RAF needs 124 personnel for each of its frontline aircraft, while the FAA does the same with 31 people. So, for the taxpayer, the RAF offers much less bang per buck.


So one Lynx has more 'bang per buck' as a GR4? Hmmmm, how can I put this? How exactly?

Go away nasty tank or I'll depth charge you to death?

"RAF needs 124 personnel for each of its frontline aircraft, while the FAA does the same with 31 people. So, for the taxpayer, the RAF offers much less bang per buck."

So just refresh me on where that feckin great boat, the home for your 31 fished's fit's into your financial equation:ugh:

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

I agree, the GR4 has more 'bang per buck' than a Lynx - but not 4 times more. Go away nasty submarine, before I toss my munitions in your general direction! Oh, and would you be good enough to stay within spitting distance of the UK coast so I can get to you.

During the fireman's strike, some bright spark in the RAF puffed out his chest and told the big cheeses that however many thousand men had been provided with no loss of operational capability. So what do these people do normally. The point was that the RAF offer poor value for money compared to the other services, as the army/RN have been pared back to the bone, whilst the RAF is still decidedly fat.

Maple 01

It is very difficult to torpedo an airfield.

PS I didn't understand ABIW's post either.

What ABIW meant was that the comparison of FAA manpower per aircraft with RAF manpower per aircraft was skewed. Many people in the RAF support the airfield services, admin and supply, tasks that the FAA piggyback on the rest of the RN for. Perhaps a better comparison would be the total complement of HMS Illustrious supporting however many ac it can carry with the total complement of RAF Marham with however many ac there are there. Don't know the numbers, perhaps someone can oblige.

Hang on. Aren't Customs and Excise the Senior Service?
Formed way before the Navy those boys. :8

OK, so one Lynx has more 'bang per buck' as a MR2? Hmmmm, how can I put this? How exactly?

Go away nasty submarine, before I toss my limited munitions in your general direction before returning to mother! Oh, and would you be good enough to stay within spitting distance of mother so I can get to you. :E

MadMark!!! :mad:

Mad Mark

Having worked with the Mr2, let me try and justify myself.

MR2 crew of 13 - Lynx 2 (3 if roled for airborne gunnery or SAR). Lynx wins.

MR2 roles, active/passive ASW(including weapons delivery), ASuW (but I've never seen them do it), search(but not rescue) - Lynx roles, ASuW, ASW, Gunner AOP, Harpoon targeting, Force protection, Search(and rescue), Loadlifting, troop insertion. So for versatility Lynx wins.

Lynx at alert 15, MR2 at alert? How far is Kinloss anyway? 10 hours on station is no use if there's no guarantee you won't have to leave when the action starts. Lynx marshals it's hours when all is quiet and is on scene as soon as needed. Lynx wins again.

I'm not saying the Nimrod isn't a great aircraft, but the issue is 'Bang per buck'. So where does the Nimrod win out exactly?

What is the point of the direction this thread has taken?

In terms of manpower, the Army is the Senior Service.

In terms of ultimate firepower, the RN is.

In terms of air power in many theatres and many different roles, the RAF is.

In terms of chronology, it is a done deal, and has been so for 88 years.

What gets me, is in 1982 the chips were down. As a 13 year old schoolboy, I vividly remember the "hasty conversions" of liners to troopships. The TV news item with the shipyard fitter talking to his wife, having been tasked to fit a helipad to (IIRC) the Canberra: "I'll be home when the job is done". The reclaiming of Vulcan bits from scrapyards. The Waterloo station announcement "All members of 1 PARA are instructed to return to barracks immediately".

In my own military career, I didn't question the provenance of the RAF when they brought me home from Sarajevo. Neither did I disprespect the RN bloke insisting I salute the bell at HMS Gannet in civvies.

Get over yourselves chaps, and fight the politicians that deprive you of the tools to do the job. A job well done by all, within the contraints imposed.

