Decision to axe Harrier is "bonkers".
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an aside, some footage here of a Harrier going under a bridge in what looks like London; pilot by the name of.. 'John Farley'?
BBC News - Archive: New British Harrier Jump Jet unveiled
A likely tale.
BBC News - Archive: New British Harrier Jump Jet unveiled
A likely tale.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Northants
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That bridge..
Looks like Menai Bridge to me. Requires careful lining up down the straights, but just about doable (in the sim). Good to see JF back in the cockpit if only in the dome. Still can't quite get over seeing 30 serviceable jets on the line last Wednesday (14 spares, none required). Bonkers indeed.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Qatar
Age: 68
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
South of the Channel, France still has a credible Naval Aviation, for some years to come - one big nuclear carrier, the "Charles de Gaulle" currently bombing Afghanistan from offshore Pakistan - and three helicopters carriers (Ocean-type vessels)
Aircraft on-board are Rafale (one squadron) and Super-Etendard (two squadrons) plus a small squadron of Hawkeye - all from the french Marine Nationale, not the Air Force.
Just food for thought.
Aircraft on-board are Rafale (one squadron) and Super-Etendard (two squadrons) plus a small squadron of Hawkeye - all from the french Marine Nationale, not the Air Force.
Just food for thought.
According to this Navy News article, Charles de Gaulle is currently being escorted by HMS Cumberland - soon to be decommisioned. I wonder if anyone is struck by the irony of being tasked to support carrier operations in support of NATO in Afghanistan, since our defence review has concluded we do not need carriers as Afghanistan is the priority?
I also remember that in October/November 2001 US Marine Corps AV8Bs did indeed fly sorties over Afghanistan from amphibious vessels.
Of course, the future is JOINT = LAND = ARMY.
I also remember that in October/November 2001 US Marine Corps AV8Bs did indeed fly sorties over Afghanistan from amphibious vessels.
Of course, the future is JOINT = LAND = ARMY.
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 24th Dec 2010 at 23:20.
I understand R.A.F. Harriers were just beginning ops from the decks of the Carriers about the time of the initial operations against the Taliban in 2001. They weren't involved though as I recall?
FB
FB
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Southampton
Age: 54
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF Harrier sqns were deploying alongside the FAA's SHAR sqns aboard our carriers from the mid to late 90s, usually seven of each supported by 3 Sea King AEW2s and 6 Sea King HAS6 to form a balanced and capable air group. Should have stuck with that pattern.
Posted by XV277
Can anyone tell us why the new dockyard crane for Rosyth assembly of the carriers has been made in China? 
http://royal-navy.org/lib/index.php?..._supercarriers
Word from friends who work at Rosyth was that it was a concern even with CVF. Lack of suitable deck paint being mentioned.
http://royal-navy.org/lib/index.php?..._supercarriers
Because that's where they make them? Not anything that's available in UK, maybe even W Europe (I think it's outside Liebherr's range).
And it's f8cking late! Should have arrived in August, but delays on the tidal entry work prevented ship being able to enter the basin.
And it's f8cking late! Should have arrived in August, but delays on the tidal entry work prevented ship being able to enter the basin.
FB
We didn't need what? Ignoring exercises, show the flag activities, and SAR operations.....
For a large part of the 1990s, the main UK military effort was in Bosnia. A carrier was deployed continuously in the Adriatic for those years, with both Sea Harriers and Sea Kings doing all sorts of stuff, including enforcing the no fly zone over Bosnia, doing reece, and ground attack - the Sea Harrier participated in NATO air attacks against the Bosnian Serbs in 1995. On here, many have been dismissive of the small number of aircraft (six Sea Jets) embarked, but turn a blind eye to the fact that the RAF contributions ashore had similar numbers of aircaft, but without the mobility or swing role. The embarked ASW and AEW Sea Kings also contributed to operations. Remember, Yugoslavia did have an air force and a navy.
In the late 90s carriers took part in various other activities, including helping police the no fly zone over Southern Iraq and at least a couple of stand offs with Saddam Hussein. I think that RAF Harrier GR7s were embarked for the first time during one of these crises, hence the inclusion of the Joint Force Harrier concept in the 1998 SDR. After Operation Desert Fox in December 1998, HMS Invincible was sent to the Arabian Gulf as (so the media said) there was a missile threat to the RAF base in Kuwait and the UK wanted another option. On her way back to the UK, Invincible got diverted to the Adriatic to participate in the Kosovo operations.
