F3 terminated
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my opinion this latest cut / capability holiday is about as bad as it gets.
From a purely AD point of view I'd love to know how this stacks up. The open source data published in Hansard last November quotes a figure of 34 Typhoons available on the "forward fleet", so lets take away 15 of those which are either allocated to OEU and OCU use, or short term u/s and you are down to a maximum availability of 19-20 jets, in other words slightly less than 2 whole squadrons. So that's a maximum of 20 jets to maintain Southern Q, plus the normal flying training programme, plus overseas training deployments, plus any peacetime NATO commitments (think Iceland or Baltic Q duties). And isn't at least one of these sqn's supposed to be multi-role?
So what's this got to do with Leuchars F3's you may ask? Well, lots in my opinion; as some have pointed out F3 is a relatively 'mature' platform with some obviously useful capabilities, and most importantly it's available in sufficient numbers now (or would be if we weren't hell bent on chopping them up so quickly) to take some of the load whilst the Typhoon force builds up, in terms of available jets, crews, systems maturity, etc...
By cutting F3 down to almost nothing we are not cutting unnecessary 'fat', we are actually removing the small amount of resiliency or redundancy that was left in the UK AD component. Personally I think this 'gamble' is wholly irresponsible and shows limited risk awareness.
"So we're not going to war any time soon where we will require AD assets then Prime Minister? Good, glad to hear it cos we'd be stuffed if we did, wouldn't we!?"
Excerpt from Hansard November 2008:
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Baroness Taylor of Bolton): As at 27 October 2008, 51 Typhoon aircraft have been delivered to the Royal Air Force and the Typhoon fleet has flown a total of 24,236 hours. Forty-nine of these aircraft have entered operational service with the RAF, 34 of which are in the Forward Fleet—that is, aircraft which are available to the front-line command for operational and training purposes and those that are short-term unserviceable.
From a purely AD point of view I'd love to know how this stacks up. The open source data published in Hansard last November quotes a figure of 34 Typhoons available on the "forward fleet", so lets take away 15 of those which are either allocated to OEU and OCU use, or short term u/s and you are down to a maximum availability of 19-20 jets, in other words slightly less than 2 whole squadrons. So that's a maximum of 20 jets to maintain Southern Q, plus the normal flying training programme, plus overseas training deployments, plus any peacetime NATO commitments (think Iceland or Baltic Q duties). And isn't at least one of these sqn's supposed to be multi-role?
So what's this got to do with Leuchars F3's you may ask? Well, lots in my opinion; as some have pointed out F3 is a relatively 'mature' platform with some obviously useful capabilities, and most importantly it's available in sufficient numbers now (or would be if we weren't hell bent on chopping them up so quickly) to take some of the load whilst the Typhoon force builds up, in terms of available jets, crews, systems maturity, etc...
By cutting F3 down to almost nothing we are not cutting unnecessary 'fat', we are actually removing the small amount of resiliency or redundancy that was left in the UK AD component. Personally I think this 'gamble' is wholly irresponsible and shows limited risk awareness.
"So we're not going to war any time soon where we will require AD assets then Prime Minister? Good, glad to hear it cos we'd be stuffed if we did, wouldn't we!?"
Excerpt from Hansard November 2008:
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Baroness Taylor of Bolton): As at 27 October 2008, 51 Typhoon aircraft have been delivered to the Royal Air Force and the Typhoon fleet has flown a total of 24,236 hours. Forty-nine of these aircraft have entered operational service with the RAF, 34 of which are in the Forward Fleet—that is, aircraft which are available to the front-line command for operational and training purposes and those that are short-term unserviceable.
I think I might bite now too!
So I guess it doesn't count when...... Please, if you want to sit on the high ground and preach, you better make sure it's to the whole congregation.
It’s clear that a battle has been fought within the MOD because of a lack of resources. JFH, which is actually fighting in a war, versus the F3 which isn’t. Once again the government has forced the services to fight amongst themselves because they haven’t provided enough money. Once again finding funding for an immediate need has increased risk for the long term.
