Cas View Of The Future
Thread Starter
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
From: Crossing Charlie
Cas View Of The Future
This from last Sunday's Telegraph, CAS's view of the future may cause a few eyebrows to be raised in the RN/FAA and the Army/AAC.
Air Force Chief hints that the Navy's carrier jets are doomed
SEAN RAYMENT Defence Correspondent
THE HEAD of the RAF has started a turf war within the Armed Forces after questioning the future of the Royal Navy's jets.
Air Chief Marshal Sir Glenn Torpy, the Chief of the Air Staff, told The Sunday Telegraph that rationalisation in the Armed Forces would lead to the RAF running all combat jet operations.
The move would effectively neuter the Navy's maritime air force, the Fleet Air Arm, leaving the service with just a small complement of helicopters.
Sir Glenn, a former Tornado pilot, accepted that the decision would be controversial but said that such consolidation of air power was "inevitable". "We have got to kill some sacred cows to make ourselves more efficient," he said.
His comments were made amid increasing signs of friction between chiefs in the Forces. Last week, Admiral Sir Jonathon Band, the head of the Navy, attacked his Army counterpart, General Sir Richard Dannatt, for suggesting that two new aircraft carriers were Cold War relics. Sir Glenn, 55, who retires next month, praised the Typhoon, the RAF's controversial multi-role combat jet, which, like the carriers, has been,dismissed by many senior officers as a waste of money. “It is a world class aeroplane," he said. The RAF chief said that anyone, including his fellow senior officers, who suggested that the aircraft was a waste of money was speaking "rubbish". He also disclosed that the Typhoon force will consist of around 123 jets and not the 232 originally planned.
Sir Glenn said that the Armed Forces desperately needed a strategic Defence Review to ensure the military was properly "resourced and funded" to meet future threats facing Britain. But it will be Sir Glenn's claim that future fixed-wing combat operations would be flown and commanded by the RAF that will cause most concern in the other Services.
If his prediction is borne out, the move will effectively spell the end of the Fleet Air Arm, which was formed in 1912 and has seen action in every major campaign since the First World War. Among the FAA's battle honours are the crippling of the Italian Fleet in Taranto Harbour by Swordfish biplanes in 1940 and its part in the sinking of the German pocket battleship Bismark the following year. During the Falklands conflict, the FAA's Sea Harriers played a vital role in protecting the task force, shooting down 21 Argentine aircraft in air-to-air combat.
The FAA is composed of 6,200 personnel and currently flies the ground attack version of the Harrier as well as helicopters. The Navy is hoping its role will be significantly expanded when two new large carriers are built, allowing it to fly supersonic F35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft. But Sir Glenn predicted that the RAF would take over control of all fixed-wing aircraft operations, effectively;control of the JSFs from the Navy.
Sir Glenn said: "Resources and finance drive you to rationalisation.
"I think over time you will see further rationalisation. I think you will find over time that the Air Force... will end up doing (all) aviation."
When asked whether such a move would mean the end of the Fleet Air Arm and the Army Air Corps, he said: "Well we'll wait and see what happens”. We'll see further consolidation, it is an inevitability as we try and make ourselves as efficient as possible. We have got to kill some sacred cows to make ourselves efficient. The public demand and deserve value for money and if that means we have to rationalise, that is what we have got to do:"
Is this the parting shot of a Chief about to move on? Surprised there were not other Sunday Telegraph readers who saw this
LB
Air Force Chief hints that the Navy's carrier jets are doomed
SEAN RAYMENT Defence Correspondent
THE HEAD of the RAF has started a turf war within the Armed Forces after questioning the future of the Royal Navy's jets.
Air Chief Marshal Sir Glenn Torpy, the Chief of the Air Staff, told The Sunday Telegraph that rationalisation in the Armed Forces would lead to the RAF running all combat jet operations.
The move would effectively neuter the Navy's maritime air force, the Fleet Air Arm, leaving the service with just a small complement of helicopters.
Sir Glenn, a former Tornado pilot, accepted that the decision would be controversial but said that such consolidation of air power was "inevitable". "We have got to kill some sacred cows to make ourselves more efficient," he said.