In 2000, the UK intervention in Sierra Leone involved HMS Illustrious with both types of Harrier embarked, a fact that may not have registered with the UK commander ashore, Brigadier David Richards (now a Knight, a General, and CDS). The political and psychological messages sent by deploying large warships close to land should also be remembered, as well as constant presence, large numbers of helicopters, command and control facilities, medical facilities, and others. I seem to remember that Illustrious made a high speed dash across the Atlantic, but had to wait for the slower Ocean to catch up.
In 2001, Illustrious once again deployed with both Harrier types embarked, for the SAIF SARREA II exercise in Oman. Following the 9/11 attacks in the United States, she was retasked to act as a helicopter carrier (Ocean needed to return to the UK for maintenance) and disembarked her fixed wing aircraft (and grey Sea Kings?). No land based UK fast jets took part in the initial strikes against the Taliban either, although submarines did.
In 2003, Ark Royal acted as a LPH for the invasion of Iraq. The Iraqi air force was mostly dead and burried after over a decade of sanctions and a no fly zone, and Kuwaiti/Bahraini/Qatari airbses were used by the US/UK/Australians. Not that that stopped the US Navy from deploying FIVE carriers.
Since then, our main military involvement has been Iraq and Afghanistan. Apart from the lack of an opponent with an air force or navy, they both lack any length of coastline, Afghanistan being land locked, Iraq having only a tiny coastline - not that this prevents carrier based aircraft operating in both places. Yet we seem to have fallen into a trap, with many believing that:
a)All future operations will be in land locked places.
b)There will never be an enemy navy or air force to worry about.
Apart from needing to retain skills for when CVF arrives, what about the spread of the war on terror to Yemen or Somalia, renewed Argentine aggresion in the South Atlantic, UK involvement in Korean crises, or the political stand off over Iran's nuclear programme getting hotter and turning into a re-run of the 1980s tanker war?
Or what about the crisis in the Ivory Coast? I can see a non combatant evacution operation coming up. But wait - that's how the intervention in Sierra Leone started. It would be s terrible thing to have a Chinook/Jungly Sea King shot down by a MiG from a third world air force (yes, the Ivorian air force has MiGs).
On which note, here is a nice PDF document on NEO Operations. Note the picture of Ocean.
We didn't need what? Ignoring exercises, show the flag activities, and SAR operations.....
For a large part of the 1990s, the main UK military effort was in Bosnia. A carrier was deployed continuously in the Adriatic for those years, with both Sea Harriers and Sea Kings doing all sorts of stuff, including enforcing the no fly zone over Bosnia, doing reece, and ground attack - the Sea Harrier participated in NATO air attacks against the Bosnian Serbs in 1995. On here, many have been dismissive of the small number of aircraft (six Sea Jets) embarked, but turn a blind eye to the fact that the RAF contributions ashore had similar numbers of aircaft, but without the mobility or swing role. The embarked ASW and AEW Sea Kings also contributed to operations. Remember, Yugoslavia did have an air force and a navy.
In the late 90s carriers took part in various other activities, including helping police the no fly zone over Southern Iraq and at least a couple of stand offs with Saddam Hussein. I think that RAF Harrier GR7s were embarked for the first time during one of these crises, hence the inclusion of the Joint Force Harrier concept in the 1998 SDR. After Operation Desert Fox in December 1998, HMS Invincible was sent to the Arabian Gulf as (so the media said) there was a missile threat to the RAF base in Kuwait and the UK wanted another option. On her way back to the UK, Invincible got diverted to the Adriatic to participate in the Kosovo operations.
In 2000, the UK intervention in Sierra Leone involved HMS Illustrious with both types of Harrier embarked, a fact that may not have registered with the UK commander ashore, Brigadier David Richards (now a Knight, a General, and CDS). The political and psychological messages sent by deploying large warships close to land should also be remembered, as well as constant presence, large numbers of helicopters, command and control facilities, medical facilities, and others. I seem to remember that Illustrious made a high speed dash across the Atlantic, but had to wait for the slower Ocean to catch up.
