Times details proposed UK defence cut options
Wildcat is a complete non-entity and cannot even remotely compete with Pu/Me in any capacity, even the AAC acknowledge it is abysmal. It was a 100% NAVY purchase.
And Chinook- let the Army find the money to operate them from their budget and let the RAF concentrate on FW.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Odiham
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is an argument for having all RW in one service although I would argue give them all to the RAF. As High Spirits says many would not transfer, I like the way the RAF does aviation not so the other services.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"best of luck with getting all those RAF Chinook crews to transfer"
and there was me thinking we all pull together for the sake of the nation's defence....................
and there was me thinking we all pull together for the sake of the nation's defence....................
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Odiham
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you mean a transfer of assets to AAC then best of luck with getting all those RAF Chinook crews to transfer, or finding enough AAC crew to start from scratch.
The Germans didn't seem to have too many problems in transferring all of their CH-53s over to the air force from the army not long ago.
I'm sure the longer term value of the pound is what is more important, and its still too early to tell which way it will go.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The RAF is a train on one set of tracks with a strop signal at every opportunity.
The other 2 services regard their crews as normal people, not demi-Gods, employ flexi-track and are much more fun to work for, alongside and with.
End of. Give RW to FAA/AAC.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Odiham
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If that is the case why do we have numerous ex AAC and FAA RW aircrew transferring to the RAF because they consider it the better option? The only person from Odiham to have gone the other way was an ex AAC Major who transferred to the RAF, did a couple of tours then transferred back.
‘And Chinook- let the Army find the money to operate them from their budget and let the RAF concentrate on FW.’
The army already pay to operate Chinook from the Land budget. If you mean a transfer of assets to AAC then best of luck with getting all those RAF Chinook crews to transfer, or finding enough AAC crew to start from scratch.
The army already pay to operate Chinook from the Land budget. If you mean a transfer of assets to AAC then best of luck with getting all those RAF Chinook crews to transfer, or finding enough AAC crew to start from scratch.
The only way for expeditionary assets to truly gain a voice is to stand up under a 4* command of their own. Abolish JHC, move the LitM ships, RM/16AAB, C130 and non-pinging helicopters under one command, then let the individual Services eat their own young....which is exactly why it will never happen. If we make a bold declaration (circa 1981) that we're now an "in area" capability then so be it. However, why have two large carriers if you do that? Does that also mean the end of a "force for good"? The two biggest factors at play here are Osborne's decision to fund Successor through the Defence Budget (and Hammond's / Fallon's tacit acceptance of it...) and the irony of buying COTS from the US (to save R&D/NRE) only to see a circa 20-30% reduction in Sterling against the Dollar. When the ForEx hit an appreciable high before the Crash, as I was working on a PT that spent Dollars, I suggested we "hedge" a few $million in case of a crash - clearly, I was looked at as if I'd grown a second head. A mere handful of months later, Sterling collapsed and a white-faced PTL came back from a meeting with the Treasury. "How did it go?" we asked. "Awful..." came the response, "but, on the bright side, the Lightning II PTL was going in after me......".
transferring all of their CH-53s over to the air force from the army
I think you've answered your own question there.
I think you've answered your own question there.
If it IS a deal breaker for the personnel, then you just retain the current air/ground crews under their current conditions (wearing blue uniforms but under a green command structure), and then when they naturally waste out of the force you replace them with army folk who I am sure would love the opportunity to operate the Chinook.
Not that difficult really.
Fair enough, but if the RAF can transfer its entire Merlin force over to the RN then I can't see why it should be so difficult to do the same for the Chinook force and the army.
If it IS a deal breaker for the personnel, then you just retain the current air/ground crews under their current conditions (wearing blue uniforms but under a green command structure), and then when they naturally waste out of the force you replace them with army folk who I am sure would love the opportunity to operate the Chinook.
Not that difficult really.
If it IS a deal breaker for the personnel, then you just retain the current air/ground crews under their current conditions (wearing blue uniforms but under a green command structure), and then when they naturally waste out of the force you replace them with army folk who I am sure would love the opportunity to operate the Chinook.
Not that difficult really.
It didn't transfer the "entire force" - it transferred the aircraft. In the mean time, CHF transitioned from SK4 to Merlin3/4. There were no wholesale transfers of personnel to accompany the airframes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melmothtw View Post
Fair enough, but if the RAF can transfer its entire Merlin force over to the RN then I can't see why it should be so difficult to do the same for the Chinook force and the army.
If it IS a deal breaker for the personnel, then you just retain the current air/ground crews under their current conditions (wearing blue uniforms but under a green command structure), and then when they naturally waste out of the force you replace them with army folk who I am sure would love the opportunity to operate the Chinook.
Not that difficult really.
It didn't transfer the "entire force" - it transferred the aircraft. In the mean time, CHF transitioned from SK4 to Merlin3/4. There were no wholesale transfers of personnel to accompany the airframes.
Originally Posted by melmothtw View Post
Fair enough, but if the RAF can transfer its entire Merlin force over to the RN then I can't see why it should be so difficult to do the same for the Chinook force and the army.
If it IS a deal breaker for the personnel, then you just retain the current air/ground crews under their current conditions (wearing blue uniforms but under a green command structure), and then when they naturally waste out of the force you replace them with army folk who I am sure would love the opportunity to operate the Chinook.
Not that difficult really.
It didn't transfer the "entire force" - it transferred the aircraft. In the mean time, CHF transitioned from SK4 to Merlin3/4. There were no wholesale transfers of personnel to accompany the airframes.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gents - this is Angels dancing on Pins stuff -
Once the Treasury can get each service fighting it's own corner and damning the others we're lost - this is how we lost the Harriers and the carriers last time
the only answer is to stop the cuts otherwise it doiesn't matter what colour uniform people wear we're all b******* as a nation
Once the Treasury can get each service fighting it's own corner and damning the others we're lost - this is how we lost the Harriers and the carriers last time
the only answer is to stop the cuts otherwise it doiesn't matter what colour uniform people wear we're all b******* as a nation
And not just the Treasury. The NSA appears to want his own cyber-empire - in a fiscally neutral manner...
http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevi...oral/75927.pdf
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: What day is it?
Age: 72
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Plus, with all the other bits at Benson you’d have to find a home for, I wouldn’t be too sure selling Benson is the easiest answer. And the humanitarian use for RW means they will always be around, even if we’re not doing war fighting."
Pedant mode [ON]
As Benson was a compulsory purchase in 1937, under Crichell Down Rules is has to be offered back to the original landowners, some of which are still major farmers in the area. What they would choose to do with it is anyone's guess. [OFF]
Regards
Pedant mode [ON]
As Benson was a compulsory purchase in 1937, under Crichell Down Rules is has to be offered back to the original landowners, some of which are still major farmers in the area. What they would choose to do with it is anyone's guess. [OFF]
Regards
