So what happens to the RAF after 2015?

[Rigga]

So what do I think? not that it means diddly-squat.

Dave stated that there would be a regular parliamentary review every 5 years to try and clear the build-up of waste...no reason to doubt that yet.

In 2014 troops should at least be pulling out of the combat zones, that we're already in, to complete their currently stated mission tasking by 2015.

So, a reduction of troop requirements will coincide with the next timed parliamentary review...just think about that for a bit...

What was the question again?

[Finningley Boy]

A series of rapid expansion schemes!

FB

[davejb]

So what happens to the RAF after 2015?

Well, at a guess, as there won't be enough people or airframes to constitute a corps, they'll form the Royal Flying Battalion.

Until the crap hits of course, when 'they' will discover that you can't resurrect a 2000+ era airforce as readily (given unlimited funds, which won't happen anyway) as you can a 1930's airforce.

At that point we all become followers of Islam, or Terminated, or assimilated by the Borg, or whatever the threat we can't deal with happens to be.

Dave

[Jayand]

Backbone has nothing to do with it, belief in the cause does.
Am sat watching the millies and am in complete awe at all the things that have been done by so many, history shows that the 2 world wars were fought for truly just reasons, can the same be said of the last few conflicts? history will show the same levels of bravery as 70 years previous but public support for the cause and understanding of the sacrifices will not be remembered so well.
I have no problem doing a job that I signed up for, it was cazatou who questioned why we aren't explained to the public better, I just answered what the Governments and nobody else seems to be able to.
We will leave in the next five years, do you honestly believe we will leave behind a better place? if not then what ha s it all been for?

[RumPunch]

I have been really inspired by CAS speach, its the same speech that was given by a different CAS in previous years . Merry Xmas blah blah blah nobody cares but throws in tough times for people. Do they have a standard speach to give out as they have no idea what its like in the real world anymore as they so shoved up there own arse they cant ****.

Leadership is what we are told ,follow the top leaders of men. They out number us Ordinary Ranks yet not one stands up and fights.

20 years service I am a small fish but I want to leave ASAP just like many others. RAF= Joke hahahahah

[Tiger_mate]

Whatever happens post 2014 I will witness from afar as I will be gone. However I will look back through the rose tinted specs in the knowledge that during the Cold War, we were pretty good at completing the task even when faced with an overwhelming opposition. Likewise Op Banner was supported in partnership (not joint) with our Army peers pretty efficiently and most inter service rivalry never got beyond banter. The Falklands was a credit to UK Military Plc but lets not take away that the Navy & Marines did the lions share. We heard little regarding the RAF QRA but that is almost certainly because it worked most of the time. Gulf War 1&2 will be seen as a tenuous campaign by western bully boys based upon an argument that had little foundation. I dare say Wikileaks will expose this in the coming months.

We have overstayed our welcome in Germany and when the RAF pulled the plug in the early ninties, the Army should have followed in total. I am not a big fan of the US using the UK as a Carrier with a concrete anchor either. I appreciate that the Army required somewhere to go, but lets face it that is a pretty pathetic excuse built upon retaining a good quality of life for the troops and retaining access to awesome training areas.

In the fullness of time I believe that the premature demise of Harrier and the execution of not only Nimrod but any MPA will be perceived as the mother of all mistakes. An island with internationally agreed SAR commitments that is clearly exposed to a MCT threat really must have a fixed wing aircraft capable of completing the MPA role. I suspect in the future it (not Nimrod but a.n.other) will be resurected despite the inevitable loss of skills.

The potential overswing to shortfalls and panic recruitment that may be seen post 2014 will be a fiscal based decision. What we are undergoing at this time comes very close to a clean sheet & start again strategy. I fear that in 2015 (if that is post Afghan) the Army Manning will be massacred by politicians, and the Navy and RAF 'trimmed' even further.

MFTS or its descendent is expected to have been sorted by then and I suspect that some of the advanced training will be replaced with an expanded OCU, ie training on operational type. The graduates will not be as slick but such direction is achievable and cost cutting. The more expensive flying hours argument is not robust enough to compete against doing the same exercise over again on two differant courses.

Morale, Standards, Professionalism will be decayed and Traditions a luxury that cannot be afforded. Thank goodness I will have gone.

[Training Risky]

Tiger mate - spot on.

Words like loyalty, respect, spirit and commitment have no meaning to me any longer...the RAF I joined as a starry-eyed idealistic kid in 1999 has seen to that.

My lexicon is now filled with words like LEAN, overstretch, DWR, harmony 'guidelines', risk-mangement, capability holiday etc.

Shame really - but that's the world we live in now.

It's going to get worse before it gets better.

Happy non-denominational holiday everyone.

[Rigga]

- but you dont really mean "happy" do you? - Shouldn't you close your statement with "benevolent non-denominational..."and so on.

(can't say "etc" in case some poor mother... can't understand it)

[iRaven]

What will the RAF look like after 2015???



This is Quick Reaction Alert only though

[Melchett01]

Well AOC 1 Gp thinks we will be compared to Belgium by the time this whole round of stupidity is finished.

RAF commander: our air force will be little better than Belgium’s - Telegraph

Funny how his comments now 'appear to have been taken out of context'. I really can't see how, it was a fairly unambiguous statement.

[BEagle]

And yet, when he took over from Torpy, Dalton is on record as having said:

"I am very conscious of the enormous privilege and responsibility that I have been given as the Chief of the Air Staff to lead the Royal Air Force over the next few years. I recognise that I take on this honour at a time when the RAF is continuing to make the vital and highly effective contribution to the UK Armed Forces' enduring military operations in Afghanistan.

"Combining these with the RAF's other operational commitments - 24/7 protection of United Kingdom airspace, the continuing obligation for the protection of the Falkland Islands, maritime air operations around the UK and search and rescue missions across the UK - means that the Royal Air Force is exceptionally busy.

[Yozzer]

An SAS Colonel is reported to have resigned in protest at Govt cuts receiving little media coverage. Quite a dignified if wasted gesture.
Perhaps in this case the same theme but a little more overt. Has RAF HQ closed for Christmas yet? It'll be dust under the carpet by January

SAS commander resigns over defence cuts | The Sun |News|Campaigns|Our Boys

[Phil_R]

When I realised in the early 2000s that the RAF's fast jet fleet was half of its cold war size, this seemed somewhat reasonable as a dividend for peace, although recent and proposed cuts provoke deeper frowns.

Here's the question, though: how much have comparable organizations diminished in the same time frame? The French, the Americans?

[Finningley Boy]

When I realised in the early 2000s that the RAF's fast jet fleet was half of its cold war size, this seemed somewhat reasonable as a dividend for peace, although recent and proposed cuts provoke deeper frowns.

Here's the question, though: how much have comparable organizations diminished in the same time frame? The French, the Americans?

Others have diminished, but to nowhere near the proposed point that the R.A.F. is expected to reach next year. The French used to have marginally fewer combat aircraft than us, they currently have marginally more. Next year, I believe their numbers will not change, but ours will shed assets quite considerably. Furthermore, as has been pointed out, this country has money to burn. Its just a question of which portfolio the government chooses to burn it on. With Defence spending at 2.5% of gdp now and at more than 5% in the period 1984 to 1985, its easy to see how additional spending can be justified. Even so, as a broad comparison, the Dutch Air Force currently have six squadrons of F16s (one training role). They are a country the geographical scale of East Anglia with a population less than 30% of that of the United Kingdom. And a Defence Budget of 1.4%. Its a broad comparison, but it certainly puts the question marks over the efficiency of our Ministry of Defence and governance in general.

FB

[Biggus]

Before you make too many comparisons with the Dutch - don't forget that they disbanded their P-3 fleet, which had, justifiably, one of the best reputations in the NATO MPA community.

[engineer(retard)]

As I recall, the peace dividend occured during a period of sustained ops. Northern and Southern watch, Kosovo etc when we had trouble fielding enough platforms.

[TBM-Legend]

"Peace in out time" proclaims new PM Neville Clegg

[Sandy Parts]

And at least the Dutch have a very capable CoastGuard Air 'Corps' (home and deployed) - where many ex-P3NL aviators now serve I understand. We on the other hand have... a couple of non-governmental (private contract) twin turboprop fisheries monitoring aircraft (one division of which is costed so close to the bone, it recently had to be resurrected after the parent contractor went bust).

[Phil_R]

it certainly puts the question marks over the efficiency of our Ministry of Defence and governance in general

That's more or less where my line of thought was going.

I'm sure I'm going to get crucified for saying this, but it seems to me that with a fairly certain immediate future of military security , and a very certain present of severe economic strife, cutting armed forces is not, in principle, a completely indefensible option. It is also not in principle indefensible for public money to sponsor job-creation schemes. But if they're going to do either of those things, they should do it straightforwardly. The alternative is mixed messages - are the carriers being built to provide carriers, or to employ shipbuilders - and my impression is that it leads to massive inefficiency.

Cuts are worrying, but I'd like to know that at least we were getting value for money from what's left.

P

[BEagle]

I caught a TV programme earlier today which revealed that the UK had something like 147 different types of aircraft in WW2....all of which were ferried by the ATA at one time or another. One of the ATA pilots was told to go and help to move a mere 200 Spitfires from Castle Bromwich as they were considered vulnerable to Luftwaffe bombing...

And now the RAF is to be reduced to a pathetic 8 (or even 6) squadrons of fast-jets? Ridiculous.

The question to ask the government is whether they are happy with 'Fully Comprehensive' insurance for the defence of the UK and its interests, or just 'Third Party, Fire and Theft'.....