Decision to axe Harrier is "bonkers".
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How are you judging an aircraft that isnt there with the British forces against one that is?? The Harrier didn't have Brimstone intergration when it left service but it was in future plans. I think the reality is that teh Harrier would have been a useful asset to have in this campaign but to compare to Tornado is fairly pointless as they complimented each other when in service .
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: oxford
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JAJ
Any thoughts on the lack of tankers available now to support the requested GR4 Herrick swap for a few weeks as they are busy with Ellemy, Herrick, Q, Falklands etc....
Not trying to take anything away from their fine work over the last few weeks - just pointing out the impact that having to support this extra op is having, ie a huge effect on AAR elsewhere.
... and i suggest you don't ask what happened to the last attempted swap in May..... it doesn't validate the 'GR4 is very servicable statements'
Occasional aviator - are you a helicopter nav at the sharp end?
Any thoughts on the lack of tankers available now to support the requested GR4 Herrick swap for a few weeks as they are busy with Ellemy, Herrick, Q, Falklands etc....
Not trying to take anything away from their fine work over the last few weeks - just pointing out the impact that having to support this extra op is having, ie a huge effect on AAR elsewhere.
... and i suggest you don't ask what happened to the last attempted swap in May..... it doesn't validate the 'GR4 is very servicable statements'
Occasional aviator - are you a helicopter nav at the sharp end?
lj - AAR, as an enabling asset is often in demand and of course the lack of it will affect all users, wherever they are based. Our own issues with the VC10 & Tristar problems mean that we must increasingly rely on other services to provide airborne fuel. Which, actually, is a good thing. It gets nations who perhaps don't have any offensive capability they are willing or able to offer and gives them a welcome place supporting the task. This may well reflect positively for them politically.
There will always be events that stand out from the norm and perhaps the "it doesn't validate the 'GR4 is very servicable statements'" is one of them. As I have repeatedly stated, my own det serviced well more than 100% of the task over the 3 1/2 months we were there, never once failing to get aircraft airborne.
There will always be events that stand out from the norm and perhaps the "it doesn't validate the 'GR4 is very servicable statements'" is one of them. As I have repeatedly stated, my own det serviced well more than 100% of the task over the 3 1/2 months we were there, never once failing to get aircraft airborne.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kilmarnock,United Kingdom
Age: 68
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"If we'd have turned up with lusty or vince instead of the GR4s, we would not have had a seat at the top table." "Rafale is doing well, but there are loads of them and interestingly we seem to get more out of the land-based ones that we do out of those coming off CDG."
If we had turned up with either it would have been a miracle since Invincible went out of service in 2005 and Illustrious was in refit! Prior to SDSR Ark Royal was the only carrier available that could have been deployed with a Tailored Air Group of either Harrier's and Helo's like the Sea King Asac7 or Apache. She had in fact exercised at sea with the latter in 2010. Ocean is now in the vicinity with AAC Apache's aboard having taken weeks to work up from a new ship just in case needed. Now it seems that it is.
When CDG first deployed it was with eight Rafale F3's though that figure was then boosted by pulling in aircraft that were being used for Trials. It is still a fairly small number but don't forget she still carries the Super Etendard.
I would be interested to learn what you mean by a seat at the top table and how we only enjoy one thanks to our Tornado FJ deployment. Looks to many that France is the driving force behind this intervention with their recent decision to deploy of Attack helos being a case in point. They decide to act and we appear to follow.
If we had turned up with either it would have been a miracle since Invincible went out of service in 2005 and Illustrious was in refit! Prior to SDSR Ark Royal was the only carrier available that could have been deployed with a Tailored Air Group of either Harrier's and Helo's like the Sea King Asac7 or Apache. She had in fact exercised at sea with the latter in 2010. Ocean is now in the vicinity with AAC Apache's aboard having taken weeks to work up from a new ship just in case needed. Now it seems that it is.
When CDG first deployed it was with eight Rafale F3's though that figure was then boosted by pulling in aircraft that were being used for Trials. It is still a fairly small number but don't forget she still carries the Super Etendard.
