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

Still broken? Is the RAF in better or worse shape than ten years ago

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.

Still broken? Is the RAF in better or worse shape than ten years ago

Old 3rd May 2018, 21:12
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 16,200
Originally Posted by Buster15 View Post
But....isn't that why we are spending all those billions on the F35???

But we are not buying enough to equip two carriers and one well placed torpedo or sea skimming missile and those billions are forming the next reef for the local fish population. I take it you have seen what damage was inflicted upon the USS Cole by a bunch of Suicide bombers with intent to inflict damage on their target..hi tech no and pretty powerless to react to in a rush.

Bob I was just being realistic, how long would you give the UK forces in a modern war where the opposition had a roughly equal capability in assets? we have sold our souls to the devil and destroyed our capability to produce squat to replace losses, we just do not have the facility to ramp up production to replace losses anymore, look at the current RAF and how much is actually home produced.

Now which first world power might involve us in a war of necessity? Spain is a possibility as are Turkey or Greece over the SBAs
and who will be maintaining the F-35 engines for us??? Ohhh Turkey of course.

Last edited by NutLoose; 3rd May 2018 at 21:27.
NutLoose is online now  
Old 3rd May 2018, 21:32
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: CYYC (Calgary)
Posts: 5,131
Don't forget I42 that there was an early post WWI SDSR which removed approx 90% of the newly formed RAF's aircraft from service.
Treble one,
Yes, I aware of that. My post was slightly tongue-in-cheek. However, if I compare the reduced size of the present day RAF with the RAF I remember from my UAS days in the 60s and if the trends continue, when does the government say “What’s the point?”
India Four Two is offline  
Old 4th May 2018, 10:10
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 1,537
Originally Posted by NutLoose View Post
But we are not buying enough to equip two carriers and one well placed torpedo or sea skimming missile and those billions are forming the next reef for the local fish population. I take it you have seen what damage was inflicted upon the USS Cole by a bunch of Suicide bombers with intent to inflict damage on their target..hi tech no and pretty powerless to react to in a rush.
I think we'll probably manage to equip two carriers when the full 138 have been bought. Unless someone does something daft on the variant choice.

I'd love to know where the idea that one well-placed torpedo or sea-skimmer being fatal comes from. Yes, the stationary and unfortunately unaware Cole got a hole blown in her, by a substantially larger blast warhead than you'd find in most missiles. Strangely that event (nearly 20 years ago now btw) triggered a sea-change in FP measures, which substantially reduces that threat.

You may be interested to know that the USN did a sinkex on one of their decommissioned carriers (ex-America) about a decade ago. The ship had been in reserve for several years, had no DC parties aboard and was therefore significantly less well-prepared to absorb damage than an operational ship would have been. They fired all sorts at her (and in her) and after some weeks of this, ended up having to scuttle her....
Not_a_boffin is offline  
Old 4th May 2018, 10:47
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: raf
Posts: 606
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin View Post
I think we'll probably manage to equip two carriers when the full 138 have been bought. Unless someone does something daft on the variant choice.

I'd love to know where the idea that one well-placed torpedo or sea-skimmer being fatal comes from. Yes, the stationary and unfortunately unaware Cole got a hole blown in her, by a substantially larger blast warhead than you'd find in most missiles. Strangely that event (nearly 20 years ago now btw) triggered a sea-change in FP measures, which substantially reduces that threat.

You may be interested to know that the USN did a sinkex on one of their decommissioned carriers (ex-America) about a decade ago. The ship had been in reserve for several years, had no DC parties aboard and was therefore significantly less well-prepared to absorb damage than an operational ship would have been. They fired all sorts at her (and in her) and after some weeks of this, ended up having to scuttle her....

Wasn't USS Cole put out of action by two guys with some C4 explosive in a small fishing boat

[img]webkit-fake-url://343e3a51-3db5-4059-b20a-fa84502c7d3e/imagejpeg[/img]
gr4techie is offline  
Old 4th May 2018, 11:08
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Among these dark Satanic mills
Posts: 1,176
Originally Posted by gr4techie View Post



Wasn't USS Cole put out of action by two guys with some C4 explosive in a small fishing boat

[img]webkit-fake-url://343e3a51-3db5-4059-b20a-fa84502c7d3e/imagejpeg[/img]
Your point being?
TorqueOfTheDevil is offline  
Old 4th May 2018, 11:31
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 1,637
Why do we (Brits that is) insist on beating ourselves up about such things?

I still maintain that, superpowers aside, there isnít really anyone that we should really fear in a realistic sense. Putting aside who we class as allies currently (I know these things can be fickle) who would we fear? Germany? France? Spain? Italy? Brazil? Argentina?

