Harrier dispute between Navy and RAF chiefs sees Army 'marriage counsellor' called in
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Back of beyond!
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The rumour is true!
Or, are these 'death rattles' from the Dark Blue convincing the World you're not actually dying....."tis but a flesh-wound"?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not my rumour my dear chap, but suffice to say, the RN will not be departing from fixed wing aviation, JHC will not go light blue and the Harrier has a long future ahead of it.
Which is more than can be said for CAS.
The Army chap has come out on the side of sanity apparently. Just like the last three times CAS demanded a recount.
Which is more than can be said for CAS.
The Army chap has come out on the side of sanity apparently. Just like the last three times CAS demanded a recount.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Waiting to return to the Loire.
Age: 54
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this an official rumour - soon to be announced through a story in the Thunderer in which "sources within the MOD indicated that dah dee dah..." - or is it just an honest to goodness rumour based upon whisperings in the corridors of power?
Harrier has a long future ahead of it
Which is more than can be said for CAS
So, if Tourist is to be believed, where will the savings come from. And we're back to the same old stories ....
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Back of beyond!
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tourist,
Knowing what you know, and knowing that you're an RN type, would you kindly care to share exactly what it is that you do know? It's rather frustrating pandering to individuals on this forum who pertain to be 'knowledgable' whilst frankly displaying little of it. Likewise, and in your case here, there are those who proffer rumour and conjecture that seems to lack credibility or substance.
If you know something, stop beating around the bush and blurt it out - you're anonymous after all. I'm not asking you to name your source, tell everyone your coming out of the closet or such-like, am I!
I believe you have a story to tell here chap but no balls to tell it, quite frankly.
Knowing what you know, and knowing that you're an RN type, would you kindly care to share exactly what it is that you do know? It's rather frustrating pandering to individuals on this forum who pertain to be 'knowledgable' whilst frankly displaying little of it. Likewise, and in your case here, there are those who proffer rumour and conjecture that seems to lack credibility or substance.
If you know something, stop beating around the bush and blurt it out - you're anonymous after all. I'm not asking you to name your source, tell everyone your coming out of the closet or such-like, am I!
I believe you have a story to tell here chap but no balls to tell it, quite frankly.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
http://www.defence-estates.mod.uk/pu...Main_Paper.pdf
<<RAF Cottesmore. Cottesmore will remain the Harrier GR9 hub until
at least 2018 and will be supported by the Operational Conversion Unit at
RAF Wittering until at least 2015. Thereafter, and depending upon the
decision for a second base for JCA and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, the site
could become surplus (possible Army interest as part of an East Midlands
Super Garrison).>>
2015 is not that far off although 'at least' does suggest 2016 or later but as they say, that is a long time in politics and possibly 2 elections before that.
If Cottesmore has the capacity then it would make sense to move earlier. If Wittering has essential infrastructure, not available at Cottesmore, then it would make no sense. [blanket stackers' centre for instance]
<<RAF Cottesmore. Cottesmore will remain the Harrier GR9 hub until
at least 2018 and will be supported by the Operational Conversion Unit at
RAF Wittering until at least 2015. Thereafter, and depending upon the
decision for a second base for JCA and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, the site
could become surplus (possible Army interest as part of an East Midlands
Super Garrison).>>
2015 is not that far off although 'at least' does suggest 2016 or later but as they say, that is a long time in politics and possibly 2 elections before that.
If Cottesmore has the capacity then it would make sense to move earlier. If Wittering has essential infrastructure, not available at Cottesmore, then it would make no sense. [blanket stackers' centre for instance]
PN
I was fishing a bit! I think that paper may have been given a stiff ignore in some corridors in MOD since its publication ....(first contact with the enemy etc)
Pheasant
I'm assuming you're either RN or a bona-mate!
Just out of curiosity, say you do reduce the Tornado Force, who then fills the gap when the GR9 goes out of service in 2018 (bearing in mind JCA (Dave B) is to replace GR9 - the Tornado replacement I don't believe has been decided as yet and isn't due until the mid 2020's). Or do we accept a "capability loss" for longer than we would if we reduced GR9 now? GR9 is planned to reduce in 2015 (I think!) to allow it to collapse down to one MOB (wasn't their a legal ruling about flying/noise at Wittering - strangely a bit online suggested Wittering would cease flying in 2012 but that source is/was a few years old!).
Personally I don't think the GR9 will be fully taken out of service any earlier than planned. But I do think it will reduce in numbers earlier than expected. A win-win situation. CAS wins because he's made some cash savings. CNS wins because he's saved JFH and therefore RN fixed wing (probably!).
But of course somepeploe won't see that and the petty 'playground' squabbling will continue ....
I was fishing a bit! I think that paper may have been given a stiff ignore in some corridors in MOD since its publication ....(first contact with the enemy etc)
Pheasant
I'm assuming you're either RN or a bona-mate!
