"Close down RAF' says Naval whippersnapper
High Spirits
The Navy has been stitched up. Again. They're cutting ships too you know. The Navy is very short of missiles.
Without a decent fleet, the carriers are vulnerable. Without Sea Harriers aboard the CVS, the fleet is vulnerable. The fleet is SERVERELY overstretched too.
More on this later............
See Steamchicken's thread.
The Navy has been stitched up. Again. They're cutting ships too you know. The Navy is very short of missiles.
Without a decent fleet, the carriers are vulnerable. Without Sea Harriers aboard the CVS, the fleet is vulnerable. The fleet is SERVERELY overstretched too.
More on this later............
See Steamchicken's thread.
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 20th Apr 2002 at 20:51.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
History is not on the side of the RAF as the reason for it,s formation was the Smuts report of 1917.
The main thrust of this was that the country required a "strategic independant force ".
As the RAF has long lost the ability to forfill this role ( with the end of the "V" force) the very reason for it,s inital set up has now vanished.
It would seem that the airforce needs to find an "independant " role or face the fact that they are a dog that has had it,s day.
The main thrust of this was that the country required a "strategic independant force ".
As the RAF has long lost the ability to forfill this role ( with the end of the "V" force) the very reason for it,s inital set up has now vanished.
It would seem that the airforce needs to find an "independant " role or face the fact that they are a dog that has had it,s day.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: at home
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WEBF / A and C,
Well aware of Navy cutbacks too, but some of your barnacled colleagues are suggesting closing the RAF on the basis of saving on infrastructure. How can you save money by closing a service and simply dividing the assets up between Army and RN as this idiot who caused this thread has suggested? It would surely cost a great deal more to train up a load of new pilots to fly your now empty airframes......cos I'm not aware of many RAF frontline aircrew who would wish to crossover to another service - it seems to work the other way round though!
Well aware of Navy cutbacks too, but some of your barnacled colleagues are suggesting closing the RAF on the basis of saving on infrastructure. How can you save money by closing a service and simply dividing the assets up between Army and RN as this idiot who caused this thread has suggested? It would surely cost a great deal more to train up a load of new pilots to fly your now empty airframes......cos I'm not aware of many RAF frontline aircrew who would wish to crossover to another service - it seems to work the other way round though!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A & C
I don't think the Smuts Report was solely concerned with strategic air operations. It was also influenced by overlapping responsibilties and scandalous waste during WW1. While the Zeppelins rumbled overhead the RFC and RNAS tended to sit around mumbling "not my part of ship, guv!" In 1916 the RN aircraft parks were crammed full of good aircraft doing sod-all while the RFC were getting their ar*es shot off in France. in the end the RNAS sent some squadrons to France under Army higher command. No 8 Sqn RNAS was one of them and formed at Dunkirk in Oct 1916. It performed brilliantly with sopwith Pups, Tripes, Camels and Snipes and was absorbed into the RAF as No 208 Sqn .
I don't think the Smuts Report was solely concerned with strategic air operations. It was also influenced by overlapping responsibilties and scandalous waste during WW1. While the Zeppelins rumbled overhead the RFC and RNAS tended to sit around mumbling "not my part of ship, guv!" In 1916 the RN aircraft parks were crammed full of good aircraft doing sod-all while the RFC were getting their ar*es shot off in France. in the end the RNAS sent some squadrons to France under Army higher command. No 8 Sqn RNAS was one of them and formed at Dunkirk in Oct 1916. It performed brilliantly with sopwith Pups, Tripes, Camels and Snipes and was absorbed into the RAF as No 208 Sqn .
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New Jersey Shore
Age: 92
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with this concept. The USA had no USAF during WWII, and we did nicely, you may recall.
We had great airpower. Army Air Corps, Navy Air, USMC Air.
Then after the war we made a seperate entity of an abomination called The U. S. Air Force. We haven't won a real war since.
We had great airpower. Army Air Corps, Navy Air, USMC Air.
Then after the war we made a seperate entity of an abomination called The U. S. Air Force. We haven't won a real war since.
"While the Zeppelins rumbled overhead the RNAS and RFC tended to look at each other and say "Not my part of ship""
A minor injustice to the RNAS; before the first war, the Army had demanded the responsibility for air defence and got it. However their planning was based on the whole RFC going with the army to France on mobilisation. When it happened, the army staff said in Winston Churchill's words, "that they had not got the men, the machines, or the money; they adhered nevertheless to the principle!" Typically, WSC immediately offered to take over the task - the RNAS already had armed aeroplanes, unlike the common belief that the first air fighting took place with hand weapons. Therefore, RNAS sqns were sent to Dunkirk to cover the shortest route from the Cologne zeppelin base. Further, in Churchill's famous "17 points to remember" memorandum of 28th July 1914, which listed matters for immediate action during the mobilisation of the fleet, there are references both to "aeroplane squadrons for Nore" i.e. Sheerness/Chatham and "anti-aircraft guns" at Plymouth! (References for all this are the first chapters of "The World Crisis", volume I, and the archive details are in it.)
As interception was unlikely, the Naval Staff (a Churchill innovation)'s Air Division decided to attack, launching the first-ever serious air attacks against the Zeppelin bases at Cuxhaven, down the Elbe from Hamburg, Cologne, and Friedrichshafen on Lake Constance. It was in 1916, after WSC had been sacked that the Army got the responsibility back.