2.) I'm not 'pro F3' as you may be suggesting, I'm was simply explaining that there are plenty of people writting on this thread who have no understanding of modern AD. It shows. Fact.
3.) The drawdown of the F3 was always going to happen, it's just going to happen quicker than initially expected. Is this risky? (Probaby not) Does it give you less flexibility than cuts elsewhere (definitely!).
That is something to be angry about.
Just a thought...
On the F3 capability point, I did meet an F15 pilot once who clearly thought the F3's capabilities were pretty laughable, but that was 8 or 9 years ago.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"One thing that is cringeworthy is the obvious greed for carriers, any carriers, at any cost.
From what was initially shown as an multi aircraft type platform has been cut and cut back to little better that larger versions of the current crop!
No angled flight deck, no cats and very limited operational capability of it's designated aircraft type (go look at the carry backs for F35B vs F18G) for what??
Where is the intrinsic AEW that cost the RN so dear in '82?(oh yes sea kings, how old are they now??)
Do not attack other services whilst they are being bled dry to fund these ersatz capital ships."
No this is where I do agree with Jacko ...
F35B doubles the physical capabilities of what we have now. Twice the range and twice the load. So its NOT a bad model. Just compare a B to a F/A18. It's just that the C model has a especially long range on internal fuel. B also means that the pilots can quickly flip between forward operating areas and carriers as when required. Buying the C model would mean keeping the pilots welded to the carriers - in order to keep their training current. The B model, with CVF is a fantastic capability at a cost the UK should and can afford.
...and remember..
1. We're getting the carrier for a very very reasonable price. Just compare them to the new US CVNs. £4bn for 2 or £9bn for 1?
2. Their running costs are already in the budget. Even though they are bigger, they probably won't cost more than the current 2 x CVS to run. e.g. a type 45 uses half the fuel of a type 42.
3. Buying the B model Dave will be the UK's deal of the century. If Rolls gets a good share of the engine buy the UK portion of the overall deal will be hugely out of proportion to our capital outlay. The government will most likely earn the purchase costs back in tax receipts.
4. and finally .. excuse me.. we might be on a thread about the cuts on F3, but has anyone noticed that the fleet has been cut in half in 10 years? Half the SSNs are gone? The RN has already cut its cloth to fund the carriers.
From what was initially shown as an multi aircraft type platform has been cut and cut back to little better that larger versions of the current crop!
No angled flight deck, no cats and very limited operational capability of it's designated aircraft type (go look at the carry backs for F35B vs F18G) for what??
Where is the intrinsic AEW that cost the RN so dear in '82?(oh yes sea kings, how old are they now??)
Do not attack other services whilst they are being bled dry to fund these ersatz capital ships."
No this is where I do agree with Jacko ...
F35B doubles the physical capabilities of what we have now. Twice the range and twice the load. So its NOT a bad model. Just compare a B to a F/A18. It's just that the C model has a especially long range on internal fuel. B also means that the pilots can quickly flip between forward operating areas and carriers as when required. Buying the C model would mean keeping the pilots welded to the carriers - in order to keep their training current. The B model, with CVF is a fantastic capability at a cost the UK should and can afford.
...and remember..
1. We're getting the carrier for a very very reasonable price. Just compare them to the new US CVNs. £4bn for 2 or £9bn for 1?
2. Their running costs are already in the budget. Even though they are bigger, they probably won't cost more than the current 2 x CVS to run. e.g. a type 45 uses half the fuel of a type 42.
3. Buying the B model Dave will be the UK's deal of the century. If Rolls gets a good share of the engine buy the UK portion of the overall deal will be hugely out of proportion to our capital outlay. The government will most likely earn the purchase costs back in tax receipts.
4. and finally .. excuse me.. we might be on a thread about the cuts on F3, but has anyone noticed that the fleet has been cut in half in 10 years? Half the SSNs are gone? The RN has already cut its cloth to fund the carriers.
