At this rate if you sign up now for 28 years you will be just about be aircraftless
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,966
Received 2,862 Likes
on
1,228 Posts
At this rate if you sign up now for 28 years you will be just about be aircraftless
The RAF has shed 22% of their aircraft fleet in a mere 7 Years!!
According to the latest review of military aircraft figures from 2016 to 2023, there has been a significant decrease in the total number of fixed-wing platforms. The fleet has reduced from 724 aircraft in service in 2016 to 564 in 2023, which represents a reduction of approximately 22%.
A number of fixed-wing platforms have been completely retired or have seen a reduction in numbers during this period. For instance, the BAE 146, Defender, Islander R Mk14, King Air 200, Tornado, and Vigilant have all been phased out, with their numbers reducing to zero by 2023. The Hawk T1/T1A/T1W numbers decreased from 90 to 67, with the remaining aircraft still in service. The Tucano fleet was also entirely phased out, decreasing from 81 to none.
On the other hand, some platforms have seen an increase or stabilisation in their numbers. The A400M’s count increased from 7 to 21, and the Poseidon fleet, which started in 2020, has grown to a total of 9 by 2023. The Lightning fleet increased from 4 to 31, while the Typhoon has maintained a stable presence with a slight decrease from 132 to 137 in total. Voyager also increased from 9 to 14 in total numbers.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/raf-...n-seven-years/
Statistics released by the Ministry of Defence have been updated, detailing UK armed forces equipment and formations for the year 2023.
The annual statistics provide insight into the vessels, land equipment, and aircraft used by the armed forces, along with military formations.According to the latest review of military aircraft figures from 2016 to 2023, there has been a significant decrease in the total number of fixed-wing platforms. The fleet has reduced from 724 aircraft in service in 2016 to 564 in 2023, which represents a reduction of approximately 22%.
A number of fixed-wing platforms have been completely retired or have seen a reduction in numbers during this period. For instance, the BAE 146, Defender, Islander R Mk14, King Air 200, Tornado, and Vigilant have all been phased out, with their numbers reducing to zero by 2023. The Hawk T1/T1A/T1W numbers decreased from 90 to 67, with the remaining aircraft still in service. The Tucano fleet was also entirely phased out, decreasing from 81 to none.
On the other hand, some platforms have seen an increase or stabilisation in their numbers. The A400M’s count increased from 7 to 21, and the Poseidon fleet, which started in 2020, has grown to a total of 9 by 2023. The Lightning fleet increased from 4 to 31, while the Typhoon has maintained a stable presence with a slight decrease from 132 to 137 in total. Voyager also increased from 9 to 14 in total numbers.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/raf-...n-seven-years/
The RAF has shed 22% of their aircraft fleet in a mere 7 Years!!
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/raf-...n-seven-years/
Spoiler
On this side of the pond, someting similar is going on. Our Army is apparently reducing manpower levels by about 24,000 in the next year or two. Brilliant! (Or is it?)
Voyager also increased from 9 to 14 in total numbers.
Have all the surge airframes been brought into service (I know one had, hence 10 in 2022) or is this just a different way of accounting to boost the numbers?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,966
Received 2,862 Likes
on
1,228 Posts
Weren't some of the ones leased out to airlines not returned?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,966
Received 2,862 Likes
on
1,228 Posts
Bring back the Hunter
What is needed is a simple load carrying reliable bomb carrying airframe (Hunter) that is not festooned with gobbly gook electronics and anything not able to be fixed by speed tape and a multi meter. Ah, and while we are on that case a few more Harriers so huge airbases and runways not required.
Well done Hawkers just like 1940 when you supplied a shed load of Hurricanes (when they were needed) which then went on to pioneer the use of said machines for the carrying of Rockets, Bombs, and 4 cannon in a single eng machine, with the odd twin 40mm for dealing with tanks.
Bin the Arrows, and just get the Hunter boys and girls to recreate the Farnborough Loop every now and again.
Well done Hawkers just like 1940 when you supplied a shed load of Hurricanes (when they were needed) which then went on to pioneer the use of said machines for the carrying of Rockets, Bombs, and 4 cannon in a single eng machine, with the odd twin 40mm for dealing with tanks.
Bin the Arrows, and just get the Hunter boys and girls to recreate the Farnborough Loop every now and again.
In 28 years most pilots in most Air Forces will be “flying” their airplanes from an ergonomically approved office chair in a windowless room somewhere.
In 28 years at least one Air Force will have outsourced drone-piloting to the Ser-Cock consortium, who will turn sub-contract the operation to a call centre in Mumbai.
The following 4 users liked this post by DuncanDoenitz:
The following users liked this post:
The following 3 users liked this post by Runaway Gun:
The surge aircraft have been included in the fleet over recent years due to their being frequently called upon for military ops (AAR over Eastern Europe, mainly). When/if that requirement dies down, the core fleet will go back down to 9.
The following users liked this post:
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,966
Received 2,862 Likes
on
1,228 Posts
The following 2 users liked this post by NutLoose:
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,966
Received 2,862 Likes
on
1,228 Posts
Not if the Green Party are in power by then, you cannot go around chopping branches off tree's you know, hugging will be permitted, but taking a saw to them... Tsk..Tsk..
The following users liked this post:
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,966
Received 2,862 Likes
on
1,228 Posts
I am waiting for the RAF to massage the figures with 500 plus Mavics... wings for everyone!
The following 2 users liked this post by NutLoose:
I hate to ruin a perfectly good rant, but if i read that table correctly it shows two figures for each year. "in service" and "total"
Presumably the difference between aircraft on strength and those actually in service (makes sense if you look at the fleets with large numbers not in service).
Comparing the numbers actually in service between 2016 and 2023 it shows that the total strength of operational aircraft has been reduced by the shameful amount of... two!
Operational aircraft slashed by 0.645 percent over 7 years. Not such a sexy headline though!
Presumably the difference between aircraft on strength and those actually in service (makes sense if you look at the fleets with large numbers not in service).
Comparing the numbers actually in service between 2016 and 2023 it shows that the total strength of operational aircraft has been reduced by the shameful amount of... two!
Operational aircraft slashed by 0.645 percent over 7 years. Not such a sexy headline though!
The following users liked this post:
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mostly in my own imagination
Posts: 476
Received 305 Likes
on
141 Posts
The following 7 users liked this post by Sue Vêtements:
POBJOY
Bring back the Hunter and the Harrier
Hear Hear and whilst dreaming why not a ‘full missile loaded ‘ Vulcan ? ( see earlier discussions )
protected by modern electronics or would they be too vulnerable ?
Bring back the Hunter and the Harrier
Hear Hear and whilst dreaming why not a ‘full missile loaded ‘ Vulcan ? ( see earlier discussions )
protected by modern electronics or would they be too vulnerable ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,966
Received 2,862 Likes
on
1,228 Posts
I hate to ruin a perfectly good rant, but if i read that table correctly it shows two figures for each year. "in service" and "total"
Presumably the difference between aircraft on strength and those actually in service (makes sense if you look at the fleets with large numbers not in service).
Comparing the numbers actually in service between 2016 and 2023 it shows that the total strength of operational aircraft has been reduced by the shameful amount of... two!
Operational aircraft slashed by 0.645 percent over 7 years. Not such a sexy headline though!
Presumably the difference between aircraft on strength and those actually in service (makes sense if you look at the fleets with large numbers not in service).
Comparing the numbers actually in service between 2016 and 2023 it shows that the total strength of operational aircraft has been reduced by the shameful amount of... two!
Operational aircraft slashed by 0.645 percent over 7 years. Not such a sexy headline though!