Sea Jet
FB11,
Having worn light blue (scruffily and briefly) you can assume that I know what banter is. But as someone who wears a uniform that looks more like that of an Isle of Wight ferry captain, I wonder whether you do. However, I'll take your advice and ask the milk-drinking poofs what it is next time I see one of them, rather than quiz any Navy type, since they obviously wouldn't have a clue. (See what I did there? Alienated people from two services at once - great journo trick. Just a pity I couldn't have thought of some way to piss off the dung-eating cabbage suit wearing mob, too....)
In case you misunderstand my misapprehension about your perception of my perceived misapprehension (and I liked what you did there so much that I plagiarised it. It's habit. I just can't help myself. As my editor would confirm.) I'd like to agree with you.
I absolutely agree that
1. It would be silly to overstate capabilities, or to throw them in to embellish a point. Which Jag capabilities do you think I have embellished, exactly?
2. I'd also agree that there is potential for damage to be done when the focus is back not forward.
Which is why my primary concern is how the GR9/9A and GR4 are to reach their OSDs. In the future (FORWARD FOCUS!). Like you, I'm not an engineer in either IPT, but unlike you, I've spoken to engineers in both, and in BAE Systems, about this very issue, so I do have an idea of the exact dates these jets are expected to reach. Which are 2017 for the GR9/9A and 2025 for the GR4/4A. (Is that focusing forward enough for you?)
Annual utilisation rates are also available (not least in Hansard), and average and fleet leader airframe hours have also been published. It's abundantly clear that neither fleet can be sustained at its planned size to its planned OSD, even if these dates don't slip again.
While the Jag is probably of cock all use in Afghanistan (let's ignore what the Indians managed to do with theirs over the Kargil and Siachen) that doesn't mean that it might not be of use in operations elsewhere. They seemed to fulfil a useful role in Warden/Resinate North, and indeed in the Balkans, and keeping them in service might allow the admittedly more useful, more important assets to be kept in service longer. On exactly the same basis, I wouldn't howl down anyone who wanted to keep ALARM armed (and who knows, TIALD and JRP equipped) SEAD F3s in service to keep hours off the GR4s.
Sometimes the requirement isn't to tote large numbers of heavy weapons a long way to a target, from a hot and high, short runway, and to do so by night or in all weathers. In an ideal world I'd want every jet I owned to be capable of doing exactly that, but in today's cash strapped times I'd look hard at the usefulness of a cheap, easily supportable, rapidly deployable asset that could do some oft-needed roles adequately, especially if it helped me keep my best assets in service until they can be replaced.
And I'd perhaps be looking at the kind of weapons that would allow a Jag to achieve the same effect as a Tornado dropping an inert, concrete 1,000-lb LGB - a weapon used in action in Iraq in 2003 because we lacked a proper low collateral damage weapon.
And I know you're hairy because you lot all are. But I'm still up for the hug. I'm a journo. I'm unnaturally curious.
Having worn light blue (scruffily and briefly) you can assume that I know what banter is. But as someone who wears a uniform that looks more like that of an Isle of Wight ferry captain, I wonder whether you do. However, I'll take your advice and ask the milk-drinking poofs what it is next time I see one of them, rather than quiz any Navy type, since they obviously wouldn't have a clue. (See what I did there? Alienated people from two services at once - great journo trick. Just a pity I couldn't have thought of some way to piss off the dung-eating cabbage suit wearing mob, too....)
In case you misunderstand my misapprehension about your perception of my perceived misapprehension (and I liked what you did there so much that I plagiarised it. It's habit. I just can't help myself. As my editor would confirm.) I'd like to agree with you.
I absolutely agree that
1. It would be silly to overstate capabilities, or to throw them in to embellish a point. Which Jag capabilities do you think I have embellished, exactly?
2. I'd also agree that there is potential for damage to be done when the focus is back not forward.
Which is why my primary concern is how the GR9/9A and GR4 are to reach their OSDs. In the future (FORWARD FOCUS!). Like you, I'm not an engineer in either IPT, but unlike you, I've spoken to engineers in both, and in BAE Systems, about this very issue, so I do have an idea of the exact dates these jets are expected to reach. Which are 2017 for the GR9/9A and 2025 for the GR4/4A. (Is that focusing forward enough for you?)
Annual utilisation rates are also available (not least in Hansard), and average and fleet leader airframe hours have also been published. It's abundantly clear that neither fleet can be sustained at its planned size to its planned OSD, even if these dates don't slip again.