I would be interested to learn what you mean by a seat at the top table and how we only enjoy one thanks to our Tornado FJ deployment. Looks to many that France is the driving force behind this intervention with their recent decision to deploy of Attack helos being a case in point. They decide to act and we appear to follow.
Originally Posted by draken55
They decide to act and we appear to follow.
And, yes, we then followed. Political games. 
Rarely played at the behest of those doing the job.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Midlands
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can quite categorically say that everyone who said that we should have binned Tornado and kept Harrier has been comprehensively proved wrong by this operation
We should have kept both types for the complete capability, yes, we should have saved money else where.
issues with the VC10 & Tristar problems mean that we must increasingly rely on other services to provide airborne fuel. Which, actually, is a good thing
Last edited by Justanopinion; 1st Jun 2011 at 05:30.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Southern UK
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We should have kept both types for the complete capability, yes, we should have saved money else where.
It might have seemed a sweeping statement, but I can back it up with some fairly concrete stuff though not on a public forum please! I wasn't actually comapring the two aircraft types. Harrier would probably have done just as well if not better in the current dynamic bit, and if we'd based it the same place and given it enough tanker support so it could take off with a decent warload and bring stuff back if necessary - and can resupply really quickly when we run out of particular things. However, there weren't enough of them and there are things which we definitely couldn't have done with Harrier. For this particular conflict if I were to have to choose between spending money on a carrier or more tankers or more ISR, I'd go for the latter two every time because they would have enhanced effect. In fact, if I could sell some Tornados and buy ISR capability (not necessarily assets) I'd do that too.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kilmarnock,United Kingdom
Age: 68
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OA, Many readers will have found your post of 31 May rather interesting but you appear to have trumped it with this new one! You seem to be indicating that the Harrier "would have done just as well if not better" presumably than the GR4 which your previous post had stated was needed to have "a seat at the top table" whatever that meant. Indeed you now wish you could trade the GR4 for Tankers or more ISR.
As to your "if we based it at the same place" point, how about on an aircraft carrier whose proximity to Libya reduces the need for tanker support? This time last year we had ample Harriers and GR4's. Now post SDSR we have none of the former and by your own indications perhaps too many of the latter.
Illustrious sails from Rosyth on 3 June to work up to replace Ocean later this year. She was due to have sailed earlier but her refit had to be altered and so delayed as she is returning as an LPH and not our on call Strike Carrier. She still has a ski jump. Our Harriers remain mothballed.
The longer we remain active off Libya the more the decision to chop Harrier appears bonkers. I have to say that your posts will convince many sceptics that this is indeed the case.
Few argued that we could do without the GR4 and those who did were wrong. It does have certain unique capabilities. However, chopping the entire Harrier fleet and by default restricting us to Land Bases until circa 2020 was an error, though accepting this won't change anything now.
As to your "if we based it at the same place" point, how about on an aircraft carrier whose proximity to Libya reduces the need for tanker support? This time last year we had ample Harriers and GR4's. Now post SDSR we have none of the former and by your own indications perhaps too many of the latter.
Illustrious sails from Rosyth on 3 June to work up to replace Ocean later this year. She was due to have sailed earlier but her refit had to be altered and so delayed as she is returning as an LPH and not our on call Strike Carrier. She still has a ski jump. Our Harriers remain mothballed.
The longer we remain active off Libya the more the decision to chop Harrier appears bonkers. I have to say that your posts will convince many sceptics that this is indeed the case.
Few argued that we could do without the GR4 and those who did were wrong. It does have certain unique capabilities. However, chopping the entire Harrier fleet and by default restricting us to Land Bases until circa 2020 was an error, though accepting this won't change anything now.
Interesting piece of information here related to draken55's post:
Of note, Solenzara is only 60 nm further than Gioia del Colle from Libya.