'Senior Service'. Mmm . . . isn't that some sort of fag? :E

:ok:

You're all wrong! Senior Service are fags and they come in packets of 20!:p

Well they used to.

Foldy

Well done. Depiste the post above yours being identical, 7 hours later you posted the same "joke".

Still, I suppose we can't expect much else from a Service formed on 1 April that is still only just getting the joke.....

Bit touchy there PS, something you want to share with the class? It's OK now.....remember, if it's not hurting it's not banter

Could have been worse, as the original 'Fags' line on this thread was on 29 Sep at 23:40:ugh:

I wanted to join the Navy, but I passed the exam.

The repeat until funny 'fag' line definitely demonstrates a whiff of lavender in the ranks of the RAF, but you can't escape a simple truth.

The first male to female sex change performed in the UK was done post WWII on an RAF fighter pilot. I would have thought there were less drastic ways to reduce the number of pricks in the organisation.

Maybe, but we all know why Sailors do not need to change sex to get a man........:ooh:



Still, at least Sailors traditions are not illegal these days....:uhoh:

Can't help but suspect you sport a bristling 'Village People' moustache yourself.

Trying to get back to the thread-ish, nobody has yet told me how the RAF can consider itself the senior service when it hasn't historically done as much to save our country from invasion as the RN and while econically it still remains a black hole where 50000 people are paid to keep just 426 aircraft on the front line.

As opposed to the Navy who have about 70 operational ships and boats (on paper) operated by just under 36,000 personnel (1 Jan figures).

Which means about just over 500 personnel for every operational vessel as opposed to the 117 personnel per operational ac you mention in your statistics.

And you can't tell me the Navy is cost effective .... if we weren't buying those 2 carriers, we could have had at least 350 Typhoons :E

And I'll have you know that there is absolutely nothing wrong with sporting a large bushy upper lip adornment - comes in very useful for catching fine fillies. Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh!

So, with 14000 fewer people we operate 70 vessels and 200 combat aircraft and we can take a fight to a lot more places than you can. You may have noticed that UK foreign policy isn't winning us friends and influencing people. Friendly overseas airfields are getting thinner on the ground. If we binned the CVF's and ordered 350 Typhoons, how would they be used? Towing RAF Marham to the South China seas, for instance, could prove a logistical challenge. Presumably you'd want the 40000 extra personnel to fly these 350 jets too?
I know the RAF all walked past the RN recruiting office to get there, because the Air Force is the soft option, but it would be nice if a larger proportion of you got your hands dirty once in a while. I think if I were a GR7 or Chinook mate, I'd feel aggrieved at the time away considering the number of 'fat wheezy boys with a note from matron' who think one night away from the mrs is a deployment.
By the way, I do hope you twirl your moustaches in a Terry-Thomas stylee whilst pursuing said fillies.:ooh:

200 combat aircraft!! Somewhat disingenuous. You do not have 200 combat aircraft - you have some Lynx and some Merlins which might at some stretch count as combat aircraft, which, as mentioned above, might, as long as they stay close to mother, be effective at dropping a torpedo or 2 against that great and well known submarine threat we are currently fighting. Some may have door guns - wow! You do not have any long range strike aircraft, you do not have long range maritime aircraft, or transport or tankers, or elint, or long range SAR or or or.......... You might claim to have a few GR7s but then we all know that, despite the change of sqn markings, those really belong to, are supported by and in the main operated by the RAF. Fixed wing FAA? About to implode!! Unless of course you count the Jetstream T3s as combat aircraft!! You might as well in the FAA it's about all you have left. And to compare a Lynx to a Nimrod, get real!! Range, endurance, weapons load recce, elint and, if StormShadow and LGB, are integrated long range strike and CAS in one platform and it isn't the Lynx:rolleyes:

Well, of those 70 vessels, how many include various Haddock protection vessels to guard against the advances of those dastardly Icelandic types, how many are engaged in mapping and colouring in all the blue bits and how many are on current ops in multiple theatres?