While the Jag is probably of cock all use in Afghanistan (let's ignore what the Indians managed to do with theirs over the Kargil and Siachen) that doesn't mean that it might not be of use in operations elsewhere. They seemed to fulfil a useful role in Warden/Resinate North, and indeed in the Balkans, and keeping them in service might allow the admittedly more useful, more important assets to be kept in service longer. On exactly the same basis, I wouldn't howl down anyone who wanted to keep ALARM armed (and who knows, TIALD and JRP equipped) SEAD F3s in service to keep hours off the GR4s.
Sometimes the requirement isn't to tote large numbers of heavy weapons a long way to a target, from a hot and high, short runway, and to do so by night or in all weathers. In an ideal world I'd want every jet I owned to be capable of doing exactly that, but in today's cash strapped times I'd look hard at the usefulness of a cheap, easily supportable, rapidly deployable asset that could do some oft-needed roles adequately, especially if it helped me keep my best assets in service until they can be replaced.
And I'd perhaps be looking at the kind of weapons that would allow a Jag to achieve the same effect as a Tornado dropping an inert, concrete 1,000-lb LGB - a weapon used in action in Iraq in 2003 because we lacked a proper low collateral damage weapon.
And I know you're hairy because you lot all are. But I'm still up for the hug. I'm a journo. I'm unnaturally curious.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isle of Wight ferry captain? The compliments just keep flowing, although I would hate to do as much sea time as they do, bad for the skin.
Your post is very informative, maybe you should have kept wearing the RAC uniform and helped advise the desk drivers in town who signed the Jaguar away to the hangars of Shawbury. I am now, as I always was, convinced that a travesty of common sense has been perpetrated.
I do hold some relief in reserve though, with an OSD of 2017 the UK has 4 years grace (I've already included the 1 year guaranteed slip) to get the Harrier replacement in. What could go wrong?
Let's hope they shrink wrap the Jag well, it may just become the GR11.
As for the concrete bombs, I have to take some of the flack for that idea. We knew it wasn't going to work when a USMC FAC asked one of the boys to "drop another one, that last one didn't go off" (I paraphrase but you get the idea.)
I'm off to get a new tube of Imac.
Your post is very informative, maybe you should have kept wearing the RAC uniform and helped advise the desk drivers in town who signed the Jaguar away to the hangars of Shawbury. I am now, as I always was, convinced that a travesty of common sense has been perpetrated.
I do hold some relief in reserve though, with an OSD of 2017 the UK has 4 years grace (I've already included the 1 year guaranteed slip) to get the Harrier replacement in. What could go wrong?
Let's hope they shrink wrap the Jag well, it may just become the GR11.
As for the concrete bombs, I have to take some of the flack for that idea. We knew it wasn't going to work when a USMC FAC asked one of the boys to "drop another one, that last one didn't go off" (I paraphrase but you get the idea.)
I'm off to get a new tube of Imac.
Wow - page 84!!
Navy News has a story about Gordon Brown's visit to HMS Kent. Perhaps they should have put him in a Harrier T8? Or in a ship in an air defence exercise?
Navy News has a story about Gordon Brown's visit to HMS Kent. Perhaps they should have put him in a Harrier T8? Or in a ship in an air defence exercise?
Going off topic again (although perhaps no more than some other posts on thee last couple of pages, I notice this from the BBC:
US ships in Somali pirate clash
Perhaps we were hasty in cutting out fleet by 20%?
US ships in Somali pirate clash
Perhaps we were hasty in cutting out fleet by 20%?
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: wherever I lay my headset
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two down....
back on topic... more pictures.
It's what we British are good at... innovation. Two great british inventions, two good aircraft sadly both now gone.
It's what we British are good at... innovation. Two great british inventions, two good aircraft sadly both now gone.
Suspicion breeds confidence
Its good to see that to mark the passing of the Shar Discovery Wings is running a Vertical take-off night this Friday evening. Time to get a few cans in and mark the passing of the most successful british postwar fighter jet.
Pierre, that one at the bottom is also a French invention....now.....just think what we could do with the Rafale.......!!!Snigger, snigger smilies dont work, snigger thumbs up!
Given that the Middle East continues to be volatile and unstable, you might be interested in this short (non subscriber) article.
Iran's sea, air and land-launched anti-shipping missile arsenal is key to its ability to damage large commercial and military vessels in the Gulf, and for this reason it remains almost entirely under IRGC control.
Iran's C-801K and C-802 anti-shipping missiles are advanced sea-skimming missiles. The latter is now indigenously produced as the Noor. Iran's defence industries are upgrading the missile's guidance and improving its ability to be fired "over the horizon" and to acquire targets when it reaches a predestined point.
Also this from the Telegraph: More worrying stuff - note the diagram.
We do live in worrying times.
