UK fighter numbers to reach all-time low with loss of Tornados and early Typhoons in
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: England
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You actually all seem suprised by this development.
The present Govt. and the one before have set it out for years. They want much smaller traditional forces and they are removing them rapidly.
And they want more controllable aggressive spies for want of a better phrase, larger Special Forces, expeditionary warfare aerial drones with a trans global range (for assassination missions), cyber warfare capability (fantastic catch all phrase) 2 x carriers (which already are looking like white elephants now-a mistake but one they are pressing on with), an ICBM submarine force (God knows why=political and no one dare cancel it), lighter adaptable mobile forces for brushfire wars and rapid response- you've seen the buzz words and phrases.
Drones are getting smaller and better at a frightening pace and their use will increase-spying/assassination tools is how they are used and all they are there for. I see weapons being smaller and smarter and deadlier and stand off.
Tanks, Tornadoes all that dated heavy metal stuff is dated and going, going gone, get used to it. Tornadoes have been around for 35 years, past it and on their way out. The threat they were designed for=long gone.
Forces tailored for the 2030s 40s and 50s will face different counter threats and have different tasks and those decades will be will be dominated by Asian and Islamic countries anyway- bet on it. We have to fit in and around them, a difficult task, but one we will have to swallow hard and master.
Anyway whose left that you want to fight in the old fashioned way? Has anybody on Prune been to London lately because its now like a foreign city, with the expensive real estate being snapped up by wealthy foreigners, but a city largely manned in the service sector by poor foreigners-this is not a quirky accident. Banks and businesses are very largely foreign owned now in the UK.Try to imagine what the future world will look and be like. The future forces are going to be nothing at all like the ones you grew up with.
To me the UK forces look more and more less like a force designed to defend a nation or nation hood but one designed more to link with others to protect big business and vested world business interests.
See recent military activity of the RAF officers embedded with the US forces be they bombing from carriers or operating drones from Nevada or Timbuktu. They seem almost beyond Parliament authority - that's the future.
We are going to be more stiletto than broadsword in the future.
The future miltary is going to be nothing at all like the even recent past.
And they want more controllable aggressive spies for want of a better phrase, larger Special Forces, expeditionary warfare aerial drones with a trans global range (for assassination missions), cyber warfare capability (fantastic catch all phrase) 2 x carriers (which already are looking like white elephants now-a mistake but one they are pressing on with), an ICBM submarine force (God knows why=political and no one dare cancel it), lighter adaptable mobile forces for brushfire wars and rapid response- you've seen the buzz words and phrases.
Drones are getting smaller and better at a frightening pace and their use will increase-spying/assassination tools is how they are used and all they are there for. I see weapons being smaller and smarter and deadlier and stand off.
Tanks, Tornadoes all that dated heavy metal stuff is dated and going, going gone, get used to it. Tornadoes have been around for 35 years, past it and on their way out. The threat they were designed for=long gone.
Forces tailored for the 2030s 40s and 50s will face different counter threats and have different tasks and those decades will be will be dominated by Asian and Islamic countries anyway- bet on it. We have to fit in and around them, a difficult task, but one we will have to swallow hard and master.
Anyway whose left that you want to fight in the old fashioned way? Has anybody on Prune been to London lately because its now like a foreign city, with the expensive real estate being snapped up by wealthy foreigners, but a city largely manned in the service sector by poor foreigners-this is not a quirky accident. Banks and businesses are very largely foreign owned now in the UK.Try to imagine what the future world will look and be like. The future forces are going to be nothing at all like the ones you grew up with.
To me the UK forces look more and more less like a force designed to defend a nation or nation hood but one designed more to link with others to protect big business and vested world business interests.
See recent military activity of the RAF officers embedded with the US forces be they bombing from carriers or operating drones from Nevada or Timbuktu. They seem almost beyond Parliament authority - that's the future.
We are going to be more stiletto than broadsword in the future.
The future miltary is going to be nothing at all like the even recent past.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why are we so keen to retire things (specifically the Tranche 1 Typhoons)? Surely the cost of retaining these, even if a bit less capable than their new stablemates would be small relative to their potential usefulness in the game of defence Top Trumps.
Surely we need to see a small uplift coming out of SDSR given world events and what their airships are saying about FJ numbers - eg enough T1s retained to stand up a sixth Typhoon sqn (20-25 airframes?) - unusually there's a relatively good value and achievable route available to alleviate a bit of pressure.
