RAF on Radio 4 Now
If the Army and Navy really want the RAF, let them have it. It's FUBAR'ed anyway and the blame for that sad fact rests not with either the RN or Army.
For years we have promoted a culture of saying yes, without thinking about the consequences. We have put an individuals ability to act as treasurer for the local brownies on a par, if not above, their ability to lead, motivate or do their job.
We have promoted people beyond their ability, and out of awkward situations. Most of all, we have all sat back and gone with the flow.
Those that like wearing green will stay, those who don't will leave. Of those who leave, the vast majority (possessing most of the experience)will do very well. There will be naysayers and doomsters, but hey, looking at these threads there will be if they stay anyway.
I find it just a little sad that after years of busting a gut to help out the guys on the ground, their counterparts would turn on you for the promise of a few clapped out aircraft and some crumbling infrastructure.
The RN I can understand; this loomed as a one or the other fight and I don't blame them for weilding the knife. The Harrier debacle didn't cover anyone in glory either.
However, the Army have not come out of this smelling of roses. I have nothing but respect for the majority on the ground, and a certain QHI from Wattisham who pulled our nuts out the fire one night, but Tim Collins et al have done you no favours.
For years we have promoted a culture of saying yes, without thinking about the consequences. We have put an individuals ability to act as treasurer for the local brownies on a par, if not above, their ability to lead, motivate or do their job.
We have promoted people beyond their ability, and out of awkward situations. Most of all, we have all sat back and gone with the flow.
Those that like wearing green will stay, those who don't will leave. Of those who leave, the vast majority (possessing most of the experience)will do very well. There will be naysayers and doomsters, but hey, looking at these threads there will be if they stay anyway.
I find it just a little sad that after years of busting a gut to help out the guys on the ground, their counterparts would turn on you for the promise of a few clapped out aircraft and some crumbling infrastructure.
The RN I can understand; this loomed as a one or the other fight and I don't blame them for weilding the knife. The Harrier debacle didn't cover anyone in glory either.
However, the Army have not come out of this smelling of roses. I have nothing but respect for the majority on the ground, and a certain QHI from Wattisham who pulled our nuts out the fire one night, but Tim Collins et al have done you no favours.
Last edited by minigundiplomat; 17th Aug 2010 at 19:48.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is all so infuriating. Instead of complaining how unfair it is, why not state the case that needs to be stated. The RAF is vested with expertise in airpower - if it flies, then the RAF should oversee and operate it.
The only service that has embraced Jointery is the RAF, followed by the Navy and slowly lumbering up to the start line is the Army. The RAF is being so meek and mild because of an on-going identity crisis after changing so many times to keep pace with an equipment programme still firmly based in the Cold War. I have spent so long trying to understand the customers we serve, whilst the Army officers I have worked with have exhibited the same level of knowledge as my sofa on the utility of airpower.
B***ocks to all this stuff about disbanding the RAF - give us the air assets and reap the economies of one force operating and coordinating the lot.
I need a drink.
The only service that has embraced Jointery is the RAF, followed by the Navy and slowly lumbering up to the start line is the Army. The RAF is being so meek and mild because of an on-going identity crisis after changing so many times to keep pace with an equipment programme still firmly based in the Cold War. I have spent so long trying to understand the customers we serve, whilst the Army officers I have worked with have exhibited the same level of knowledge as my sofa on the utility of airpower.
B***ocks to all this stuff about disbanding the RAF - give us the air assets and reap the economies of one force operating and coordinating the lot.
I need a drink.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 58
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if it flies, then the RAF should oversee and operate it.
With that logic 'if it can march the Army should oversee and operate it & if it swims - you get my point!!! You pompous tw*t
PS the Yanks provide the Air Power now days, get a grasp of reality and remember, the Ruskies are friendly now - you have no job!
So on the basis that RAF movements system is rubbish (by the way, I saw more Army movers this summer in theatre than I did RAF), our AT fleet is knackered (so would your Challengers be if they were bought second hand and then run into the ground) and we can't march (I didn't notice much requirement for me being able to march in theatre), let's just disband the RAF.
Obviously a well reasoned, logically thought out and presented argument there. Almost up there with the 'because I said so' line you resort to when you know you have lost an argument with a child. Just the sort of line I have come to expect from senior army officers and washed-up ex senior army officers.