Iran's sea, air and land-launched anti-shipping missile arsenal is key to its ability to damage large commercial and military vessels in the Gulf, and for this reason it remains almost entirely under IRGC control.
Iran's C-801K and C-802 anti-shipping missiles are advanced sea-skimming missiles. The latter is now indigenously produced as the Noor. Iran's defence industries are upgrading the missile's guidance and improving its ability to be fired "over the horizon" and to acquire targets when it reaches a predestined point.
Also this from the Telegraph: More worrying stuff - note the diagram.
We do live in worrying times.
Worrying indeed WEBF.
Thank goodness we're freeing up resources to pay for the kit we need by retiring those SHars.
And in doing so, freeing up space on the CVS to carry meaningful numbers of GR7/7A/9/9A.
Perhaps some of the funding will be going to Future Lynx.....
a more relevant weapon against the kind of asymmetric threat you outline.
Thank goodness we're freeing up resources to pay for the kit we need by retiring those SHars.
And in doing so, freeing up space on the CVS to carry meaningful numbers of GR7/7A/9/9A.
Perhaps some of the funding will be going to Future Lynx.....
a more relevant weapon against the kind of asymmetric threat you outline.
Good job we have land based AD assets.
Good job we have plenty of allies in the coalitions within which we inevitably operate.
Good job that we haven't faced a credible air threat since the end of the Cold War.
Good job we have plenty of allies in the coalitions within which we inevitably operate.
Good job that we haven't faced a credible air threat since the end of the Cold War.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: troon
Age: 61
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jacko
...Aye, Safely tucked away in Blighty. How are they supposed to defend (a now very small) fleet bl00dy 100’s of miles away from anywhere that would give us HNS?
...I can’t recall since the last war these Allies ever coming to our defence. We always seem however to come to theirs.
If that’s the case then why are we still buying 232 Eurfighters?
Don’t get me wrong. Shar is old and knackered and long overdue retirement. But (a) I wouldn’t trust the septics (Or any of our "Allies")to defend our fleet as far as could kick any of them and (b) Life does seem to throw us the occasional googly where we have to act on our own(Falklands)
By the way. If you really want to get the smallest of tastes of what it is like to be in a ship that has just been hit by an Anti-ship missile. Then may I suggest that you write to the RN see if you can get enroled on a fire-fighting and NBCD/DC course. I did the Damage control platform once and the Fire Fighting course 3 times. All of which are underwear-soiling experiences. (I’m quite happy to say I’ve never experienced the real thing) You may afterwards wish to re asses your opinion of SHAR.
Good job we have land based AD assets.
Good job we have plenty of allies in the coalitions within which we inevitably operate.
Good job that we haven't faced a credible air threat since the end of the Cold War
Don’t get me wrong. Shar is old and knackered and long overdue retirement. But (a) I wouldn’t trust the septics (Or any of our "Allies")to defend our fleet as far as could kick any of them and (b) Life does seem to throw us the occasional googly where we have to act on our own(Falklands)
By the way. If you really want to get the smallest of tastes of what it is like to be in a ship that has just been hit by an Anti-ship missile. Then may I suggest that you write to the RN see if you can get enroled on a fire-fighting and NBCD/DC course. I did the Damage control platform once and the Fire Fighting course 3 times. All of which are underwear-soiling experiences. (I’m quite happy to say I’ve never experienced the real thing) You may afterwards wish to re asses your opinion of SHAR.
Suspicion breeds confidence
Yeah, someone remind me of the other coalition partners in Op Corporate? What did the American's send us in 1939? Their best wishes.
Happy birthday Bill Hicks Rules!
Happy birthday Bill Hicks Rules!
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A 1000 aircraft, land or sea based, wouldn't elminate the threat of the single ASM/SSM reqired to hole a supertanker and create havoc with oil/gas exports through the Straits. Try to convince any rational lawyer to allow the ROE to drop an aircraft from a non-conflict state before he's committed a hostile act.
Looking at the potential stranglehold Iran has on net importers of gas (being the second biggest producer behind big buddy Russia,) sinking a ship would surely serve to polarise countries against her that are hitherto waivering or ambivalent?
That wouldn't be smart no matter how cool 100,000 tonnes of burning crude is on CNN.
And as for the type of weapon should you be foolish enough to split steel? Why would you bother flying an aircraft with an ASM knowing the relative tracking capabilities of western forces in the region when you can plink at ships from coastal batteries and nip back between salvos to grab some coffee and figs? Even if you knew where the salvos were coming from, do you think anyone would start shelling sovereign territory?