In 2001, Illustrious once again deployed with both Harrier types embarked, for the SAIF SARREA II exercise in Oman. Following the 9/11 attacks in the United States, she was retasked to act as a helicopter carrier (Ocean needed to return to the UK for maintenance) and disembarked her fixed wing aircraft (and grey Sea Kings?). No land based UK fast jets took part in the initial strikes against the Taliban either, although submarines did.
In 2003, Ark Royal acted as a LPH for the invasion of Iraq. The Iraqi air force was mostly dead and burried after over a decade of sanctions and a no fly zone, and Kuwaiti/Bahraini/Qatari airbses were used by the US/UK/Australians. Not that that stopped the US Navy from deploying FIVE carriers.
Since then, our main military involvement has been Iraq and Afghanistan. Apart from the lack of an opponent with an air force or navy, they both lack any length of coastline, Afghanistan being land locked, Iraq having only a tiny coastline - not that this prevents carrier based aircraft operating in both places. Yet we seem to have fallen into a trap, with many believing that:
a)All future operations will be in land locked places.
b)There will never be an enemy navy or air force to worry about.
Apart from needing to retain skills for when CVF arrives, what about the spread of the war on terror to Yemen or Somalia, renewed Argentine aggresion in the South Atlantic, UK involvement in Korean crises, or the political stand off over Iran's nuclear programme getting hotter and turning into a re-run of the 1980s tanker war?
Or what about the crisis in the Ivory Coast? I can see a non combatant evacution operation coming up. But wait - that's how the intervention in Sierra Leone started. It would be s terrible thing to have a Chinook/Jungly Sea King shot down by a MiG from a third world air force (yes, the Ivorian air force has MiGs).
On which note, here is a nice PDF document on NEO Operations. Note the picture of Ocean.
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 23rd Apr 2017 at 14:51.
The Rosyth dockyard Goliath crane has been made by ZPMC in China. It is not a standard product, and as such it could have been made by any suitable fabrication yard or shipyard in UK. Extensive and expensive supervision by the UK contractor has been necessary to ensure compliance with the specification and welding standards.
ZPMC are specialists in container cranes. Their other products are general steel fabrication. They have recently fabricated the new seismically upgraded Oakland Bay Bridge for San Francisco and a Shiploader Wharf for Port Hedland, Australia.
Pity we have exported our bread and butter work to China.
ZPMC are specialists in container cranes. Their other products are general steel fabrication. They have recently fabricated the new seismically upgraded Oakland Bay Bridge for San Francisco and a Shiploader Wharf for Port Hedland, Australia.
Pity we have exported our bread and butter work to China.
It is not a standard product, and as such it could have been made by any suitable fabrication yard or shipyard in UK.
Steelwork, maybe (but not cost-effectively) - control systems and running gear, definitely not. Class supervision to ensure build compliance is standard - just see how many surveyors Lloyds, ABS, DNV etc have in China.
Suspect that a turnkey was required, hence go to a specialist crane manufacturer that can design and build one-offs like this. Babcocks have enough on their plate stitching the ship together, without that. Even Harlands cranes were made in Germany back in the 60s.
Steelwork, maybe (but not cost-effectively) - control systems and running gear, definitely not. Class supervision to ensure build compliance is standard - just see how many surveyors Lloyds, ABS, DNV etc have in China.
Suspect that a turnkey was required, hence go to a specialist crane manufacturer that can design and build one-offs like this. Babcocks have enough on their plate stitching the ship together, without that. Even Harlands cranes were made in Germany back in the 60s.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not_a_boffin,
Off the shelf sir? Suits you sir.
Cranes, China cranes, cranes Manufacturers, China cranes catalog
250 Metres tall..
Tower Crane (Q6015) - China Tower Crane,Construction Machine,Building Machinery in Construction Machinery
Off the shelf sir? Suits you sir.
Cranes, China cranes, cranes Manufacturers, China cranes catalog
250 Metres tall..
Tower Crane (Q6015) - China Tower Crane,Construction Machine,Building Machinery in Construction Machinery
Any chance of getting back to the topic of Harrier? In all the excitement over cranes, my comments got left behind..
