Extra FJ for Afghanistan
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 1,360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Sadly we're in an age of very small numbers of assets. If you want to adhere to 'harmony' then 1/5th of your assets is your ceiling"
Harmony, harmony.....good grief
We have been breaking harmony f@cking guidelines for over two years with no end to that in sight, and with 33% of our fleet permanantly deployed along with air and ground crews to support we bl@@dy dream of maintaining harmony and your stated asset ceiling
all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced
Harmony, harmony.....good grief
We have been breaking harmony f@cking guidelines for over two years with no end to that in sight, and with 33% of our fleet permanantly deployed along with air and ground crews to support we bl@@dy dream of maintaining harmony and your stated asset ceiling
all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not my asset ceiling. I didn't even say it was right, or defensible. Neither did i deny that other communities were having to break it time and again. But you are right, i did state it.
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
So it's down to one of two possibilities.
1) The planners on the mission did not forecast the required amount of CAS, and so the ground forces have been left exposed, or
2) The planners did forecast the required amount of CAS, but couldn't have it as it because someone veto'ed it.
So which is it?
1) The planners on the mission did not forecast the required amount of CAS, and so the ground forces have been left exposed, or
2) The planners did forecast the required amount of CAS, but couldn't have it as it because someone veto'ed it.
So which is it?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 1,360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies for the abruptness of my post Orca but if harmony has anything to do with FJ numbers in theatre then I really will have heard it all
all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced
all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No offence taken in the slightest - especially from your community. Perhaps i would have been more correct to state simply that i believe the fixed wing assets are being managed for the long haul, not the short.
I completely appreciate that this not might be right in the opinion of other communities, especially those working their fingers to the bone in the same theatre. It's just what i think is happening.
Repeat my complete respect for those out doing the job. As our Out Brief used to end "Godspeed".
I completely appreciate that this not might be right in the opinion of other communities, especially those working their fingers to the bone in the same theatre. It's just what i think is happening.
Repeat my complete respect for those out doing the job. As our Out Brief used to end "Godspeed".
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: purple academy
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a whole Harrier?
Let me see if I have this right...
The dilution level of 'managers' to aeroplanes is now so ludicrous that we need the SoS for Defence to announce the movement of one aeroplane. No doubt the mission was authorised by CAS, briefed by CinC Strike, and flown by the AOC! I bet the team of 4 Gp Capt crewchiefs...
How many AirMarshals? How many aeroplanes?
Could this be the result of the military's recent breaks through in holistic systems approach thinking and 'whole life, whole system' systems engineering paradigm shift inspired management techniques, best exemplified by the startling improvements in force multiplication strategies (incorporating lean, just in time asset management whilst retaing sufficient surge capability to ramp up equipment capability before drawing down to maintain peace support operations for many hot places for many, many years) recently demonstrated in the, er, em - well if you are not in step with these solutions you are part of the problem.
You couldn't make this farce up - you would be sectioned, as should most of the technophobe intellectual dynamos of the new systems generation!
And Jesus wept!
The dilution level of 'managers' to aeroplanes is now so ludicrous that we need the SoS for Defence to announce the movement of one aeroplane. No doubt the mission was authorised by CAS, briefed by CinC Strike, and flown by the AOC! I bet the team of 4 Gp Capt crewchiefs...
How many AirMarshals? How many aeroplanes?
Could this be the result of the military's recent breaks through in holistic systems approach thinking and 'whole life, whole system' systems engineering paradigm shift inspired management techniques, best exemplified by the startling improvements in force multiplication strategies (incorporating lean, just in time asset management whilst retaing sufficient surge capability to ramp up equipment capability before drawing down to maintain peace support operations for many hot places for many, many years) recently demonstrated in the, er, em - well if you are not in step with these solutions you are part of the problem.
You couldn't make this farce up - you would be sectioned, as should most of the technophobe intellectual dynamos of the new systems generation!
And Jesus wept!
Champagne anyone...?
Orca, you might be right however only some fixed wind assets are being "managed for the long haul". I suspect that the end result of the long haul, in the case of the FJ community and in the eyes of their airships, is the triumphant arrival of Typhoon which (if a recent brief by a senior top neddy is to be believed) will not only cure all our AT, CAS and SH woes but will also cure cancer and reverse world poverty
The AT fleet, especially my little corner of it, is being run into the ground. As ABIW hinted to above, 33% of our total fleet is deployed. If you look at fleets within fleets my particular type has nearly 50% of available aircraft deployed covering 80% of this station's commitment. There is no long haul here - this is ops normal. My board shows month on, month off for the next 8 months at least. I've done three months away already this year (would've done more, sorry, but was on a course for 3 months too
qualifying me to do more dets! 
) and this is pretty normal for everyone on the fleet. I'm not looking for sympathy here, far from it - I enjoy Ops flying and have just signed on for another 17 years of the same. What annoys me though is listening to the high paid help twittering on about Typhoon, ASTOR, MRA4, A400M etc etc painting pictures of this utopian future of shiny jets and happy smiling service(wo)men whilst all around them Rome burns.
