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

Bliar “Promises” Extra Resources in Afghanistan

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.

Bliar “Promises” Extra Resources in Afghanistan

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 15th Oct 2006, 10:06
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Shrewsbury, UK
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by RileyDove
I wonder if having Griffons at Shawbury we should be looking at what resources could be sent from within what we already have.
Completely stall the rotary training system by taking all their aircraft, at a time when we need more and more rotary crews to enable this intense tempo of ops to continue without destroying every family in the rotary world?

Take the aircraft away from their civilian, and therefore non-deployable, servicing facilities to some of the harshest operating conditions available without a proper spares package or trained engineers?
RobinXe is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2006, 10:53
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,926
Received 139 Likes on 64 Posts
If there is such a critical shortage of SH assets in Afghanistan that we have to consider contracting civilian outfits and suggesting robbing the training community (hardly a practical option for reasons outlined by RobinXe), just how much of the SH force is currently deployed?

Chinook: 8 out of a 40 a/c fleet

Merlin: 6 out of a 22a/c fleet

Puma: 4 out of a 36 a/c fleet

SK4: 6 out of a 30a/c fleet

Add the 4 extra Pumas bought from South Africa and the 6 SK HAS6 converted to a Junglie role, 8 HC3 Chinooks sat in Wiltshire gathering dust and enquire as to where the Army Air Corps is in all this, and it does beg a few questions…………………………
pr00ne is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2006, 11:27
  #63 (permalink)  
mbga9pgf
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by pr00ne
If there is such a critical shortage of SH assets in Afghanistan that we have to consider contracting civilian outfits and suggesting robbing the training community (hardly a practical option for reasons outlined by RobinXe), just how much of the SH force is currently deployed?
Chinook: 8 out of a 40 a/c fleet
Merlin: 6 out of a 22a/c fleet
Puma: 4 out of a 36 a/c fleet
SK4: 6 out of a 30a/c fleet
Add the 4 extra Pumas bought from South Africa and the 6 SK HAS6 converted to a Junglie role, 8 HC3 Chinooks sat in Wiltshire gathering dust and enquire as to where the Army Air Corps is in all this, and it does beg a few questions…………………………

Forget the Pumas,SK and Lynx for a start. If you had ever operated in Afghanistan Pr00ne, then you would have realised it is simply too hot and too high for them to be of any use (without only carrying 2 pax for example). Once you take aircraft out for major, continuity training back in the UK, then look at how this government has raped the front line of much of its engineering experience, (including the very senior NCO engineering leadership that has dissapeared by PVRing due to the atrocious way in which THIS GOVERNMENT have treated them, it dont leave you with much engineering capacity.

My whole criticism with that Tw*t Tony is he has promised the Army things he KNOWS cannot be delivered; for example, aircraft but where are the crews? Extra troops? Oh well 20% have PVRd since their last tour in Iraq. Oh, and do these civilian contractors we are going to start using to fly our guys have an appropriate level of DAS, and to what level are the crews trained? Its easy to try and throw money at a solution (ala the diabolic way money has been wasted on the NHS, mainly going on management consultant REMFs), unless its been well thought out and planned (which this latest headline grabber Swis Tone has come up with certainly has not) it simply anit that simple to provide a reliable, quality SH force.

Pr00ne, before believing the crap that this government spouts, I suggest you listen to informed, decent and honest views, as spoken by Sir Richard Dannatt, who in my opinion, is a Diamond amongst a skip of coal.
 
Old 15th Oct 2006, 11:43
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,926
Received 139 Likes on 64 Posts
mbga9pgf,

"Pr00ne, before believing the crap that this government spouts, I suggest you listen to informed, decent and honest views, as spoken by Sir Richard Dannatt, who in my opinion, is a Diamond amongst a skip of coal."

I have listened to what he says and it is 100% in accordance with what Blair says about Iraq, some diamond!

The latest manning figures for the forces show a manning level of over 97% so how do your personel facts stack up?

