Thanks for that Mike
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: London
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
During the invasion phase o9f OIF the RAF provided just six percent of total coalition sorties (the RAAF provided 2%) and dropped/launched 3% of munitions. So you're about ten times more liekly to see a US aircraft than an RAF one.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Preston
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't posted many times despite viewing for many, many months and I always enjoy reading the stories and banter on the site as I now relax in my back garden sipping the odd G and T after retiring from over 30 yrs of flying in Betty's aeroplanes. I had just read in my paper of the loss of 2nd Lt Johnson, Capt Eida, L/Cpl Ross and Cpl Cornish who were very brave and I've no doubt intelligent young men who are actually younger than my sons and daughters. I then read the Crass, Ignorant and thoroughly Shameful comment about soldiers intelligence from "COULD BE THE LAST" along with equally stupid comments about the Army from others on the site. Well I haven't bothered to read all the profiles but if that's the standard of "Banter" in the RAF then I'm amazed
Join Date: May 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TBSG
If you are Joe Grunt then that is exactly where you want your air power - overhead and giving the bad guys the good news. Which is why AH and GR7 are doing so well for the blokes in the 'Stan. The Army has a limited view at the lower levels for a very good reason - they are the ones with the bayonets, they are the ones being SVBIED'd all the time. They want help getting out of the sh1t.
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.
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.
GR7/9- Doing a great job with very limited assets and people, knackered pilots, poor retention (lots leaving)
F3- Like it or not it's a source of bemusement for the Army. I'm sure it's very capable, but right now it's redundant! F3 mates don't take this as a dig at you.
GR4- Why so few in the 'Deid?
Jaguar- Days to do... sadly.
Eurofighter- Brilliant, but only available at airshows.
Can we deploy more assets? Yes, but only if someone is willing to cough up a lot of extra money.
So what does the army see? A load of battered, uncomfortable AT various, usually late, getting them home to their loved ones. An air interface (movers) who predominantly don't care a toss for the throughput of passengers. A shortfall in SH hours to move vital kit around theatre in a bunch of battered uncomfortable SH various, usually late...etc. Not enough CAS on occasion when required (no slight intended on the GR mates)
It's all about effect. We don't deliver enough. Simple.
Until our fast-jet centric Lords and Masters (and some sycophantic acoloytes) learn that we need to spend some money on the 2 elements of our service which have been constantly delivering effect for 20 years, namely SH and AT, we'll never change. Two hundred Typhoons are all very well for fighting an enemy in a war we MAY fight in 20 years time (assuming Typhoo has a capability by then) but right now, WE are fighting two real wars. And, sadly, by and large, we aren't delivering the level of support we should be.
Politics? Money? Poor leadership? Who's standing up to be counted at the top levels?
As someone in a dark hole once said "Lots. And none at all."
STUK
Stick to your G n Ts..........
Crass, Ignorant and shameful tut tut tut. I think you may have been confused by the heat or the GnT. But the reading age is a fact and how you can merge that with the death of 4 very brave individuals is shameful on your part.
Stick to your G n Ts..........
Crass, Ignorant and shameful tut tut tut. I think you may have been confused by the heat or the GnT. But the reading age is a fact and how you can merge that with the death of 4 very brave individuals is shameful on your part.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Originally Posted by TBSG
If we accept that the SH force are part of the Army (as with CHF) - they do after all belong to JHC and therefore Land Command -.
As an aside, maybe pilot's wings should be issued with a black velcro circle. On graduation a small patch with the relevant Service would be applied. Once operational it would be changed to STC PTC FAA etc
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Originally Posted by TBSG
What percentage of the Harrier Force is 8 aircraft, exactly? And how many of the Joint Harrier Force are from the RN?
And I am certain that there are no GR4s in the Gulf.
So, other than RN and RAF Harriers, SH and AT, what exactly is the pointy end of the RAF doing?
And I am certain that there are no GR4s in the Gulf.
So, other than RN and RAF Harriers, SH and AT, what exactly is the pointy end of the RAF doing?
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Age: 44
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gentlmen I must say that the fact that so many of you are fighting a single service arguement is shameful.
We all should all know that the ground troops rely heavily on air power to give them the protection they deserve, the navy requires air power of a degree to deploy on ops as demonstrated with the Falklands to deploy troops, and the RAF cannot hold ground in any great quantity like the army(Withstanding the fine job of the RAF Regt).
Therefore we should all be able to accept the limitations our own service and channel our energies into educating the members of the other services, so that we can work for the benefit of the other services.