I think we need to be a lot more short-termist if we are to have any significant effect in Afghanistan. For example, clinging onto all assets "just until Typhoon arrives" is not a luxury we can afford. I'm not sniping but with things the way they are in both theatres can we really afford to keep the Jag force flying? Seriously. Keeping pilots in current flying practice for transition to Typhoon is, I'm afraid, a pretty poor excuse. Sure there'll be skill fade but it's not like they're going to be launching straight into the Battle of Britain when they get on type is it?
Someone needs to look at where our money is being spent and why. The MoD needs to be realistic and focus our assets and resources where they are needed most. If that means some lean years for some fleets then so be it; the end result will be proper support for the blokes on the ground and that can only be a good thing.
I know lots of people (me included!!) are working pretty hard on Ops etc but this moan isn't directed at them in any way. We are engaged in war fighting in Afghanistan - the Govt aren't terribly keen to admit it and the public aren't really that bothered. A full squadron of Harriers in theatre and a full sqn or two of Apaches would a) give the guys on teh ground the support they need and deserve and b) perhaps get things over with quicker. If this means a few F3 sqns don't get their APC next year or a few Jag mates have to run the sim at Valley for a year then I don't think that too high a price to pay.
The AT fleet, especially my little corner of it, is being run into the ground. As ABIW hinted to above, 33% of our total fleet is deployed. If you look at fleets within fleets my particular type has nearly 50% of available aircraft deployed covering 80% of this station's commitment. There is no long haul here - this is ops normal. My board shows month on, month off for the next 8 months at least. I've done three months away already this year (would've done more, sorry, but was on a course for 3 months too
qualifying me to do more dets! ) and this is pretty normal for everyone on the fleet. I'm not looking for sympathy here, far from it - I enjoy Ops flying and have just signed on for another 17 years of the same. What annoys me though is listening to the high paid help twittering on about Typhoon, ASTOR, MRA4, A400M etc etc painting pictures of this utopian future of shiny jets and happy smiling service(wo)men whilst all around them Rome burns.I think we need to be a lot more short-termist if we are to have any significant effect in Afghanistan. For example, clinging onto all assets "just until Typhoon arrives" is not a luxury we can afford. I'm not sniping but with things the way they are in both theatres can we really afford to keep the Jag force flying? Seriously. Keeping pilots in current flying practice for transition to Typhoon is, I'm afraid, a pretty poor excuse. Sure there'll be skill fade but it's not like they're going to be launching straight into the Battle of Britain when they get on type is it?
Someone needs to look at where our money is being spent and why. The MoD needs to be realistic and focus our assets and resources where they are needed most. If that means some lean years for some fleets then so be it; the end result will be proper support for the blokes on the ground and that can only be a good thing.
I know lots of people (me included!!) are working pretty hard on Ops etc but this moan isn't directed at them in any way. We are engaged in war fighting in Afghanistan - the Govt aren't terribly keen to admit it and the public aren't really that bothered. A full squadron of Harriers in theatre and a full sqn or two of Apaches would a) give the guys on teh ground the support they need and deserve and b) perhaps get things over with quicker. If this means a few F3 sqns don't get their APC next year or a few Jag mates have to run the sim at Valley for a year then I don't think that too high a price to pay.
When the Indians and the Omanis both manage to operate Jags hot and high, there seems to be no compelling reason why we shouldn't. Especially if the rumoured offers of basing from Quetta are true.
The real question is why the Jag is being sidelined and isn't being used.
If we need more CAS than the Harrier force can provide, then why aren't the Jags being used? The Jag will never have any short field capability, but its ability to operate from austere strips is well proven. Surely to god it isn't beyond the wit of man to find a long enough runway for this jet (which is more FOD resistant that the Hooverrier GR7)?
I'm by no means convinced that loading more on the Harrier force is remotely sensible. These jets will have a hard enough job stretching to the planned OSD of 2017 (and may require expensive rear fuselage replacements to do so) and if the F-35 is delayed any more, then that OSD will have to slip further.
Retaining Jags offered a heaven-sent opportunity to keep hours off the GR7s/9s, helping to baby them through to their OSD, and ensuring that we had enough Harriers, for long enough, to man the boat and do all those things that only a puffer jet can do.
Could it be that to use the Jag in Afghanistan would be to confirm its usefulness, and would thereby raise questions as to the wisdom of withdrawing it early?
Can any other RAF FJ platform use the JRP to its full capability yet, in the way that Jag already does? Or will they ever? Does any other RAF FJ offer such low operating costs? Does any other RAF FJ offer the same avalability and sortie rate during deployed ops? Does any other RAF FJ have as good a TIALD integration yet?
Or perhaps an interim buy/lease of 24 surplus Swedish Gripen As would plug the gap?
The real question is why the Jag is being sidelined and isn't being used.
