When was the RAF at its most capable?

[minigundiplomat]

Cornerstone, don't forget Rinteln (had my tonsils taken out there).

Indeed, I had a rather unhappy week there with glandular fever in 1990.

[Low Flier]

I think you will find that the correct phrase is "since the end of the second world war.".

Nope. 1968 was the only year in the whole of the 20th century during which not one single British serviceman was killed in action. I don't suppose there was such a year in the 19th or 18th centuries either.

There hasn't been such a year in the 21st century, yet, and the way the Afghan nonsense is going it really doesn't look like we'll have such a year for a long time.

[Green Flash]

Whilst agreeing that the mid 70's is a strong contender, may I propose the late evening of 5th June, 1944 please? The RAF had the wherewithall and intent to give Adolfs lads a Sound Thrashing. Both qauntity and quality were in play; piston was reaching it's zenith, jets were evolving, weapons and tactics had reached a high level of maturity, manpower was massive. We had a close relationship with our allies and after succesfully seeing off the Beastly Hun a few years earlier - it was payback time.

[Squirrel 41]

1974 - interesting. But two things strike me - firstly, we need to include SAM Sqns and the RAF Regt Field Sqns - and second, even back in those halcyon days, the amount of strategic transport and rotary wing transport was inadequate for expeditionary warfare - showing that the current unbalanced force structure is nothing new.

The next question is what is (a) the "right" size for today's RAF, if we were spending 30% more than we are now and (b) within the same amount of cash - ie trade offs - what would the appropriate front line look like?

S41

[BEagle]

"....even back in those halcyon days, the amount of strategic transport and rotary wing transport was inadequate for expeditionary warfare...."

Perhaps because then we were rather more interested in defending UK interests than following in American footsteps wherever they chose to play world policeman?

[mad_bob]

Eeer! Madbob ave you harf inched me Moniker...

[BBadanov]

I would go for the 1970s.

Re Jacko's quote: "before the withdrawal of WE177, and when the Tornado was still cutting edge and credible"

Cutting edge and credible??

"Bombs in a bucket,
25 miles from base"....as the song goes!

[rockape2k7]

Cornerstone, don't forget Rinteln (had my tonsils taken out there).

3P

My lad was born there... only came back to me when I read that... aluminium...

[Al R]

MGD: Up to the 90's! During the 90's, accountants ran the RAF. During the 00's, politicians have run the RAF.

Words from that era.. 'New Management Strategy', and 'Moritorium'. From the 80s whenever you went to stores: 'FOFAD' (Fuc4 off - fire at Donnington).

I suppose in 2029, 2009 will seem like golden days. Depressing thought that.

[Pontius Navigator]

If you want absolute power you are looking at 1964 before the Valiants were withdrawn - 4 x Victor 1a, 2 x Victor 2, 3 x Vulcan 2 BS, 3 x Vulcan 1a, 3 x Vulcan 2, Valiant PR, Tanker and TBF. Runs out at about 18 V-force ac on QRA armed with megaton weapons. Countless Canberra sqns in Germany also on QRA.

How do you really stipulate one peak in 90 years? There are many peaks and troughs.

Obviously immediately at its formation it was a most powerful force which, with peace, immediately started to decline.

A peak can then be considered in the 20s and 30s with air policing in Africa and Mesoptamia.

In parallel with this peak was the decline in adherence to biplane technology.

At the same time the air base design, in particular the hangar designs and base locations was a peak.

RAF strength in 1938-42 was also a trough until the massive buildup of the TAF, Bomber, Coastal and Fighter Commands.

How do you measure the WW2 highs of 1944-45 with the 1960 highs of nuclear deterence or the precision capability of the few in 2000-2009?

[Madbob]

Pontius

I started this thread but would question the RAF's ability to project and sustain the air power it once had. 1970 - 1976 is my best guess as when the RAF could really spread its wings across the world. Not only were there "teeth" but also air transport assets to support deployed ops and an MU infrastructure to make repairs and mods to ac in service. (We could have done with that kind of capability to return a certain E3 to service sooner recently.)

