The future of the RAF is.........
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The future of the RAF is.........
Army! 
Heard a nasty rumour (from a reliable source however) that a current study is being conducted to absorb the RAF into the Army within 15 years!
Nothing against the pongos, but I for one have NO intention of staying in if this goes ahead. Any thoughts.....?
Heard a nasty rumour (from a reliable source however) that a current study is being conducted to absorb the RAF into the Army within 15 years!
Nothing against the pongos, but I for one have NO intention of staying in if this goes ahead. Any thoughts.....?
Back to that 'save money by having the same ranks and uniforms' thing we had bandied about a few years back, as well as cutting down on ivory tower dwellers.
No offence to the pongos but it wouldn't work.
No offence to the pongos but it wouldn't work.
Purple??
When will Brain Porridge and CAS start standing up for the oldest Air Force in the world and stop using civvie MBAs to run the military?!?! Civvie "best practice" ( ) does not mean it will work for the military. Several hundred years of warfighting/peacekeeping should mean that "military best practice" is equally well valued!
When will Brain Porridge and CAS start standing up for the oldest Air Force in the world and stop using civvie MBAs to run the military?!?! Civvie "best practice" (
) does not mean it will work for the military. Several hundred years of warfighting/peacekeeping should mean that "military best practice" is equally well valued!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anything to save money!!
It would not work, its not worked for anyone else thats tried it.
It would be a very quick way to get the strenght of the RAF from 42,000 to 0 thought!!!! I dont know many people who would hang around for that!
It would not work, its not worked for anyone else thats tried it.
It would be a very quick way to get the strenght of the RAF from 42,000 to 0 thought!!!! I dont know many people who would hang around for that!
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: TheDarkSide
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hardly a surprising concept.
Consider - Tpt fleet effectively funded by the Army vote.
BH funded by the Army - Less a few yellow canaries and a few senior helitaxis at Northholt, all other RAF helicopters under JHC - part of LAND Command (Army) or DSF (Army).
By default therefore most of TSW supports the Army direct.
Griffon in Cyprus supports SBA's (et al Army), de-facto SAR role is merely a sideshow. 412 of 60 Sqn is funded by the Adjutant General - thats an Army appointment.
All CAS effectively supports Army units (Cdo Bde considered Army for Ops purposes).
SHORAD & VSHORAD now fully under Royal Artillery (Army unit) control - RAF only provides FIND function.
Sentinal R1 - Army funded and tasked. Less the aircraft handling / engineering bit..operationally commanded by an Army officer!
AAC (Army unit) has responsibility for airworthiness of all UAV, to include Watchkeeper.
RIC supports the Army in NI.
The Royal Signals (Army unit) provide all tactical / theatre communications for CAS / BH and Tac Tpt.
The Royal Engineers (Army unit) build /repair runways
The Royal Logistic Corps (Army unit) provide all 2nd line fuel for deployed units. Also Air Despatchers, Load Riggers etc.
The Army currently operates more rotary aircraft than the RAF and FAA combined - with a fraction of the manpower and costs!
The "oldest Air Force" was an Army unit from 1911 - 1918, with Army badges of rank. The first CAS was an ex-Army Major. Upavon (the true home of the RAF) is now an Army barracks, as are most ex-RAF bases.
Most other RAF functions are now joint - Logistics DLO, Transport Trg - DSMT, Joint NBC Regt, Basic Technical Trg - Cosford, DHFS, JEFTS. Communications - DCISS Blandford Forum. Service Police Centre in bound.
Not an exhaustive list..but you get the point.
Oh..must not forget the MR boys..but they really support Fleet!
That leaves a few pointy things at Leeming / Leuchars, a few trainers, a lack lustre Display Team, couple of R1's and tankers.
So..some bean counter looking hard at the junior service to perhaps wrap it up into some larger Defence Force.is hardly surprising. What is surprising is with the enormous histrorical connections, requirement for direct support and funding given to the RAF by the Army, is how poor the RAF is at understanding how the Army works
Consider - Tpt fleet effectively funded by the Army vote.
BH funded by the Army - Less a few yellow canaries and a few senior helitaxis at Northholt, all other RAF helicopters under JHC - part of LAND Command (Army) or DSF (Army).
By default therefore most of TSW supports the Army direct.
