Thanks for that Mike
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NOTTINGHAM
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TBSG
Thanks for that intelligent response.
Herewith a very recent quote from a Taleban Warlord in Helmand Province: "If it was not for the presence of Air Power, the British Army would all be dead in their foxholes!"
Clearly your enemy has a better understanding of military doctrine than you do!
KNOB
And that goes for all the other KNOBs on here who are driven by their devotion to wearing khaki rather than understanding the concept of Jointery. Air Power is inherently JOINT, unlike the British Army which has no concept unless they mean joined at the hip!
KNOBs, all of them!
Back to my Morangie and it's just gone 1300!
FW
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NOTTINGHAM
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Twonston Pickle
what will the Army do now?
Just before I get a refill!
They send a vast number of majors a year to their ICSC at Shrivenham; a course which lasts as long as ACSC, fer Christ's sake! Plenty of slack there for culling!
FW
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Around
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TBSG
And I am certain that there are no GR4s in the Gulf.
And would you like to tell that to my husband and his Sqn, of whom most will be spending the festive season away from home in the desert!!!
Yes I am p*!sed!
And I am certain that there are no GR4s in the Gulf.
And would you like to tell that to my husband and his Sqn, of whom most will be spending the festive season away from home in the desert!!!
Yes I am p*!sed!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Several miles SSW of Watford Gap
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=TBSG]
And I am certain that there are no GR4s in the Gulf.
QUOTE]
Are you going to tell the MOD that their Defence Fact Sheet Detailing UK Forces on Op TELIC is wrong.
Defence Fact Sheet Detailing UK Forces on Op TELIC Scroll to the bottom
And I am certain that there are no GR4s in the Gulf.
QUOTE]
Are you going to tell the MOD that their Defence Fact Sheet Detailing UK Forces on Op TELIC is wrong.
Defence Fact Sheet Detailing UK Forces on Op TELIC Scroll to the bottom
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Between the devil and the deep blue sea
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I stand corrected on the GR4s and am happy to admit it. Not that I ever saw them when I was flying in, around and between Basrah and Al-Amarah.
However, my original gentle dig at parts of the RAF seems to have hit a few raw nerves. I stand by my point, as someone who in the last 2 years has spent more nights away from home than in it, that the FJ world is not as busy or as deployed as the Army in general, the SH forces, the AT force....
So this was not a dig at the RAF in general, there is enough of that around this forum at the best of times. I do always laugh on being lectured on jointery by the light blue - for whom joint usually = Air Power.
However, my original gentle dig at parts of the RAF seems to have hit a few raw nerves. I stand by my point, as someone who in the last 2 years has spent more nights away from home than in it, that the FJ world is not as busy or as deployed as the Army in general, the SH forces, the AT force....
So this was not a dig at the RAF in general, there is enough of that around this forum at the best of times. I do always laugh on being lectured on jointery by the light blue - for whom joint usually = Air Power.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Several miles SSW of Watford Gap
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TBSG
I stand corrected on the GR4s and am happy to admit it. Not that I ever saw them when I was flying in, around and between Basrah and Al-Amarah.
However, my original gentle dig at parts of the RAF seems to have hit a few raw nerves. I stand by my point, as someone who in the last 2 years has spent more nights away from home than in it, that the FJ world is not as busy or as deployed as the Army in general, the SH forces, the AT force....
So this was not a dig at the RAF in general, there is enough of that around this forum at the best of times. I do always laugh on being lectured on jointery by the light blue - for whom joint usually = Air Power.
However, my original gentle dig at parts of the RAF seems to have hit a few raw nerves. I stand by my point, as someone who in the last 2 years has spent more nights away from home than in it, that the FJ world is not as busy or as deployed as the Army in general, the SH forces, the AT force....
So this was not a dig at the RAF in general, there is enough of that around this forum at the best of times. I do always laugh on being lectured on jointery by the light blue - for whom joint usually = Air Power.
As for not all elements of the RAF are as busy as others - well this is true of elements all Services (not much call for MRLS in current ops). Plus some elements (including FJ) have mil ops to conduct closer to home.
Still back to work in the great purple cave...
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: UK sometimes
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not just the army at Al Amarah fella. And when I was at Abu Naji and nearby, I spoke to the GR4s a number of times as well as the AT and SH. Just because YOU didn't SEE the pointys (US and UK) doesn't mean they weren't there!
I stand corrected on the GR4s and am happy to admit it. Not that I ever saw them when I was flying in, around and between Basrah and Al-Amarah.
'Joint' begins with 'A' and ends in 'rmy'
I saw the GR4's plenty of times, usually when they were stuck on the runway after breaking down
Seriously though, what CGS meant to say was that it is easier to redeploy a frigate stuck in the med on patrol to cover Lebanon than it is to provide a deployed force.
Of course if one wanted to be a stirrer you could have the debate held in my (purple) office today. Along the lines of RAF has 4 F3's down South, 6 Harriers in the Stan and * (number not known but not high) in Qatar. Why exactly do we need upwards of 250 Tornados and 80 harriers again?
Seriously though, what CGS meant to say was that it is easier to redeploy a frigate stuck in the med on patrol to cover Lebanon than it is to provide a deployed force.
Of course if one wanted to be a stirrer you could have the debate held in my (purple) office today. Along the lines of RAF has 4 F3's down South, 6 Harriers in the Stan and * (number not known but not high) in Qatar. Why exactly do we need upwards of 250 Tornados and 80 harriers again?