Believe me I long ago stopped taking at face value ANYTHING this Govt says, but they are no different to any govt of whatever persuasion.

You are right, I certainly have NOT operated in Afghanistan, Germany was the last time I "operated" anything and then it was powered by 2 afterburning Speys but still had a weeny bit of a problem at altitude!
pr00ne is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2006, 11:53
  #65 (permalink)  
mbga9pgf
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by pr00ne
mbga9pgf,
"Pr00ne, before believing the crap that this government spouts, I suggest you listen to informed, decent and honest views, as spoken by Sir Richard Dannatt, who in my opinion, is a Diamond amongst a skip of coal."
I have listened to what he says and it is 100% in accordance with what Blair says about Iraq, some diamond!
Thats odd. Because every newspaper I read yesterday, from the left wing to the right, all interpreted Sir Richards comments as one huge knife in the back of this governments foreign policy and exit strategy in Iraq.

The latest manning figures for the forces show a manning level of over 97% so how do your personel facts stack up?
Lies, damned lies and statistics.

1) The planners may wish to believe that our guys will stay in whilst living in Iraq and Afghanistan more of the time than they do in the country for which they pay top rate income tax and council tax for homes they never see; the planning figures are wrong, and certainly are far too low bearing in mind we are committed in the long term on two fronts. People are simply getting burned out and leaving. Managing and coping are two completely different things.
2) 97% of whom? I think if you look at what the experienced guys are doing, and from what I have seen, most of them have either left or on the way out at the next chance. Quality of life is far more important to them than fighting for a cause they lost heart for years ago.

Believe me I long ago stopped taking at face value ANYTHING this Govt says, but they are no different to any govt of whatever persuasion.
You are right, I certainly have NOT operated in Afghanistan, Germany was the last time I "operated" anything and then it was powered by 2 afterburning Speys but still had a weeny bit of a problem at altitude!

Well it must have been awefully nice for you to have sat in a bunker, living with your partner away, waiting for the war to start. Try living away from home for 6 months of the year in the sandpit, and I garantee you will have a completely different perspective on things. But then our boys are out of sight, out of mind for most of the population.

Last edited by mbga9pgf; 15th Oct 2006 at 14:01.
 
Old 15th Oct 2006, 14:18
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes on 16 Posts
The Helpful Stacker is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2006, 14:40
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Beside the beach
Posts: 290
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just remember - on the subject of getting more resources, helos in particular - the govt might turn round and give them to us only to make HMF look complete aarses when they can't crew them thanks to undermanning in the RAF and RN and half the AAC pilots (officers) doing non-jobs like SO2 C&A.
That said, CGS (gawd bless him) is the Colonel Commandant of the AAC and since I recall how enthusiastic he was about Apaches back when he was Commander 4 Armd Bde. With the services now about to get their acquisition budgets devolved to them (or so I hear), maybe, just maybe we might get a few more SH. And in the Army too.
That'd be nice, but the holding breath SOP applies.
ChristopherRobin is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2006, 14:55
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes on 16 Posts
Originally Posted by junglyAEO
Not completely sure its a shortage of aircraft that's the problem, as your list points out only something like 20% of the airframes are deployed.
We may not be short of a/c overall but we are short of suitable a/c for the operations we are currently engaged in. Although the FAA and AAC are doing their best with the assets they have they are using assets which are less suitable (except the Apache) to the environments they are operating in, with the very small force of a/c that are up to the job (Merlins and Chinooks) being drawn from very small pools with correspondingly small pools of support personnel and aircrew.

Originally Posted by junglyAEO
Now if we were to take personnel from other (currently less productive) units and use them we might do better. The whole debate over UKSAR or ASW springs to mind.
jungly
It also doesn't help when someone quite high in the Chinook world informs PMC that he would rather personnel deployed for Chinook dets where drawn from purely Chinook operating units (that'll be just Odiham then).