You may say Turkey or Iran or Saudi but our new carriers which, despite what the naysayers would have you believe, will be an awesome capability and could happily project power far beyond our island.

Assuming our alliances hold I still donít think we should fear anyone for a while yet.

I know I am an eternal ray of sunshine in an otherwise cloudy world but a military that has 7 frontline Sqns of Typhoons, 2-3 Sqns of F35, carriers, nukes, MPA, modern AT aircraft, 30-40000 highly trained, well equipped fighting soldiers (Iím just talking teeth arms here) and the Red Arrows (cheeky one to see if youíre still paying attention) does not look too bad in comparison to most of our peers.

BV
Bob Viking is offline  
Old 4th May 2018, 11:40
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: England
Posts: 247
From my perspective, our politicians are either deluded or see the electorate as half wits; probably a mixture of both. I was watching the BBC news this morning and a Conservative politician was saying (nothing at all to do with the local elections by the way) that under the Conservative Party Great Britain has now the best defence capabilitiy in the world......
I am not sure what he was on but it cannot be legal.
Buster15 is offline  
Old 4th May 2018, 11:56
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: South Skerry
Posts: 305
It's a bit annoying when people like Bromund, who wear their academic credentials like medals, bewail the inadequacy of the money coming into defense and utterly ignore the inefficiency with which it has been spent.

A few weeks back I heard a political hack from a shipyard state outgassing about the desperate need for a 355-ship Navy and whingeing that sequestration had cost the Navy $4 billion in investment. How does that compare with the cost of the Little Crappy Ship? The whole Zumwalt misadventure? The overruns on one CVN?

As for UK air power, where would its strength stand today if the F-35 had arrived on schedule and on cost? The force would be six years past IOC, <80 aircraft in service and arriving at a rate of 12 per year. What if MRA4 had not been gooned up?
George K Lee is offline  
Old 4th May 2018, 13:31
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 2,857
I strongly suspect someone has written a staff paper saying 'drones' will do it all within 15 years, and this has hit the desk of a beancounter who already has guidelines saying aircraft must exhibit a 40 year useful life - and he's submitted a GEMS suggestion.
tucumseh is online now  
Old 4th May 2018, 20:07
  #70 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Just behind the back of beyond....
Posts: 3,926
99 C HHow dare you inject reason and logic into the debate?!

Thankfully someone with much better knowledge than yourself (along with some examples of how many Hunters we had in 1957) will be along shortly to silence your inane ramblings.

BV
You're a witty chap, BV. But no-one is looking to return to a 1957-sized air force, and nor does anyone think that tossing eight dumb 1,000-lb bombs around is really going to cut it nowadays. But PGMs have been part of the scenery for most of this century, and their use has been routine (unless you're Russian). And a PGM-delivering air force in 2007 had five dedicated AD squadrons to sustainably do QRA and the Falklands, and about a dozen Tornado/Harrier/Jaguar units to do the deployed stuff, whether that was a Telic, or a simultaneous Herrick and Grapple.

​​​​​​​That doesn't seem unreasonable, does it?

Arguing for a 12-18 Squadron FJ force is arguing for an air force that is comparable with nations like Turkey, France and Italy - all of whom spend less on defence than we do. For an air force big enough to support a Granby-sized op. For an air force that can sustain more modest commitments without people becoming so disillusioned by the quality of life that they leave in droves.
Jackonicko is offline  
Old 4th May 2018, 20:36
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 627
Originally Posted by India Four Two View Post


Treble one,
Yes, I aware of that. My post was slightly tongue-in-cheek. However, if I compare the reduced size of the present day RAF with the RAF I remember from my UAS days in the 60s and if the trends continue, when does the government say ďWhatís the point?Ē
My apologies I42. I guess that's 'Agile, Adaptable and Capable' for you. The RAF has some very state of the art kit. just not very much of it. Budgets eh?
Treble one is offline  
Old 4th May 2018, 20:37
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Age: 59
Posts: 1,196
Originally Posted by 99 Change Hands View Post
How many GR1s lofting dumb 1000-pounders would have been needed to achieve the recent action in Syria?
This is quite an old argument now, does anyone actually sit down and calculate just how many GR4s are needed as compared with the number GR1s? Are the possible and probable scenarios where HM Forces could be deployed fed into a computer somewhere which then spits out an answer saying something like you'll manage with just x number of GR4s, just don't be careless and allow any to be shot down! Military assets and personnel are given the boot for one multi-facet reason.. Primarily to save money, the driver is the next facet; to secure expected votes by spending savings on other government departments. And of course, the government will always fend off criticism of some unsatisfactory state of affairs in the nation's defence arrangements by saying in a 'lets have no more of this nonsense' tone; We have the fourth/fifth largest blah blah blah budget in the whole wide world! So there!!