Alongside that some sort of modest uplift too in earlyish F35 acquisition - enough at least for a third (and ideally fourth) front line sqn, at which point the T1s could go. A nudge towards a force that you can do something relatively sustainable with, and a better fit too (presentationally and actually) with operating two carriers. Nine FJ sqns doesn't sound especially lavish to me and ought to be a realistic outcome.
Alongside that some sort of modest uplift too in earlyish F35 acquisition - enough at least for a third (and ideally fourth) front line sqn, at which point the T1s could go. A nudge towards a force that you can do something relatively sustainable with, and a better fit too (presentationally and actually) with operating two carriers. Nine FJ sqns doesn't sound especially lavish to me and ought to be a realistic outcome.
Hangarshuffle,
You really are a strange sort aren't you?
You must have visited a very different London from the one that I live and work in!
A foreign city? One where the vast majority of the working and residential population is British? Perhaps THE most popular and frequented capital city on the face of the planet?
As for the rest of your clap trap. Around one third of UK industry is foreign owned, so that means that around two thirds isn't, a strange definition of most...
And that one third of UK industry that is UK owned actually owns and operates billions of pounds worth of overseas operations and companies, we do live in a global economy dominated by global multinationals.
As to the banks, mainly foreign owned? I beg to differ! ALL of the top 5 UK banks are 100% UK owned, quite a few by the Government, so that means they are owned by us! And they are some of the largest banking organisations in the world, operating multinationally.
Of course the majority of the major banking operations in London are foreign owned, it is THE international financial capital of the world and every single bank on the face of the planet has major operations there precisely because of that reason, indeed quite a few major foreign banks and financial institutions base their global and international headquarters and operations in London, for a reason.
Happy in my London, best of luck to you in yours, wherever that happens to be.
As to the rest, it was like reading a weird internet conspiracy web site, not entirely related to the world around us, and you.
Stu666,
An excellent idea! Could also replace 100 and 736 fleets.
You really are a strange sort aren't you?
You must have visited a very different London from the one that I live and work in!
A foreign city? One where the vast majority of the working and residential population is British? Perhaps THE most popular and frequented capital city on the face of the planet?
As for the rest of your clap trap. Around one third of UK industry is foreign owned, so that means that around two thirds isn't, a strange definition of most...
And that one third of UK industry that is UK owned actually owns and operates billions of pounds worth of overseas operations and companies, we do live in a global economy dominated by global multinationals.
As to the banks, mainly foreign owned? I beg to differ! ALL of the top 5 UK banks are 100% UK owned, quite a few by the Government, so that means they are owned by us! And they are some of the largest banking organisations in the world, operating multinationally.
Of course the majority of the major banking operations in London are foreign owned, it is THE international financial capital of the world and every single bank on the face of the planet has major operations there precisely because of that reason, indeed quite a few major foreign banks and financial institutions base their global and international headquarters and operations in London, for a reason.
Happy in my London, best of luck to you in yours, wherever that happens to be.
As to the rest, it was like reading a weird internet conspiracy web site, not entirely related to the world around us, and you.
Stu666,
An excellent idea! Could also replace 100 and 736 fleets.
papajuliet,
Really? Why?
Maybe because I post facts and observations and not cliched opinions?
Really? Why?
Maybe because I post facts and observations and not cliched opinions?
Well of course it could be argued that your post was also cliched opinion, just a left wing blinkered one. What makes your "fact" and observations any more (or less) true than anyone else's fact and observation?
But then what has this got to do with FJ numbers in the RAF?
But then what has this got to do with FJ numbers in the RAF?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TW50 - yes, I've thought that myself and it is kind of laughable
Also agree with Hangarshuffle that it has been stated policy for a few years now that we were heading for no more than 5 or 6 FJ sqns - so no real surprise.
I think what's surprising is that its taken so long to realise that this number is woefully inadequate. Let's hope that, unlike pr00ne, those that hold the purse strings will start making some sensible choices
Leeming to house tranche 3 swing role Typhoons sounds eminently sensible to me (to plug gap between GR4 and sufficient numbers of JSF), but I doubt it will happen!
Also agree with Hangarshuffle that it has been stated policy for a few years now that we were heading for no more than 5 or 6 FJ sqns - so no real surprise.
