Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

THE RAF is under fire for blowing nearly £2 million to take part in an air show in Ma

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

THE RAF is under fire for blowing nearly £2 million to take part in an air show in Ma

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 21st Apr 2013, 16:55
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
These Joint Tactical Air Controllers sound quite useful - I wonder how they compare to Joint Terminal Attack Controllers?

Thanks for expanding on their role though!
orca is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2013, 18:46
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
"One hears a rumour that the RTB could have been supported by a TriShaw, but that the reliability of the old beasts is nowadays so poor that pressure was brought to bear to ensure that the KC-767I was also used to support the recovery, so that the Typhoons could be reasonably sure of getting back on the planned date.." Beags

Why did they not use a VC10?

OAP

Last edited by Onceapilot; 21st Apr 2013 at 18:47.
Onceapilot is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2013, 19:20
  #23 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 81
Posts: 16,777
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Did anyone mention force protection as well?
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2013, 19:37
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 84 Likes on 22 Posts
Never mind Force Protection!

In Malaysia the most important people to deploy to maintain credibility is a strong Karaoke team!
ex-fast-jets is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2013, 20:50
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Southern Jessieland
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Deja vu all over again....

I remember a cartoon at Dunsfold after some Tornados went to Malaysia (1987?) on sales tour. The cartoon showed a line up of a couple of hundred personnel, tankers and 4(?) Tornados with the Hawk 100 demonstrator that went as well in one corner with just 3 blokes. Malaysia ordered Tornados and then changed their minds for some reason and bought Hawk 108s and 208s instead.

Typhoon is a very capable aircraft but how many air forces can maintain it?
Plastic Bonsai is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2013, 22:43
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: England
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The point about warships is worth exploring. I remember being alongside in a
Type 42 with a gun, sea dart and a helo. Next to us was an Israeli Sa'ar class
with Harpoon, Oto Melara, Gabriel, CIWS and more HMG than you could count. We
had circa 300 on board - I think they had 60! I'm pretty sure our helo had about
8 chaps to mend it, not the 240 this might suggest.
Orca
In answer to your RN Helo maintenance manning exploration point, the RN maintenance crew for a Lynx helicopter on a Frigate/Destroyer was usually only 7 in my day and they were not just responsible for mending the helicopter. As those ships often deployed for long periods (perhaps several months without any main base workshop support or maintenance crew/aircraft rotations) the helo maintenance crews were also required to carry out other supplementary roles including the maintenance/repair of the aircraft’s Ground Support Equipment, Crew Survival Equipment, Weapons/Role Equipment, Hangar and Flight Deck facilities, also dealing with aircraft spares, publications updates, aircraft/ships fire fighting, other ship support roles, carrying out Aircrewman roles, etc.
It was also not uncommon to regularly work 18 hour days (in peacetime) at sea to meet day and night flight operations/maintenance commitments as there was no other helo Shift on such ships that operated one Lynx. As such work could also sometimes be carried out in poor aircraft operating and maintenance environments, that created increased workloads, due to worse corrosion/damage risks, etc.
Those well cross-trained, capable and hard-working aircraft maintenance teams therefore provided very good value for money to the tax payers.

With regards to RN Type 42 Destroyer ship manning levels seeming high when compared to the Israeli warship, the Type 42s were of course a late 1960s/early 1970s design and none of them appear to be left in service (as far as I am aware). More modern RN ships do have much smaller crews than the Type 42s (as more modern and automated systems have also been progressively introduced within the RN).
As the RN ships usually have to spend much more time operating independently a very long way from their home bases (than the Israeli ships do) so they may also require bigger crews for that reason.
Gullwings is offline  
Old 22nd Apr 2013, 05:27
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 509
Received 21 Likes on 6 Posts
LJ

I am aware of the MCCE system, the problem is that we are supposed to barter various tasks against each other (it is measured in C130 hour equivalents) my concern is how we actually get any credits at all since we have so many capability gaps. How long are we allowed to run an overdraft?
vascodegama is offline  
Old 22nd Apr 2013, 05:48
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 26,819
Received 271 Likes on 110 Posts
Why did they not use a VC10?
No doubt they might have had to, had a TriStar been allocated.....which would have broken down somewhere exotic.

There are only 4 x VC10s left. 1 in the South Atlantic, 3 others. I imagine that their availability is thus somewhat limited?
BEagle is offline  
Old 22nd Apr 2013, 07:06
  #29 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 81
Posts: 16,777
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
PB, good point. BiL was involved with their Hawk programme. They didn't have 6000psi nitrogen and used air instead with predictable consequences.
Pontius Navigator is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.