Tornado F3: 25 Years of Air Defence
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Overlooking the beach, NZ
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LOL a funny thread derail, the hook was flung and many bit>
Is a good book, and an interesting read. Well done to all you guys that contributed... even happier my ugly mug was in a couple of times
Is a good book, and an interesting read. Well done to all you guys that contributed... even happier my ugly mug was in a couple of times
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am enjoying the incongruity of being told that I don't know what I am talking about by members of the RAF AD community.
I am RN. You know, that service that has been shooting down enemy aircraft since WW2 on a regular basis? And I am not just talking about Harriers. The fleet has many people who have actually shot down aircraft from ships.
The RAF helicopter guys have been doing their thing week in week out for real since they were set up. They know their capabilities. Not what they think they can do, but what they can actually do.
The AT fleet ditto.
The GR fleet ditto
The Rocks have also spent the last few years getting themselves very dirty.
The AD fleet has never, ever actually found out if it can do what all the sims and exercises make them think they can do. No missile has left a rail in anger. Those that actually do their jobs know that reality and exercises are very different.
You are the guys that do not know what you are talking about.
Nothing in well over half a century, and you talk about defending us from the USSR!!!
First I am told that the airframe limitations are unimportant due to the combat systems, then when I suggest using a C130 I am told that it does, in fact, matter.
I am told that the F3 is the match for anything out there, but everyone says we need Typhoon.
You are embarassing yourselves.
I am RN. You know, that service that has been shooting down enemy aircraft since WW2 on a regular basis? And I am not just talking about Harriers. The fleet has many people who have actually shot down aircraft from ships.
The RAF helicopter guys have been doing their thing week in week out for real since they were set up. They know their capabilities. Not what they think they can do, but what they can actually do.
The AT fleet ditto.
The GR fleet ditto
The Rocks have also spent the last few years getting themselves very dirty.
The AD fleet has never, ever actually found out if it can do what all the sims and exercises make them think they can do. No missile has left a rail in anger. Those that actually do their jobs know that reality and exercises are very different.
You are the guys that do not know what you are talking about.
Nothing in well over half a century, and you talk about defending us from the USSR!!!
First I am told that the airframe limitations are unimportant due to the combat systems, then when I suggest using a C130 I am told that it does, in fact, matter.
I am told that the F3 is the match for anything out there, but everyone says we need Typhoon.
You are embarassing yourselves.
If this thread was 'F3 best air superiority fighter in the world' then I might understand the responses. However, Beagle started a thread about a book that's been published to mark the aircraft going out of service.
At the end of the day, whatever your views on the platform a lot of good blokes (colleagues of most of us on here) dedicated many years (and, as always, their lives in some cases) to making the best use of poor procurement by MOD.
Maybe if you don't have a positive input to make you should show a little respect and leave this thread to those who do.
At the end of the day, whatever your views on the platform a lot of good blokes (colleagues of most of us on here) dedicated many years (and, as always, their lives in some cases) to making the best use of poor procurement by MOD.
Maybe if you don't have a positive input to make you should show a little respect and leave this thread to those who do.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tourist,
This started as a harmless renminiscing thread by BEagle which those of us with fond memories of the F3 werehapy to share and you have completely spoiled it. Please go and take your teddies somewhere else.
You clearly haove no concept of the integration of military capability to deliver an effect through a weapon SYSTEM and not just a fancy platform.
This started as a harmless renminiscing thread by BEagle which those of us with fond memories of the F3 werehapy to share and you have completely spoiled it. Please go and take your teddies somewhere else.
You clearly haove no concept of the integration of military capability to deliver an effect through a weapon SYSTEM and not just a fancy platform.
Thread Starter
You are embarassing yourselves.
Back to the thread topic, the quality of this book is excellent. I've just read the section about Red Flag and the kill ratios obtained by the F3 force against the best the USAF had to offer were exceptionally good.
Slight thread drift perhaps but I have amended (in bold) Tourists earlier statement to read :
Surely it's all about deterrence - be it AD/QRA or big buckets of sunshine. I'd rather have a big stick and not have to use it than try to fight with a small one.
The Vanguard submarine fleet has never, ever actually found out if it can do what all the sims and exercises make them think they can do. No missile has left a rail in anger. Those that actually do their jobs know that reality and exercises are very different.
I always found it interesting that the Germans upgraded the Phantom when we replaced our F4s with the F3.
Somewhat ironically it seems that the Luftwaffe F4s might just outlast our last F3s.
While acknowledging that the F3 became a potent machine I wonder if we would be saying goodbye to RAF F-15Cs if we had bought them in the 80s?
Somewhat ironically it seems that the Luftwaffe F4s might just outlast our last F3s.
