Disband the Royal Air Force?
Lt Cdr May (presumably retired, or someone will be having a word with him...) has a bit of a problem with the RAF, particularly after a retired AVM suggested that Alan Johnston ought to be invited to teach the RN conduct after being taken hostage. In response, he wrote (Times online comments, July this year)
I have a feeling that he's written a similar letter before, since the name rings a bell for some reason. Whether he's written one or two letters, he's still talking rubbish for the reasons MM articulated in the post he's linked to.
This really is not the sort of letter one would expect any proper two star officer to write. Praise in public but criticism in private - but perhaps the air marshal and the RAF do things differently. To be honest, given that so few of the RAF actually fly or serve on, or even near, the front line, it beggars belief that a crab should so criticise any other armed service. The RAF has little to teach the Royal Navy though I admit that the incident to which AVM Macey refers was not its finest hour. The RAF's finest hour was 67 years ago ....
Colonel Tim Collins made a very good case for the RAF to be disbanded and its aircraft passed to the RN, RM and the Army, all of whom have real aviation and warfare experience. Think of the savings to be made and so little - just 89 years - tradition to be lost. Ane (sic) fewer silly letters, too!
Lester May, London, England
Colonel Tim Collins made a very good case for the RAF to be disbanded and its aircraft passed to the RN, RM and the Army, all of whom have real aviation and warfare experience. Think of the savings to be made and so little - just 89 years - tradition to be lost. Ane (sic) fewer silly letters, too!
Lester May, London, England
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
Perhaps all three services could be combined into one and the resultant force could be called the Royal Armed Forces, which could be shortened to R.A.F. A design of cap badge that would be suitable is already in use.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Historicly valid point.
If you look at RAF disbandment from a historical point of veiw the guy is right.
The RAF was formed as a result of the Smutts report of August 1917 that recomended an "air service" that could be used as an independant means of war. With the demise of the V bomber fleet the RAF is unable to conduct a truly independant strategic air offensive and so in historic terms the RAF is unable to do what it was formed to do.
However things have moved on 90 years, the RAF (and the other armed forces) roles have changed and addapted to the threats that they face, in my opinion war in the air has evolved so far that a dedicated service is needed and the RAF is best placed to forfill this role.
The RAF was formed as a result of the Smutts report of August 1917 that recomended an "air service" that could be used as an independant means of war. With the demise of the V bomber fleet the RAF is unable to conduct a truly independant strategic air offensive and so in historic terms the RAF is unable to do what it was formed to do.
However things have moved on 90 years, the RAF (and the other armed forces) roles have changed and addapted to the threats that they face, in my opinion war in the air has evolved so far that a dedicated service is needed and the RAF is best placed to forfill this role.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South of Old Warden
Age: 87
Posts: 1,375
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
It's RAF not R dot A dot F,
Passed the sign on the A40 last week it read, R.A.F. Brize Norton 3 miles.
As usual AIDU you're wrong.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The front end and about 50ft up
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not this one again!
What a sad state of affairs that successive governments have neglected the forces to such an extent their only hope of survival in any recognisable form is by public infighting and attacking their sister services. Shame on certain elements of the RN and Army for adopting this shameful below the belt sniping.
This comes up so often now that I shall not do it the dignity of the routine full blown riposte however I will say that most servicemen with warfighting experience are normally very appreciative of what the RAF brings to the party. Those that publicly advocate the disbandment of the RAF are generally backroom REMFs or axegrinding retirees with a woeful lack of understanding of airpower.
blah, blah, blah. Just how close has any battleship been to any frontline since 1982?
Do I hear the same voices calling to disband the cavalry regiments? No, because obviously the cavalry, just like the RAF, has evolved over the years and has an important contemporary role.
The RAF has operated tanks, sea launches and has infantry. By Lester May's logic surely we should disband the Army and Navy.