FB
We didn't need what? Ignoring exercises, show the flag activities, and SAR operations.....
For a large part of the 1990s, the main UK military effort was in Bosnia. A carrier was deployed continuously in the Adriatic for those years, with both Sea Harriers and Sea Kings doing all sorts of stuff, including enforcing the no fly zone over Bosnia, doing reece, and ground attack - the Sea Harrier participated in NATO air attacks against the Bosnian Serbs in 1995. On here, many have been dismissive of the small number of aircraft (six Sea Jets) embarked, but turn a blind eye to the fact that the RAF contributions ashore had similar numbers of aircaft, but without the mobility or swing role. The embarked ASW and AEW Sea Kings also contributed to operations. Remember, Yugoslavia did have an air force and a navy.
In the late 90s carriers took part in various other activities, including helping police the no fly zone over Southern Iraq and at least a couple of stand offs with Saddam Hussein. I think that RAF Harrier GR7s were embarked for the first time during one of these crises, hence the inclusion of the Joint Force Harrier concept in the 1998 SDR. After Operation Desert Fox in December 1998, HMS Invincible was sent to the Arabian Gulf as (so the media said) there was a missile threat to the RAF base in Kuwait and the UK wanted another option. On her way back to the UK, Invincible got diverted to the Adriatic to participate in the Kosovo operations.
In 2000, the UK intervention in Sierra Leone involved HMS Illustrious with both types of Harrier embarked, a fact that may not have registered with the UK commander ashore, Brigadier David Richards (now a Knight, a General, and CDS). The political and psychological messages sent by deploying large warships close to land should also be remembered, as well as constant presence, large numbers of helicopters, command and control facilities, medical facilities, and others. I seem to remember that Illustrious made a high speed dash across the Atlantic, but had to wait for the slower Ocean to catch up.
In 2001, Illustrious once again deployed with both Harrier types embarked, for the SAIF SARREA II exercise in Oman. Following the 9/11 attacks in the United States, she was retasked to act as a helicopter carrier (Ocean needed to return to the UK for maintenance) and disembarked her fixed wing aircraft (and grey Sea Kings?). No land based UK fast jets took part in the initial strikes against the Taliban either, although submarines did.
In 2003, Ark Royal acted as a LPH for the invasion of Iraq. The Iraqi air force was mostly dead and buried after over a decade of sanctions and a no fly zone, and Kuwaiti/Bahraini/Qatari airbses were used by the US/UK/Australians. Not that that stopped the US Navy from deploying FIVE carriers.
Since then, our main military involvement has been Iraq and Afghanistan. Apart from the lack of an opponent with an air force or navy, they both lack any length of coastline, Afghanistan being land locked, Iraq having only a tiny coastline - not that this prevents carrier based aircraft operating in both places. Yet we seem to have fallen into a trap, with many believing that:
a)All future operations will be in land locked places.
b)There will never be an enemy navy or air force to worry about.
Apart from needing to retain skills for when CVF arrives, what about the spread of the war on terror to Yemen or Somalia, renewed Argentine aggresion in the South Atlantic, UK involvement in Korean crises, or the political stand off over Iran's nuclear programme getting hotter and turning into a re-run of the 1980s tanker war?
Or what about the crisis in the Ivory Coast? I can see a non combatant evacution operation coming up. But wait - that's how the intervention in Sierra Leone started. It would be s terrible thing to have a Chinook/Jungly Sea King shot down by a MiG from a third world air force (yes, the Ivorian air force has MiGs).
On which note, here is a nice PDF document on NEO Operations. Note the picture of Ocean - if that Phalanx was moved then she would have a through deck. Hmm.
We didn't need what? Ignoring exercises, show the flag activities, and SAR operations.....
For a large part of the 1990s, the main UK military effort was in Bosnia. A carrier was deployed continuously in the Adriatic for those years, with both Sea Harriers and Sea Kings doing all sorts of stuff, including enforcing the no fly zone over Bosnia, doing reece, and ground attack - the Sea Harrier participated in NATO air attacks against the Bosnian Serbs in 1995. On here, many have been dismissive of the small number of aircraft (six Sea Jets) embarked, but turn a blind eye to the fact that the RAF contributions ashore had similar numbers of aircaft, but without the mobility or swing role. The embarked ASW and AEW Sea Kings also contributed to operations. Remember, Yugoslavia did have an air force and a navy.