Morale at Odiham is rock bottom at the moment (in my humble opinion) with personnel being worn down from one side by the relentless march of LEAN and it poorly thought out and rushed workplace implementations and a high level of deployments from the other.
The Helpful Stacker is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2006, 15:04
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Shropshire
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Chinook: 8 out of a 40 a/c fleet

Merlin: 6 out of a 22a/c fleet

Puma: 4 out of a 36 a/c fleet

SK4: 6 out of a 30a/c fleet

Add the 4 extra Pumas bought from South Africa and the 6 SK HAS6 converted to a Junglie role, 8 HC3 Chinooks sat in Wiltshire gathering dust and enquire as to where the Army Air Corps is in all this, and it does beg a few questions…………………………[/quote]

The question which does beg to be answered is why over half the fleets listed above are stuck in "depth" maintenance without any spares to get them back out!!!!

Put that together with the fact that most SH (RN or RAF) are only manned to approx 80%, both aircrew and engineers. Trance 3 just got rid of a load more TG1 and 2

Tony B Liar should concentrate on the roots before he promises the earth!!
WIWOWessex is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2006, 20:47
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 26,822
Received 271 Likes on 110 Posts
"Forget the Pumas,SK and Lynx for a start. If you had ever operated in Afghanistan Pr00ne, then you would have realised it is simply too hot and too high for them to be of any use (without only carrying 2 pax for example)."

Why should any specifically naval aircraft be expected to operate from other than sea level locations? Or is everything nowadays corrupted by Purple Prose?

I guess the Puma's designers only ever expected them to go to war on the North German Plain?
BEagle is online now  
Old 15th Oct 2006, 22:54
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: midlands
Age: 59
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There is a lot of good information here ........and bad.

The areas we are operating in need both more ac and more crews to achieve the task. But, they have to be suitable, i.e. capable of operating hot and high. That really only leaves us with the Merlin and Chinook. One might say once bitten twice shy for extra Wokkas so .... Merlins it is. That said the Merlin would offer some golden opportunities for cross pollenation to solve the imediate manning problem? However you solve this probelm you have to look further ahead than right now. You cant rape and pilage accross the services to man new kit if you stop training, for instance, because then you miss keeping a flow of new blood to the front line. [also an argument against deploying the training ac to front line ops]

On PVR's. The global figure may well be 97%. But what is the localised specialist figures. For example, lets say you have 4 qualified Royal Auxillary Balloon core personnel. You need all 4 for operations but they all PVR. You have lost that capability [never underestimate the balloon core!] Examine the global figure and its probably still at 97% and only changed by 0.0001 of a percent. You can make most numbers read what you want.

Sorry about spelling. Too much Merlot! hic.
SARREMF is offline  
Old 17th Oct 2006, 22:20
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Robin - I do sometimes wonder if the reality of a long and sustained war has really sunk in ! The U.S has been reworking UH-1's for use in resupply and non direct combat roles . We choose the most expensive route in everything whilst ignoring the Bell UH-1 /212/412 series are about the most combat proven helicopters in history . These machines are available from Bell - why are we so worried about spares packages and training ground crews? Surely Bell is capable of supplying any part off the shelf and ground crew training must be achievable in weeks and months not years.
I feel distinctly uncomfortable with the notion that a well proven helicopter would need a large amount of work to make it suitable for use when there is a need for helicopters now and not at some indeterminate stage in the future.
RileyDove is offline  
Old 17th Oct 2006, 22:44
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Apologies for the long post but the para's from this year's AFPRB report are worth reading.

.."widespread dissatisfaction was reported on the impact on personnel and their families of overstretch and operational commitments."


2.31 Superficially, the manning position appears to be relatively healthy compared to current requirements. However, we note that there continues to be an overall deficit as each Service experienced varying difficulties meeting the requirement. The manning position therefore remains fragile and in this context we note the Army comments on the most acute deficits among Other Ranks with less than 9 years’ service. We consider it significant that, while MOD considers the overall manning deficit to be within the PSA tolerances, there remain persistent, serious manning shortfalls in key operational enablers and MOD acknowledges that these shortfalls will continue to 2008 and possibly beyond. We explore these operational pinch points further in paragraphs 2.42 to 2.48 below. For our 2007 Report, we will be able to draw on the outcome of the National Audit Office’s study into Armed Forces’ manning, recruitment and retention6to supplement our manning evidence.