We also didn't have all our eggs in one basket. Harriers, Jags and Buccs had the attack roles, Phantoms and Lightnings had air defence (backed up by Hunters for point defence) and Canberras had recce and ECM duties. The V force was still pretty potent and the Nimrod fleet (46 airframes) was supreme in ASW. The Herc and VC10 fleets were still pretty youthful and not totally past their sell by dates as now. We even still had Belfasts, Argosys, Andovers and Britannias not to mention Devons, Pembrokes and HS125s for light communications. There might still have been the odd Twin Pioneer which was pretty useful in certain sandy places....

Pumas were in the inventory from 1971 and the Wessex was also doing excellent work on the SH side. Granted, medium/heavy lift assets were missing.


Nowadays, one gets the impression that a commander before deciding to launch a mission against Terry has to determine what the mission will cost, and get the Treasury to agree to paybefore take off! Can't begin to imagine how we can win a war like that, or imagine Churchill telling to Montgomery to use fewer shells in the barrage that preceded the battle of el Alamein.....

MB

[Pontius Navigator]

Originally Posted by Madbob

the RAF's ability to project and sustain the air power it once had. 1970 - 1976 is my best guess as when the RAF could really spread its wings across the world. Not only were there "teeth" but also air transport assets to support deployed ops and an MU infrastructure to make repairs and mods to ac in service.

Good point. However in 1964, under Plan Addington, Coastal, Transport, Bomber and Fighter Coommands, together with Canberras from RAF G, all flowed through NEAF and MEAF to reinforce FEAF in Confrontation with Indonesia. A fair chunk of inventory was already in theatre as FEAF and included Javelin, Canberra, transport and helicopter sqns.

We also didn't have all our eggs in one basket. [in 1970 - 1976] Harriers, Jags and Buccs had the attack roles, Phantoms and Lightnings had air defence (backed up by Hunters for point defence) and Canberras had recce and ECM duties. The V force was still pretty potent and the Nimrod fleet (46 airframes) was supreme in ASW. The Herc and VC10 fleets were still pretty youthful and not totally past their sell by dates as now. We even still had Belfasts, Argosys, Andovers and Britannias not to mention Devons, Pembrokes and HS125s for light communications. There might still have been the odd Twin Pioneer which was pretty useful in certain sandy places....

Pumas were in the inventory from 1971 and the Wessex was also doing excellent work on the SH side. Granted, medium/heavy lift assets were missing.

But by then we were already placing all the baskets in UK and Europe.

Nowadays, one gets the impression that a commander before deciding to launch a mission against Terry has to determine what the mission will cost, and get the Treasury to agree to paybefore take off! Can't begin to imagine how we can win a war like that, or imagine Churchill telling to Montgomery to use fewer shells in the barrage that preceded the battle of el Alamein.....MB

Actually having studied the Confrontation, similar arguments applied then too with MOD requesting and the cabinet finally approving deployment. Even after the 'off' we were held back in Aden as they belatedly realised the FEAF bases were becoming overloaded and vulnerable to attack.

So for out and out power projection the 1960s was one pinacle. In terms of modern jets the 1970s was clearly a contender wit aircraft still ordered in significant numbers.

[BEagle]

Peak numerical strength of the V-force was probably Dec 62 - Mar 63 with some 22 squadrons of V-bombers.

Plus another 20 Thor missile sites, each with 3 missiles per site.

The emphasis back then was on nuclear deterrence and the air defence of the UK as well as other UK interests including BAOR.

This 'agile' or 'expeditionary' bolleaux is a more recent phenomenon whose morality many people are beginning to question. Even in 1984 when I started on the VC10K, we didn't have any mission requirements involving offensive operations - although one did raise its head later and we were somewhat surprised at being involved in something other than purely defensive activity.