A minor injustice to the RNAS; before the first war, the Army had demanded the responsibility for air defence and got it. However their planning was based on the whole RFC going with the army to France on mobilisation. When it happened, the army staff said in Winston Churchill's words, "that they had not got the men, the machines, or the money; they adhered nevertheless to the principle!" Typically, WSC immediately offered to take over the task - the RNAS already had armed aeroplanes, unlike the common belief that the first air fighting took place with hand weapons. Therefore, RNAS sqns were sent to Dunkirk to cover the shortest route from the Cologne zeppelin base. Further, in Churchill's famous "17 points to remember" memorandum of 28th July 1914, which listed matters for immediate action during the mobilisation of the fleet, there are references both to "aeroplane squadrons for Nore" i.e. Sheerness/Chatham and "anti-aircraft guns" at Plymouth! (References for all this are the first chapters of "The World Crisis", volume I, and the archive details are in it.)
As interception was unlikely, the Naval Staff (a Churchill innovation)'s Air Division decided to attack, launching the first-ever serious air attacks against the Zeppelin bases at Cuxhaven, down the Elbe from Hamburg, Cologne, and Friedrichshafen on Lake Constance. It was in 1916, after WSC had been sacked that the Army got the responsibility back.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Naval 8"
Steam Chicken
I have no ready access to RN archives from WW1. But I do have the official history of Naval 8/208 Sqn.
"During the winter months of 1915 the then Wing Commander C L Lambe, RN Commaner of the Naval Air Forces at Dover and Dunkirk, had been reorganising and building up the RNAS in the Dover Patrol. By April the following year three wings were operating between Dunkirk and Bergues, and in the summer a loan by the Admiralty of a squadron to reinforce the RFC on the Somme was approved. Each of the three wings provided one flight towards this squadron, thus Squadron Commander Bromet (later A M Sir Geoffrey) received a rather mixed bag of aircraft consisting of six Pups, six Nieuport Scouts, and six Sopwith 1.5 Strutters" On 26 Oct the Squadron moved to le Vert Galant and were visited next day by Major-General Trenchard and some days later by Sir Douglas Haig. They began operations on 3 Nov, with No 22 wing, 5th Brigade, RFC.
I cannot find any reference to patrolling against zeppelins in the rest of the history, but they gave the Red Baron and the rest of his f*kkers brown pants !
I M Esperto
I thought your lads did well in Korea and, within the political limits imposed, in Vietnam. You would not have had any POWs back but for LINEBACKER 2 when SAC were at last allowed to give Hanoi and Haiphong the good'ole Buff treatment. And we know the Desert Storm was a breeze for the grunts because the spade-work had been done by the Buffs
I winder if anyone has done a realistic cost/benefit comparison between two strike carriers, for which (we are told) £2.7B is in the budget and a buy of some large, non-penetrating, ordnance-deliverers (bombers!) that could do for the UK what the Buffs are still doing for Uncle SAM. After all, we all know who really gave the Al Quaida the runs!
I have no ready access to RN archives from WW1. But I do have the official history of Naval 8/208 Sqn.
"During the winter months of 1915 the then Wing Commander C L Lambe, RN Commaner of the Naval Air Forces at Dover and Dunkirk, had been reorganising and building up the RNAS in the Dover Patrol. By April the following year three wings were operating between Dunkirk and Bergues, and in the summer a loan by the Admiralty of a squadron to reinforce the RFC on the Somme was approved. Each of the three wings provided one flight towards this squadron, thus Squadron Commander Bromet (later A M Sir Geoffrey) received a rather mixed bag of aircraft consisting of six Pups, six Nieuport Scouts, and six Sopwith 1.5 Strutters" On 26 Oct the Squadron moved to le Vert Galant and were visited next day by Major-General Trenchard and some days later by Sir Douglas Haig. They began operations on 3 Nov, with No 22 wing, 5th Brigade, RFC.
I cannot find any reference to patrolling against zeppelins in the rest of the history, but they gave the Red Baron and the rest of his f*kkers brown pants !
I M Esperto
I thought your lads did well in Korea and, within the political limits imposed, in Vietnam. You would not have had any POWs back but for LINEBACKER 2 when SAC were at last allowed to give Hanoi and Haiphong the good'ole Buff treatment. And we know the Desert Storm was a breeze for the grunts because the spade-work had been done by the Buffs
I winder if anyone has done a realistic cost/benefit comparison between two strike carriers, for which (we are told) £2.7B is in the budget and a buy of some large, non-penetrating, ordnance-deliverers (bombers!) that could do for the UK what the Buffs are still doing for Uncle SAM. After all, we all know who really gave the Al Quaida the runs!
The deployment of navy planes to Dunkirk in 1914 was also the reason why the navy ended up running armoured-car units (to keep the German flank guard away from their forward bases in Belgium). When the Germans turned from the Marne to the north in October, 1914, we lost most of this area, but finally stopped them at Ypres. The RNAS patrols were sent elsewhere, partly because the threat didn't materialise quite yet, and partly because their base was more or less under artillery fire (and would stay that way until 1918)