As Jacko says. Lots of land (and sea) based AD aircraft and AD capable ships; an area heaving with coalition forces on standing Gulf duties facing a potential adversary who, if he has any sense (and he has watching the diplomatic lines being taken in recent months) would use air launched kinetic effect as a last resort.
Looking at the potential stranglehold Iran has on net importers of gas (being the second biggest producer behind big buddy Russia,) sinking a ship would surely serve to polarise countries against her that are hitherto waivering or ambivalent?
That wouldn't be smart no matter how cool 100,000 tonnes of burning crude is on CNN.
And as for the type of weapon should you be foolish enough to split steel? Why would you bother flying an aircraft with an ASM knowing the relative tracking capabilities of western forces in the region when you can plink at ships from coastal batteries and nip back between salvos to grab some coffee and figs? Even if you knew where the salvos were coming from, do you think anyone would start shelling sovereign territory?
As Jacko says. Lots of land (and sea) based AD aircraft and AD capable ships; an area heaving with coalition forces on standing Gulf duties facing a potential adversary who, if he has any sense (and he has watching the diplomatic lines being taken in recent months) would use air launched kinetic effect as a last resort.
BHR
Too many people fighting the last war rather than looking to the next one.
So that's why people justify the loss of air defence as there hasn't been a serious air threat in the last few years is it? Surely assuming that there will be no hostile aircraft is fighting the last war?
How far is it from Iran to the RAF bases on the West side of the Gulf?
What if Host Nation Support is denied due to diplomatic rows, or the Gulf states not wanting to be targetted?
It was Janes that brought up the issue of air launched missiles - not me.
Too many people fighting the last war rather than looking to the next one.
So that's why people justify the loss of air defence as there hasn't been a serious air threat in the last few years is it? Surely assuming that there will be no hostile aircraft is fighting the last war?
How far is it from Iran to the RAF bases on the West side of the Gulf?
What if Host Nation Support is denied due to diplomatic rows, or the Gulf states not wanting to be targetted?
It was Janes that brought up the issue of air launched missiles - not me.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Englandshire, mostly.
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WBF,
Do you seriously think that the SHAR would offer a defence against an ever present threat? Not with the numbers you could place on a Invincible class. No real chance of holding 'ready 5' 24 hours let alone a 24 hr CAP. We would still need allied assistance which in my opinion negates the whole point of SHAR.
If you seriously think that the USN would not be on station with a large number of AD assets during a hot period with Iran then you are, with respect, not being realistic.
Far better to have a belly full of GR9s to actually do some damage when the balloon goes up.
SHAR is going, we don't need it as much as other procurements right now, our allies have got our back for a while. I may be wrong here but if we keep SHAR, won't it have a harmful effect on the purchase of the RN's much needed new carriers?
Do you seriously think that the SHAR would offer a defence against an ever present threat? Not with the numbers you could place on a Invincible class. No real chance of holding 'ready 5' 24 hours let alone a 24 hr CAP. We would still need allied assistance which in my opinion negates the whole point of SHAR.
If you seriously think that the USN would not be on station with a large number of AD assets during a hot period with Iran then you are, with respect, not being realistic.
Far better to have a belly full of GR9s to actually do some damage when the balloon goes up.
SHAR is going, we don't need it as much as other procurements right now, our allies have got our back for a while. I may be wrong here but if we keep SHAR, won't it have a harmful effect on the purchase of the RN's much needed new carriers?
Last edited by Tombstone; 21st Mar 2006 at 19:23.
Do you seriously think that the SHAR would offer a defence against an ever present threat? Not with the numbers you could place on a Invincible class. No real chance of holding 'ready 5' 24 hours let alone a 24 hr CAP. We would still need allied assistance which in my opinion negates the whole point of SHAR.
Not really able to answer that, but surely some defence is better than none?
If you seriously think that the USN would not be on station with a large number of AD assets during a hot period with Iran then you are, with respect, not being realistic.
Will they be able to provide continuous CAP? If not, will the USN fighters be able to reach our task group faster than the hostile ones? I am assuming that UK forces operate as a discrete group, possibly responsible for a separate area within the theatre.
What if the solution to a crisis isn't just dropping bombs, but things like mine clearance? Just a few hostile aircraft could cause mayhem.
Not really able to answer that, but surely some defence is better than none?
If you seriously think that the USN would not be on station with a large number of AD assets during a hot period with Iran then you are, with respect, not being realistic.
Will they be able to provide continuous CAP? If not, will the USN fighters be able to reach our task group faster than the hostile ones? I am assuming that UK forces operate as a discrete group, possibly responsible for a separate area within the theatre.
What if the solution to a crisis isn't just dropping bombs, but things like mine clearance? Just a few hostile aircraft could cause mayhem.