Originally Posted by Defense-Aerospace.com
Because of the time wasted flying from Solenzara to Libya, France is negotiating to transfer its Rafale detachment to Sigonella air base, in Sicily, which is much closer to the combat area. For the same reason, French air force Mirages have already been redeployed to Crete.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
'Only' 60nm?
Now I was never privy to the detailed ins and outs of ops planning but I believe those who are more experienced in such things plan on the ac going and coming back, which would be 120nm.
Now once again, I'm not the expert on these things but isn't 120nm a significant distance for ac to travel when bombed up, especially if there is a bring back requirement, something that is expected when the weapons being carried cost nigh on 3/4 million pounds a pop?
Now I was never privy to the detailed ins and outs of ops planning but I believe those who are more experienced in such things plan on the ac going and coming back, which would be 120nm.
Now once again, I'm not the expert on these things but isn't 120nm a significant distance for ac to travel when bombed up, especially if there is a bring back requirement, something that is expected when the weapons being carried cost nigh on 3/4 million pounds a pop?
Stacker - Excellent point. As cogent an argument I've seen for the capability to launch a dozen or more A/C from a carrier stooging off the Libyan coast instead of flying 1,000 nm round trips from Gioia del Colle. Even the half dozen AV-8Bs of USS Kearsarge were each flying two sorties per night before they were pulled. Naturally, land-based A/C would be required as well but what a valuable asset a carrier would be in these circumstances.
Breaking news - Navy News has an interesting story:
Task force sent to Libya to ratchet up the pressure on Gaddafi
The five ships from the Cougar group offer extra aerial power in the form of Fleet Air Arm Sea Kings and Lynx from Ocean as well as her Apaches.
The deployment of Apache in this situation is not quite the same as in Afghanistan or anywhere else where it supports troops on the ground - it is to take out targets. I suspect Apaches from Ocean will be better placed to deal with urgent targets than Italy based jets - albeit at considerably higher risk. From the target's point of view - does it really care what sort of aircraft fires the missile that destroys it? Surely the effect is the same?
In addition to carrying Royal Marine commandos, Albion will serve as a command ship with task group commander Cdre John Kingwell and his staff commanding and control activity and liaising with NATO allies.
That used to be a CVS role. In fact the CVS would carry the aircraft too. Merlins would help make up for the lack of a UK MPA, and the Harriers....
This same story is covered by James Daly's History blog.
Breaking – Royal Navy Task Group to Libya
We were told less than a year ago by ‘call me Dave’ that such a deployment would not be necesary for the next ten years. Thankfully we are operating with allies, as the Task Group has no air cover of its own, no any ability to project any. True, jets may be flying ‘epic’ missions (copyright RAF PR Department) from Britain and Italy, but even the French have sent their carrier close in. Shorter range, more economic, more time on station, more flexible.
The comments are also worth reading.
Task force sent to Libya to ratchet up the pressure on Gaddafi
The five ships from the Cougar group offer extra aerial power in the form of Fleet Air Arm Sea Kings and Lynx from Ocean as well as her Apaches.
The deployment of Apache in this situation is not quite the same as in Afghanistan or anywhere else where it supports troops on the ground - it is to take out targets. I suspect Apaches from Ocean will be better placed to deal with urgent targets than Italy based jets - albeit at considerably higher risk. From the target's point of view - does it really care what sort of aircraft fires the missile that destroys it? Surely the effect is the same?
In addition to carrying Royal Marine commandos, Albion will serve as a command ship with task group commander Cdre John Kingwell and his staff commanding and control activity and liaising with NATO allies.
That used to be a CVS role. In fact the CVS would carry the aircraft too. Merlins would help make up for the lack of a UK MPA, and the Harriers....
This same story is covered by James Daly's History blog.
Breaking – Royal Navy Task Group to Libya
We were told less than a year ago by ‘call me Dave’ that such a deployment would not be necesary for the next ten years. Thankfully we are operating with allies, as the Task Group has no air cover of its own, no any ability to project any. True, jets may be flying ‘epic’ missions (copyright RAF PR Department) from Britain and Italy, but even the French have sent their carrier close in. Shorter range, more economic, more time on station, more flexible.