His comments were made amid increasing signs of friction between chiefs in the Forces. Last week, Admiral Sir Jonathon Band, the head of the Navy, attacked his Army counterpart, General Sir Richard Dannatt, for suggesting that two new aircraft carriers were Cold War relics. Sir Glenn, 55, who retires next month, praised the Typhoon, the RAF's controversial multi-role combat jet, which, like the carriers, has been,dismissed by many senior officers as a waste of money. “It is a world class aeroplane," he said. The RAF chief said that anyone, including his fellow senior officers, who suggested that the aircraft was a waste of money was speaking "rubbish". He also disclosed that the Typhoon force will consist of around 123 jets and not the 232 originally planned.
Sir Glenn said that the Armed Forces desperately needed a strategic Defence Review to ensure the military was properly "resourced and funded" to meet future threats facing Britain. But it will be Sir Glenn's claim that future fixed-wing combat operations would be flown and commanded by the RAF that will cause most concern in the other Services.
If his prediction is borne out, the move will effectively spell the end of the Fleet Air Arm, which was formed in 1912 and has seen action in every major campaign since the First World War. Among the FAA's battle honours are the crippling of the Italian Fleet in Taranto Harbour by Swordfish biplanes in 1940 and its part in the sinking of the German pocket battleship Bismark the following year. During the Falklands conflict, the FAA's Sea Harriers played a vital role in protecting the task force, shooting down 21 Argentine aircraft in air-to-air combat.
The FAA is composed of 6,200 personnel and currently flies the ground attack version of the Harrier as well as helicopters. The Navy is hoping its role will be significantly expanded when two new large carriers are built, allowing it to fly supersonic F35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft. But Sir Glenn predicted that the RAF would take over control of all fixed-wing aircraft operations, effectively;control of the JSFs from the Navy.
Sir Glenn said: "Resources and finance drive you to rationalisation.
"I think over time you will see further rationalisation. I think you will find over time that the Air Force... will end up doing (all) aviation."
When asked whether such a move would mean the end of the Fleet Air Arm and the Army Air Corps, he said: "Well we'll wait and see what happens”. We'll see further consolidation, it is an inevitability as we try and make ourselves as efficient as possible. We have got to kill some sacred cows to make ourselves efficient. The public demand and deserve value for money and if that means we have to rationalise, that is what we have got to do:"
Is this the parting shot of a Chief about to move on? Surprised there were not other Sunday Telegraph readers who saw this
LB
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 296
Likes: 0
From: ball gazing
Surprised there were not other Sunday Telegraph readers who saw this
...
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
From: Southampton
And a hell of a lot better designed than any of the RN battleships 
No, she wasn't. Bismarck's (and her twin sister Tirpitz's) designers needed 53,000 tons to achieve what the RN managed on 35,000 tons. Also what they came up with turned out to be a glass jawed giant, with parts of her armour which was supposed to effective against 15" shells being penetrated by 8" shells from cruisers. They wasted a lot of weight aboard ship by having a secondary anti ship armament AND a tertiary anti aircraft armament, when every other navy had opted for a dual purpose secondary armament. When the Admiralty designers found out about this they were astonished. The RN and USN had the benefit of testing WW1 battleships to destruction and incorporated the lessons learned in their new construction. The Germans did not have access to this data, and had to make do with updating existing WW1 designs, The Bismarck class being directly descended from the Baden class of twenty years before. Even the German designers admitted they produced poor seaboats, better suited to the Baltic than the Atlantic.
No, she wasn't. Bismarck's (and her twin sister Tirpitz's) designers needed 53,000 tons to achieve what the RN managed on 35,000 tons. Also what they came up with turned out to be a glass jawed giant, with parts of her armour which was supposed to effective against 15" shells being penetrated by 8" shells from cruisers. They wasted a lot of weight aboard ship by having a secondary anti ship armament AND a tertiary anti aircraft armament, when every other navy had opted for a dual purpose secondary armament. When the Admiralty designers found out about this they were astonished. The RN and USN had the benefit of testing WW1 battleships to destruction and incorporated the lessons learned in their new construction. The Germans did not have access to this data, and had to make do with updating existing WW1 designs, The Bismarck class being directly descended from the Baden class of twenty years before. Even the German designers admitted they produced poor seaboats, better suited to the Baltic than the Atlantic.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
From: planet earth
Possibly, but I stand by my statement on the princpal that von Tirpitz had the better doctrine in ship design which was translated into the Krigmarine's capitol ships in WWII. Their gunnery was way better too.
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
From: Several miles SSW of Watford Gap
Gnd
Only in terms of providing air cover to the RN as it evacuates the Army 
if you bite at that then you're holding on too tight
Thought the RAF was only a support arm for the land forces anyway, give it all to the Army???????
if you bite at that then you're holding on too tight
