RAF Unsuitable for Carrier Operations - Chris Bolton
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: It's Fairyland!
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF Unsuitable for Carrier Operations - Chris Bolton
http://linkis.com/********.com/Jzy6l
Well at least he doesn't bring up moving Australia on the map.
But it's not very purple is it?
Well at least he doesn't bring up moving Australia on the map.
But it's not very purple is it?
Last edited by Thomas Woodrooffe RN; 18th Mar 2017 at 17:32.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guff
I know nothing of the intricacies of carrier vs land-based operations. But I know how to read and analyse a scientific paper. By such criteria, this paper is tendentious guff.
I shall now crawl back into my hole.
I shall now crawl back into my hole.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, I just love the sweeping generalisation about RAF aircrew lifestyle just sitting at home feet up working Mon-Fri 9-5.
The author could do with a visit to Odiham and Brize to get a dose of reality. I'm sure the Chinook Force would love never to embark again, I'm not sure if the marines would be happy with that though!
What a load of tosh.
The author could do with a visit to Odiham and Brize to get a dose of reality. I'm sure the Chinook Force would love never to embark again, I'm not sure if the marines would be happy with that though!
What a load of tosh.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South of Old Warden
Age: 87
Posts: 1,375
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
' The pilot is responsible for the aircraft and it's crew'! Really. Yer learn something new...........
Some enlightening stuff about the sea being dangerous too!
Some enlightening stuff about the sea being dangerous too!
I remember reading 'Sea Harrier at War" and ended it by throwing it across the bedroom. Chips on both shoulders and an almost fanatical hate of the RAF. Does not warrant the oxygen of any attention. Nuff from me.
Don't worry too much. In any future 'peer' conflict Carriers (of all sides) will last about 48 hours. Remember the Battleships in WW2; well Carriers are the modern equivalent.
The article is from 2013. I'm pretty sure we all gnashed our teeth over it back then.
The man did an awful lot that he can be proud of many years ago but let's not give him the satisfaction once again of thinking we either believe anything he has to say or even give a sh1t about it.
BV
The man did an awful lot that he can be proud of many years ago but let's not give him the satisfaction once again of thinking we either believe anything he has to say or even give a sh1t about it.
BV
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
46 Posts
Bloody HELL - this is really the ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE - 'Sharkey' resurrected from about 04 April 2011. Article was published at 'phoenix think tank' about then however the site has moved from original article URL to here:
The Phoenix Think Tank > Articles | Independent Naval & Maritime Thinking | A Platform for Naval and Maritime Authors. Click on 'CVF, F-35 and other carriers' to see article title: The Phoenix Think Tank > Articles > Alan Hensher > Defence of the Realm
But of course nothing there either. Regurgitating old old material is Shirley unwise. The 2011 date is known from a post about it on F-16.net at that time.
Here is a UK Parliament Submission Shark Attack submission post repeat from 03 Aug 2011: scroll down a lot to...
Annex A FLYING FROM OUR NEW CARRIERS—THE RN OR THE RAF ETHOS
http://www.publications.parliament.u...61/761vw39.htm
The Phoenix Think Tank > Articles | Independent Naval & Maritime Thinking | A Platform for Naval and Maritime Authors. Click on 'CVF, F-35 and other carriers' to see article title: The Phoenix Think Tank > Articles > Alan Hensher > Defence of the Realm
But of course nothing there either. Regurgitating old old material is Shirley unwise. The 2011 date is known from a post about it on F-16.net at that time.
Here is a UK Parliament Submission Shark Attack submission post repeat from 03 Aug 2011: scroll down a lot to...
Annex A FLYING FROM OUR NEW CARRIERS—THE RN OR THE RAF ETHOS
http://www.publications.parliament.u...61/761vw39.htm
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 18th Mar 2017 at 20:51. Reason: add extra URL
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
8. The RAF aviator lives in the mess or at home with his wife and family and enjoys all the social amenities that would be expected in any other form of life. This alone provides for a lower overall stress factor in his or her life; being able, for example, to resolve domestic problems in the home at all times, walk the dog, go to a pub, spend weekends with friends and so on.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,047
Received 2,920 Likes
on
1,249 Posts
Me too, fascinating guff, out of interest how many fast jet deck qualified and current pilots does the Royal Navy actually have? It must be in single figures, which makes all this patronising verbiage even more unpalatable.