Just out of curiosity, say you do reduce the Tornado Force, who then fills the gap when the GR9 goes out of service in 2018 (bearing in mind JCA (Dave B) is to replace GR9 - the Tornado replacement I don't believe has been decided as yet and isn't due until the mid 2020's). Or do we accept a "capability loss" for longer than we would if we reduced GR9 now? GR9 is planned to reduce in 2015 (I think!) to allow it to collapse down to one MOB (wasn't their a legal ruling about flying/noise at Wittering - strangely a bit online suggested Wittering would cease flying in 2012 but that source is/was a few years old!).
Personally I don't think the GR9 will be fully taken out of service any earlier than planned. But I do think it will reduce in numbers earlier than expected. A win-win situation. CAS wins because he's made some cash savings. CNS wins because he's saved JFH and therefore RN fixed wing (probably!).
But of course somepeploe won't see that and the petty 'playground' squabbling will continue ....
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
WM, as I am sitting on the fence, and DE owns the fence, I suspect that it was politics. DE is laying ownship to all the real estate, led by a 2* admiral I am led to believe, with the idea that they can then run or sell whatever and treat the other 3 TLB as lodger units.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WM,
The problem is the GR4 can't go to sea, neither can the Typhoon, but the Typhoon can do medium level stuff. Given the ridiculous numbers of Typhoon, reducing GR4 seems logical to some. When the CVF comes into Service the GR9 will certainly embark in large numbers, if only to prove the deck etc. Defence may even see a mix of GR9 and JCA for many years and/or a JCA CVF and a GR9 CVF.
Unlike the current state of play whereby we see minimal embarkations of GR9 and for the minimum period, when CVF comes in there will be major embarkations for significant periods of time - firstly to keep the aircrew up to speed but much more importantly to exercise all the systems and people on board. The politicians will not want to see these ships tied up, particularly as France is re-entering the military structure of NATO and will parade CdeG all over the place.
The problem is the GR4 can't go to sea, neither can the Typhoon, but the Typhoon can do medium level stuff. Given the ridiculous numbers of Typhoon, reducing GR4 seems logical to some. When the CVF comes into Service the GR9 will certainly embark in large numbers, if only to prove the deck etc. Defence may even see a mix of GR9 and JCA for many years and/or a JCA CVF and a GR9 CVF.
Unlike the current state of play whereby we see minimal embarkations of GR9 and for the minimum period, when CVF comes in there will be major embarkations for significant periods of time - firstly to keep the aircrew up to speed but much more importantly to exercise all the systems and people on board. The politicians will not want to see these ships tied up, particularly as France is re-entering the military structure of NATO and will parade CdeG all over the place.
Pheasant
I can sort of understand the logic behind keeping lots of GR9s for longer than planned, particularly with the embarked time required (as that is something which is sorely missing due to the current op tempo, and which will ease when (or if just to calm the Bona mates down) the Tonka deploys on HERRICK) but you've got to be having a laugh with the statement:
Of course you're assuming both CVFs will survive the current bun fight! Is CNS stamping his foot really just a smoke screen because he knows one of the CVFs is about to be chopped (or delayed considerably)..... retires (almost) and takes cover in the Bar ....
... and whilst the GR9 is back home to embark to keep the decks warm and the maintainers current who looks after HERRICK (and any follow on of TELIC) ..... cut back the GR4 and you'll find the cupboard bare. And the Typhoon is, rumour has it, a bit off being ready.
I can sort of understand the logic behind keeping lots of GR9s for longer than planned, particularly with the embarked time required (as that is something which is sorely missing due to the current op tempo, and which will ease when (or if just to calm the Bona mates down
) the Tonka deploys on HERRICK) but you've got to be having a laugh with the statement:
Defence may even see a mix of GR9 and JCA for many years and/or a JCA CVF and a GR9 CVF
... and whilst the GR9 is back home to embark to keep the decks warm and the maintainers current who looks after HERRICK (and any follow on of TELIC) ..... cut back the GR4 and you'll find the cupboard bare. And the Typhoon is, rumour has it, a bit off being ready.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WM,
We need a GR9 chap to comment but my understanding is that the GR9s are coming out of Afgh purely to service CAS's whim to get GR4 (or Typhoon) in. The comment in the various bits of media (and the excellent book by Cdr Orchard) is that the GR9 could happily carry on in theatre and, with a bit of juggling, do quite a lot of the sea bit as well......but I am definitely no expert here. Indeed it would save Defence the (about) £500M it is costing to get GR4 in (including wet concrete) - whose hair-brained idea was that.....oh yes Leeson/Andersons.
We need a GR9 chap to comment but my understanding is that the GR9s are coming out of Afgh purely to service CAS's whim to get GR4 (or Typhoon) in. The comment in the various bits of media (and the excellent book by Cdr Orchard) is that the GR9 could happily carry on in theatre and, with a bit of juggling, do quite a lot of the sea bit as well......but I am definitely no expert here. Indeed it would save Defence the (about) £500M it is costing to get GR4 in (including wet concrete) - whose hair-brained idea was that.....oh yes Leeson/Andersons.
Pheasant.
It has been said so many times, the Harrier is being pulled out of Afg because it is "tired."
The fatigue life that they have been using up would see a premature end to the Harrier unless it is at least given a break.