Thread drift alert...
The CVF could have an angled deck with cables as in this picture.
Plus a ski-jump for F35C as in this picture.
The C model should be able to get off with 20T AUW with 20kts of breeze across the front in around 150m with the ramp - help out any aerodynamic gurus (the MiG 29 does it in far less). So why go to all the bother of carting around a heavy lift fan apart from Rolls-Royce jobs and for JSF mates to have flaps on their boots
Surely weapons/fuel load are better than lift fans and govt tax benefits?
LJ
The CVF could have an angled deck with cables as in this picture.
Plus a ski-jump for F35C as in this picture.
The C model should be able to get off with 20T AUW with 20kts of breeze across the front in around 150m with the ramp - help out any aerodynamic gurus (the MiG 29 does it in far less). So why go to all the bother of carting around a heavy lift fan apart from Rolls-Royce jobs and for JSF mates to have flaps on their boots
Surely weapons/fuel load are better than lift fans and govt tax benefits?LJ
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Deepest darkest London
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back to the topic in question,
I thought we still had 60+ airframes not 30 F.3s with or without (the other)? 5 in storage at Shawbury, mind you that doesn't include keeping track of those that have quietly been fed into the smelting works after a visit to Leeming....
I see we now have 6 new Tranche 2 Typhoons at Coningsby now, so are the Saudi airframes on the line with ours and coming out at the same time or is that it after the first six till god only knows when??
Taking into account the attrition factor, can we do without T3? And yes I know we should have more SFH and lots of other new toys for the poor old AT boys first.
V1
I thought we still had 60+ airframes not 30 F.3s with or without (the other)? 5 in storage at Shawbury, mind you that doesn't include keeping track of those that have quietly been fed into the smelting works after a visit to Leeming....
I see we now have 6 new Tranche 2 Typhoons at Coningsby now, so are the Saudi airframes on the line with ours and coming out at the same time or is that it after the first six till god only knows when??
Taking into account the attrition factor, can we do without T3? And yes I know we should have more SFH and lots of other new toys for the poor old AT boys first.
V1
Hulahoop
Where is the intrinsic AEW that cost the RN so dear in '82?(oh yes sea kings, how old are they now??)
It's a big unfunded requirement and until something is seriously done about it, the SKASaC altitude limit will be an op limit for the group.
F35B doubles the physical capabilities of what we have now. Twice the range and twice the load.
So a GR9 goes only 250 nm radius, high-altitude, with two 500 pound bombs? Suffice it to say that's not in the USN standard aircraft characteristics.
B also means that the pilots can quickly flip between forward operating areas and carriers as when required.
Up to a point. However, one of the things that was never in the published KPPs or KURs from the get-go was land-based STOVL performance and surface compatibility. Also, the fuel load required will hamper off-airbase FOL stuff.
Buying the B model Dave will be the UK's deal of the century. If Rolls gets a good share of the engine buy the UK portion of the overall deal will be hugely out of proportion to our capital outlay.
But the UK will only see taxes and jobs from the work done in the UK. The biggest British share of the program is in the F136 and the EW system, both UK-owned but US-located. Yes, RR builds the lift fan - but that is on 600 jets tops. The big money (assuming the whole venture works) will be in the A-model.
Where is the intrinsic AEW that cost the RN so dear in '82?(oh yes sea kings, how old are they now??)
It's a big unfunded requirement and until something is seriously done about it, the SKASaC altitude limit will be an op limit for the group.
F35B doubles the physical capabilities of what we have now. Twice the range and twice the load.
So a GR9 goes only 250 nm radius, high-altitude, with two 500 pound bombs? Suffice it to say that's not in the USN standard aircraft characteristics.
B also means that the pilots can quickly flip between forward operating areas and carriers as when required.
Up to a point. However, one of the things that was never in the published KPPs or KURs from the get-go was land-based STOVL performance and surface compatibility. Also, the fuel load required will hamper off-airbase FOL stuff.