With regards to the matter of people being overstretched and available personnel for deployments, the fact is that all three services are feeling the pressure of our own inability to say no, and suffering from the age old can do attitude. Thankfully it is coming to the attention of the wider public that sooner or later the donkey is going to stop and we will not be able to dig our PM out of scrapes.
I personnally feel that the RAF is slightly overmanned in that in my experience where the Army and RN have had a certain number of people to do a job the RAF has had considerably more e.g. the harrier operated by a small crew off the back of a ship compared to a land based squadron. Now who has it right? The RAF I'm sure, but the fact is we all have to tighten our belts and we are no longer able to afford ourselves the luxury of one man doing a specific task, we all need to become multifaceted.
I reccomend to you all a book called "Lions, Donkeys and Dinosaurs" by Lewis Page. Although to be viewed with some sceptecism it provides food for thought, about the way that all three services are stuck in fighting the cold war and each other for that matter.
Until we stop the infighting and become truely joint and defend ourselves against our political masters no one will win.
Oh and by the way I am Army!
We all should all know that the ground troops rely heavily on air power to give them the protection they deserve, the navy requires air power of a degree to deploy on ops as demonstrated with the Falklands to deploy troops, and the RAF cannot hold ground in any great quantity like the army(Withstanding the fine job of the RAF Regt).
Therefore we should all be able to accept the limitations our own service and channel our energies into educating the members of the other services, so that we can work for the benefit of the other services.
With regards to the matter of people being overstretched and available personnel for deployments, the fact is that all three services are feeling the pressure of our own inability to say no, and suffering from the age old can do attitude. Thankfully it is coming to the attention of the wider public that sooner or later the donkey is going to stop and we will not be able to dig our PM out of scrapes.
I personnally feel that the RAF is slightly overmanned in that in my experience where the Army and RN have had a certain number of people to do a job the RAF has had considerably more e.g. the harrier operated by a small crew off the back of a ship compared to a land based squadron. Now who has it right? The RAF I'm sure, but the fact is we all have to tighten our belts and we are no longer able to afford ourselves the luxury of one man doing a specific task, we all need to become multifaceted.
I reccomend to you all a book called "Lions, Donkeys and Dinosaurs" by Lewis Page. Although to be viewed with some sceptecism it provides food for thought, about the way that all three services are stuck in fighting the cold war and each other for that matter.
Until we stop the infighting and become truely joint and defend ourselves against our political masters no one will win.
Oh and by the way I am Army!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Leo
Perhaps it is also that we have existed through a lengthy period of cuts and more cuts that everyone feels that they have to single-handedly justify their existence. Whilst you feel that the RAF is overmanned, there are definitely areas of the Army that could have the same charge levelled at them. 'Jointery' seems to bring with it huge degrees of infighting when the reality is quite clear - air will get you to battle and support you in it, however the Army suffers from not being able to express what they want based on what the RAF can actually provide. It's not all bad and we have some immensely capable people, but we have to stop being so vain and recognise where we all fit in. And before you ask, I work in a Joint environment, so I have plenty of opportunity to observe both sides
Perhaps it is also that we have existed through a lengthy period of cuts and more cuts that everyone feels that they have to single-handedly justify their existence. Whilst you feel that the RAF is overmanned, there are definitely areas of the Army that could have the same charge levelled at them. 'Jointery' seems to bring with it huge degrees of infighting when the reality is quite clear - air will get you to battle and support you in it, however the Army suffers from not being able to express what they want based on what the RAF can actually provide. It's not all bad and we have some immensely capable people, but we have to stop being so vain and recognise where we all fit in. And before you ask, I work in a Joint environment, so I have plenty of opportunity to observe both sides
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 Pontius Navigator
I admit to being confused by all these new fangled organisations but I thought JHC was a JOINT and not an ARMY Command. Certainly I saw in a JSP yesterday that helicopters with crew-served weapons were the responsibility of JHC whereas helicopters with integrated weapons were the responsibility of LAND.
JHC is indeed a joint organisation, but it belongs to the LAND TLB, in that it sits under the Army 4* for C2 (and therefore budgetary) considerations.
Therefore all 'green' (CHF, RAF SH and AAC) helicopters come under operational command of HQ LAND, although each service retains full command over its people - but that is another entirely different can of worms.
TBSG
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Originally Posted by TBSG
. . . each service retains full command over its people - but that is another entirely different can of worms.
TBSG
TBSG
Joke: Was asked for a copy of my TORs. Last TORs were from 'the smiling knife' at Strike, but he retired 4 years ago.
As long as Betty keeps signing the cheques 'Who cares who pays?'
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK, sometimes!
Age: 74
Posts: 436
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.
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/De...uthernIraq.htm
MadMark!!!