This comes up so often now that I shall not do it the dignity of the routine full blown riposte however I will say that most servicemen with warfighting experience are normally very appreciative of what the RAF brings to the party. Those that publicly advocate the disbandment of the RAF are generally backroom REMFs or axegrinding retirees with a woeful lack of understanding of airpower.
given that so few of the RAF actually fly or serve on, or even near, the front line....
in historic terms the RAF is unable to do what it was formed to do
The RAF has operated tanks, sea launches and has infantry. By Lester May's logic surely we should disband the Army and Navy.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
It is only RN and RAF because JSP101 did away with full stops in abbreviations many moons agi when AIDU was in nappies, assuming they had nappies.
I concede that the COED has it as RAF.
For older chaps like BEagle I am sure that both R.A.F. and RAF would be acceptable with Raf being a hanging offence.
I concede that the COED has it as RAF.
For older chaps like BEagle I am sure that both R.A.F. and RAF would be acceptable with Raf being a hanging offence.
The RAF was formed as a result of the Smutts report of August 1917 that recomended an "air service" that could be used as an independant means of war. With the demise of the V bomber fleet the RAF is unable to conduct a truly independant strategic air offensive and so in historic terms the RAF is unable to do what it was formed to do.
Henderson recommended the formation of a third service to remove the gross inefficiences in procurement and the constant in-fighting between the Admiralty and the War Office over who got what aeroplanes, engines, equipment, and the way in which aircraft were to be employed. The RAF was not formed just to project air power independently, but to project air power more efficiently, and more effectively by removing from the chain of command an array of army and RN officers who thought they knew how aircraft should be used but who didn't have a clue.
The saving grace for the RFC was that Haig knew that air power was important, but understood that he didn't have sufficient expertise to use it properly - so he left it to Trenchard, with GHQ telling RFC HQ what effect it wanted air to achieve (yes, this is the same Douglas Haig as the famed bungling idiot only interested in horses Douglas Haig...) and leaving the RFC to get on with it.
As a number of posters here have experienced, when you give organic air to army and RN officers who think they fully understand air power and therefore don't need to listen to their SME, the problems start.
Lloyd George's administration liked the idea of an independent service being out of Haig's control, and which could be used for revenge bombing against Germany, and after the war, the RAF had to stress independent air power to survive against attacks from the RN and the Army to the point where this came to dominate thinking, with a legacy that remains today.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: In my house
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh Dear ...
Lester's credibility has gone in the same direction as the Government Security Advisor's. West.
We must hang together, or we will hang separately, under this untrustworthy and disastrous government.
Oh, and just to mention, the RAF has been breathing for the Fleet Air Finger for some years, and must continue to do so TFN. Rather than writing non-sensical drivel to a newspaper, a word of appreciation or thanks would be more appropriate.
We must hang together, or we will hang separately, under this untrustworthy and disastrous government.
Oh, and just to mention, the RAF has been breathing for the Fleet Air Finger for some years, and must continue to do so TFN. Rather than writing non-sensical drivel to a newspaper, a word of appreciation or thanks would be more appropriate.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What would absorbing the RAF into the Army and Royal Navy achieve?
We already have a single pay and personnel system that we all know and love - JPA - and we'll shortly have a unified IT system - DII. Medical and dental services are Joint, and we have a single headquarters that runs operations - PJHQ. Each Service is managed from a single Command; Fleet, Air and Land, and we already seem to be drifting towards wearing a single working dress - Combat 95. I understand that even flying training is about to become a fully Joint enterprise under MFTS!
If the RAF were absorbed, its role would have to be managed by someone and that would mean that the other 2 command headquarters would have to expand - so no real savings there I'm afraid. In fact, apart from losing the CAS post, I can't see what real savings could be made by such a move. Personally, I don't think it will be too long before we lose all 3 Service chiefs anyway; when we do, we'll have a ready-built single defence force.
Perhaps the only visible change that amalgamation of the RAF would bring, would be the loss of the light blue uniform. However, before we go down that route, perhaps we should see the Army lead the way and abolish their regimental system so that they can standardise on just one uniform - think of the savings!
What all suggestions like this boil down to, is the desire to get their hands on the RAF's share of the defence budget - and that's very sad, and quite naive, when you consider how budget decisions are made in the Centre.
