Is it REALLY the RAFs?
So if 5 of these things at any one time are going to be transporting tattooed feckwit sun readers about how on earth could any sane thinking person think that we the military own them
Last edited by Trim Stab; 19th Jul 2011 at 18:53.
Cbtl, in theory in a PFI, yes. Or a lower "service fee" because of the estimated offset from the 3rd party use. One of the Treasury tests of whether a contract like this is actually a PFI or not (ie are the assets on the Country's balance sheet or the PFI Operator's balance sheet) is to ascertain whether there is any genuine 3rd party use for the asset when its not being used by the military. Flying the Army around doesn't count as 3rd party use, flying the bucket & spade brigade around does.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
TrimStab - Not sure I understand the bolding in the quote. One could infer that you were equating the Army with said Sun readers. But then that wouldn't really tie up with the outcome of SDSR would it? Army left more or less intact, RAF equipment, manpower and stations decimated. Who are the Sun readers again?
MOA:
No, I think I'm the one who must. Point taken!
Must brush up on my irony....
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Well I was hardly likely to overplay that, was I? 
However, the fact remains that the RAF coming out of SDSR is a different beast to that going in. Practically sod all use to the Navy (no MPA, no Harrier). Less useful to the Army (less CAS), and heading for sod all use at all. Dwindling AT assets, a poxy 7 sqns of FJ and some geriatric US ELINT capability.
This thread's a shining example. It's a poor reflection on the RAF when the "new kit" is owned by a bank, a third of it is nothing more than a few airliners, and ALL AT is crammed into a single-runway airfield. If the "wheels up" Herc sketch is pulled again at BZZ, then in the words of Snatch, you're "proper fcuked".
In fact, the future miniscule size of the RAF calls into question the need to have the institutions it has. Its own Medical service, Fire Service, Police, recruit training, even Cranwell. The individual cost of each of these will approach the point where it makes no sense - if it hasn't already. There'll be a 2* for each Squadron.
Now all of the above is merely a commentary resulting from the "Sun readers" hypocrisy. For myself, I truly wish it weren't as it is. Despite being a (retired) soldier, I wish the RAF (and the RN, for that matter) hadn't been as decimated as they have been, but they have.
Sun readers indeed!
However, the fact remains that the RAF coming out of SDSR is a different beast to that going in. Practically sod all use to the Navy (no MPA, no Harrier). Less useful to the Army (less CAS), and heading for sod all use at all. Dwindling AT assets, a poxy 7 sqns of FJ and some geriatric US ELINT capability.
This thread's a shining example. It's a poor reflection on the RAF when the "new kit" is owned by a bank, a third of it is nothing more than a few airliners, and ALL AT is crammed into a single-runway airfield. If the "wheels up" Herc sketch is pulled again at BZZ, then in the words of Snatch, you're "proper fcuked".
In fact, the future miniscule size of the RAF calls into question the need to have the institutions it has. Its own Medical service, Fire Service, Police, recruit training, even Cranwell. The individual cost of each of these will approach the point where it makes no sense - if it hasn't already. There'll be a 2* for each Squadron.
Now all of the above is merely a commentary resulting from the "Sun readers" hypocrisy. For myself, I truly wish it weren't as it is. Despite being a (retired) soldier, I wish the RAF (and the RN, for that matter) hadn't been as decimated as they have been, but they have.
Sun readers indeed!
Roadster,
Bit of thread drift, but I think you'll find that Con Coughlin shares a broadly similar view, albeit going a stage further and arguing that all 3 Services have been equally done over by Camoron and the vermin Fox - albeit not helped by single service chiefs and their peeing contests - and that it is now time to 'go Canadian'.
It’s time for Britain to merge its*Army, Navy and Air Force - Telegraph
It pains me to admit it, but Camoron really is turning out to be am exceptionally average PM, Fox a bit like a petulant teenager and the government in general rather poor, especially on defence. Frankly, we are even less of a concern to the politicians than we were under Noo Labour (until of course LOCOG screw up the security, car parking, hot dog and souvenir brochure sales for Olympics then Op DENY SUMMER will kick in) as evidenced by the Civil Service take over of the Defence Board (Civil Defence Board?). I've yet to work out what it is that Camoron is actually interested in, other than himself and his chums, but it isn't defence and frankly I think we would be better of with the egregious Boris Johnson running the show. At least he has the advantage of being a likeable buffoon, so he either fails to shock or surprises in buckets.