I think what's surprising is that its taken so long to realise that this number is woefully inadequate. Let's hope that, unlike pr00ne, those that hold the purse strings will start making some sensible choices
Leeming to house tranche 3 swing role Typhoons sounds eminently sensible to me (to plug gap between GR4 and sufficient numbers of JSF), but I doubt it will happen!
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chilling out on the water if it's warm enough
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Virginia
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My understanding of the original plan was that once the T3 a/c came on line, the T1s would be refurbished to T3 standard. T2s would never be updated and just be used as spare farms once the refurbished T1s became available. Of course, it also possible that I dreamt that in a gin induced haze!
CM might know more than I.
CM might know more than I.
It's a rare thing, but I find myself agreeing and disagreeing with both Hangarshuffle and pr00ne simultaneously.
To my mind, and from the meetingsI sit in on a daily basis and the work strands I deal with, it's very clear to me that this government views counter-terrorism rather than military ventures as the major issue. Consequently there has been a subtle shift from defence and security being different things - MOD and Spooks - to defence being a component part of the broader security environment. That's why there is now less of a focus on exquisite technology and heavy metal and more on intelligence, communications and light, rapid reaction forces. That said, there is still the investment in said heavy metal etc, but it now really is only one part of a far greater consideration. That's why I think we are struggling so much these days; the political perception appears to be that the major threat, for now, isn't state on state (it isn't necessarily even Russia long term, I'd be looking at China and Iran for state on state issues), the government deems security and terrorism as the major threat and is investing heavily on countering it up stream through the work of the FCO and agencies like DFID and downstream through the work of the police and security services. And none of that sadly requires large numbers of fast jets (or tanks and destroyers for that matter).
As for London, I took my mum to the RAF. Club last weekend for afternoon tea. She loved the Club, hated London. Busy, crowded, unfriendly people barging around. For me, I love it and find the dynamism and international aspects fascinating. Wouldn't change a thing.
To my mind, and from the meetingsI sit in on a daily basis and the work strands I deal with, it's very clear to me that this government views counter-terrorism rather than military ventures as the major issue. Consequently there has been a subtle shift from defence and security being different things - MOD and Spooks - to defence being a component part of the broader security environment. That's why there is now less of a focus on exquisite technology and heavy metal and more on intelligence, communications and light, rapid reaction forces. That said, there is still the investment in said heavy metal etc, but it now really is only one part of a far greater consideration. That's why I think we are struggling so much these days; the political perception appears to be that the major threat, for now, isn't state on state (it isn't necessarily even Russia long term, I'd be looking at China and Iran for state on state issues), the government deems security and terrorism as the major threat and is investing heavily on countering it up stream through the work of the FCO and agencies like DFID and downstream through the work of the police and security services. And none of that sadly requires large numbers of fast jets (or tanks and destroyers for that matter).
As for London, I took my mum to the RAF. Club last weekend for afternoon tea. She loved the Club, hated London. Busy, crowded, unfriendly people barging around. For me, I love it and find the dynamism and international aspects fascinating. Wouldn't change a thing.
Last edited by Melchett01; 25th Jul 2015 at 13:02.
chainkicker,
They are both 100% in every possible way UK owned.
They are both 100% in every possible way UK owned.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Deepest darkest London
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
O-P
All the Typhoon T.1s have been modded to T.3s. There never were any T.2s the single seat F.2s were all modded to FGR.4s.
I hope someone can see sense and keep the Tranche 1s, and for the Tranche 3s well what are we going to do with 9,12, 15, and 31 when they have no more Tonkas
V1
All the Typhoon T.1s have been modded to T.3s. There never were any T.2s the single seat F.2s were all modded to FGR.4s.
I hope someone can see sense and keep the Tranche 1s, and for the Tranche 3s well what are we going to do with 9,12, 15, and 31 when they have no more Tonkas
V1
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chilling out on the water if it's warm enough
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
chainkicker,
That's not how you determine ownership. By that measure almost every company on the face of the planet would be UK owned!
A company is domiciled in a country, it has it's headquarters in that country and it is registered in that country. Our banks are all of those.
That's not how you determine ownership. By that measure almost every company on the face of the planet would be UK owned!
A company is domiciled in a country, it has it's headquarters in that country and it is registered in that country. Our banks are all of those.