally, more important than making a f*cking task group "look more impressive".
And a task that the sole RN Harrier squadron is doing rather well, adding to its laurels, and proving rather more 'essential' than it did for most of its time flying your beloved SHars.
Air-to-mud from land-based airfields may not be as glamorous as air-to-air from a carrier, but it is what is needed now.
The reason that there wouldn't have been a struggle is that you'd have had surplus jets floating around that didn't have a real job of work to do. A jet that might have been worth keeping on 'just in case' and for contingencies, but that could not be justified in today's harsh financial climate.
Today's naval aviators don't have time for pointless, lengthy, flag waving jollies on the boat just at the moment, any more than do their RAF colleagues in JFH, because, having binned the Jag, failed to exploit F3's A-G/SEAD/recce capabilities and failed to bring forward Typhoon's A-G capabilities quickly enough, the Harrier force has a real war-fighting job to do - a job which is, incidentally, more important than making a f*cking task group "look more impressive".
And a task that the sole RN Harrier squadron is doing rather well, adding to its laurels, and proving rather more 'essential' than it did for most of its time flying your beloved SHars.
Air-to-mud from land-based airfields may not be as glamorous as air-to-air from a carrier, but it is what is needed now.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Task Group
Typical response from the journo..
Yes the Harriers are doing a good job in Stan, but the UK should also be able to afford to properly protect a task group going East.
Yes the Harriers are doing a good job in Stan, but the UK should also be able to afford to properly protect a task group going East.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Hampshire
Age: 62
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, I'm not a "PR obsessed RN" person. I have no connection with the RN whatsoever- just an interested layman/taxpayer.
The ignorance displayed by some posters here is breathtaking, as is the prejudice against the RN.
I'll know better than to ask a simple question in future.
Cheers lads- covered yourselves in glory, well done.
The ignorance displayed by some posters here is breathtaking, as is the prejudice against the RN.
I'll know better than to ask a simple question in future.
Cheers lads- covered yourselves in glory, well done.
As I type this there are 19 entries on this thread.
4 from Sunk at Narvik - an RN interested layman.
3 from two other ex naval civillians, presumably still interested in the RN
3 from a current naval aviator, presumably interested in the RN.
That leaves 9 entries from people whose background I am not totally familiar with. No doubt these are the people who are 'covering themselves with glory' and 'prejudice against the RN'. Well I do know that one of those contributors is on SH, and regularly in a sandy place - covering himself in glory, or no doubt as he would say, just doing his job. These people are busy fighting one of the two wars we are currently engaged in, and not too fussed about what sits on a naval carrier on what they consider a jaunt to the Far East (would you like to post a list of the proposed port visits, both locations and dates - I realise it is probably not widely available for security reasons, but I bet it is quite impressive!). In the same way that if you walked into a pub in most Army towns and talked to some soldiers about the lack of carrier avaition they wouldn't be too fussed.
Maybe as members of the armed services we should be more bothered about deficiencies in our brother services, but most of us are too busy dealing with the deficiencies in our own on a day to day basis. I would suggest that you may have the luxury of having the time, energy, and dare I say passion to worry about the subjects close to your hearts, such as the state of the RN, but kindly don't be surprised if most non RN service people elect to devote their spare energies elsewhere!
4 from Sunk at Narvik - an RN interested layman.
3 from two other ex naval civillians, presumably still interested in the RN
3 from a current naval aviator, presumably interested in the RN.
That leaves 9 entries from people whose background I am not totally familiar with. No doubt these are the people who are 'covering themselves with glory' and 'prejudice against the RN'. Well I do know that one of those contributors is on SH, and regularly in a sandy place - covering himself in glory, or no doubt as he would say, just doing his job. These people are busy fighting one of the two wars we are currently engaged in, and not too fussed about what sits on a naval carrier on what they consider a jaunt to the Far East (would you like to post a list of the proposed port visits, both locations and dates - I realise it is probably not widely available for security reasons, but I bet it is quite impressive!). In the same way that if you walked into a pub in most Army towns and talked to some soldiers about the lack of carrier avaition they wouldn't be too fussed.
Maybe as members of the armed services we should be more bothered about deficiencies in our brother services, but most of us are too busy dealing with the deficiencies in our own on a day to day basis. I would suggest that you may have the luxury of having the time, energy, and dare I say passion to worry about the subjects close to your hearts, such as the state of the RN, but kindly don't be surprised if most non RN service people elect to devote their spare energies elsewhere!