Given the monumental costs of this PFI, I'm surprised that it hasn't been renogotiated in some way shape or form. I know there are contracts involved, but at the end of the day, the government can move the goal posts, up sticks and take its toys away and has shown that it is willing to do so when it suits its own agenda. Short of a long drawn out legal battle, there is very little an organisation which isn't a bank could do to force the government's hand at least in the short term.
Bit of thread drift, but I think you'll find that Con Coughlin shares a broadly similar view, albeit going a stage further and arguing that all 3 Services have been equally done over by Camoron and the vermin Fox - albeit not helped by single service chiefs and their peeing contests - and that it is now time to 'go Canadian'.
It’s time for Britain to merge its*Army, Navy and Air Force - Telegraph
It pains me to admit it, but Camoron really is turning out to be am exceptionally average PM, Fox a bit like a petulant teenager and the government in general rather poor, especially on defence. Frankly, we are even less of a concern to the politicians than we were under Noo Labour (until of course LOCOG screw up the security, car parking, hot dog and souvenir brochure sales for Olympics then Op DENY SUMMER will kick in) as evidenced by the Civil Service take over of the Defence Board (Civil Defence Board?). I've yet to work out what it is that Camoron is actually interested in, other than himself and his chums, but it isn't defence and frankly I think we would be better of with the egregious Boris Johnson running the show. At least he has the advantage of being a likeable buffoon, so he either fails to shock or surprises in buckets.
Given the monumental costs of this PFI, I'm surprised that it hasn't been renogotiated in some way shape or form. I know there are contracts involved, but at the end of the day, the government can move the goal posts, up sticks and take its toys away and has shown that it is willing to do so when it suits its own agenda. Short of a long drawn out legal battle, there is very little an organisation which isn't a bank could do to force the government's hand at least in the short term.
Last edited by Melchett01; 20th Jul 2011 at 23:40.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Well I don't support the view of fully merged Services, but certainly there's a critical mass to justify retention of a semblance of the current structure. Regrettably, the RAF and RN seem to be tumbling out of control to below that level.
With 33,000 people to keep a couple of hundred aircraft in the air, it's not hard to see that there'll be of the order of 100 airmen for every aircraft.
Same for the Navy. Three dockyards, two airfields, 30,000 blokes, 50 (being generous) ships. A tad overstaffed?
The acid test - if the MOD had a reality check, and realized there wasn't enough of the right ships and aircraft to do the task, and upped the orders accordingly, but not the overall manpower count, would the RAF and RN complain, or gladly accept?
OK, I'm done with thread diversion now.
Back on thread, would it be true to say that the A340 would have been a better fit for the RAF than the A330, but the A330 is better suited to the charter market?
With 33,000 people to keep a couple of hundred aircraft in the air, it's not hard to see that there'll be of the order of 100 airmen for every aircraft.
Same for the Navy. Three dockyards, two airfields, 30,000 blokes, 50 (being generous) ships. A tad overstaffed?
The acid test - if the MOD had a reality check, and realized there wasn't enough of the right ships and aircraft to do the task, and upped the orders accordingly, but not the overall manpower count, would the RAF and RN complain, or gladly accept?
OK, I'm done with thread diversion now.
Back on thread, would it be true to say that the A340 would have been a better fit for the RAF than the A330, but the A330 is better suited to the charter market?
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forgive my thread drift for one more comment.
Something was said fairly recently, the sense of which is only now beginning to become clear. I suspect that certain parts of the Army are only just beginning to realise just what the recent change in emphasis to reserve forces actually means; I suspect that a large lump of the Army's tail (logistics & equipment support) is about to get cut off en-masse and be replaced by reservists; outside of Afghanistan, a large lump of this work is already conducted by a 3rd party and if you no longer have a requirement to move a large lump of combat supplies to support armoured divisions in the field, why do you need logistic regiments to support it.
Something was said fairly recently, the sense of which is only now beginning to become clear. I suspect that certain parts of the Army are only just beginning to realise just what the recent change in emphasis to reserve forces actually means; I suspect that a large lump of the Army's tail (logistics & equipment support) is about to get cut off en-masse and be replaced by reservists; outside of Afghanistan, a large lump of this work is already conducted by a 3rd party and if you no longer have a requirement to move a large lump of combat supplies to support armoured divisions in the field, why do you need logistic regiments to support it.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So who are all these Tour Operators that are queuing up to use tax payers A330's painted in dull grey with no IFE that can be called back into immediate military use at the drop of a hat with about 100 less seats than they already have on their own aircraft?
It's never going to work...
It's never going to work...
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BBC News - British army 'faces thousands more job losses'
Would seem the hurt is being spread about a bit more than you thought.
