BBMF & Arrows
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VVCA is right, the capitation rates suggest something well above £5m pa - which is not to say that it's not good value, but that transparently costing these things is a much more solid foundation than the figures quoted here.
S41
S41
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: England
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
vecvechookattack,
you're suggesting that RAFAT cost in excess of £10M per annum. I'm not so sure. Much of the cost is offset with industry on the airshow circuit, particularly when they are overseas. The budget does sit at around 5-6 million.
If you think the money gained from disbanding them would remain in the MoD's budget, you're being a little naive IMHO. Please don't think I'm suggesting that they should be ring fenced, far from it although I think the public would go apesh*t if the government did can them.
Far better to let the Hawks life out and retire the team with a bit of grace. Any argument against would be met with the absolutely correct argument that the procurement of new a/c to keep them going would be absurd whilst we are committed to Herrick and still short of SH.
On the other hand... If we are out of bandit country by then, perhaps it would be palatable, even to the SH chaps!
If you really want to save a few quid... Bin 3 of the E3s. They cost a small fortune and, aside of a few bits & bobs, they don't do much. Reducing them down to 4 airframes would allow them to carry out 1 op at any time, give them more spares and leave a jet free for training. Commit a few crews to the NATO fleet and Bob's your uncle.
you're suggesting that RAFAT cost in excess of £10M per annum. I'm not so sure. Much of the cost is offset with industry on the airshow circuit, particularly when they are overseas. The budget does sit at around 5-6 million.
If you think the money gained from disbanding them would remain in the MoD's budget, you're being a little naive IMHO. Please don't think I'm suggesting that they should be ring fenced, far from it although I think the public would go apesh*t if the government did can them.
Far better to let the Hawks life out and retire the team with a bit of grace. Any argument against would be met with the absolutely correct argument that the procurement of new a/c to keep them going would be absurd whilst we are committed to Herrick and still short of SH.
On the other hand... If we are out of bandit country by then, perhaps it would be palatable, even to the SH chaps!
If you really want to save a few quid... Bin 3 of the E3s. They cost a small fortune and, aside of a few bits & bobs, they don't do much. Reducing them down to 4 airframes would allow them to carry out 1 op at any time, give them more spares and leave a jet free for training. Commit a few crews to the NATO fleet and Bob's your uncle.
How many more hours does the BBMF Lanc have before it is at the end of its flying life? It can't go on forever. The spits and hurricanes no doubt have a decent amount of time left between them all.
Perhaps the Reds could be migrated onto Tucanos - anyone a dab hand with photoshop to give us an idea what they'd look like? We could get the Brazilians to pay for them then.
Perhaps the Reds could be migrated onto Tucanos - anyone a dab hand with photoshop to give us an idea what they'd look like? We could get the Brazilians to pay for them then.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Lincolnshire UK
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe the main spar in the BBMF Lanc isn’t the original, but a replacement specially manufactured by BAe several years ago. They took the opportunity to make a second (spare) spar at the same time. With the relatively few hours PA474 flies each year its current main spar still has enough hours of life to keep her flying for many years and the spare spar is in store for the day when it is required.
With the ability to manufacture just about any part required she should in theory be able to carry on indefinitely – or at least until it isn’t possible to get fuel anymore.
With the ability to manufacture just about any part required she should in theory be able to carry on indefinitely – or at least until it isn’t possible to get fuel anymore.
>or at least until it isn’t possible to get fuel anymore.<
Out of curiosity, can contemporary Merlins and Griffons run on 100LL Avgas or do they need something more exotic?
Out of curiosity, can contemporary Merlins and Griffons run on 100LL Avgas or do they need something more exotic?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone who thinks that cutting either RAFAT or BBMF (or both) will a) release any further significant funding for "frontline" capabilities, or b) have anything other than a highly negative impact on recruitment, morale, visibility / perception of RAF and other armed forces is frankly mad.
And there's the small matter that BBMF is a lasting memorial to those that served in conflicts past and saved us all from a lifetime of Nazism (those of us that would have survived that is). And as for RAFAT, much like HMQ, they represent all that is great about UK plc and are generally fantastic, value for money, ambassadors for the RAF and armed forces in general.
Why does this topic keep getting dredged up time and again (I know it's a discussion forum for all but can't we just consign this debate to where it belongs - the bin!)
And there's the small matter that BBMF is a lasting memorial to those that served in conflicts past and saved us all from a lifetime of Nazism (those of us that would have survived that is). And as for RAFAT, much like HMQ, they represent all that is great about UK plc and are generally fantastic, value for money, ambassadors for the RAF and armed forces in general.
Why does this topic keep getting dredged up time and again (I know it's a discussion forum for all but can't we just consign this debate to where it belongs - the bin!)
Personally, I don't see that the issue is one of costs, mor like perception.
Yes they are fantastic, been watching them since I was a kid. Best in the world IMHO.
However, at a time when people are screaming about overstretch is it acceptable to have 9 (10?)pilots and associated groundcrew/manager/admin staff on full time PR/Recruiting work? All paid from the public purse.
I think the answer is a resounding yes. But I fear I/we may be in a minority as the cuts bite across society.
Yes they are fantastic, been watching them since I was a kid. Best in the world IMHO.
However, at a time when people are screaming about overstretch is it acceptable to have 9 (10?)pilots and associated groundcrew/manager/admin staff on full time PR/Recruiting work? All paid from the public purse.
I think the answer is a resounding yes. But I fear I/we may be in a minority as the cuts bite across society.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for the Reds I am sure there will be a few options on the table from keeping as is to reducing the number of aircraft in the display team, perhaps even changing the aircraft to a cheaper version (running costs), dare I say a turbo prop trainer.
Could always have a formation of UAV's up there in future I suppose. At least that way the pilots need never leave the bar.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Muscat, Oman
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I was at Coningsby (a long time ago) they were talking about resparring the Lanc and that it would give it another 75 years life! Don't know if that was the final result but it shows the motivation to keep this memorial (rather than display team).
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to agree with Wyler.
I think that the RAFAT do a magnificent job for recruiting / PR etc. but its not servicemen that needs persuading. Joe Public is the fella that needs persuading and seeing as though 99% of them have probably never seen the RAFAT live, then retaining the RAFAT may be an uphill struggle we can't win.
I think that the RAFAT do a magnificent job for recruiting / PR etc. but its not servicemen that needs persuading. Joe Public is the fella that needs persuading and seeing as though 99% of them have probably never seen the RAFAT live, then retaining the RAFAT may be an uphill struggle we can't win.
The reds are not getting the 128. Much more difficult to service meaning they would need a larger fleet in order to guarantee displays.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not the technological advancement of the aircraft that has caused this problem. Its the lack of any technological expertise from the maintainers and engineers. Most of them wouldn't know how to fix an aircraft if it didn't involve changing a black box. Ask them to mend the black box and they wouldn't be able to.
Originally Posted by Green Flash
Wasn't it re-sparred with a modded Shack main spar?
Cool Mod
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: 18nm N of LGW
Posts: 6,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