As for that clown Kiley and his
No, the RAF doesn't work for the Army. There are parts of the RAF currently engaged on operations as the supporting element, commanded by the CFACC. On a UK national level, the RAF 'works for' Defence as part of the MOD. It only creates a muddle if you are irretrievably stupid or have absolutely no understanding of Defence and its structures.
I'll give you a hint Mr Kiley - they are already part of one force, the Royal Air Force. And if you can't find a single one that doesn't want to move across to the Army, then you obviously haven't looked very hard.
It's so frustrating trying to have a reasoned argument with people that have absolutely no clue whatsoever
Obviously a well reasoned, logically thought out and presented argument there. Almost up there with the 'because I said so' line you resort to when you know you have lost an argument with a child. Just the sort of line I have come to expect from senior army officers and washed-up ex senior army officers.
As for that clown Kiley and his
"The existence of the RAF creates a muddle, They work for the Army , they might as well be in it"
Harrier pilots, RAF mechanics, ...I haven't met a single one who wouldn't be happy to integrate into one single force"
"There is considerable love for Harrier pilots and there is nothing but awe for Chinook pilots and they all should be part of one force"
"There is considerable love for Harrier pilots and there is nothing but awe for Chinook pilots and they all should be part of one force"
It's so frustrating trying to have a reasoned argument with people that have absolutely no clue whatsoever
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Melchette01 said:
"It's so frustrating trying to have a reasoned argument with people that have absolutely no clue whatsoever"
Which made me instantly remember this gem!
"If were talking about bits of the military that are no longer needed lets start looking at the Parachute Regiment."
Odd that a statement about a military unit that has a short but honourable tradition, which allows its members to do their job very very well....No matter how they get there should come from a poster who feels that:
"Its the other services job to learn what the RAF does"
But remains clueless about premier infantry.
Please take your own advice, and you may learn why the paras (and their can do attitude) are actually quite essential to the British armies ORBAT!
I suppose under that same kind of clueless thinking, you would be calling for AWACS, Typhoon and any other current RAF stuff not being used to be scrapped too.
Of course if the paras were scrapped as you suggest, then their NATO means of delivery could be scrapped too I suppose...The Hercules!
"It's so frustrating trying to have a reasoned argument with people that have absolutely no clue whatsoever"
Which made me instantly remember this gem!
"If were talking about bits of the military that are no longer needed lets start looking at the Parachute Regiment."
Odd that a statement about a military unit that has a short but honourable tradition, which allows its members to do their job very very well....No matter how they get there should come from a poster who feels that:
"Its the other services job to learn what the RAF does"
But remains clueless about premier infantry.
Please take your own advice, and you may learn why the paras (and their can do attitude) are actually quite essential to the British armies ORBAT!
I suppose under that same kind of clueless thinking, you would be calling for AWACS, Typhoon and any other current RAF stuff not being used to be scrapped too.
Of course if the paras were scrapped as you suggest, then their NATO means of delivery could be scrapped too I suppose...The Hercules!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to double post, but I don't want to be mis-understood here.
Just as I know the paras have been ultra busy for years in Afghanistan, and doing
some very fierce and bloody fighting (but do wonder where a poster who does
not realise this is based/stationed), I also know that a large part of the RAF
(and RN come to that) have been there too, being very busy, and doing some
very brave things! I am all for keeping all three services, and actually think all
three need more gear, not less.
The army lads on the ground (including the paras) love the support they get from
the RAF, be it kinetic help, or water. All are dangerous to deliver.
Just as I know the paras have been ultra busy for years in Afghanistan, and doing
some very fierce and bloody fighting (but do wonder where a poster who does
not realise this is based/stationed), I also know that a large part of the RAF
(and RN come to that) have been there too, being very busy, and doing some
very brave things! I am all for keeping all three services, and actually think all
three need more gear, not less.
The army lads on the ground (including the paras) love the support they get from
the RAF, be it kinetic help, or water. All are dangerous to deliver.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Ruskies are friendly now
Gnd
.......remember, the Ruskies are friendly now - you have no job!
Tell that to the RAF crews who get to explore the northern North Sea and North Atlantic shadowing the (very heavily armed) Russian bombers that still frequently test the response of our AD forces and support tankers.
We definitely still have a job...... I hope I someday get to live in the world that you think you do.
.......remember, the Ruskies are friendly now - you have no job!
