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

UK fighter numbers to reach all-time low with loss of Tornados and early Typhoons in

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.

UK fighter numbers to reach all-time low with loss of Tornados and early Typhoons in

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 22nd Jul 2015, 06:39
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Beyond the M25
Posts: 523
Received 49 Likes on 25 Posts
UK fighter numbers to reach all-time low with loss of Tornados and early Typhoons in

Ouch! One wonders just how much fat there really is left to cut, or are we well and truly now cutting into bone?

UK fighter numbers to reach all-time low with loss of Tornados and early Typhoons in 2019 - IHS Jane's 360
Mil-26Man is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2015, 07:21
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: England
Posts: 1,930
Received 7 Likes on 4 Posts
Never mind cutting into the bone, we've been cutting through the bone in so many areas, for quite some time!!
Roland Pulfrew is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2015, 08:25
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: England
Posts: 576
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm starting a rumour that the British military serial number system is going to be scrapped - we'll just give the aircraft names instead.

You heard it here first!
P6 Driver is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2015, 09:03
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Essex
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I suppose this can only come off as a stupid question, but -

Do Typhoons really only last ten years?

Seems astonishingly bad value for money.

P
Phil_R is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2015, 09:29
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Among these dark Satanic mills
Posts: 1,197
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Presumably we are already at a record low number of 'fighters'? All that is changing in 2019 is that we will be setting a new record.
TorqueOfTheDevil is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2015, 09:37
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Southern Europe
Posts: 5,335
Received 17 Likes on 6 Posts
Phil_R,

No, they don't. The plan to replace Trance 1 was simply part of the capability growth. The article did mention the possibilty of keeping them on, but that would depend on the Government being willing to miss another opportunity to save money.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2015, 09:40
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: York
Posts: 627
Received 23 Likes on 14 Posts
And then you deduct the number of aircraft under long term maintenance and a myriad of other reasons why they are on the ground. God forbid typhoon ever gets grounded with a fleet problem.
dctyke is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2015, 09:48
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
"You fight the war with the kit you've got". Hmmnn...I really hope there is no war coming? Oops

OAP
Onceapilot is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2015, 09:56
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The back of beyond
Posts: 2,133
Received 173 Likes on 89 Posts
Presumably we are already at a record low number of 'fighters'? All that is changing in 2019 is that we will be setting a new record
That's true, but 2019 will (???) represent the absolute nadir, with numbers (hopefully) rising after. Even so, as the article states, they are not likely to rise much above 150 aircraft.
melmothtw is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2015, 10:11
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Next to Ross and Demelza
Age: 53
Posts: 1,235
Received 52 Likes on 21 Posts
So Tranche 1 aircraft are not able to be upgraded to full swing role configuration? So retain some as QRA aircraft in air-air fit only. Or is that too sensible?
Martin the Martian is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2015, 10:12
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,895
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Re the author's argument: What would be the point of retaining the Tranche 1's if there aren't the aircrew to fly them, or the budget to keep them current?

Or is this the plan?


And, as Courtney says, when was the last time you saw the Government miss a chance to save money?
Fox3WheresMyBanana is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2015, 10:13
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The back of beyond
Posts: 2,133
Received 173 Likes on 89 Posts
Not too sensible at all Martin, and I think that is what the author of the article was suggesting when he said "they remain highly potent air-to-air fighter platforms and should be able to more than match any adversaries that they might meet in this arena for a number of years yet".

What would be the point of retaining the Tranche 1's if there aren't the aircrew to fly them, or the budget to keep them current?
Surely, the manning plans have been drawn up with the reduced platform numbers in mind. Increase the numbers of aircraft, and adjust the manning level plans accordingly. As the article points out, all of the Typhoon investment has already been made, and all of the operating and support infrastructure will remain budgeted for out to the 2030 OSD of the T2 and T3 aircraft - how much more would it cost for the T1s to ride along on their coat tails? For sure, there would be an economic hit, but I'd suggest it would be relatively minor when offset by the added capability.
melmothtw is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2015, 10:15
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Among these dark Satanic mills
Posts: 1,197
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
2019 will (???) represent the absolute nadir, with numbers (hopefully) rising after
Let's hope so!

Never mind cutting into the bone, we've been cutting through the bone in so many areas, for quite some time!!
Some would say at least one limb has been amputated already...
TorqueOfTheDevil is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2015, 16:10
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Essex
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Thanks, Courtney.

I suppose the remaining salient comparison is how much they're worth (53 Typhoons including depreciation seems like several billion) and how much it costs to run them per year, given that support for the type continues in general.

What's that, three squadrons' worth?

P
Phil_R is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2015, 07:51
  #15 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Beyond the M25
Posts: 523
Received 49 Likes on 25 Posts
Interesting editorial comment at the end here UK Fighter Numbers to Reach All-Time Low with Loss of Tornados and Early Typhoons In 2019 (excerpt) , and does somewhat open the MoD up to ridicule with it's response to the original Jane's piece that:

The RAF has and will have the aircraft it needs to meet its commitments around the world, whether that’s conducting Tornado air strikes against ISIL in Iraq, policing Baltic air space and securing the skies over the UK and in Falkland Islands with Typhoon jets, or providing vital surveillance over Syria with Reaper flights. Tough decisions were made during the last Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) to rationalise our fast jet forces into two advanced and efficient fleets and we continue to assess future requirements ahead of this year’s SDSR, which is supported by our £160bn equipment programme that will deliver the fifth-generation Lightning II joint strike fighter.
Mil-26Man is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2015, 07:59
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's ok, you'll have the F-35 by then.....Maybe..

Thank God for the Super Hornet.
Hempy is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2015, 08:37
  #17 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Beyond the M25
Posts: 523
Received 49 Likes on 25 Posts
But in what numbers Hempy? Only 15 to 20 by 2019, according to the piece, and that's the problem.
Mil-26Man is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2015, 17:34
  #18 (permalink)  
Danny42C
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
We could re-arm the Spits and Hurricanes on the Memorial Flight, I suppose, and buy a few back from the civil register. Even at £1.5 million they would be cheaper than what's on offer now; you could hang a radar pod on one wing and an air-to-air missile on the other.

(I think, perhaps, that I have been too long out in the sun !).

D.
 
Old 23rd Jul 2015, 17:47
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by dctyke
God forbid typhoon ever gets grounded with a fleet problem.
HoHoho. Not.
glad rag is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2015, 18:27
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Age: 63
Posts: 1,854
Received 77 Likes on 43 Posts
Re the author's argument: What would be the point of retaining the Tranche 1's if there aren't the aircrew to fly them, or the budget to keep them current?
Are you saying that there are absolutely no conceivable circumstances under which any of HM Forces will ever expand again? and that there isn't the Human resource any longer to facilitate any future expansion?

Don't forget with the defence budget being retained at 2%, Afghanistan no longer an issue and SAR going to Bristow Helicopters, together with a host of new threats to consider, a resurgent Russian Hegemony and IS, is it not just possible that the Tornados could be replaced by the retention of the Tranche 1 Typhoons, allowing the earlier aircraft to become dedicated to the air defence role while the more developed take on the offensive role from the Tornados. It would be a very moderate expansion over a period of time.

FB
Finningley Boy is offline  


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.