[Pontius Navigator]

Originally Posted by BEagle

Peak numerical strength of the V-force was probably Dec 62 - Mar 63

Thank you. I have turned the rest of your post around reply.

Even in 1984 when I started on the VC10K, we didn't have any mission requirements involving offensive operations - although one did raise its head later and we were somewhat surprised at being involved in something other than purely defensive activity

Though we did walk a tight rope at Suez which was arguably a war of choice. Later, in the mid-late 60s we planned an offensive operation against a 3rd party country. Ostensibly it would have been a self-defence operation with 'clear' military and political objectives and justification, though I could not see it at the time.

This 'agile' or 'expeditionary' bolleaux is a more recent phenomenon whose morality many people are beginning to question.

I suspect that it is smoke and mirrors and a necessary replacement for the pre-70s permanent bases between UK and the Far East. As always, active operations are more expensive that effective deterence.

[The Gorilla]

IMHO, right up to the point the Tories brought in NMS - New Management Strategy. From that day on the Stn Cdr and his cohorts had to account for every bean they spent, every department became acutely aware of how much everything cost. That was the beginning of the end and broadly coincided with options for change, front line first etc etc.

[sisemen]

IMHO, right up to the point the Tories brought in NMS - New Management Strategy. From that day on the Stn Cdr and his cohorts had to account for every bean they spent, every department became acutely aware of how much everything cost. That was the beginning of the end and broadly coincided with options for change, front line first etc etcIMHO, right up to the point the Tories brought in NMS - New Management Strategy. From that day on the Stn Cdr and his cohorts had to account for every bean they spent, every department became acutely aware of how much everything cost. That was the beginning of the end and broadly coincided with options for change, front line first etc etc.

.....and that was the point at which I quit! Having been forced into the position of bringing in NMS to a not so secret base close by the Thames I could see the writing on the wall. And so it came to pass

1976 - 79 the RAF was pushing over 100,000 strength with new aircraft types appearing all over the place - and still most of the old ones (V Force etc) still in place. Golden years ... but try telling that to the youth of today; they'll never believe you ......

[Tiger_mate]

but try telling that to the youth of today; they'll never believe you

I once did tell that to student aircrew in response to being questioned on changes good and bad over the years. I normally mention the high morale despite weekly Tacevals which in turn demonstrated the rapport and bond between air and ground trades in achieving a specific objective laid down by NATO. Freezing German winters did little to dampen spirits, and work hard / play hard meant what it said. The answer I got which is quite reasonable though in some ways quite sad when discussing the present day was: "We do not know anything differant".

[Hamish 123]

While the 70's & early 80s RAF certainly had a great number of very capable aircraft, didn't the Falklands War reveal that there was a severe lack of weaponry to hang off pylons? Wasn't it the case that the Black Buck raids required every single available 1,000 lb iron bomb in the RAF's inventory? And that the the USA supplied the modern sidewinders - while presumably the Phantom QRAs were still using the old models?

Apart from the nuclear capability, could the RAF of that period have fought a sustained conventional war (unlikely though that prospect would have been), with such small stocks of modern conventional weapons?

[tarnish26]

Surely the 1940's....the last time we stuffed anyone that was a real threat....if it was not for the young boys flying in those days none of us would be using pprune today!!!

[anotherthing]

The '74 list is sad reading indeed when looked at levels today.

Maybe a more intersting question and comparison would be 'When was the UK armed forces as a collective at their most capable'?..

But we did still have over 30 stations more than today - in the UK alone...

Doesn't mean that much if by cutting some stations we gained more capable aircraft... How many Tornados is one Typhoon worth, for instance?

Obviously if you can throw huge numbers at something like the Chinese do, then quality can be dropped slightly as attrition rates will not count for as much (in the eyes of the politicians), but when you're cash strapped as we are in the UK surely cutting bases is better if (a big if), the money is spent on superior equipment?

There must be a position somewhere in the middle of sheer numbers and quality of training (which the UK excels at) and equipment that is the optimum mix when talking about capability as a force.