Buying the B model Dave will be the UK's deal of the century. If Rolls gets a good share of the engine buy the UK portion of the overall deal will be hugely out of proportion to our capital outlay.
But the UK will only see taxes and jobs from the work done in the UK. The biggest British share of the program is in the F136 and the EW system, both UK-owned but US-located. Yes, RR builds the lift fan - but that is on 600 jets tops. The big money (assuming the whole venture works) will be in the A-model.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is amazing how many so called professional aviators have no concept of AD, as illustrated by some of the posts, such as by Tourist.
Remember chaps, Control of the Air is CORE business for us and UK PLC. If you do not understand this then I suggest you make an effort to learn, this may prevent the usual rubbish being typed on PP.
The F3 has finished up a highly capable platform, but it is rightly being replaced by a more capable platform- Fact.
As LeonJ indicates- an affect does not have to be a smoking hole in the ground, the no-fly zones worked on a number of occasions by deterring the IAF, but again people's ignorance of this is apparent.
Very nice point about JFH not having a deployed operational role post the Summer/Autumn. This may end the usual JFH crap that we see on here.
Remember chaps, Control of the Air is CORE business for us and UK PLC. If you do not understand this then I suggest you make an effort to learn, this may prevent the usual rubbish being typed on PP.
The F3 has finished up a highly capable platform, but it is rightly being replaced by a more capable platform- Fact.
As LeonJ indicates- an affect does not have to be a smoking hole in the ground, the no-fly zones worked on a number of occasions by deterring the IAF, but again people's ignorance of this is apparent.
Very nice point about JFH not having a deployed operational role post the Summer/Autumn. This may end the usual JFH crap that we see on here.
Any news on the end of F3 Party then? I went to the thrunge at Wattisham for the end of the Jehova Jet and that'll take some beating!
T'was also the first time I met a bloke called Eric who is now called Caroline - scary!
I just want to get 1st dibs on a room in the Mess at Leuchars, that's all...without a tranny (and I'm not talking radios).
LJ
T'was also the first time I met a bloke called Eric who is now called Caroline - scary!
I just want to get 1st dibs on a room in the Mess at Leuchars, that's all...without a tranny (and I'm not talking radios).
LJ
We're short of pilots and engineers on the SH Force if you fancy a change.
Having said that, we're short of everything on the SH Force. But at least we can look forward to a little more sea time when HMS Titanic and Lusitania finally limp out of a french dry dock and want to prove their capabilities in some sh1thole.
I digress, we're still short of pilots and engineers.
Having said that, we're short of everything on the SH Force. But at least we can look forward to a little more sea time when HMS Titanic and Lusitania finally limp out of a french dry dock and want to prove their capabilities in some sh1thole.
I digress, we're still short of pilots and engineers.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Yes, Him
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 2,689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sad to see Squadrons go but I think that bombers living in the suburbs of our major cities are of more immediate concern than ones with Red Stars.
Maybe the money spent on the new gear at Waddo has been of better value?
Maybe the money spent on the new gear at Waddo has been of better value?
Fine.
So let's disband the forces, apart from those directly involved in Afghanistan, and spend all the money on Policing the UK.
What's that you say? New threats can develop more quickly than we could re-equip to meet them?
We'll be ok. Russia's no threat. It's as stable now as it was under Tsar Nicholas.... And as long as none of our own malcontent Islamo-nutters saw the TV footage of 9/11. They're not aviation people, after all. Aviation doesn't figure in their plans. That plot to spring their people from Full Sutton in a hi-jacked helicopter was a figment of the Daily Telegraph's fertile imagination.
No need for the UK to guard its own airspace, nothing to see, move along....
So let's disband the forces, apart from those directly involved in Afghanistan, and spend all the money on Policing the UK.
What's that you say? New threats can develop more quickly than we could re-equip to meet them?
