Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

RAF to reduce to 9 front line fast jet squadrons?

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

RAF to reduce to 9 front line fast jet squadrons?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 4th Oct 2006, 17:43
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,924
Received 139 Likes on 64 Posts
RAF to reduce to 9 front line fast jet squadrons?

Hidden away in the depths of the Joint Combat Aircraft Basing Working study (JSF to Lossiemouth) by Group Captain Strategic Plans is an intriguing statement on the Tornado GR4 replacement, now known as the Future Combat Air Capability (FCAC).
This, it reveals, if the JSF is chosen, is to be 2 squadrons with a unit establishment of 8 a/c a piece plus an addition of 6 a/c to the JSF OCU. This to replace a current capability of 7 squadrons with a unit establishment of 13.

Add this to the rumoured 5 squadrons of Typhoons will leave the RAF with a front line of 9 fast jet squadrons, NINE!
( 5 Typhoon, 2 JSF and another 2 JSF as the fast jet element of the FCAC, plus the 2 RN JSF squadrons, that is if they can find any aircrew for them)

No wonder they only need 28 Hawk 128.
pr00ne is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2006, 17:56
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 64
Posts: 2,278
Received 35 Likes on 14 Posts
How did Noo Labour let them get away having 9 FJ sqns, surely Comrades Brown and Bliar only require 1 sqn -and that is of comfortable VIP transport aircraft that will do Heathrow/Washington in rapid time..
ZH875 is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2006, 22:03
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by pr00ne
This, it reveals, if the JSF is chosen, is to be 2 squadrons with a unit establishment of 8 a/c a piece plus an addition of 6 a/c to the JSF OCU.
A total of 22 aircraft then. Mmm, quite a small number - in fact that is so small that I doubt even a cash strapped British military would bother procuring such small numbers. Why not just get a few more JSF or Tranche 3 Typhoon - less support costs afterall, than going to all the effort to have a support set-up for a 'fleet' of just 22 jets. Are you talking utter boll**ks.......? Perhaps!
sense1 is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2006, 22:09
  #4 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,924
Received 139 Likes on 64 Posts
sense1,

ER, I think you've rather missed the point, what they are talking about IS buying more JSF, so that is an addirional 22 alongside, or part of, the original JSF buy. It would then be a buy to support the original 4 squadrons to replace the Harrier and these two to replace GR4, plus an additional 6 for the OCU.

It was the overall reduction in squadrons that took me by surprise.

Oh, and it's not me talking utter bolleaux, it's Group Captain Strategic Plans from HQ STC.
pr00ne is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2006, 22:54
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Just behind the back of beyond....
Posts: 4,183
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Proone,

Check yer PMs!

JN
Jackonicko is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2006, 22:56
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swindonshire
Posts: 2,007
Received 16 Likes on 8 Posts
The study is available here, if anyone who's not yet seen it wishes to read it.
Archimedes is offline  
Old 5th Oct 2006, 09:27
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,527
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Wouldn't such a paper be at least Restricted?
jindabyne is offline  
Old 5th Oct 2006, 09:30
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: my own, private hell
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Pr00ne has hit the nail on the head - just add up the publically-released plans for Typhoon and JCA. The gap between the 'Mighty FCAC JCA' wing of 16 ac will, of course, be filled by whatever UCAV/missile solutions are drummed up by the programmes that used to be FOAS etc...

The next question, coming to a Public Sector Spending Review 07 near you, is , 'If we can do with only 9 FJ sqns in 2020 why are we wasting money on more sqns now?'