Last edited by Mad_Mark; 5th Aug 2006 at 06:32.
No one is doubting their contribution, it is the constant whining about the perceived overstretch when clearly there are others in the armed forces who are really stretched.
Over 200 FJ according to the RAF website.
Over 100 SH according to the RAF website.
Lots of C130
Over 200 FJ according to the RAF website.
Over 100 SH according to the RAF website.
Lots of C130
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Back in the USSR
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Leo Sayer
Gentlmen I must say that the fact that so many of you are fighting a single service arguement is shameful.
We all should all know that the ground troops rely heavily on air power to give them the protection they deserve, the navy requires air power of a degree to deploy on ops as demonstrated with the Falklands to deploy troops, and the RAF cannot hold ground in any great quantity like the army(Withstanding the fine job of the RAF Regt).
Therefore we should all be able to accept the limitations our own service and channel our energies into educating the members of the other services, so that we can work for the benefit of the other services.
With regards to the matter of people being overstretched and available personnel for deployments, the fact is that all three services are feeling the pressure of our own inability to say no, and suffering from the age old can do attitude. Thankfully it is coming to the attention of the wider public that sooner or later the donkey is going to stop and we will not be able to dig our PM out of scrapes.
I personnally feel that the RAF is slightly overmanned in that in my experience where the Army and RN have had a certain number of people to do a job the RAF has had considerably more e.g. the harrier operated by a small crew off the back of a ship compared to a land based squadron. Now who has it right? The RAF I'm sure, but the fact is we all have to tighten our belts and we are no longer able to afford ourselves the luxury of one man doing a specific task, we all need to become multifaceted.
I reccomend to you all a book called "Lions, Donkeys and Dinosaurs" by Lewis Page. Although to be viewed with some sceptecism it provides food for thought, about the way that all three services are stuck in fighting the cold war and each other for that matter.
Until we stop the infighting and become truely joint and defend ourselves against our political masters no one will win.
Oh and by the way I am Army!
We all should all know that the ground troops rely heavily on air power to give them the protection they deserve, the navy requires air power of a degree to deploy on ops as demonstrated with the Falklands to deploy troops, and the RAF cannot hold ground in any great quantity like the army(Withstanding the fine job of the RAF Regt).
Therefore we should all be able to accept the limitations our own service and channel our energies into educating the members of the other services, so that we can work for the benefit of the other services.
With regards to the matter of people being overstretched and available personnel for deployments, the fact is that all three services are feeling the pressure of our own inability to say no, and suffering from the age old can do attitude. Thankfully it is coming to the attention of the wider public that sooner or later the donkey is going to stop and we will not be able to dig our PM out of scrapes.
I personnally feel that the RAF is slightly overmanned in that in my experience where the Army and RN have had a certain number of people to do a job the RAF has had considerably more e.g. the harrier operated by a small crew off the back of a ship compared to a land based squadron. Now who has it right? The RAF I'm sure, but the fact is we all have to tighten our belts and we are no longer able to afford ourselves the luxury of one man doing a specific task, we all need to become multifaceted.
I reccomend to you all a book called "Lions, Donkeys and Dinosaurs" by Lewis Page. Although to be viewed with some sceptecism it provides food for thought, about the way that all three services are stuck in fighting the cold war and each other for that matter.
Until we stop the infighting and become truely joint and defend ourselves against our political masters no one will win.
Oh and by the way I am Army!
Only teasing...
CC
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
Op Corporate (Falklands War)?
Op Banner perhaps?
Op Banner perhaps?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
Originally Posted by serf
OK,having done a bit of research and spoken to some 'horses mouths' it would seem that some elements of the SH fleet are quite stretched.
Sorry
Sorry
Can you tell me which elements aren't so that I can ask for a posting to them?
Puma's are currently still playing silly buggers in sandy places, as are Merlins and Chinooks (in many sandy places).
What are TWA's Lynx and Gazelle's doing at the moment, other than delivering Pizza's? What about the JHC Sea Kings? Still grounded in Iraq or has the temperature dropped low enough for them to actually start the things?
Perhaps the RAF should look at how it mans detatchments - you could then have less people deployed each time to support relatively small dets.
Seems like a Fire Brigade attitude to manning and change.
Seems like a Fire Brigade attitude to manning and change.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Hyperspace...
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lots of C130
However, do you know how many are:
A) Unserviceable
B) Serviceable and already tasked elsewhere
C) Serviceable, but tasked for QRA / Standby
D) Serviceable, and available for tasking
...at any one given moment?
I can tell you with some authority that D, which can be expressed as (50-odd)-A-B-C=not alot.
Unfortunately, educating the Army about air power, and AT in particular, is rather like
