Still broken? Is the RAF in better or worse shape than ten years ago
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'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....
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: raf
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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....
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]
Why do we (Brits that is) insist on beating ourselves up about such things?
I still maintain that, superpowers aside, there isn’t 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 don’t 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 (I’m just talking teeth arms here) and the Red Arrows (cheeky one to see if you’re still paying attention) does not look too bad in comparison to most of our peers.
BV
I still maintain that, superpowers aside, there isn’t 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 don’t 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 (I’m just talking teeth arms here) and the Red Arrows (cheeky one to see if you’re still paying attention) does not look too bad in comparison to most of our peers.
BV
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.
I am not sure what he was on but it cannot be legal.
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: South Skerry
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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?
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?
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.
Thread Starter
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
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
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.
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?
FB
Thread Starter
…..large multi national alliances the idea of a state vs state war is just far more unlikely than it ever was.
I’m not stupid enough to believe the planet will become a more peaceful place as time goes on (I’d 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
I’m not stupid enough to believe the planet will become a more peaceful place as time goes on (I’d 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.
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.
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.
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?
Puts on kevlar helmet, takes tongue out of cheek and ducks!
How do you get the Smilies to work in this new site?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South of Old Warden
Age: 87
Posts: 1,375
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
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!
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,808
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
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!
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 17:28.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,808
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
Trés bon, Tengah Type. I never had that sort of work ethic, which is why I walked from the RAF happily at 49y 9m after 29 fairly happy years ... clutching my Rediundancy cheque, of course!
A life of freedom and leisue awaited ... until I discovered Voluntary Work, which leaned toward a 7-day week until I quit again some 10 years later!,
A life of freedom and leisue awaited ... until I discovered Voluntary Work, which leaned toward a 7-day week until I quit again some 10 years later!,
On the software test system today, I 'flew' a trail from Souda to Abu Dhabi, with 4 x receivers who joined at a down route RV point. During the first bracket one of the pods failed, so the trail continued single hose. Then during the second bracket, one of the receivers couldn't fill his external tanks. The software solved both snags very quickly indeed (a few seconds in each case) - but I thought at the time that in VC10K days, probably the only tanker nav who could have solved the problem as quickly was you, Tengah Type!
Software is great and I know that it doesn't crash hire cars or get itself banned from Atlanta
, but somehow I doubt whether AAR trails are as much fun these days, without chaps with the vast amount of experience and knowledge as there once were...
Software is great and I know that it doesn't crash hire cars or get itself banned from Atlanta
, but somehow I doubt whether AAR trails are as much fun these days, without chaps with the vast amount of experience and knowledge as there once were...