If we need more CAS than the Harrier force can provide, then why aren't the Jags being used? The Jag will never have any short field capability, but its ability to operate from austere strips is well proven. Surely to god it isn't beyond the wit of man to find a long enough runway for this jet (which is more FOD resistant that the Hooverrier GR7)?
I'm by no means convinced that loading more on the Harrier force is remotely sensible. These jets will have a hard enough job stretching to the planned OSD of 2017 (and may require expensive rear fuselage replacements to do so) and if the F-35 is delayed any more, then that OSD will have to slip further.
Retaining Jags offered a heaven-sent opportunity to keep hours off the GR7s/9s, helping to baby them through to their OSD, and ensuring that we had enough Harriers, for long enough, to man the boat and do all those things that only a puffer jet can do.
Could it be that to use the Jag in Afghanistan would be to confirm its usefulness, and would thereby raise questions as to the wisdom of withdrawing it early?
Can any other RAF FJ platform use the JRP to its full capability yet, in the way that Jag already does? Or will they ever? Does any other RAF FJ offer such low operating costs? Does any other RAF FJ offer the same avalability and sortie rate during deployed ops? Does any other RAF FJ have as good a TIALD integration yet?
Or perhaps an interim buy/lease of 24 surplus Swedish Gripen As would plug the gap?
Jacko
If we could "confirm the Jag's usefulness" we'd have done it by now.
The Jag would be awesome in Afghanistan if it could carry a proper warload at the temps and altitude the Harrier can.
Gainesy: It would take just as long for a Jag pilot to convert to the Harrier as it would any other Ab-initio pilot from 19 i.e. about 15 months to day CR. With a tailwind and no other commitments
If we could "confirm the Jag's usefulness" we'd have done it by now.
The Jag would be awesome in Afghanistan if it could carry a proper warload at the temps and altitude the Harrier can.
Gainesy: It would take just as long for a Jag pilot to convert to the Harrier as it would any other Ab-initio pilot from 19 i.e. about 15 months to day CR. With a tailwind and no other commitments
Of course the Jag can't carry a GR7/9 payload - but how often does a GR7 go out and do recce? How often would one PWIII be better than none? How often would using a Jag spiker with GR7 bombers be better than using hours on a Harrier?
Isn't there a place for an aircraft that can strafe, or deliver a couple of pods of CRV7?
No-one's pretending that the Jag would be as useful as a GR7, but when the GR7s have to last to 2017 or beyond, and when there's a critical shortage of CAS, less useful is still a useful augmentation, surely.
Besides, BV's now shagged his way around Lincs and needs to go somewhere more austere and unpleasant to contemplate his youthful follies.
PS: Two months type conversion and 13 months ego upgrade?
Isn't there a place for an aircraft that can strafe, or deliver a couple of pods of CRV7?
No-one's pretending that the Jag would be as useful as a GR7, but when the GR7s have to last to 2017 or beyond, and when there's a critical shortage of CAS, less useful is still a useful augmentation, surely.
Besides, BV's now shagged his way around Lincs and needs to go somewhere more austere and unpleasant to contemplate his youthful follies.
PS: Two months type conversion and 13 months ego upgrade?
PW3 is no use out there. Harriers do recce every day. Harrier self designates so no need for buddy spiker. We already can deliver a couple of pods of CRV7.
Jag wouldn't get out of the Manpad envelope, and I sure as hell don't want to sit there for any longer than I absolutely have to.
Jag wouldn't get out of the Manpad envelope, and I sure as hell don't want to sit there for any longer than I absolutely have to.
You misunderstand.
All of those are Harrier jobs that could be done by Jags, relieving overstretch and helping keep the Harriers going as long as they're needed.
Otherwise what do we do in 2012, with five or more years left to wait for JSF and a bunch of shagged GR7/9s?
All of those are Harrier jobs that could be done by Jags, relieving overstretch and helping keep the Harriers going as long as they're needed.
Otherwise what do we do in 2012, with five or more years left to wait for JSF and a bunch of shagged GR7/9s?
I get what you meant, Jacko, it's just that we're already doing those jobs just fine. We carry TIALD on every sortie so there's no need to have another jet do it for us. Same for the recce pod. So bringing Jags out just to do what we're doing already would be worthless I'm afraid. I understand where you're coming from about saving fatigue life, but we'd still have the GR7s airborne on missions so we wouldn't save a thing.
Also, by sending out a sqn of Jags you'd need a new dispersal area, more engineers, and worst of all they'd assign another 10 thousand or so adminers to further complicate things!
Also, by sending out a sqn of Jags you'd need a new dispersal area, more engineers, and worst of all they'd assign another 10 thousand or so adminers to further complicate things!
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rumour has it Canadian CF-18s (6 of them?) will be seen in Afghanistan soon.
The Min of Def says he knows nothing about it. But he said that about Leopard too when the CF were working them up "just in case" and now 15 of them are slated to be deployed to theatre in the near future.
The Min of Def says he knows nothing about it. But he said that about Leopard too when the CF were working them up "just in case" and now 15 of them are slated to be deployed to theatre in the near future.