We already have a single pay and personnel system that we all know and love - JPA - and we'll shortly have a unified IT system - DII. Medical and dental services are Joint, and we have a single headquarters that runs operations - PJHQ. Each Service is managed from a single Command; Fleet, Air and Land, and we already seem to be drifting towards wearing a single working dress - Combat 95. I understand that even flying training is about to become a fully Joint enterprise under MFTS!
If the RAF were absorbed, its role would have to be managed by someone and that would mean that the other 2 command headquarters would have to expand - so no real savings there I'm afraid. In fact, apart from losing the CAS post, I can't see what real savings could be made by such a move. Personally, I don't think it will be too long before we lose all 3 Service chiefs anyway; when we do, we'll have a ready-built single defence force.
Perhaps the only visible change that amalgamation of the RAF would bring, would be the loss of the light blue uniform. However, before we go down that route, perhaps we should see the Army lead the way and abolish their regimental system so that they can standardise on just one uniform - think of the savings!
What all suggestions like this boil down to, is the desire to get their hands on the RAF's share of the defence budget - and that's very sad, and quite naive, when you consider how budget decisions are made in the Centre.
Last edited by LFFC; 15th Dec 2007 at 23:03.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cambridgeshire
Age: 55
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RN out before RAF
I always remember being in a watering hole in Gib when 20 submariners walked in wearing t shirts with Kosovo stuff on it as "we did the business".or stuff to that effect Bearing in mind I was under siege in Sarajevo 4 years prior I did dare...."how brave under the Adriatic 150 miles away you launching missiles." I did beat a retreat before I got my lights punched out, didnt go down well! All you need from a future Navy couple of boats sorry ships for peace keeping!
NM
NM
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is but one valid reason for merging the services and that is to get rid of the generals, admirals, air marshals and bands that are irrelevant to our task.
Unfortunately, the money saved would be witheld by the treasury and pumped into one or other of new labour's bottomless pits.
So why don't all the Services work together to stop Brown from destroying this Country's armed forces?
Unfortunately, the money saved would be witheld by the treasury and pumped into one or other of new labour's bottomless pits.
So why don't all the Services work together to stop Brown from destroying this Country's armed forces?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The letters R, A and F are the initials of the words Royal, Air and Force. It is therefore correct English to write them as R.A.F. because initials should be upper case and followed by a full stop (note: FULL STOP, not "dot").
Never mind that common usage has dropped the full stops, it's still wrong. Common usage has the brain dead spelling "mate" as "M8" and "you are" as "UR" - it still doesn't make it right!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What all suggestions like this boil down to, is the desire to get their hands on the RAF's share of the defence budget
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: South of Penge
Age: 74
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The letters R, A and F are the initials of the words Royal, Air and Force. It is therefore correct English to write them as R.A.F. because initials should be upper case and followed by a full stop (note: FULL STOP, not "dot")."
Q.E.D.
Other offenders against common decency include:
1. Cerebrally challenged individuals using the pronunciation "Raff".
2. Pathetically ignorant ex-colonials who fail to see the tautology in
"British Royal Air Force".
Q.E.D.
Other offenders against common decency include:
1. Cerebrally challenged individuals using the pronunciation "Raff".
2. Pathetically ignorant ex-colonials who fail to see the tautology in
"British Royal Air Force".
Last edited by RETDPI; 16th Dec 2007 at 06:49.
And what fun it was amending MAFL to 'delete' R.A.F and 'insert' RAF......
Ever tried deleting a full stop? It took me days to complete that AL action!
Ever tried deleting a full stop? It took me days to complete that AL action!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: South of Penge
Age: 74
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shouldn't that have been M.A.F.L.?
Whoops sorry! I must have I missed an A.L. somewhere.
Oh B*gger , that should now be an AL .
Oh Sh*t! I said "B*gger"
B*gger , I said "Sh*t !"
I never wanted to be a priest anyway.
Somebody will have to be responsible for disbanding the band one day soon.
Whoops sorry! I must have I missed an A.L. somewhere.
Oh B*gger , that should now be an AL .
Oh Sh*t! I said "B*gger"
B*gger , I said "Sh*t !"
I never wanted to be a priest anyway.
Somebody will have to be responsible for disbanding the band one day soon.