If Carlsberg ran Air Forces they would probably be the best in the world...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
" A 27 ship formation take off - that I'd like to see! "
In 2 years time that will be the whole of the RAF FJ's on one runway
In 2 years time that will be the whole of the RAF FJ's on one runway
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
if we all went MTP, kept our headress and our Service Stable Belts to distinguish the Services, if the rather large badge stating Royal Air Force or Royal Navy and the TRF wasn't a big enough clue! Thereby getting rid of blue, shirts, white shirts, brown shirts, long sleeve, short sleeve, 15 different Mks of Jersey various colours of trouser etc etc etc ad infinitum! Trust me, wearing MTP day in, day out, for the last 9 months has been extremely comfortable in all weathers!
I can remember just how far back to common uniform idea went, Mountbatten I think. The principle was to be:
1. All wear the same.
2. If not then all the cloth to be the same, just different colours.
3. All patterns to be the same with embellishments if necessary.
Naturally the RN stepped sideways which left the RAF and Army, oh and the RM.
The RM could not wear either the same colour or same cloth as the Army.
The RN had a different flying coverall from the RAF and the AAC was different too.
The woolly pulley at last was an item where there should be no problem except for the colour.
Except the RAF went from ribbed to plain, round neck to V, to round neck and ribbed with the RN and Army unable to keep up.
"If we're going to bin all the other Air Combat Service Support trades and branches why retain the engineers? After all the only deploy to the same places that the other trades go to so there is no military reason that they too can't be contractors (are they at any greater risk than the contract chefs in Bastion/KAF?).
While we're at it. Do we really need our AT/AR crews to be regular service personnel. Don't they do the air equivalent if the RFA's maritime role? So let's bin them too. If we do that, then the policy could be extended to the non-Fast Jet ISTAR lot too.
So we'd be left with was a Royal Air Force comprising Fast Jet Pilots, the odd Tornado WSO, and Support Helicopter aircrew."
....and dont forget each one would have his/her own 1*,2*, and 3* of course!
While we're at it. Do we really need our AT/AR crews to be regular service personnel. Don't they do the air equivalent if the RFA's maritime role? So let's bin them too. If we do that, then the policy could be extended to the non-Fast Jet ISTAR lot too.
So we'd be left with was a Royal Air Force comprising Fast Jet Pilots, the odd Tornado WSO, and Support Helicopter aircrew."
....and dont forget each one would have his/her own 1*,2*, and 3* of course!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Several miles SSW of Watford Gap
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Ken Scott. Chap, I was taking the p*ss; it was never meant to be taken as a serious proposition. Unless, of course, you agree with the original post about the ACSS branches and trades being civilianised. In which case, I've been shot at a few times (direct and indirect) and I'm a Blunty!
@Oldman. You are, of course, correct; however, those stars would also be FJ or SH pilots (maybe with an odd Tornado WSO for E&D qouta reasons).
@Kreuger. Fair point. My ISS Tutor would have, probably, highlighted my apparent tautology. Are you my ISS Tutor?
@Oldman. You are, of course, correct; however, those stars would also be FJ or SH pilots (maybe with an odd Tornado WSO for E&D qouta reasons).
@Kreuger. Fair point. My ISS Tutor would have, probably, highlighted my apparent tautology. Are you my ISS Tutor?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 146 Likes
on
28 Posts
In which case, I've been shot at a few times (direct and indirect) and I'm a Blunty!
however, those stars would also be FJ or SH pilots (maybe with an odd Tornado WSO for E&D qouta reasons).
As FJ pukes are allegedly to be allowed to command AT squadrons (not enough FJ ones to permit the 'right' people to have a command) then an AT background presumably will no longer be a bar...
Provided of course that all the AT pilots don't just say 'f**k it, I'm leaving for BA/ Cathay/ Jet2 etc'.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Going deeper underground
Age: 55
Posts: 332
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The CS peeps who deploy seem to get rather large allowances for being there which would seem to negate the savings from civilianising the post in the first place.
NB. Both of these scenarios have already happened in AFG and Iraq.
Being in harm's way is not unique to military personnel and therefore, while there are pros and cons regarding affordability and reliability, it is perfectly feasible for contractors/CS to fulfill these tasks.
However, what is unique to military personnel is the authority to kill and inflict violence. Thus civilians (some exceptions, such as the Prime Minister) are excluded from being part of the kill chain.
However, what is unique to military personnel is the authority to kill and inflict violence. Thus civilians (some exceptions, such as the Prime Minister) are excluded from being part of the kill chain.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Malkin Tower
Posts: 847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the RAF ran a bewery it would campaign to shut down the Rum distillers on the basis that it could the same job better and more cheaply with its brewing kit. Once the distillers wee shut the RAF would admit it couldn't distill, but would claim there was no demand for Rum anyway, so why bother making it?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Going deeper underground
Age: 55
Posts: 332
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RLE - of course it is perfectly feasible (and appropriate) to use contractors on deployed ops. My point is that their use is not a way to save money vice uniforms and, if things are too kinetic, they may not be there.
However small the support tails gets in relation to the teeth, there will always be a requirement to have all bases covered by an as-small-as-practical cadre of military personnel, especially at the start of an op when the metal is flying.
However small the support tails gets in relation to the teeth, there will always be a requirement to have all bases covered by an as-small-as-practical cadre of military personnel, especially at the start of an op when the metal is flying.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Several miles SSW of Watford Gap
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ken
In the words of Michael Winner - calm down dear.
It's irony. The original post postulated a binning of all of the people perceived as being a supplementary. My post in extended the pretext ironically. This is not a sensible post.
The answer to the star point is that in this threads make-believe ironic world the RAF would only comprise of FJ and SH.
In the words of Michael Winner - calm down dear.
It's irony. The original post postulated a binning of all of the people perceived as being a supplementary. My post in extended the pretext ironically. This is not a sensible post.
The answer to the star point is that in this threads make-believe ironic world the RAF would only comprise of FJ and SH.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 146 Likes
on
28 Posts
In the words of Michael Winner - calm down dear.
I thought we were having a discourse on the merits (or lack of) of your suggestion.... no calming down required thank you.
An interesting suggestion your 'ironic RAF' where one of the two fleets (the other being SH) that have done their real job continuously for many decades should be excluded but the one that had spent virtually all its time until fairly recently only practicing should be included.
I'll go and have a lie down before the nasty man makes me any more cross....!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 146 Likes
on
28 Posts
Jamesdevice,
I think you're in the wrong thread!
If the RAF ran a bewery it would campaign to shut down the Rum distillers on the basis that it could the same job better and more cheaply with its brewing kit. Once the distillers wee shut the RAF would admit it couldn't distill, but would claim there was no demand for Rum anyway, so why bother making it?
the one that had spent virtually all its time until fairly recently only practicing should be included
I could enrage you further by saying, IMHO, the only fleet within the RAF that has really been doing their proper job continuously for many decades is the SAR force....