The comments are also worth reading.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Malkin Tower
Posts: 847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
when the possibility of the Apaches going to Libya was first raised, I found a press release which specifically said they were required to take the place of the A-10 - which had just been withdrawn from the attack by the USA. However that press release seems to have vanished from the ether - too political maybe
Ironic thing is Albion is to be mothballed in a few months time
Ironic thing is Albion is to be mothballed in a few months time
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bouncing around the Holding pattern
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The deployment of Apache in this situation is not quite the same as in Afghanistan or anywhere else where it supports troops on the ground - it is to take out targets. I suspect Apaches from Ocean will be better placed to deal with urgent targets than Italy based jets - albeit at considerably higher risk. From the target's point of view - does it really care what sort of aircraft fires the missile that destroys it? Surely the effect is the same?
I would challenge the current misconception (IMHO) that just because the AH will set down for the night post sortie significantly closer, that they would be able to react quicker to targets of opportunity. Fast air on CAP stand a much better chance of achieving a short lived TOT by virtue of their speed. This, I'll grant you, depends on a well run ATO that provides for that coverage.
To fill any holes in said ATO, a decent carrier strike jet parked just off the coast on GCAS would.......... bugger.
TTH
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Sandhurst, Berkshire
Age: 57
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
speaking as some one who is not in the armed forces, I just wondered if it would physically be possible to reverse this, should the need arise?
I think I read somewhere that the aircraft are in hangars, if say for example it ID become neccasary to return them to service, could it be done, and if so how quickly?
I think I read somewhere that the aircraft are in hangars, if say for example it ID become neccasary to return them to service, could it be done, and if so how quickly?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The five ships from the Cougar group offer extra aerial power in the form of Fleet Air Arm Sea Kings and Lynx from Ocean
as well as her Apaches.
as well as her Apaches.
And once again we have it gentlemen....
..just remember dark blue only for the tea and biscuits on return...
Originally Posted by Daily Telegraph 6 Jun 2011 (sic)
Britain and France are set to share an aircraft carrier as part of plans for far closer integration between the two navies, the head of France’s fleet has said in an interview with The Daily Telegraph. Admiral Pierre-Francois Forissier also disclosed that the French navy was amazed by the swath of cuts last year that severely reduced the Royal Navy with the axing of aircraft carriers and Harrier jump jets alongside warships.
“From a French standpoint, I have to say that we were really stunned because the Royal Navy has always been a model for us and it is now faced with a very difficult situation,” he said. He also highlighted the shortcomings of the weakened British fleet, suggesting that the Libya campaign could have been “more efficient” if there had been a second aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean. At present there is only the Charles de Gaulle. Its aircraft are responsible for more than a quarter of all attacks but soon it will need to dock for maintenance.
“If the UK did have another aircraft carrier in the Libyan theatre that would have been a support for the RAF because they would need less hours of travel and they would have been more efficient,” said the admiral. “When you only have one carrier that means you don’t have permanent availability because of maintenance issues and, of course, it would be better to have two carriers.”...
The comments by the French Admiral are spoton. note he speaks of an Aircraft Carrier to support the R.A.F. not replace it. And there lays the problem in the UK today. Aside from internal internecine disunity over (read the R.A.F. Scotland thread)over being unable to agree who we are, we have had our liberal left political mainstream play one service off against another in order to denounce one another as superfluous. Whether its hte Army, backed by the likes of Col Tim Collins and Sir Max Hastings, putting themselves forward as the only military force with a real job, or the Navy getting upset with the R.A.F. for not decimating its own principal assets in order to keep the Navy in business with light Carriers and Harriers, or Sir Glenn Torpy and his attempts to bring all means of military air capability under the control of the R.A.F. and thus sowing the seeds for the end of the Harriers and Carriers tha way. No wonder the French Admiral can't quite understand what the hell it is we're playing at over here these days. And who can blame him!
FB
FB