While acknowledging that the F3 became a potent machine I wonder if we would be saying goodbye to RAF F-15Cs if we had bought them in the 80s?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excellent Wraithmonk 
As an ex O's bloke, I always appreciated the subtle irony of the flash's [most probable] homing method in actual use.
Still makes me smile when you read some of the stuff being posted by so called "knowledgeable" posters..
As an ex O's bloke, I always appreciated the subtle irony of the flash's [most probable] homing method in actual use.
Still makes me smile when you read some of the stuff being posted by so called "knowledgeable" posters..
I've just read the section about Red Flag and the kill ratios obtained by the F3 force against the best the USAF had to offer were exceptionally good.
So to say it is against the best the USAF had to offer is misleading at best and willful misrepresentation at worst.
Some of the Best, yes, but with playing a game by a very different set of rules to what they would choose... Thats not to say that an F3 cant do a good job, from what I have heard, good radar, relatively quick, AIM120 and AIM132, Link16 = happy days...
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Deci ACMI '88-89ish. The scenario, a bunch of GRs doing a low level run with F2s providing top cover/escort. The opposition is a package of F15s loitering somewhere in the stratosphere.
Loooootenant Chuck watching the carnage in the ACMI - "Geee, its raining F15"
Chuck was right, a small number of GRs got through whilst the entire F2 package was sacrificed.
Roll on a few years to a similar scenario. A bit of learning has taken place, the CONOPS has evolved and the RAF now have F3s. Looooootenant Chuck's humour is nowhere to be seen.
For those of us who have been around a short while, it is fair to say that the F3 was better than the F4 and the Typhoon is somewhat better than both. Someone else hit the nail squarely on the head - as part of the system the F3 was a rather important and capable cog.
Loooootenant Chuck watching the carnage in the ACMI - "Geee, its raining F15"
Chuck was right, a small number of GRs got through whilst the entire F2 package was sacrificed.
Roll on a few years to a similar scenario. A bit of learning has taken place, the CONOPS has evolved and the RAF now have F3s. Looooootenant Chuck's humour is nowhere to be seen.
For those of us who have been around a short while, it is fair to say that the F3 was better than the F4 and the Typhoon is somewhat better than both. Someone else hit the nail squarely on the head - as part of the system the F3 was a rather important and capable cog.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wrathmonk
Fair point, but modified slightly by the fact that all the bombers from all the nations are in the same boat.
Plus of course Trident is a big stick, and the F3 is at best a limp twig.
Honestly, you'd think I had slagged off the aircrew not the aircraft from the vitriol I have received!
Fair point, but modified slightly by the fact that all the bombers from all the nations are in the same boat.
Plus of course Trident is a big stick, and the F3 is at best a limp twig.
Honestly, you'd think I had slagged off the aircrew not the aircraft from the vitriol I have received!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The F3 took it's time to develop and this was for many reasons, but as it retires, it is a capable AD platform. I will raise a glass to it and enjoy this well informed book by the guys at Squadron Prints.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not wishing to pour oil onto a fire but when did the RAF last shoot down an aircraft?
I have a nasty feeling it was 1945.....................
(and the guys who were in Korea were flying with the US or the Oztralian's)
I have a nasty feeling it was 1945.....................
(and the guys who were in Korea were flying with the US or the Oztralian's)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: -
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it wasn't for our politico-military masters it would've been back in 1991.
IIRC an F3 about to bounce an IQAF MIG had to 'yield' to a Saudi F3/F15 (I forget which) driver whose being attributed the 'Kill' was seen to be of greater political value in terms of the 'coalition'.
From Wikipedia
IIRC an F3 about to bounce an IQAF MIG had to 'yield' to a Saudi F3/F15 (I forget which) driver whose being attributed the 'Kill' was seen to be of greater political value in terms of the 'coalition'.
From Wikipedia
The Tornado ADV has been criticised for its lack of "true" fighter performance. It is true that the Tornado does not have the close combat performance of an aircraft such as the F-16. However, it was designed as an interceptor rather than as an air superiority fighter. Its primary purpose was to carry a large number of missiles and fly them far from base over the North Sea and Northern Atlantic; once on station it needed to have good endurance, and then be able to engage and destroy targets at long range. These targets were envisaged to be formations of Soviet bomber aircraft, the engagement of which would not have required significant air combat manoeuvrability. For this reason, dogfighting capabilities would always be a secondary consideration.
rab-k,
think you'll find that's an urban myth. The F3s went for anything that they had a chance for - blew off 18 drop tanks in all so it's a pity that they never got close enough to get a missile off the rail.
think you'll find that's an urban myth. The F3s went for anything that they had a chance for - blew off 18 drop tanks in all so it's a pity that they never got close enough to get a missile off the rail.