Sea Jet
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We're talking about a jet which made you fell rusty after a weekend off. The RNR guys did come back and fly the SHAR, but in all probability their war time role would have been LSO/ Duty pilot to take the weight off the regulars. Anyone who did a PWO tour or similar had a hefty refresher and was then absorbed into an up and running squadron. Sending a bunch of refreshees, none of whom had flown the thing for a period of time, off on their own would be utter carnage.
It would also make for a great dit....
It would also make for a great dit....
orca I'm not stupid or arrogant enough to argue with you, but at least (to my mind anyway) the possibility is there (even if it is slim) - that may be enough to deter potential aggressors.
I note that the Sea Harrier page has been removed from the RN website.
BHR We're not talking about ongoing operations, but unexpected crises in which the United States in unwilling or unable to get involved.
Never say never.
I note that the Sea Harrier page has been removed from the RN website.
BHR We're not talking about ongoing operations, but unexpected crises in which the United States in unwilling or unable to get involved.
Never say never.
Some of you might be interested in this discussion of Exercise Konkan. The Government should consider this a warning.
Roll on CVF, T45 and please be gentle with the SFDO Shars.
Assuming there is time to regenerate them - perhaps 100 days like INVINCIBLE? In a crisis, all sorts of things become possible or acceptable. I hope the the possibility is enough to prevent this sort of crisis.
Roll on CVF, T45 and please be gentle with the SFDO Shars.
Assuming there is time to regenerate them - perhaps 100 days like INVINCIBLE? In a crisis, all sorts of things become possible or acceptable. I hope the the possibility is enough to prevent this sort of crisis.
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 14th Jul 2006 at 22:35.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Lincs
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=WE Branch Fanatic]Some of you might be interested in this discussion of Exercise Konkan.[QUOTE]
No, not really. I thought this thread had died! WEBF, I admire your tenacity and ability to stick your fingers in your ears singing "lah lah lah" ....but for god's sake man give it up! Do you REALLY think the SFDO SHARs will be in any fit state to resurrect? I wouldn't want to have flown in the Cosford or Scampton taxi-jets.......and I used to fix them!
(Don't believe I've been drawn into this thread AGAIN)
SBG
No, not really. I thought this thread had died! WEBF, I admire your tenacity and ability to stick your fingers in your ears singing "lah lah lah" ....but for god's sake man give it up! Do you REALLY think the SFDO SHARs will be in any fit state to resurrect? I wouldn't want to have flown in the Cosford or Scampton taxi-jets.......and I used to fix them!
(Don't believe I've been drawn into this thread AGAIN)
SBG
Suspicion breeds confidence
Not so long I ago I heard that the low airframe life Cosford taxi-jets were considered for refurb to plug the Typhoon delays!
Plenty of room of course for the IN Shars since our "strike carrier" only had six GR7a on board.
Plenty of room of course for the IN Shars since our "strike carrier" only had six GR7a on board.
And the pilots will come from where exactly? And the spares? Maintainers? Let's stop living in a dream world people. The Navy has already proved it can achieve a more relevant task in todays theatres with 6 GR7As on board than it could with all the Sea Harriers it ever had. Let's embrace the future and stop crying about the past.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Hampshire
Age: 62
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The Navy has already proved it can achieve a more relevant task in todays theatres with 6 GR7As on board .."
We'll have to learn to be chosey about our enemies then and not offend anyone with an airforce.
We'll have to learn to be chosey about our enemies then and not offend anyone with an airforce.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Several miles SSW of Watford Gap
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Navaleye
Sunk, I'm struggling to think of any that don't. Unless we are planning to take on the Kiwis or Eire. Welcome to PPRuNe by the way.
To paraphrase the little Britain - the FAF computer said no and all of the sudden the Ivorian Frogfoots were all broken!!
Suspicion breeds confidence
Hmnn. The french send in a ferry and pick up 1000. The UK send in a destroyer which can pick up a fraction of that. At the same it invites attack upon itself in a location where it is least capable of defending itself. i.e. alongside.
Illustrious can no longer provide top cover in the event of trouble and the can't even strafe ground based threats not worth a missile.
Illustrious can no longer provide top cover in the event of trouble and the can't even strafe ground based threats not worth a missile.
Navaleye
The top cover that Illustrious provides now is a lot more relevant than what it could with the SHAR. Providing cover for the good guys on the ground is what we do now. When was the last time we shot down an enemy aircraft? Quarter of a century ago?
As for your "not worth a missile" rubbish - how many missiles do you use against ground targets? What do you think CRV7 is for?
Not that bringing a strike wing on board Lusty has any relevance in the Lebanon scenario......
The top cover that Illustrious provides now is a lot more relevant than what it could with the SHAR. Providing cover for the good guys on the ground is what we do now. When was the last time we shot down an enemy aircraft? Quarter of a century ago?
As for your "not worth a missile" rubbish - how many missiles do you use against ground targets? What do you think CRV7 is for?
Not that bringing a strike wing on board Lusty has any relevance in the Lebanon scenario......