2.38 While overall outflow will include the Services’ in-year measures to meet reduced manning requirements, information on Premature Voluntary Retirement/Release9(PVR) shows the trends on those requesting to leave for a variety of external reasons. In general, the latest information suggests a worrying reverse of recent stable trends with an upturn in PVR10application and exit rates during 2004-05 and into early 2005-06. Exit rates for Officers have increased over the last three years to 3.1 per cent in 2004-05. PVR exit rates for Other Ranks have also increased to 5.3 per cent in 2004-05 reversing the downward trend of the previous two years.

Outflow from the Services has been influenced by measures to manage manning levels. However, we consider the latest PVR data, as a measure of Voluntary Outflow, show emerging retention difficulties across all three Services at most ranks. As MOD observes, PVR rates would have been expected to fall during periods of manning reductions and redundancy programmes. The factors influencing retention primarily relate to the impact of operational tempo and have been consistently reported for a number of years. We note from our visits the significance of Junior Ranks making earlier decisions about whether to remain in the Armed Forces. Overall, with operational commitments and tempo at a high level, it seems likely that the Services will be faced with managing the drawdown to 2008 against a background of rising Voluntary Outflow rates leading to manning imbalances and even greater pressure on key enablers.
nigegilb is offline  
Old 17th Oct 2006, 23:53
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Shrewsbury, UK
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by RileyDove
Robin - I do sometimes wonder if the reality of a long and sustained war has really sunk in ! The U.S has been reworking UH-1's for use in resupply and non direct combat roles . We choose the most expensive route in everything whilst ignoring the Bell UH-1 /212/412 series are about the most combat proven helicopters in history . These machines are available from Bell - why are we so worried about spares packages and training ground crews? Surely Bell is capable of supplying any part off the shelf and ground crew training must be achievable in weeks and months not years.
I feel distinctly uncomfortable with the notion that a well proven helicopter would need a large amount of work to make it suitable for use when there is a need for helicopters now and not at some indeterminate stage in the future.
You've never seen the MoD try to buy anything have you....
RobinXe is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2006, 00:25
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: South West
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
94.7% of statistics...

Originally Posted by pr00ne
The latest manning figures for the forces show a manning level of over 97% so how do your personel facts stack up?
There's a difference between having 97% of the established manpower as opposed to 97% of the required manpower.

I think you'll find that the statistic supports the former, not the latter. An established manning level that has dropped over 5 years inversely proportional to workload and tasking.

It also doesn't break down to where the shortages are either.
Days Like These is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2006, 06:14
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes on 16 Posts
Originally Posted by Days Like These
There's a difference between having 97% of the established manpower as opposed to 97% of the required manpower.
I think you'll find that the statistic supports the former, not the latter. An established manning level that has dropped over 5 years inversely proportional to workload and tasking.
It also doesn't break down to where the shortages are either.
It also doesn't mention that the figure includes those going through training, those in their final year going through resettlement, those who are downgraded (quite a sizable amount in some trades) and those who are in tours screened from DWR commitments.

Of course I wouldn't have expected the New Labour apologist that is Pr00ne to look any deeper into the figures he quotes as he probably would have the found the truth out of keeping with his devotion to 'the cause'.
The Helpful Stacker is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2006, 07:16
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Robin - Sadly I have ! Must remember not to have flights of fantasy!
RileyDove is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2006, 09:51
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In a field far far away...
Age: 51
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by pr00ne
If there is such a critical shortage of SH assets in Afghanistan that we have to consider contracting civilian outfits and suggesting robbing the training community (hardly a practical option for reasons outlined by RobinXe), just how much of the SH force is currently deployed?