Isn't it strange how when they finally get themselves a new ship all this guff rises to the surface again, as said shades of Sharkey Ward.... At least with an airfield one hit and it doesn't sink.
Isn't it strange how when they finally get themselves a new ship all this guff rises to the surface again, as said shades of Sharkey Ward.... At least with an airfield one hit and it doesn't sink.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
46 Posts
Isn't it strange that some blogger resurrects some six years old Sharkey Ward post for what purpose? ClickBait. Now what person wants to harrumph about it all over again? What next?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: It's Fairyland!
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The blogger resurrected Sharkey's work in response to the visit of CAS, with 1SL, to Rosyth on Friday.
CLICK!
Recollect Army friend, upon my comment re RAF walking up hill, out in the sticks, in the rain, at night, remarking: "That's a curious place to go looking for an hotel!"
Anyway, I thought this, from the report, was a particularly good example of sleight of hand which disingenuously compared apples with oranges.
Perhaps someone should tell him about tactical rotary, ASR, what Hercs do, maritime ops, close air support etc etc . . . .
Recollect Army friend, upon my comment re RAF walking up hill, out in the sticks, in the rain, at night, remarking: "That's a curious place to go looking for an hotel!"
Anyway, I thought this, from the report, was a particularly good example of sleight of hand which disingenuously compared apples with oranges.
38. The expectations of a young RAF officer are
c) That all personnel within the RAF are there exclusively to support their pilots (other matters are of little import).
39. The expectations of a young Naval officer are
c) That in spite of his expertise he is just one small cog (albeit an important one) in the Fleet Weapons System and needs to integrate fully with that weapons system.
c) That all personnel within the RAF are there exclusively to support their pilots (other matters are of little import).
39. The expectations of a young Naval officer are
c) That in spite of his expertise he is just one small cog (albeit an important one) in the Fleet Weapons System and needs to integrate fully with that weapons system.
Perhaps the report should also note that "the expectation of a would-be RAF officer is to only visit OASC once......"
Old news. Done to death. Sharkey had his moment in the sun (and we should be forever grateful of his leadership and service), but the caribbean sun now seems to have finished him off as a sensible commentator on military affairs. There was a time when I had more embarked time and Day/Night/NVG/CBRN DLs as a CH-47 pilot than an awful lot of my CHF friends - it's just the way the Op/Tasking cycle goes. The key thing is not the flying, it's the planning; the RAF need to accept that a CV is not a floating airfield, and the RN need to admit that landing on 65000 tons of steel isn't that hard if you "stop then land" in a modern VSTOL FW, Tilt Rotor or capable helicopter. The hard ship/TAG integration piece is where you need experts and where the more experienced FAA crews are essential - we need to ensure we continue to nurture and grow them. That CAS/1SL went to see QE together should be applauded, not used as the touch paper for another round of the p1ssing contest. And as for moving Australia? Well, if the RN had got their Staff Work right in the mid 60s it wouldn't have been an issue....economics and politics killed CVA-01, not the RAF.
Old news. Done to death. Sharkey had his moment in the sun (and we should be forever grateful of his leadership and service), but the caribbean sun now seems to have finished him off as a sensible commentator on military affairs. There was a time when I had more embarked time and Day/Night/NVG/CBRN DLs as a CH-47 pilot than an awful lot of my CHF friends - it's just the way the Op/Tasking cycle goes. The key thing is not the flying, it's the planning; the RAF need to accept that a CV is not a floating airfield, and the RN need to admit that landing on 65000 tons of steel isn't that hard if you "stop then land" in a modern VSTOL FW, Tilt Rotor or capable helicopter. The hard ship/TAG integration piece is where you need experts and where the more experienced FAA crews are essential - we need to ensure we continue to nurture and grow them. That CAS/1SL went to see QE together should be applauded, not used as the touch paper for another round of the p1ssing contest. And as for moving Australia? Well, if the RN had got their Staff Work right in the mid 60s it wouldn't have been an issue....economics and politics killed CVA-01, not the RAF.