We'll be ok. Russia's no threat. It's as stable now as it was under Tsar Nicholas.... And as long as none of our own malcontent Islamo-nutters saw the TV footage of 9/11. They're not aviation people, after all. Aviation doesn't figure in their plans. That plot to spring their people from Full Sutton in a hi-jacked helicopter was a figment of the Daily Telegraph's fertile imagination.
No need for the UK to guard its own airspace, nothing to see, move along....
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All this talk about the RAFs priorities and the MODs lack of funding (with the same tired ol' CVF vs Typhoon arguements from the same tired ol' characters) - yet you still seem to be able to find the money for an entire Sqn of FJs with argueably some of your best pilots and full engineering support etc that are blatently decorational?!
Frontline first? Ring any bells? Anyone?
I'd sleep safer at night knowing that we have a few extra operational Air Defenders up north (even if they aren't in that great an aircraft) than watching a nice Red jet over Eastbourne seafront.
And why do I, as a tax payer, fund the BBMF? The RN Historic flight is a charity and self funds! Yes I agree that the Reds put the best show on in the world and love seeing the Lanc, Hurricanes and Spitfires but times are hard and money is tight. It may indeed be time to look hard at the family silver.
If we are argueing over money Mr RAF, get rid of the decoration, consolidate some of your airfields (yes you can operate more than one type from the same station) and start prioritising the actual needs of the service now (and that includes AT & RW!), not just the wizzy jets that your head honcho egos would like cos thats their background.
Frontline first? Ring any bells? Anyone?
I'd sleep safer at night knowing that we have a few extra operational Air Defenders up north (even if they aren't in that great an aircraft) than watching a nice Red jet over Eastbourne seafront.
And why do I, as a tax payer, fund the BBMF? The RN Historic flight is a charity and self funds! Yes I agree that the Reds put the best show on in the world and love seeing the Lanc, Hurricanes and Spitfires but times are hard and money is tight. It may indeed be time to look hard at the family silver.
If we are argueing over money Mr RAF, get rid of the decoration, consolidate some of your airfields (yes you can operate more than one type from the same station) and start prioritising the actual needs of the service now (and that includes AT & RW!), not just the wizzy jets that your head honcho egos would like cos thats their background.
Last edited by RNGrommits; 17th Apr 2009 at 09:54. Reason: poor spelliing!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: the smoke
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RNGrommits,
Lets not mention HMS Victory shall we, or is that part of the family silver we can just give up. History is a difficult thing to bring back once you've given it up.
G8D
Lets not mention HMS Victory shall we, or is that part of the family silver we can just give up. History is a difficult thing to bring back once you've given it up.
G8D
Grommits, while I don't claim to understand the MoD's balance sheets all that well, I don't think the £5.6 million with £0.7 million additional costs that the Reds had in their budget for 08/09 will really make that much of a difference.
Why does everyone think the Reds cost £100M a year to run or something?
Why does everyone think the Reds cost £100M a year to run or something?
£5.6 million with £0.7 million additional costs that the Reds had in their budget for 08/09 will really make that much of a difference
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually HMS Victory was up for debate as to whether it should be entirely "civilianised" and given over entirely to a charitable trust - I am sure we could probably squeeeze an extra couple of quid out the hordes of school kids that always seem to swarming over it! And if push comes to the shove why not? I'd rather flog of Victory and not all but shut down guzz as they now seem to be proposing.
And I am pleasantly suprised that the Reds cost under £6m a year to run. How much for an F3 sqn a year?
Now, what have the Army got that is old and worth a few quid?
And I am pleasantly suprised that the Reds cost under £6m a year to run. How much for an F3 sqn a year?
Now, what have the Army got that is old and worth a few quid?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No need for the UK to guard its own airspace, nothing to see, move along....
Both the RN and RAF have endured cuts over the years and as mentioned often here there is a common enemy and you all know who that is.
It seems to me that even if there wasn't any cuts and both services had proper funding, there are some here that would still be looking to cut the others balls off, so to speak.
Interservice rivalry