Tell that to the RAF crews who get to explore the northern North Sea and North Atlantic shadowing the (very heavily armed) Russian bombers that still frequently test the response of our AD forces and support tankers.
We definitely still have a job...... I hope I someday get to live in the world that you think you do.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's stupid comments like that that make the rest of HMF want to get rid of you!
With that logic 'if it can march the Army should oversee and operate it & if it swims - you get my point!!! You pompous tw*t
PS the Yanks provide the Air Power now days, get a grasp of reality and remember, the Ruskies are friendly now - you have no job
With that logic 'if it can march the Army should oversee and operate it & if it swims - you get my point!!! You pompous tw*t
PS the Yanks provide the Air Power now days, get a grasp of reality and remember, the Ruskies are friendly now - you have no job
what planet are you from?!
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
This thread is a microcosm of exactly what's about to happen in Main Building - a few lofty pitches about delivering Air Power, countered by the current reality of how that works in the real world. Then instead of the RAF building the case of how Afghanistan and Iraq are no more representative of future operations than the Falkland were of past operations, it rapidly descends into sniping and penis measuring. The bean counters can't beat rational arguments or justify their actions, so instead they rely on inter-service attacks to do the job for them - if this 'reasoned" discussion is anything to go by, their work is done.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 146 Likes
on
28 Posts
No paras = no Hercules??
It's because the Hercules are all rather busy doing other stuff that there are only 120 paras currently qualified to jump out of them.
It's because the Hercules are all rather busy doing other stuff that there are only 120 paras currently qualified to jump out of them.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: North Yorkshire
Age: 82
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CP
You are showing in spades your own ignorance of the other Services while carping on about how little they understand the RAF. I suggest you stop demonstrating your hypocrisy before you make an even bigger fool of yourself.
Of course we need a separate RAF, just as we need an Army and a RN. There is no way the RAF will disappear. Stop being so blasted paranoid.
You are showing in spades your own ignorance of the other Services while carping on about how little they understand the RAF. I suggest you stop demonstrating your hypocrisy before you make an even bigger fool of yourself.
Of course we need a separate RAF, just as we need an Army and a RN. There is no way the RAF will disappear. Stop being so blasted paranoid.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No actually Lyneham has 24 Hercules sitting on the pan with crews waiting to collar the nearest para squad, just so they can go flying.
FFS some people need to get a life.
All these Army tw@s would soon shut up about binning the RAF/ Albert when their supplies stop coming to their patrols and FOBs.
FFS some people need to get a life.
All these Army tw@s would soon shut up about binning the RAF/ Albert when their supplies stop coming to their patrols and FOBs.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Gnd
the Ruskies are friendly now
It was preceded by a programme called 'Why Russia Spies'. Those who think the Russians have gone away would do well to listen to it on iPlayer.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: North Yorkshire
Age: 82
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CP
Probably for reasons not too dissimilar to those requiring Tornado x 2 varieties, Typhoon, Harrier etc "segments" in the RAF fast flying segment. Different horses for different courses.
Probably for reasons not too dissimilar to those requiring Tornado x 2 varieties, Typhoon, Harrier etc "segments" in the RAF fast flying segment. Different horses for different courses.
Do you fly? Do you support the Army on the ground on the front line? Or are you just some REMF sitting in an air conditioned cabin at KAF?
PS the Yanks provide the Air Power now days, get a grasp of reality and remember, the Ruskies are friendly now - you have no job!
And that is typical of the understanding of (the broad spectrum of) air power one can expect from the green. Also an unrealistic and ill-informed understanding of the "Ruskies" in the current climate.
you pompous t**t
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
vecvechookattack. Not wishing to make an Australian pun of your callsign, wouldn't your proposal lead to a headless chicken? How else do you work towards avoiding gaps , duplication and uneven tasking?
course_profile. When you get a moment, I would urge you to familiarise yourself with how the RM is organised and deployed. Despite the efforts in the 'Stan at the moment, it is not just another highly selected and trained Army Unit. They are not Army but an integral element of the RN. They function to go to sea in warships. They are more integral and important to the RN than the Regiment is to the Air Force.
We digress.
course_profile. When you get a moment, I would urge you to familiarise yourself with how the RM is organised and deployed. Despite the efforts in the 'Stan at the moment, it is not just another highly selected and trained Army Unit. They are not Army but an integral element of the RN. They function to go to sea in warships. They are more integral and important to the RN than the Regiment is to the Air Force.
We digress.