You might be right about Tornado but think what BAE Systems would say if the GR fleet was prematurley cut!
I have believed for a long time the position of the F3 fleet is the most precarious, especially if Typhoon can fulfil all it should this year.
As for the inter-service aspect, how about this: CAS mutters about having to make cuts, suggests Harrier, Navy (naturally) bleat a lot, tons of press about RAF trying to finish FAA fast jet. CAS then "decides" to give up something else. The CAS has then made a saving, given up an asset and in the next round of cuts the RAF can argue "not our turn" we just gave up xxxxxx.
(The above is not entirely my own idea)
It has been said so many times, the Harrier is being pulled out of Afg because it is "tired."
The fatigue life that they have been using up would see a premature end to the Harrier unless it is at least given a break.
You might be right about Tornado but think what BAE Systems would say if the GR fleet was prematurley cut!
I have believed for a long time the position of the F3 fleet is the most precarious, especially if Typhoon can fulfil all it should this year.As for the inter-service aspect, how about this: CAS mutters about having to make cuts, suggests Harrier, Navy (naturally) bleat a lot, tons of press about RAF trying to finish FAA fast jet. CAS then "decides" to give up something else. The CAS has then made a saving, given up an asset and in the next round of cuts the RAF can argue "not our turn" we just gave up xxxxxx.
(The above is not entirely my own idea)
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
I would have thought the Harrier force is also tired both physically and emotionally and not just the servicemen but their families too.
I would imagine there is also an emotional stress on the Tornado force too in the extent that theri role in the Gulf is less stressful than in Afg and thus they have it 'cushy.'
I would imagine there is also an emotional stress on the Tornado force too in the extent that theri role in the Gulf is less stressful than in Afg and thus they have it 'cushy.'
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Belgium
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It isn't just the aircraft getting tired in the Harrier fleet - its the crews as well. They have been on the verge of breaking for some time and indeed by some criteria are already broken. A large portion of the Harrier force have very little experience of anything except CAS in a benign environment ie Afghanistan. Obviously I mean benign from a medium level FJ point of view not a squadie on patrol point of view. Some (most of the army) don't have a problem with this - they believe that the RAF should only be doing CAS and ISTAR (and AT, AAR etc) for evermore, but the RAF standpoint is to maintain a flexible capability on top of the current operational tasks. A debate for another thread, really.
Typhoon is, of course the crux of it all. At the moment it has a horrible reputation in the RAF - CR(airshows and N America dets only). In terms of CAS capabilities it needs more weapons clearances - having the option of a 1000lb bomb or a different 1000lb bomb isn't very flexible.
For air to air it might have some issues but for the current UK ADR policing and FI roles it would be fine. So cut F3 and Typhoon takes over seems an obvious choice. Unfortunately the current commitment of the FIs, northern q and southern q is a big demand on aircraft numbers and crews. If Typhoon were to take on all 3 commitments tomorrow it could cope BUT the ability to gain other capabilities (such as robust CAS) and the spare crews for a sustainable deployment would not be there - and surely that should be the focus, both militarily and politically. Of course the Saudi buy and training does not help from a military point of view - although it has saved our ass from pretty much every other point of view!
I think the above is pretty much fact. My personal view is that the Harrier force are in 2 minds - they love being on ops and "important" (don't we all) and are a bit worried that once they have no operational commitments they will be sidelined and possibly cut. On the other hand they are a bit fatigued/pissed off with the constant Afghan deployments.
Typhoon is, of course the crux of it all. At the moment it has a horrible reputation in the RAF - CR(airshows and N America dets only). In terms of CAS capabilities it needs more weapons clearances - having the option of a 1000lb bomb or a different 1000lb bomb isn't very flexible.
For air to air it might have some issues but for the current UK ADR policing and FI roles it would be fine. So cut F3 and Typhoon takes over seems an obvious choice. Unfortunately the current commitment of the FIs, northern q and southern q is a big demand on aircraft numbers and crews. If Typhoon were to take on all 3 commitments tomorrow it could cope BUT the ability to gain other capabilities (such as robust CAS) and the spare crews for a sustainable deployment would not be there - and surely that should be the focus, both militarily and politically. Of course the Saudi buy and training does not help from a military point of view - although it has saved our ass from pretty much every other point of view!
I think the above is pretty much fact. My personal view is that the Harrier force are in 2 minds - they love being on ops and "important" (don't we all) and are a bit worried that once they have no operational commitments they will be sidelined and possibly cut. On the other hand they are a bit fatigued/pissed off with the constant Afghan deployments.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The CAS has then made a saving, given up an asset and in the next round of cuts the RAF can argue "not our turn" we just gave up xxxxxx.
Been tried before - doesn't work.
Been tried before - doesn't work.
PN,
Not sure what you're saying.
Is it that the Tonka guys are worried their desert isn't "hard" enough? Or that some one else thinks what the Tonka is currently doing not "hard" enough?
So do we agree that:
Harrier needs a break?
The only British Military air platform that can be deployed instead of it is the GR4?
It is entirely right for each service Chief to defend his Service?