In the words of Private Wilson 'We're doooooomed'
BluntedAtBirth is offline  
Old 5th Oct 2006, 09:38
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swindonshire
Posts: 2,007
Received 16 Likes on 8 Posts
Jin,

You'd have thought so, but obviously not... FOI and all that, I suppose.
Archimedes is offline  
Old 5th Oct 2006, 09:47
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 80
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Archimedes see PM.
Wader2 is offline  
Old 5th Oct 2006, 09:49
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Do we even need 9 FJ Sqns? For the past 5 years all we've used is AT and helos with a decent CAS package - less jets = more money for the fleets doing the work!!!
Antique Driver is offline  
Old 2nd Jul 2012, 18:50
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Just behind the back of beyond....
Posts: 4,183
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
And now here we are, six years on, with just eight frontline FJ squadrons (three Typhoon - 3, 6 and 11 and five GR4, II, IX, 12, 31, and 617) with every sign that the long term FJ fleet will be just six squadrons - five Typhoon (1, 3, 6, 11 and ??) and one expanded JSF Squadron.

9 Squadrons long term? I wish!

Last edited by Jackonicko; 2nd Jul 2012 at 18:51.
Jackonicko is offline  
Old 2nd Jul 2012, 19:54
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: BFG
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
HARVEST HAWK simples !
recce_FAC is offline  
Old 2nd Jul 2012, 20:31
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ah, has 'Admin Guru' been reborn as 'Antique Driver'? Surely that can be the only explanation for one of the most ill-informed, crass posts I have ever read here, other than flash baiting...

Same old story - more to do, less to do it with - I think UK PLC will realise at some stage in the not-too-distant future we can't continue with this fantasy that we're still a major power unless we fund accordingly, but until our politicians match egos to reality, we'll continue to man up and get on with it. Certainly makes life interesting!
Beermonkey is offline  
Old 2nd Jul 2012, 20:50
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Anglia
Posts: 2,076
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
So that'll be ten line mechanics needing two 1/2" AF spanners, a Soldering Iron and a tube of superglue.

The rest'll be up to BAE.
Rigga is offline  
Old 2nd Jul 2012, 23:10
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Beermonkey
Ah, has 'Admin Guru' been reborn as 'Antique Driver'? Surely that can be the only explanation for one of the most ill-informed, crass posts I have ever read here, other than flash baiting...
Admin Guru
  • Last Activity: 13th Mar 2002 18:24
  • Join Date: 15th Jan 2002
5th Oct 2006, 03:49 #11 (permalink) Antique Driver

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 39


Do we even need 9 FJ Sqns? For the past 5 years all we've used is AT and helos with a decent CAS package - less jets = more money for the fleets doing the work!!!
Antique Driver
  • Last Activity: 21st Jan 2007 11:51
  • Join Date: 16th Aug 2006
Not only are you winging about a 6-year-old post, you are complaining about a poster who has been gone from the forum for 5 1/2 years!

For your own sake... put down the beer.
GreenKnight121 is offline  
Old 3rd Jul 2012, 15:13
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It is clearly flash-baiting though, although the Odiham mafia would genuinely have you believe that you can solve all the world's problems with SH. One word answer to that... Libya. I'd suggest that future appetite in the UK for Afghanistan-like ops will be fairly low, but probably much higher for ops of the ilk of Libya, so the future requirement for all aspects of air capability seems clear. That probably counts as a bite, rather than a full blown flash...
Knight Paladin is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2012, 20:36
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Just behind the back of beyond....
Posts: 4,183
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Further to my post above, I'm starting to hear intriguing rumours of a bigger-than-five Typhoon squadron FJ force (made possible by retaining Tranche 1), and a bigger than single-squadron JSF force.

People are even working on the old 138 JSF number, I'm told.

Shome Mishtake, Shurely?
Jackonicko is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2012, 23:21
  #19 (permalink)  
Suspicion breeds confidence
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gibraltar
Posts: 2,405
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 3 Posts
In that case in order to make up a "routine" CVF deployment of 12 aircraft how do you make up that number one when the light blue sqns have at most 9 a/c and the dark blue only 8. Unless of course you plan to mix them which is waste of resource.

Last edited by Navaleye; 7th Jul 2012 at 23:39.
Navaleye is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2012, 23:36
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Home alone
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Jackonicko,

Where did you hear that gen? Standard rumourmill or a substantiated source?
Bastardeux is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.