GR7s for Kandahar
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Henley
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GR7s for Kandahar
MoD has just announced that we are sending six GR7s to Kandahar to support southern operations, the Yanks having pulled out some AD8Bs.
Not fishing, just informing!
Not fishing, just informing!
Last edited by micksmith; 25th Aug 2004 at 16:12.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Crossing Charlie
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MANNING RATIOS
Nothing new there figures from GW 1 much the same:
AAC 44 hels sub 500 pers (rate capped) comd by Lt Col
RAF less than 25 hels if memory serves over 1000 pers comd by Gp Capt
FAA 8-10 SK similar nos to Bosnia comd by Lt Cdr
Don't bother with the old 3 shifts 24 hours a day arguements I know for a fact that FAA and AAC managed 24 hours a day tasking with thier levels of manpower.
Plenty of headroom for a few cuts there
Low Ball
AAC 44 hels sub 500 pers (rate capped) comd by Lt Col
RAF less than 25 hels if memory serves over 1000 pers comd by Gp Capt
FAA 8-10 SK similar nos to Bosnia comd by Lt Cdr
Don't bother with the old 3 shifts 24 hours a day arguements I know for a fact that FAA and AAC managed 24 hours a day tasking with thier levels of manpower.
Plenty of headroom for a few cuts there
Low Ball
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The 24th & a Half Century
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
7 Posts
Think you will find after initiall set up the number will reduce to 250 persons for around 9 months at present...but again it is a large number of personnel compared to the rotary world and even what was at Incirlik......
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Lincs
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From my experience, this number (which is surprisingly large) will also include a Tac FP HQ (used to be called Tac STO), a flt of Regt Gunners, QRF etc. Ever the opportunists, the RAF Regt have cornered the market on this one and shout down anyone who disagrees....despite the fact that Khandahar has been an established base for at least two years...
I was on a deployment where the FP staff numbered 1/3 of the total strength...self licking lollipop anyone?
I think you'll find that the actual flying squadron manning establishment is a fraction of those deploying.
SBG
I was on a deployment where the FP staff numbered 1/3 of the total strength...self licking lollipop anyone?I think you'll find that the actual flying squadron manning establishment is a fraction of those deploying.
SBG
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 6 miles 14
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking at it a GR7 sqn has roughly 12 ac and around 150 people so I guess the actual squadron guys will number between 60 and 80. Not quite the 300+ mark but as has been said the you still need medics ATC supply etc etc.
Last edited by HOODED; 26th Aug 2004 at 22:29.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Lincs
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lot less, I would guess! Not needing a Regt Field Sqn to defend the base at AUD would be a start, and all catering at AUD is, I believe US-provided (although there were RAF Chefs and stewards deployed there during TELIC Ph III).
Hard to compare the two because AAS was much more of a 'stand-alone' detachment whereas the det at AUD relies more heavily on life support from the US.
SBG
Hard to compare the two because AAS was much more of a 'stand-alone' detachment whereas the det at AUD relies more heavily on life support from the US.
SBG
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England
Age: 52
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been there over a few months and since the MEU left, almost on mass, it has been a bit quiet. It'll be nice to get some company that speaks english!!!!!!
There is 1 RAF ac based at Kabul that manages to operate V well without any admin/ops support apart from a CP team,2 armourers and 2 engineers. Total pers less than 15. Does this tell you something?
The BX is good but the BK and the North Face shop are better.
Top buy - LED headtorch (£6)
Bon chance in the land of the poppy.
There is 1 RAF ac based at Kabul that manages to operate V well without any admin/ops support apart from a CP team,2 armourers and 2 engineers. Total pers less than 15. Does this tell you something?
The BX is good but the BK and the North Face shop are better.
Top buy - LED headtorch (£6)
Bon chance in the land of the poppy.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whipping Boy's SATCO, ref your question how many men would be required to support 6 Apache. It depends how often you would like the aircraft to fly and how reliable you would like the weapons launch to be.
If you say not often and don't care, then roughly 10-15 tech's (greeny & blacky mix 60/40) 7 groundcrew between 2 a/c.
If you say fly when needed and weapons need to be 100%, then the AAC woould need as much support as a GR7 Sqn. Problem is they won't get, but the expectation won't be any less! Fatigue will be twice as much though!
Rip what you like out of the Crabs, cos it really is a great sport. I tell you what, they laugh last, and longest. They always have!
If you say not often and don't care, then roughly 10-15 tech's (greeny & blacky mix 60/40) 7 groundcrew between 2 a/c.
If you say fly when needed and weapons need to be 100%, then the AAC woould need as much support as a GR7 Sqn. Problem is they won't get, but the expectation won't be any less! Fatigue will be twice as much though!
Rip what you like out of the Crabs, cos it really is a great sport. I tell you what, they laugh last, and longest. They always have!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps WEBF or Navaleye could enlighten us on how much manpower would be involved if the GR7s were deployed on Invincible or the Ark in the Arabian Sea? Please include all ships' crews (not forgetting the attendant frigates, oilers, storeships, minesweepers) and the AAR support that would undoubtedly be needed to provide reasonable endurance over the operational area?
Wondered how long it would take for that to be said.....
FV- Well done for NOT comparing like with like.
What if.....
1. There was no established base there and it had to be build from scratch, all the protection and infrastructure was the responsibilty of UK Forces, as well as the aiircraft. How many personel would THAT need?
Then we would be comparing like with like.
2. There were no land bases anywhere near?
3. What if Pakistan had refused use of there airspace post 9/11? Would the US just have accepted it, or would they have fought there way through?
4. If 3 had happened, and presuming there were air to air combats, would the destruction of the UK's air defence capabilities over the last couple of years (loss of two Tornado F3 units, early retirement of the Sea Harrier) still have taken place?
Why has this thread turne into another inter service slanging match?
FV- Well done for NOT comparing like with like.
What if.....
1. There was no established base there and it had to be build from scratch, all the protection and infrastructure was the responsibilty of UK Forces, as well as the aiircraft. How many personel would THAT need?
Then we would be comparing like with like.
2. There were no land bases anywhere near?
3. What if Pakistan had refused use of there airspace post 9/11? Would the US just have accepted it, or would they have fought there way through?
4. If 3 had happened, and presuming there were air to air combats, would the destruction of the UK's air defence capabilities over the last couple of years (loss of two Tornado F3 units, early retirement of the Sea Harrier) still have taken place?
Why has this thread turne into another inter service slanging match?