FB
Finningley Boy is online now  
Old 4th May 2018, 20:54
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 130
It seems to me that the RAF is not resourced adequately to perform the tasks required by your political masters.
flighthappens is online now  
Old 4th May 2018, 21:01
  #74 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Just behind the back of beyond....
Posts: 3,926
Ö..large multi national alliances the idea of a state vs state war is just far more unlikely than it ever was.
Iím not stupid enough to believe the planet will become a more peaceful place as time goes on (Iíd say the exact opposite is true) but name me one country of a similar stature to ourselves that we could realistically see ourselves at war with on a 1 v 1 basis in the next 100 years
BV, remember the various war options: wars of necessity and wars of choice. The Falklands was arguably the former though, as a n overseas territory we could have left them to their fate.

Kuwait, like Poland, was a war of moral choice.

Now which first world power might involve us in a war of necessity? Spain is a possibility as are Turkey or Greece over the SBAs. Of choice? A country with whom we have a mutual assistance treat, say one of the former colonies? We can discount Africa as they are not first world class opponents. We can also discount the Middle East which really leaves the Far East. Our commitment is probably the traditional Malaysian one with a threat from the North rather than the south.

In essence, apart from maintaining a policing role against Russia, the balance of our forces is probably adequate for the more likely different role in our areas of interest. What we have to hope is that our bluff isn't called.
Great posts, BV and PN. Good points well made.

But surely the point is that in today's World you don't get sufficient warning to reconfigure or grow your armed forces to meet a developing threat. Nor can you necessarily rely on being able to make only a small tokenistic contribution to a multinational coalition, or to rely overly on a particular ally. In the 1930s we had enough warning to train lots of people, build lots of kit, and to be ready (more or less) when war broke out - though arguably we had to let the Czechs and the Poles down while we completed our preparations.

How much warning would we get of a growth of isolationism in the US that would compel us to take on more of the burden of our own defence?

And remember that these threats emerge quickly and unpredictably.

In 1977, who could have predicted an Argentinian invasion of the Falklands?

In 1986, who was predicting that Saddam Hussein would march into Kuwait?

In 1998 who would have predicted 9/11 and the subsequent war in Afghanistan?

In 2008 who would have predicted the rise of Daesh?

You necessarily have to size and scale your armed forces not to meet predictable threats, but to be able to deal with the unpredictable-yet-conceivable. The old planning assumptions that sought to size the forces to 'do a Granby' or to undertake two smaller commitments simultaneously were not, in my view, unreasonable or unrealistic.
Jackonicko is offline  
Old 6th May 2018, 11:07
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: S W France
Age: 75
Posts: 189
We all know the RAF is not as good as it was " in my day ". I know it has gone downhill since 29 July 2012, because that was the day I retired!

Puts on kevlar helmet, takes tongue out of cheek and ducks!

How do you get the Smilies to work in this new site?
Tengah Type is offline  
Old 6th May 2018, 14:00
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 1,002
Tengah Type,

Wow! Did you really retire when you were 68?
Brian 48nav is offline  
Old 6th May 2018, 14:29
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 4,650
How do you get the Smilies to work in this new site?
You have to go to 'Post Reply' instead of 'Quick Reply'.
Fareastdriver is online now  
Old 6th May 2018, 15:29
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South of Old Warden
Age: 82
Posts: 1,380
In the early 60s I attended a lecture on ‘The Role of the RAF’. The Wng/Cmdr, giving the lecture started off by saying the RAF had 97 plans requiring possible RAF involvement. When the first invasion of Kuwait took place, the 98th plan was drawn up!
goudie is offline  
Old 6th May 2018, 17:35
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 75
Posts: 5,281
Originally Posted by Brian 48nav View Post
Tengah Type,

Wow! Did you really retire when you were 68?
That exemplifies the Front Line overstretch
MPN11 is offline  
Old 6th May 2018, 18:18
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: S W France
Age: 75
Posts: 189
Talking

Fareastdriver.
Thanks for the steer on the smilies.

Brian 48nav
Aged 68 yrs 6 months and two days to be exact. After 37 yrs Regular Service, I was lucky enough to be offered a post under the old Retired Officer scheme, and served just shy of 14yrs with a Reserve Commission. I was able to continue later, but thought it was time to go for " a proper job " rather than continue with my hobby. Enjoyed about 98% of it.

MPN11
Frontline overstretch! You have obviously been looking at my trouser belt!





























Last edited by Tengah Type; 6th May 2018 at 18:28.
Tengah Type is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.