Sunday Times Story - RAF cuts to bases & Planes (merged)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The days of SAR being mostly maritime are long since gone, due largely to the decimation of the fishing industry; the quantity of overland tasking has also increased with better liaison with civ emergency services and dropping the "Downed aircrew is the primary role" mantra, allowing a wider range of tasking to be undertaken.
I think you'll find that the majority of SAR jobs could be considered Maritime.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Bucks
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
willantis
IF the Times story is correct,and I hope it is not, then it shows a naivety at the top of the RAF which is quite extraordinary, allied with an ignorance of history. In the early '70's, post the oil crisis, the UK was in financial difficulty and the Services were under threat of a Defence Review. The then CAS, a well-meaning gentleman who name was I think Humphries, offered "pre-emptive" cuts to the RAF. The Government of the day said "Thanks very much" and took them. The Defence Review was then held and all three Services, including the RAF, gave up even more. At that time the RN and Army, always much shrewder with internal MoD wrangling, sat on the side-lines until they were forced into cuts. I note that with their usual wisdom, neither the RN nor Army are today offering any "savings" whatsoever. The RN "carrier gambit" is very clever. They know what the future holds, and it won't be good for any of our Services, but unless the RAF leaders sharpen up, the Army and RN will be much less badly mawled by the results of the financial crisis.
Addressing the point about the success of the RAF expanding in the '30's there are several reasons why this would be impossible in the foreseeable future. The main one is the enormous investment required to build an RAF airfield and the almost impossibilty of obtaining Planning Position.
So, those of you with any influence, hang on to every piece of concrete and every hangar you can, because they will NEVER be replaced, even if we have 5 years notice of invasion.
Willantis
Addressing the point about the success of the RAF expanding in the '30's there are several reasons why this would be impossible in the foreseeable future. The main one is the enormous investment required to build an RAF airfield and the almost impossibilty of obtaining Planning Position.
So, those of you with any influence, hang on to every piece of concrete and every hangar you can, because they will NEVER be replaced, even if we have 5 years notice of invasion.
Willantis
I was going to write a post about the RAF that existed when I was a space cadet in the '60s - the RAF that I joined. I was going to wax lyrical about the global force that was, with RAF stations (not bases) from Sydenham to Seletar, from Macrihanish to Masirah, the communications flights, the Maintenance Units, aircraft lined up on the ASP (rather than HASs), the leaders (not managers), the commanders (not executives).....
But then I woke up; those days are gone forever. I shall go and open a bottle, dribble into my glass of Merlot and know that that I enjoyed the dying days of a once-proud Service.
But then I woke up; those days are gone forever. I shall go and open a bottle, dribble into my glass of Merlot and know that that I enjoyed the dying days of a once-proud Service.
.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Europa
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PLAAF to Fly 5th Generation Fighter
Chinese are making even USAF think about F22 cancellations:
http://www.aviationweek.com:80/aw/ge...show=dubai2009
http://www.aviationweek.com:80/aw/ge...show=dubai2009
Last edited by angelorange; 15th Nov 2009 at 20:20. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Waiting to return to the Loire.
Age: 54
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, but post Lisbon...
Why will Britain need the RAF when the EU Defence Force is responsible for all things militaristic.
Italy's Foreign Minister says post-Lisbon EU needs a European Army - Times Online
Italy's Foreign Minister says post-Lisbon EU needs a European Army - Times Online
Sort of drops into place now - doesn't it?
New EU Treaty (not) validated by the last EU country (watch out for the EU Grants there next year) and the political drive for the new EU Forces a few days later, strangely coinciding with the announcement of plans to reduce independant national forces.
The French have Non-NATO, but EU, nukes.
Call me a cynic but, to complete the roll-over, we'll have to start driving on the left next.
Bon Chance, Mein Fruende.
New EU Treaty (not) validated by the last EU country (watch out for the EU Grants there next year) and the political drive for the new EU Forces a few days later, strangely coinciding with the announcement of plans to reduce independant national forces.
The French have Non-NATO, but EU, nukes.
Call me a cynic but, to complete the roll-over, we'll have to start driving on the left next.
Bon Chance, Mein Fruende.
So if they scrap the Reds, does that mean the BBMF will follow shortly after?
After all, we still have to support the troops in the field...
Vec:
Thanks for the maths lesson.
(Did UK milsar '85-97; I attended just 1 ejection in '89. Curiously it was the winchops first ejection attended after 20 years of milsar.)
3 ejections in the last 12 months is 1 every 4 months.
(Did UK milsar '85-97; I attended just 1 ejection in '89. Curiously it was the winchops first ejection attended after 20 years of milsar.)
Stumbled upon this quote yesterday...... 
Not to have an adequate air force in the present state of the world is to compromise the foundations of national freedom and independence.
— Winston Churchill, House of Commons, 14 March 1933.
Not to have an adequate air force in the present state of the world is to compromise the foundations of national freedom and independence.
— Winston Churchill, House of Commons, 14 March 1933.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Erehwon
Posts: 1,146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Buy some Pitt's Specials and paint them red, no one will know! They're piston engined so could replace BBMF at the same time.
They could then flog the Hawks to some third world country whose air force is more powerful than ours.
This would also free up lots of real estate (aka RAF stations) for occupation by illegal immigrants, asylum seekers and their social workers et al.
Just think of the savings - we also don't need to deploy overseas to 'fight' our enemies, we just invite them over here to save travelling time and provide an excuse to get rid of the AT fleet too.
I reckon that's a plan.
They could then flog the Hawks to some third world country whose air force is more powerful than ours.
This would also free up lots of real estate (aka RAF stations) for occupation by illegal immigrants, asylum seekers and their social workers et al.
Just think of the savings - we also don't need to deploy overseas to 'fight' our enemies, we just invite them over here to save travelling time and provide an excuse to get rid of the AT fleet too.
I reckon that's a plan.
Yes, Him
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 2,689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well the SNP has launched a McSpittle-flecked attack on the very idea of closing any Stations in Woadistan. Today's Scotsman (I think, deleted it).
Local/regional papers now jumping on the line: "Keep Our Base, its not that noisy, no, really. Did we say that? Didn't mean it, honest. Keep spending Lads. Pleease?"
Google RAF Base Cuts or similar in Google News Alerts.
Local/regional papers now jumping on the line: "Keep Our Base, its not that noisy, no, really. Did we say that? Didn't mean it, honest. Keep spending Lads. Pleease?"
Google RAF Base Cuts or similar in Google News Alerts.