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by serf
Lots of aircraft according to the RAF website (last updated Apr 21 2006 2:22pm)
220 FJ
100 SH
What are they all doing?
220 FJ
100 SH
What are they all doing?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Midlands
Age: 84
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strength of Israeli Armed Forces
125,000 soldiers + 500,000 reservists
3650 tanks
10400 APCs
620 SP guns
400+ aircraft including
200 F15 and F16
175 GA AIRCRAFT
95 attack helicopters
Mind you I bet they pay more of the GDP on defence than we do + loads of freebies or cheapies from GWB.
3650 tanks
10400 APCs
620 SP guns
400+ aircraft including
200 F15 and F16
175 GA AIRCRAFT
95 attack helicopters
Mind you I bet they pay more of the GDP on defence than we do + loads of freebies or cheapies from GWB.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TBSG- pretty sure that the GR4s are included in the ATO every time they launch. Don't you read it before you go flying in the sandpit? Or does the British Army have its own special ATO?
Perhaps the Pongos views are jaded as the only Air assets they see tend to be the non glamorous, non sexy and utterly essential stuff like A/T and C130's. They also suffer when it breaks down, and wonder why it is that the RAF is getting 232 shiny new Typhoons when it can't keep more than 15 of its predecessors deployed at once, and when it can't afford to fund the AT replacement?
Not that I've wasted days of my life suffering at the hands of the movers in the Middle East of course...
Not that I've wasted days of my life suffering at the hands of the movers in the Middle East of course...
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Between the devil and the deep blue sea
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Training Risky
I am temporarily resident at the big Purple Learning Centre in Swindonshire, and we have been discussing this exact attitude displayed by the Army. ie: they don't know, or even give a t0ss, about air power unless it's directly over their heads or taking them home.
'Joint' begins with 'A' and ends in 'rmy'
'Joint' begins with 'A' and ends in 'rmy'
One has to ask from the green viewpoint - what exactly will 232 Typhoon bring? THIS IS A RHETORICAL QUESTION AND NOT DESIGNED TO DISAPPEAR DOWN A RABBIT HOLE OFTEN VISITED IN THIS FORUM!
Anyway, anyone can list the roles of Air Power from the doctrinal publications. No-one has actually yet agreed (or stated) what the pointy ones are doing - less 8 GR7 in AFG, F3 in FI and some GR4a in Qatar. How about the other 200?
Goldcup - any time we wanted FJ presence over Al Amarah, the USAF came along. Don't know why them and not RAF. Maybe that was only when I was there.
Goldcup - any time we wanted FJ presence over Al Amarah, the USAF came along. Don't know why them and not RAF. Maybe that was only when I was there.[/QUOTE]
Probably because the USAF has a darn sight more assets based nearer to Al Amarah than 6 GR4s based in Qatar, which don't have a 2 hour transit each way. Not to mention their good number of Al Udeid based stuff which does.
Then you have the USMC CAS based at Al Asad IINM?
Plus a CVN in the Arabian Gulf with around 48 F/A-18s on board.
I think I can see why you got US rather than RAF....
Probably because the USAF has a darn sight more assets based nearer to Al Amarah than 6 GR4s based in Qatar, which don't have a 2 hour transit each way. Not to mention their good number of Al Udeid based stuff which does.
Then you have the USMC CAS based at Al Asad IINM?
Plus a CVN in the Arabian Gulf with around 48 F/A-18s on board.
I think I can see why you got US rather than RAF....
Cunning Artificer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 76
Posts: 3,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
66 years on and the argument is still the same.
Here's the Allies first true "Joint Operation" - Operation Dynamo or 'Dunkirk' as it more commonly known...
and
In fact RAF squadrons supporting Operation Dynamo had carried out 171 reconnaissance, 651 bombing, and 2,739 fighter sorties and had suffered 177 aircraft destroyed or seriously damaged including 107 fighters and 87 pilots, leaving Fighter Command with just 331 serviceable fighters to defend the homeland.
What's Dunkirk got to do with it? Well, "Just because you can't see them, doesn't mean they're not there."
Per Ardua Ad Astra. With emphasis on the Ardua.
Here's the Allies first true "Joint Operation" - Operation Dynamo or 'Dunkirk' as it more commonly known...
Subjected to an utterly exhausting and terrifying experience, our soldiers and sailors returned home with a single question on their lips—'Where was the R.A.F.?'
...rather it told them that they could have held the enemy on the ground if only the Royal Air Force had played its part in the air.
What's Dunkirk got to do with it? Well, "Just because you can't see them, doesn't mean they're not there."
Per Ardua Ad Astra. With emphasis on the Ardua.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[/qoute] Probably because the USAF has a darn sight more assets based nearer to Al Amarah than 6 GR4s based in Qatar, which don't have a 2 hour transit each way. Not to mention their good number of Al Udeid based stuff which does.
Then you have the USMC CAS based at Al Asad IINM?
Plus a CVN in the Arabian Gulf with around 48 F/A-18s on board.
I think I can see why you got US rather than RAF....[/QUOTE]
The emphasis above should actually be on the difference in numbers of ac deployed US v RAF, as the GR4s (not GR4as) are covering the whole area, regardless of transit time.
Then you have the USMC CAS based at Al Asad IINM?
Plus a CVN in the Arabian Gulf with around 48 F/A-18s on board.
I think I can see why you got US rather than RAF....
[/QUOTE]The emphasis above should actually be on the difference in numbers of ac deployed US v RAF, as the GR4s (not GR4as) are covering the whole area, regardless of transit time.