In the late 90s carriers took part in various other activities, including helping police the no fly zone over Southern Iraq and at least a couple of stand offs with Saddam Hussein. I think that RAF Harrier GR7s were embarked for the first time during one of these crises, hence the inclusion of the Joint Force Harrier concept in the 1998 SDR. After Operation Desert Fox in December 1998, HMS Invincible was sent to the Arabian Gulf as (so the media said) there was a missile threat to the RAF base in Kuwait and the UK wanted another option. On her way back to the UK, Invincible got diverted to the Adriatic to participate in the Kosovo operations.
In 2000, the UK intervention in Sierra Leone involved HMS Illustrious with both types of Harrier embarked, a fact that may not have registered with the UK commander ashore, Brigadier David Richards (now a Knight, a General, and CDS). The political and psychological messages sent by deploying large warships close to land should also be remembered, as well as constant presence, large numbers of helicopters, command and control facilities, medical facilities, and others. I seem to remember that Illustrious made a high speed dash across the Atlantic, but had to wait for the slower Ocean to catch up.
In 2001, Illustrious once again deployed with both Harrier types embarked, for the SAIF SARREA II exercise in Oman. Following the 9/11 attacks in the United States, she was retasked to act as a helicopter carrier (Ocean needed to return to the UK for maintenance) and disembarked her fixed wing aircraft (and grey Sea Kings?). No land based UK fast jets took part in the initial strikes against the Taliban either, although submarines did.
In 2003, Ark Royal acted as a LPH for the invasion of Iraq. The Iraqi air force was mostly dead and buried after over a decade of sanctions and a no fly zone, and Kuwaiti/Bahraini/Qatari airbses were used by the US/UK/Australians. Not that that stopped the US Navy from deploying FIVE carriers.
Since then, our main military involvement has been Iraq and Afghanistan. Apart from the lack of an opponent with an air force or navy, they both lack any length of coastline, Afghanistan being land locked, Iraq having only a tiny coastline - not that this prevents carrier based aircraft operating in both places. Yet we seem to have fallen into a trap, with many believing that:
a)All future operations will be in land locked places.
b)There will never be an enemy navy or air force to worry about.
Apart from needing to retain skills for when CVF arrives, what about the spread of the war on terror to Yemen or Somalia, renewed Argentine aggresion in the South Atlantic, UK involvement in Korean crises, or the political stand off over Iran's nuclear programme getting hotter and turning into a re-run of the 1980s tanker war?
Or what about the crisis in the Ivory Coast? I can see a non combatant evacution operation coming up. But wait - that's how the intervention in Sierra Leone started. It would be s terrible thing to have a Chinook/Jungly Sea King shot down by a MiG from a third world air force (yes, the Ivorian air force has MiGs).
On which note, here is a nice PDF document on NEO Operations. Note the picture of Ocean - if that Phalanx was moved then she would have a through deck. Hmm.
If this thread is about Harriers then shouldn't it be moved to the Aviation History and Nostalgia forum .......?
The SHAR has gone, the GR9/T10 has gone. Both of them have done fantastic jobs in the past but, rightly or wrongly (and that discussion has been done to death several times over on this board....), they are no more. None of them are coming back however long and hard you scream and scream and scream. The F35B has been canned in favour of the F35C so who cares about moving the Phalanx on Ocean. It's irrelevant. Time to move on.
I'd write to the Telegraph if I were you.
Oh - and be grateful that the Carriers didn't go the same way!
The SHAR has gone, the GR9/T10 has gone. Both of them have done fantastic jobs in the past but, rightly or wrongly (and that discussion has been done to death several times over on this board....), they are no more. None of them are coming back however long and hard you scream and scream and scream. The F35B has been canned in favour of the F35C so who cares about moving the Phalanx on Ocean. It's irrelevant. Time to move on.
I'd write to the Telegraph if I were you.
Oh - and be grateful that the Carriers didn't go the same way!