Griffon in Cyprus supports SBA's (et al Army), de-facto SAR role is merely a sideshow. 412 of 60 Sqn is funded by the Adjutant General - thats an Army appointment.
All CAS effectively supports Army units (Cdo Bde considered Army for Ops purposes).
SHORAD & VSHORAD now fully under Royal Artillery (Army unit) control - RAF only provides FIND function.
Sentinal R1 - Army funded and tasked. Less the aircraft handling / engineering bit..operationally commanded by an Army officer!
AAC (Army unit) has responsibility for airworthiness of all UAV, to include Watchkeeper.
RIC supports the Army in NI.
The Royal Signals (Army unit) provide all tactical / theatre communications for CAS / BH and Tac Tpt.
The Royal Engineers (Army unit) build /repair runways
The Royal Logistic Corps (Army unit) provide all 2nd line fuel for deployed units. Also Air Despatchers, Load Riggers etc.
The Army currently operates more rotary aircraft than the RAF and FAA combined - with a fraction of the manpower and costs!
The "oldest Air Force" was an Army unit from 1911 - 1918, with Army badges of rank. The first CAS was an ex-Army Major. Upavon (the true home of the RAF) is now an Army barracks, as are most ex-RAF bases.
Most other RAF functions are now joint - Logistics DLO, Transport Trg - DSMT, Joint NBC Regt, Basic Technical Trg - Cosford, DHFS, JEFTS. Communications - DCISS Blandford Forum. Service Police Centre in bound.
Not an exhaustive list..but you get the point.
Oh..must not forget the MR boys..but they really support Fleet!
That leaves a few pointy things at Leeming / Leuchars, a few trainers, a lack lustre Display Team, couple of R1's and tankers.
So..some bean counter looking hard at the junior service to perhaps wrap it up into some larger Defence Force.is hardly surprising. What is surprising is with the enormous histrorical connections, requirement for direct support and funding given to the RAF by the Army, is how poor the RAF is at understanding how the Army works
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't be averse to wearing CS95 as my routine daily garb, nor would I complain about a change to the name of my rank. The important issues such as force structure, command and control, etc, probably wouldn't change much anyway. CAOC is CAOC, PJHQ will still be PJHQ with the intentions of putting the right people in the right jobs. An airfield stn cdr on posting would never then be put in charge of a corps of main battle tanks. A colonel will never be put in charge of an airfield operating ISTAR assets, although there would be an element of ground forces stationed at that unit for good reason.
There would be some savings made in terms of personnel management, although JPA is already taking care of that issue anyway. Geting rid of regimental/RAF dress codes will also save money, but when we consider the costs of building and maintaining ships, aircraft and tanks, the savings to be made by "integration for presentation" is negligible at best.
There would be some savings made in terms of personnel management, although JPA is already taking care of that issue anyway. Geting rid of regimental/RAF dress codes will also save money, but when we consider the costs of building and maintaining ships, aircraft and tanks, the savings to be made by "integration for presentation" is negligible at best.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: troon
Age: 61
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, I've been known to bash the Crabs in the past but this is sheer lunacy....
Put the JFH,MPA and SAR in the hands of the WAFU's
Put JHC (Yes all of it!) under direct control of the Pongoes
Leave the rest with the crabs - its what they know and what they're good at.
Therefore
1/ No more winging about going to sea
2/ Less winging about detached duties in far off places
3/ As a result of 1/ & 2/ therefore not so much people signing the line to get out, therefore money saved on recruitment and training.
4/ Smaller number of people = Smaller number of Airships and staff (One would hope)
5/ Spotty youths will still have a choice of 3 services.
... For those of you of the dark - blue persuasion who also wish to cite "Tradition" or lack of it in the RAF. I would have to strongly disagree. In the relatively short time they've been around they have proportionaly as much to celebrate as the other two services.
... The WAFU's have Taranto Night. Why don't the Crabs have BofB Night????
(GOD! I never thought i'd end up defending the RAF, But there you go, just shows that you can really surprise yourself sometimes
)
Al
Put the JFH,MPA and SAR in the hands of the WAFU's
Put JHC (Yes all of it!) under direct control of the Pongoes
Leave the rest with the crabs - its what they know and what they're good at.
Therefore
1/ No more winging about going to sea
2/ Less winging about detached duties in far off places
3/ As a result of 1/ & 2/ therefore not so much people signing the line to get out, therefore money saved on recruitment and training.
