Do all RAF Aircraft fly in support of troops on the ground?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Southern UK
Age: 64
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do all RAF Aircraft fly in support of troops on the ground?
Just a thought, do all RAF aircraft fly in support of troops on the ground? We know that all helicopters do. Harriers do. The Typhoon wil be carrying out CAS. In fact directly or indirectly all of the RAF's aircraft support troops on the ground. Perhaps it is time to rename back to the Royal Flying Corps.
I stand corrected, the only aircraft that don't support are the'Red Arrows' and the'BBMF'.
I stand corrected, the only aircraft that don't support are the'Red Arrows' and the'BBMF'.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: england
Posts: 613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Typhoons and F3s that defend the sky.
The ISTAR assets that do stuff the troops don't need to know about.
The chaps who guard the Queen when the Guards are on holiday.
The strategic stuff that occurs just a little bit forward of the FLOT.
Otherwise, they just look pretty and have better chefs.
The ISTAR assets that do stuff the troops don't need to know about.
The chaps who guard the Queen when the Guards are on holiday.
The strategic stuff that occurs just a little bit forward of the FLOT.
Otherwise, they just look pretty and have better chefs.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: bored
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well we just spent billions buying an air defence fighter for the RAF, even though the RAF have never shot down another aircraft in A2A combat since WW2, and is never likely to ever again in any seriously probable conflict scenario. So you could say that most of the RAF is spent supporting the careers of the senior RAF officers who came to that decision.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you are fighting a shooting war, you ultimately need troops to hold the ground you may have won with air power. At the moment, the higher profile work the Service does is in support of those troops. The RAF have done all sorts of other missions though (Nimrod for search and rescue, or Hercules for the famine relief efforts in Ethiopia as examples, and the 24/7 QRA watch manned by the F3 and Typhoon).
As we see more capable platforms coming into service, their multi-roll capabilities will probably mean that most aircrew will be familiar with, if not on, joint ops.
As we see more capable platforms coming into service, their multi-roll capabilities will probably mean that most aircrew will be familiar with, if not on, joint ops.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When the troops on the ground secure an LZ are they doing it for themselves or for the RAF Chinnys to land on?? In which case who's working for who? When a Herc/C-17/Tri*/VC10 does a sweeper/trail/tanking for a Harrier/Typhoon/GR4 is it an RAF sortie or does that also come under 'Army Suport' as ultimately that is their role in the grand scheme of things...
Oooer, think this could run and run...
Oooer, think this could run and run...
never shot down another aircraft in A2A combat since WW2
directly or indirectly all of the RAF's aircraft support troops on the ground
United Kingdom Peace-seeking Overseas Defensive Expeditionary Team, anyone?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
Well we just spent billions buying an air defence fighter for the RAF, even though the RAF have never shot down another aircraft in A2A combat since WW2, and is never likely to ever again in any seriously probable conflict scenario. So you could say that most of the RAF is spent supporting the careers of the senior RAF officers who came to that decision.
Anyone want to poke a few holes in that tripe?
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember chatting to an ex Staish at a secret Wiltshire AT base not so long ago who reckoned he'd put together a very compelling argument for binning the RAF in favour of some kind of 'Army Air Support Service'. In fact, the model already exists, he reckoned, with the USMC.
Thought it was a load of cr*p myslef. Wouldn't fancy marching to work every day and wearing a beret wherever I went. There's too much tradition enshrined in our fine service for that to ever happen.
No doubt its at the top of our wise leaders' agendas...
Thought it was a load of cr*p myslef. Wouldn't fancy marching to work every day and wearing a beret wherever I went. There's too much tradition enshrined in our fine service for that to ever happen.
No doubt its at the top of our wise leaders' agendas...
Last edited by Co-Captain; 11th Dec 2008 at 20:24.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
Are you still seriously worried about invasion by martians?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: bored
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last recorded RAF air to air victory was when an RAF Phantom downed an RAF Jaguar over Germany in 1982. Prior to that, unconfirmed reports of RAF Spits downing Egyptian Air Force Spits in 1948. Already debated here:
Last RAF air to air kill? - Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums
I'm not knocking RAF - just the judgement to place an emphasis with Typhoon procurement of priority of AD over GA/carrier role. AD role is only a deterrent, rather than a capability that we are ever likely to really need. On the other hand, GA/carrier versatile capability is exactly what we do and will need for the next twenty years or so.
No potential enemy is ever going to look at France and Britain and decide - ooh the Brits have got that awesome Typhoon for AD but the Frogs have only got measly Rafale - so let's attack the Frogs, as they'll be a pushover with Rafale. Rafale is, in fact, perfectly capable in AD role against any realistic potential aggressors, but more importantyly is also a much more versatile GA/carrier aircraft than Typhoon.
Last RAF air to air kill? - Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums
I'm not knocking RAF - just the judgement to place an emphasis with Typhoon procurement of priority of AD over GA/carrier role. AD role is only a deterrent, rather than a capability that we are ever likely to really need. On the other hand, GA/carrier versatile capability is exactly what we do and will need for the next twenty years or so.
No potential enemy is ever going to look at France and Britain and decide - ooh the Brits have got that awesome Typhoon for AD but the Frogs have only got measly Rafale - so let's attack the Frogs, as they'll be a pushover with Rafale. Rafale is, in fact, perfectly capable in AD role against any realistic potential aggressors, but more importantyly is also a much more versatile GA/carrier aircraft than Typhoon.
Last edited by CirrusF; 11th Dec 2008 at 21:15.
1948 is decidedly confirmed, Cirrus by a whole variety of sources, including the Egyptians.
Upon what evidence do you base your claim that the Rafale is a much more versatile GA aircraft than Typhoon?
Upon what evidence do you base your claim that the Rafale is a much more versatile GA aircraft than Typhoon?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: bored
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a lot of public debate on the subject already:
Typhoon vs Rafale, the end all thread [Archive] - Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums
Typhoon vs Rafale, the end all thread [Archive] - Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums
