AOC 1 Gp breaks ranks
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Here and there, occasionally at home.
Age: 56
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
O-D
The true cost of pressing ahead with Nimrod is now so astronomical it isn't even a non-runner. The team has been all but disbanded, the simulators are in bits awaiting disposal and I suspect the aircraft are not far behind (haven't been to Warton/Woodford recently, too painful after 10 years of effort to watch your life's work being cut up and thrown in the bin).
The sad fact is that we put a politician in a position where he had to make a military decision. Unsurprisingly, the SDSR now looks unbalanced, incoherent, unfocused and exposed for what it was, a cuts exercise. Our SMT put the politicians in that position by being unable to agree amongst themselves (and I am just talking Light Blue here) what our focus and priority were.
I would be intrigued to know (not that I hold much hope of ever finding out) how much it would have cost/saved over the next 4 years to bin GR4 instead of Harrier.
Keeping Harrier would have retained the current CAS capability requirement whilst allowing future JSF transition more easily.
Binning GR4 would have allowed the RAF release 90 odd crews, cease FJ WSO training (there are no future 2-man FJ aircraft in the pipeline AFAIK) and re-role/dispose of 2 large bases.
I suspect the savings would have even been sufficient to prevent MRA4 being dragged onto the chopping block.
Anyway, not sure why I posted? I am seriously running out of enthusiasm for the organisation I had wanted to join since the age of about 6. I was lucky, I got in and I got to fly HM's hardware around the world and I was damned proud to do it.
When people ask these days what I do, I usually tell them I'm a biscuit designer for Cadbury's, or a Stained Glass Window Fitter.
The sad fact is that we put a politician in a position where he had to make a military decision. Unsurprisingly, the SDSR now looks unbalanced, incoherent, unfocused and exposed for what it was, a cuts exercise. Our SMT put the politicians in that position by being unable to agree amongst themselves (and I am just talking Light Blue here) what our focus and priority were.
I would be intrigued to know (not that I hold much hope of ever finding out) how much it would have cost/saved over the next 4 years to bin GR4 instead of Harrier.
Keeping Harrier would have retained the current CAS capability requirement whilst allowing future JSF transition more easily.
Binning GR4 would have allowed the RAF release 90 odd crews, cease FJ WSO training (there are no future 2-man FJ aircraft in the pipeline AFAIK) and re-role/dispose of 2 large bases.
I suspect the savings would have even been sufficient to prevent MRA4 being dragged onto the chopping block.
Anyway, not sure why I posted? I am seriously running out of enthusiasm for the organisation I had wanted to join since the age of about 6. I was lucky, I got in and I got to fly HM's hardware around the world and I was damned proud to do it.
When people ask these days what I do, I usually tell them I'm a biscuit designer for Cadbury's, or a Stained Glass Window Fitter.
Last edited by ShortFatOne; 20th Dec 2010 at 19:50. Reason: Smelling pistakes! as usual
I would be intrigued to know (not that I hold much hope of ever finding out) how much it would have cost/saved over the next 4 years to bin GR4 instead of Harrier.
Keeping Harrier would have retained the current CAS capability requirement
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Midlands
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wrathmonk
Lets just pretend the Harrier Force hadn't strangely lost a Squadron in the year preceding the defence review.
I think it would have managed to continue to support Herrick just as it had for 5 years despite constantly being told the Harrier force was broken.
I enjoyed being briefed by AOC 1 Grp that we had lost our core skills, including flying from the boat, due to Afghanistan despite becoming Night Boat Qualified ,conducting a Magic Carpet from the Boat as well as a 6 week multiple UK/NATO exercise boat det.
Lets just pretend the Harrier Force hadn't strangely lost a Squadron in the year preceding the defence review.
I think it would have managed to continue to support Herrick just as it had for 5 years despite constantly being told the Harrier force was broken.
I enjoyed being briefed by AOC 1 Grp that we had lost our core skills, including flying from the boat, due to Afghanistan despite becoming Night Boat Qualified ,conducting a Magic Carpet from the Boat as well as a 6 week multiple UK/NATO exercise boat det.
Justanopinion,
Blame your former leadership for the "Harrier force broken" message; it was the Harrier force that wanted a break from HERRICK due to the decay of core skills. They changed their tune about a year before the eventual swap when they realised what the likely consequence would be, but things had progressed too far by then. Bear in mind that in 2007, when the staff work behind the GR9-GR4 swap was taking shape, the Tornado force had 17 years' continuous operational service behind it, so had nothing to prove by muscling in on HERRICK. The 2009 TELIC pullout occurred with only a matter of weeks' notice, so the HERRICK swap was hardly in response to that either.
SFO,
If you've been following the Dominie thread you'll already know that FJ WSO trg has effectively been terminated - the last few are on their way through the system now. Incidentally a WSO is much better than a pilot at staring at a screen for hours on end looking for suspicious activity - he doesn't have anything else to worry himself about. Despite all the C2 technology on offer, ops over Afghanistan involves a lot of 'see and avoid'; a single pilot going 'heads in' is effectively rolling the dice, as things stand. Hopefully the next-gen aircraft will have a collision-warning system to abate this risk. However I wouldn't hold my breath, given the pace at which we seem to get kit onto Typhoon...
Everyone bangs on about RAPTOR being the difference between GR4 and GR9 in HERRICK - there's more to it though. With the benefit of the dedicated sensor operator, and the mixed-load of 2xPW4, 3xBrimstone and the gun, the GR4 is as flexible and capable a CAS platform as any in theatre. HERRICK does not demand turn-on-a-sixpence performance so the GR4's traditional weakness does not apply - and its straight-line speed is a benefit when legging it to the scene of the action! There was plenty of pre-swap scaremongering about the GR4's lack of CAS capability, inability to AAR at safe heights, blah blah... all of which has turned out to be bolleaux. Now it's just carried on out of ignorance / prejudice / bitterness.
Blame your former leadership for the "Harrier force broken" message; it was the Harrier force that wanted a break from HERRICK due to the decay of core skills. They changed their tune about a year before the eventual swap when they realised what the likely consequence would be, but things had progressed too far by then. Bear in mind that in 2007, when the staff work behind the GR9-GR4 swap was taking shape, the Tornado force had 17 years' continuous operational service behind it, so had nothing to prove by muscling in on HERRICK. The 2009 TELIC pullout occurred with only a matter of weeks' notice, so the HERRICK swap was hardly in response to that either.
SFO,
Binning GR4 would have allowed the RAF release 90 odd crews, cease FJ WSO training (there are no future 2-man FJ aircraft in the pipeline AFAIK) and re-role/dispose of 2 large bases.
Everyone bangs on about RAPTOR being the difference between GR4 and GR9 in HERRICK - there's more to it though. With the benefit of the dedicated sensor operator, and the mixed-load of 2xPW4, 3xBrimstone and the gun, the GR4 is as flexible and capable a CAS platform as any in theatre. HERRICK does not demand turn-on-a-sixpence performance so the GR4's traditional weakness does not apply - and its straight-line speed is a benefit when legging it to the scene of the action! There was plenty of pre-swap scaremongering about the GR4's lack of CAS capability, inability to AAR at safe heights, blah blah... all of which has turned out to be bolleaux. Now it's just carried on out of ignorance / prejudice / bitterness.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: An Ivory Tower
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Prawn2King. So using the pre SDSR figures you appear to suggest that we have 65 aircraft in service 
....Probably about right one day soon.
Wikipedia: The RAF operates 1,114 aircraft (2010) and, as of late 2009, had a total manpower strength of 44,300 regular,1] and 2,500 volunteers.
Which would be 42 personnel (inc reserves) per aircraft, a year ago.
'There are lies, damn lies - and statistics.’
....Probably about right one day soon.Wikipedia: The RAF operates 1,114 aircraft (2010) and, as of late 2009, had a total manpower strength of 44,300 regular,1] and 2,500 volunteers.
Which would be 42 personnel (inc reserves) per aircraft, a year ago.
'There are lies, damn lies - and statistics.’
Cunning Artificer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 76
Posts: 3,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We (Europe in general) are slowly but surely headed in a direction that ends where a newly beligerent Russia could simply walk in and take over. We must remember that Hitler walked all over Europe simply because he knew he could and there was nothing anyone could do to stop him. Why must we always forget the lessons of history?
As one learns in the schoolyard, showing the slightest sign of weakness inevitably results in a beating.
As one learns in the schoolyard, showing the slightest sign of weakness inevitably results in a beating.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blacksheep
"Hitler walked all over Europe" because there was no Collective Defence Treaty between other European Nations at that time.
Warsaw Pact Nations presented a formidable threat during the "Cold War" - but many of those Nations are now members of Nato and the EU.
"Hitler walked all over Europe" because there was no Collective Defence Treaty between other European Nations at that time.
Warsaw Pact Nations presented a formidable threat during the "Cold War" - but many of those Nations are now members of Nato and the EU.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easystreet,
Good to see some sense spoken here at last.... Given that the GR4 was intended to be running TWIN Ops at one point, those who bleat should remember that the GR4 Force was not actually looking forward to Op HERRICK, but got on and did it.. and achieved some significant Capability upgrades in the timescale too.
Good to see some sense spoken here at last.... Given that the GR4 was intended to be running TWIN Ops at one point, those who bleat should remember that the GR4 Force was not actually looking forward to Op HERRICK, but got on and did it.. and achieved some significant Capability upgrades in the timescale too.
Justanopinion,
Blame your former leadership for the "Harrier force broken" message; it was the Harrier force that wanted a break from HERRICK due to the decay of core skills. They changed their tune about a year before the eventual swap when they realised what the likely consequence would be, but things had progressed too far by then. Bear in mind that in 2007, when the staff work behind the GR9-GR4 swap was taking shape, the Tornado force had 17 years' continuous operational service behind it, so had nothing to prove by muscling in on HERRICK. The 2009 TELIC pullout occurred with only a matter of weeks' notice, so the HERRICK swap was hardly in response to that either.
SFO,
Quote:
Binning GR4 would have allowed the RAF release 90 odd crews, cease FJ WSO training (there are no future 2-man FJ aircraft in the pipeline AFAIK) and re-role/dispose of 2 large bases.
If you've been following the Dominie thread you'll already know that FJ WSO trg has effectively been terminated - the last few are on their way through the system now. Incidentally a WSO is much better than a pilot at staring at a screen for hours on end looking for suspicious activity - he doesn't have anything else to worry himself about. Despite all the C2 technology on offer, ops over Afghanistan involves a lot of 'see and avoid'; a single pilot going 'heads in' is effectively rolling the dice, as things stand. Hopefully the next-gen aircraft will have a collision-warning system to abate this risk. However I wouldn't hold my breath, given the pace at which we seem to get kit onto Typhoon...
Everyone bangs on about RAPTOR being the difference between GR4 and GR9 in HERRICK - there's more to it though. With the benefit of the dedicated sensor operator, and the mixed-load of 2xPW4, 3xBrimstone and the gun, the GR4 is as flexible and capable a CAS platform as any in theatre. HERRICK does not demand turn-on-a-sixpence performance so the GR4's traditional weakness does not apply - and its straight-line speed is a benefit when legging it to the scene of the action! There was plenty of pre-swap scaremongering about the GR4's lack of CAS capability, inability to AAR at safe heights, blah blah... all of which has turned out to be bolleaux. Now it's just carried on out of ignorance / prejudice / bitterness.
Blame your former leadership for the "Harrier force broken" message; it was the Harrier force that wanted a break from HERRICK due to the decay of core skills. They changed their tune about a year before the eventual swap when they realised what the likely consequence would be, but things had progressed too far by then. Bear in mind that in 2007, when the staff work behind the GR9-GR4 swap was taking shape, the Tornado force had 17 years' continuous operational service behind it, so had nothing to prove by muscling in on HERRICK. The 2009 TELIC pullout occurred with only a matter of weeks' notice, so the HERRICK swap was hardly in response to that either.
SFO,
Quote:
Binning GR4 would have allowed the RAF release 90 odd crews, cease FJ WSO training (there are no future 2-man FJ aircraft in the pipeline AFAIK) and re-role/dispose of 2 large bases.
If you've been following the Dominie thread you'll already know that FJ WSO trg has effectively been terminated - the last few are on their way through the system now. Incidentally a WSO is much better than a pilot at staring at a screen for hours on end looking for suspicious activity - he doesn't have anything else to worry himself about. Despite all the C2 technology on offer, ops over Afghanistan involves a lot of 'see and avoid'; a single pilot going 'heads in' is effectively rolling the dice, as things stand. Hopefully the next-gen aircraft will have a collision-warning system to abate this risk. However I wouldn't hold my breath, given the pace at which we seem to get kit onto Typhoon...
Everyone bangs on about RAPTOR being the difference between GR4 and GR9 in HERRICK - there's more to it though. With the benefit of the dedicated sensor operator, and the mixed-load of 2xPW4, 3xBrimstone and the gun, the GR4 is as flexible and capable a CAS platform as any in theatre. HERRICK does not demand turn-on-a-sixpence performance so the GR4's traditional weakness does not apply - and its straight-line speed is a benefit when legging it to the scene of the action! There was plenty of pre-swap scaremongering about the GR4's lack of CAS capability, inability to AAR at safe heights, blah blah... all of which has turned out to be bolleaux. Now it's just carried on out of ignorance / prejudice / bitterness.
The shocking ignorance/prejudice of some posters of the GR4 and its capabilities is becoming almost childish in its persistence. There was little/no chance of the GR4 being cut rather than the Harrier, not only because of the greater numbers to sustain current ops (unbroken for 18+ years for GR1/4) but because of contingent capabilities (the unknown future war) where the GR4 far outmatched the Harrier. Those requirements overcame any debate on costs. Harrier has been oustanding don't get me wrong, but please stop the endless GR9 vs GR4 debate. It's over. Done. Dusted.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Here and there, occasionally at home.
Age: 56
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Calm Down - Calm Down eh, eh!
Guys, I wasn't suggesting GR4 isn't a very capable CAS platform, I know enough GR4 mates to understand it is a fine platform in that role. I was just pointing out that, as everything is AFG focussed at the moment, using GR4's wider utility as an argument does not hold water, particularly as everyone else has been told they can't use that argument to fight their own corner.
I was postulating that there may have been a case to support wider future defence capabilities and requirements by retaining Harrier, that's all.
If FJ WSO training has effectively been binned, how does the RAF intend to supply GR4 WSOs for the next 10 years (according to CAS, Future Farce 2020has GR4 at the top of the pile)?
I was postulating that there may have been a case to support wider future defence capabilities and requirements by retaining Harrier, that's all.
If FJ WSO training has effectively been binned, how does the RAF intend to supply GR4 WSOs for the next 10 years (according to CAS, Future Farce 2020has GR4 at the top of the pile)?
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Midlands
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The shocking ignorance/prejudice of some posters of the GR4 and its capabilities is becoming almost childish in its persistence. There was little/no chance of the GR4 being cut rather than the Harrier, not only because of the greater numbers to sustain current ops
Serious Questions
Question One:
During the SDSR debate (if one was held - that is!!) was any thought given to retaining a mix of Harriers and GR4s or was it seen as a straight 'one or t'other'?
Let's postulate, therefore.
Retain the two sqns of the Naval Strike Wing Harriers and Ark Royal and bin the Puma upgrade and reduce (but not dispose of) a certain number of GR4s. What is the break even point as far as Tornado reduction is concerned before this becomes a viable financial option? Is there another sensible way of doing the GR4 recce role, for example, which might allow the attack role to continue without too much degradation in that capability?
Question Two:
For what purpose is the Puma upgrade being pursued? Is it to provide a 'training facility' for the army, using a smaller and cheaper (?) helicopter or is there some operational role for which it is to be used (please don't say it's going to Afghanistan to supplement the other pair).
Old Duffer
During the SDSR debate (if one was held - that is!!) was any thought given to retaining a mix of Harriers and GR4s or was it seen as a straight 'one or t'other'?
Let's postulate, therefore.
Retain the two sqns of the Naval Strike Wing Harriers and Ark Royal and bin the Puma upgrade and reduce (but not dispose of) a certain number of GR4s. What is the break even point as far as Tornado reduction is concerned before this becomes a viable financial option? Is there another sensible way of doing the GR4 recce role, for example, which might allow the attack role to continue without too much degradation in that capability?
Question Two:
For what purpose is the Puma upgrade being pursued? Is it to provide a 'training facility' for the army, using a smaller and cheaper (?) helicopter or is there some operational role for which it is to be used (please don't say it's going to Afghanistan to supplement the other pair).
Old Duffer
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I asked this very question recently to someone at the coal face as on face value it does appear to be a bizarre decision. Answer: There are customers with autonomous budgets that want it retained for a few years. Read between the lines. When the Army take a manpower kicking post Afghanistan I suspect that Puma will go also, although there will be a gap based upon size alone between Lynx & Merlin/Chinook that may in the future require filling.
Anybody want to buy a secondhand Blackhawk never raced or rallied?
Anybody want to buy a secondhand Blackhawk never raced or rallied?
Its a fact that there are more GR4's than the Harrier - but how servicable were they in comparison?
I was just pointing out that, as everything is AFG focussed at the moment, using GR4's wider utility as an argument does not hold water, particularly as everyone else has been told they can't use that argument to fight their own corner.
Its a fact that there are more GR4's than the Harrier - but how servicable were they in comparison?
If FJ WSO training has effectively been binned, how does the RAF intend to supply GR4 WSOs for the next 10 years (according to CAS, Future Farce 2020has GR4 at the top of the pile)?
Congratulations........
......... Easy Street, you've found the solution that a committee of 25 manners (and femaleers), financiers, HR specialists etc etc would have taken 5 months to resolve.
There will be enough pilots ready, willing and able to take on the WSO role.
The problem will come when they are flying in the two stick version and the one in the back thinks he knows best! "I have control, I have control, I said I have control and I'm senior to you in the Air Force List - well I would be if it was still published".
O-D
There will be enough pilots ready, willing and able to take on the WSO role.
The problem will come when they are flying in the two stick version and the one in the back thinks he knows best! "I have control, I have control, I said I have control and I'm senior to you in the Air Force List - well I would be if it was still published".
O-D
Is it me, or is it the case that far to many people on these forums rack their brains to find new suggestions for how we could all the more severely down-size, down-grade the Air Force? Often suggestions which the powers that be may well not have thought of!?
FB
FB
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Midlands
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easy street
Really? Are you aware of how many of the so called 'diamond fleet' are scattered between here and AFG at the moment? Do you really have any idea of how many hundreds and thousands of pounds are wasted by collecting various GR4's that are left behind in Canada/ USA on a regular basis?
Thought not - speak to their engineers mate. You may be in for a huge surprise.
The GR4's increased their numbers by 25% to keep on top of their game for a few months. The Harrier force achieved > 100% of their sorties the whole period they were out there, with a higher sotie rate - and no need to increase numbers. Fact
The late-90s reputation of the GR1/GR4 for unserviceability is no longer deserved. The fact that it's still viewed as "fact" by many is just another example of the prejudice I mentioned in my last post.
Thought not - speak to their engineers mate. You may be in for a huge surprise.
The GR4's increased their numbers by 25% to keep on top of their game for a few months. The Harrier force achieved > 100% of their sorties the whole period they were out there, with a higher sotie rate - and no need to increase numbers. Fact
Last edited by Justanopinion; 23rd Dec 2010 at 07:42.