4/ Smaller number of people = Smaller number of Airships and staff (One would hope)
5/ Spotty youths will still have a choice of 3 services.
... For those of you of the dark - blue persuasion who also wish to cite "Tradition" or lack of it in the RAF. I would have to strongly disagree. In the relatively short time they've been around they have proportionaly as much to celebrate as the other two services.
... The WAFU's have Taranto Night. Why don't the Crabs have BofB Night????
(GOD! I never thought i'd end up defending the RAF, But there you go, just shows that you can really surprise yourself sometimes
)Al
Well its allways been on the cards. Labour plans this by stealth just like their 66 tax rises that have hit us thus far (but the basic rate of income tax has remained the same!!)
JPA is the newest cr@p on the scene to go with JHF,JATEU and all the other Jointeries...It was only a matter of time before the fine elected members started looking at all this 'Joint' stuff and thinking.."Hmmm all this Jointery gives cause for a common and single 'Defence Force' what?"
The pensions will be next, when Brown gets his ways and powers.. we will face the axe like the civil service but the MP's will be immune!
JPA is the newest cr@p on the scene to go with JHF,JATEU and all the other Jointeries...It was only a matter of time before the fine elected members started looking at all this 'Joint' stuff and thinking.."Hmmm all this Jointery gives cause for a common and single 'Defence Force' what?"
The pensions will be next, when Brown gets his ways and powers.. we will face the axe like the civil service but the MP's will be immune!
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Shefford, Beds, UK
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some of the previous points have missed the mark (slightly). To one degree or another all three Services support 'Land' operations in the sense that to command influence over a region you have to physically occupy it (boots on the ground etc). The question of supporting it therefore is not that we do it, but how it is done and the uniquely technical nature of the Service. Just before everyone hits me with, there’s ‘high tech’ in the other Services as well comments, I’m talking about it being the rule not the exception.
How often have you been in briefings in a joint environment to be lambasted by the brown jobs over the length of time it takes to execute an ATO or its ‘inflexibility’? Try asking the question as to the planning time required to get a brigade moving - it’s the same as an ATO – and just as inflexible due to similar logistical and physical constraints.
I would be utterly useless in charge of an Army unit or element of a ship – I leave that to the experts in their field. Why then, is it considered that running the Royal Air Force is a piece of cake and can be performed by anyone that’s completed Sandhurst with equal efficiency to the air experts?
How often have you been in briefings in a joint environment to be lambasted by the brown jobs over the length of time it takes to execute an ATO or its ‘inflexibility’? Try asking the question as to the planning time required to get a brigade moving - it’s the same as an ATO – and just as inflexible due to similar logistical and physical constraints.
I would be utterly useless in charge of an Army unit or element of a ship – I leave that to the experts in their field. Why then, is it considered that running the Royal Air Force is a piece of cake and can be performed by anyone that’s completed Sandhurst with equal efficiency to the air experts?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Up North
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
... The WAFU's have Taranto Night. Why don't the Crabs have BofB Night????
The Army and the Navy have certain requirements and interests built up over centuries of warfighting. They are unlikely to care about vast volumes of airspace, air transport, air-air refuelling or long-range air defence as these have little direct impact on their operations. It would cause an enormous amount of expense and pain to carve up the RAF cake and allocate slices to the other services. So it won't happen.
BTW I heard the Army were ditching CS95 in garrison and moving back to barrack dress, because of wear and tear.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: troon
Age: 61
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You don't hear the harrier force whinging about going to sea, it gives them a chance to show the FAA how it's done!!!
....er no mate - You don't hear them winging because they're either (a) At sea where the fish heads couldn't give a rats @rse about what they say or (b) Too busy filling out their requests to PVR
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Over the rainbow
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JOINTERY
It would appear that we are now a step further on the way to having only one service. Now that the Review of the Service Discipline System (Their will be only one system instead of the current three) has been announced, it should pave the way for joined-up forces. We already have RAF/RN working together on Harrier, RAF techies now being posted to Army helicoptor units and the Army massing in great numbers on 5 Squadron at Waddington (Amongst other mixed up units). How long have the individual services left to go their own way? Not long I fear. Tony and his chums, who know nothing of Service ethos, will do for everyone in the end.