Suspicion breeds confidence
Late,
Maybe munitions are cheaper now than I remember them. Missile use in a crowded harbour area is not recommended as they have a habit of going rogue as the israelis have found out many times. If we are talking about taking out potential Hez "boghammers" then there's nothing better then rapid fire guns either ship borne or on attack a/c.
I agree the air threat is limited and the Syrians are unlikely to do anything. This is handy, because we won't be able to stop them.
Maybe munitions are cheaper now than I remember them. Missile use in a crowded harbour area is not recommended as they have a habit of going rogue as the israelis have found out many times. If we are talking about taking out potential Hez "boghammers" then there's nothing better then rapid fire guns either ship borne or on attack a/c.
I agree the air threat is limited and the Syrians are unlikely to do anything. This is handy, because we won't be able to stop them.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: fife
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Navaleye
I'm as confused as others about your arguements. In this scenario, I would have thought a carrier ramped with helicopters and a few CAS aircraft might be an ideal solution. DCA could easily be provided by land bases if it was required, why waste the space on the carrier.
I'm as confused as others about your arguements. In this scenario, I would have thought a carrier ramped with helicopters and a few CAS aircraft might be an ideal solution. DCA could easily be provided by land bases if it was required, why waste the space on the carrier.
LAL - which bit of capabilities and intent didn't they teach you? Last time I looked, (the Syrians who may choose to get involved) had Fulcrums & more importantly Fencers. Although I'm sure we'd love to rely on the Red Sea Pedestrian AF for top cover, it may not be the wisest choice.
I'm sure a US CVBG is hurtling up the Red sea or inbound from 2nd Fleet (as the scenarios which must be obeyed assume), but at the minute, DCA capability is looking a little thin wouldn't you agree?
Hezbollah may be making merry with all sorts of Iranian missile toys (which I grant you can only be countered by ASMD or striking the launch sites), but should this get any more serious there are upwards of 2500 matelots in a constrained position, with close to SFA in way of stand-off defence and a reasonably capable AF (if only on paper) too bloody close.
The whole point about the disquiet in losing organic DCA is that there are a lot of capable AF out there and we may well end up in their AoA with no idea of their intent. I seem to recall 800/801 doing some fairly serious DACM with Fulcrums in mind, not a million miles away from where we are operating now......
I'm sure a US CVBG is hurtling up the Red sea or inbound from 2nd Fleet (as the scenarios which must be obeyed assume), but at the minute, DCA capability is looking a little thin wouldn't you agree?
Hezbollah may be making merry with all sorts of Iranian missile toys (which I grant you can only be countered by ASMD or striking the launch sites), but should this get any more serious there are upwards of 2500 matelots in a constrained position, with close to SFA in way of stand-off defence and a reasonably capable AF (if only on paper) too bloody close.
The whole point about the disquiet in losing organic DCA is that there are a lot of capable AF out there and we may well end up in their AoA with no idea of their intent. I seem to recall 800/801 doing some fairly serious DACM with Fulcrums in mind, not a million miles away from where we are operating now......
Suspicion breeds confidence
Vec, I agree. I wonder if Hezbollah will be as cooperative when uncle same turns up. I would not be surprised if Illustrious landed her GR7s at Gib which seems to be the norm.
Luckily Iwo Jima carries AV8Bs so that problem is covered, although it would not look very good in the eyes of the muslim world if the US and Israel were bombing Beirut at the same time, even if it was for different reasons.
Off on a slightly different tangent, has anyone noticed the dearth of publicity about the exploits of 800NAS of late. We were used to regular news stories pre April and then virtually nothing. Also our only fixed wing NAS does even appear on the official RN website. What gives?
Luckily Iwo Jima carries AV8Bs so that problem is covered, although it would not look very good in the eyes of the muslim world if the US and Israel were bombing Beirut at the same time, even if it was for different reasons.
Off on a slightly different tangent, has anyone noticed the dearth of publicity about the exploits of 800NAS of late. We were used to regular news stories pre April and then virtually nothing. Also our only fixed wing NAS does even appear on the official RN website. What gives?
Gents
We've gone on in this thread about the lack of organic AD forever and are still in the same situation i.e. without any. No-one thinks this is an ideal situation and it is a calculated risk. But still a risk.
The main thing is that there will not be any offensive ac on board Lusty. This is not why we are going there. We go to rescue/pick up our people from harms way, not to strike anyone/shoot down their jets. It would make things much worse in an already volatile situation if we were to turn up off the coast with a strike package on board. Then we might need to get worried about stray rockets etc.
Cheers
LAL
We've gone on in this thread about the lack of organic AD forever and are still in the same situation i.e. without any. No-one thinks this is an ideal situation and it is a calculated risk. But still a risk.
The main thing is that there will not be any offensive ac on board Lusty. This is not why we are going there. We go to rescue/pick up our people from harms way, not to strike anyone/shoot down their jets. It would make things much worse in an already volatile situation if we were to turn up off the coast with a strike package on board. Then we might need to get worried about stray rockets etc.
Cheers
LAL