Chinook: 8 out of a 40 a/c fleet

Merlin: 6 out of a 22a/c fleet

Puma: 4 out of a 36 a/c fleet

SK4: 6 out of a 30a/c fleet

Add the 4 extra Pumas bought from South Africa and the 6 SK HAS6 converted to a Junglie role, 8 HC3 Chinooks sat in Wiltshire gathering dust and enquire as to where the Army Air Corps is in all this, and it does beg a few questions…………………………

It's always staggering to me that self-confessed intelligentsia can come up with figures like this. I can only comment on the mighty Wokka, so I'll put this to you. Of 40 aircraft, some will be in varying levels of 'depth' maintenance, from primary to major. Of the remaining, 8 will be in Afghanistan, some will be committed to the Hereford Hooligans in support of their various shenanigans, some will be at various stages of modification programmes to enhance it's capability, some will be at Boscombe on trials of mod programmes. The ones that are left are committed to training new crews, maintaining currency amongst the crews who aren't in Afghanistan, holding standby for National Emergencies and then you'll have the ones that are broken in various techie-type ways. So, where do you expect us to magic up some more? Yes, there are 8 at Boscombe, incapable of flying, with no crews able to operate them. Even if they were clear to fly, and had all the necessary modifications for operational flying, would we have the crews to fly them, or the engineers to fix them? The same could probably be applied to our brethren on the other rotary wings to which you refer.

To put all this into perspective, when the evacuation of Lebanon kicked off someone did some quick calculations:
The rest of the RAF had around 40 aircraft committed to operations, that's fixed-wing, fast jet etc.
RAF Odiham had 19 aircraft committed to operations.
The most basic mathematician should be able to see that 1/3 of the operationally committed aircraft were provided by one station, comprising less than 2000 personnel. In an Air Force numbering over 40000, 1/3 of the operational effort was shouldered by less than 5% of the manpower.

Your post is offensive to every one of those people. And you sir, by your own confession an ex-pilot and no longer serving, do not know of what you speak.

May I also add that the Chinook force alone has been on continuous deployed operations since around 1996 when the FRY detachment kicked off. Frankly, you should shut up.

Last edited by LeanMe; 18th Oct 2006 at 09:57. Reason: spelling 3/10, see me
LeanMe is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2006, 09:56
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Odiham
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Only 8 out of 40 but........

What about the others??
We need aircraft to support UK tasking and UK training, thats 3/4 per day.
We need aircraft for the OCF that's another 2.
We have aircraft in various stage of maintenance.
We also have aircraft in bits around hangar floor where Qinetiq pretend they are doing any sort of work.
Plus the aircraft at Boscombe down
And finally the aircrfat used by 7 Sqn in various dets around the world.
This quickly comes to 40 aircraft.
8 aircraft is probably half the available chinooks to the SH force. I wonder if the US have deployed half their flyable Chinnies? I dont think so!!


Next point: more helos.
Lets face it the Merlin is a very expensive troop mover. (3 times the price fo a fully kitted chinook with up to date DAS and last gen avionics). Now I cant confirm my next statement and I would like Merlin mates to confirm this but I ve been told they are already limited ,compare to their max troop load in temperate conditions, in Iraq. We would problably need 7 Merlins for an op mounted by 2 to 3 chinooks in the Stan.

We need more chinooks!! Plus the Merlin is doing a great job in Basrah and is stretched enough. (3 months on 3 months off?)
Forget about the 8 Mk 3 rotting in Boscombe down. They are a long way down. They need DAS, hums and a new cockpit. I will not see them until i leave the air force.
Let's just bite the bullet, stop pumping money in the NHS, benefits for a week and buy 10 spanking new a/c for 7 Sqn and we recover their a/c for the SH role.
Anyway that was my 2 pennies worth.
wokawoka is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2006, 11:45
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: England
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
danish merlin

The UK has agreed to buy 6 Danish Merlin with the money saved on Tranche 2 Typhoon. Deal was agreed last week
Chillwinston1 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.