And where are you getting your 200 combat aircraft ? Your Harriers are our old ac and whilst you do have a few Hawks knocking about the place, I would hardly describe the Jet Streams as combat types. And yes you do have helos, but aren't most of them still in bits on the hangar floor somewhere, with the ones in Basrah on their last legs and being held together by Duck Tape and rust with the drivers complaining they haven't seen a single Russian sub since 1978?


We could go round and round in ever decreasing circles with this one, but personally, I think for once we should get together and show true jointery and reach a gentlemens' agreement:

We'll agree that the Navy, whilst being fine old gentlemen are starting to smell a bit in their old age and require constant help from the nursing staff, that the Army are the irritating parents - disliked by both the kids and the grandparents constantly trotting out the argument 'because I said so' whenever anbody dares to disagree, and that the RAF are the young upstarts heading towards the ASBOs and court appearance but ultimately the future. And that we all hate the bloody politicians and bean counters :ok:

Oh and yes, I do twirl my moustache in a Terry Thomas style, although I could never quite get the drawling 'hello' off as well as he did.

Fair point, I got the 200 figure from the RN website and it may need updating to round it down a smidge.
I do have another question. During WWII Coastal command was put under the control of the RN because all its work was in conjunction with the RN and it was a far more sensible arrangement. How will it be any different when the JCA squadrons get up and running? Two squadrons at least are going to have to be worked up for carrier ops and given the tempo of operations at the moment, one carrier is always likely to be away. Why not call them 800 and 801?
I know, I know, I'm pi$$ing in the wind on that one - but I do think that the RAf pilots will be timing their squadron appointments to get out of carrier time and the RN boys will be timing theirs to get into it. Result - the RN pilots remain the embarked specialists and squadrons with RAF numbers will have minimal RAF involvement. What's the point of that?
Roland - an MR2 might be able to find something, but lobbing out a liferaft hardly qualifies as rescue. If LGB and stormshadow are integrated, then feel free to claim the capability, for now you can't. I concede that the Lynx has substantially less endurance, but it is employed with the GR7 ethos of staying close to the action and having an increased sortie rate. You can't condemn the Lynx ethos without damning the GR7. The fact remains that a Lynx can get to a lot of places that a Nimrod can't, unless you want to move Australia on the globe - again!;)

Trust me mate, been there and done that. Scrambled, 20-ish West (well out of land based helo SAR), found persons in distress, dropped life raft (big and better equipped than their small and open dinghy), found nearest ship, directed ship to rescue, waited till rescue complete, then landed, on PLE, at nearest (UK) diversion - total time 8.55hrs. No Lynx could have achieved that:ok:

Oh, come now, Roly old bean. You can't dismiss the RN's fixed wing combat aircraft so easily.......





.....don't forget that they also have a Sea Fury, Sea Hawk......and a couple of Swordfish!

They must be the only military organisation in the world whose highest performance aircraft are in their heritage flight.......:(

But hey, let them have their little jokes about 'crabs' as they bounce across the briny in their little grey coffins from cockers P to cockers P in order to contribute to the nation's defence by poncing about in sailor suits to impress the locals.

Nuff respec
I wouldn't ever belittle a good day at the office. Banter is banter, but saving lives is saving lives. I am fairly sure that any further away and they'd have sent a Pussers grey with a Lynx on the back though.
And after they'd been rescued they'd have been regaled with top sh@gging dits on the way back to the ship.:ok:

"And after they'd been rescued they'd have been given a top sh@gging on the way back to the ship"

Undoubtedly.....

"D'you hear there! Hands to buggery stations - fresh meat coming aboard!"

Well, you know the Navy motto:
'If it moves, sh@g it - if it doesn't move, sh@g it until it does'
Seems like a fair price for being rescued.
I know you're RAF, but you are aware it's not just for pi$$ing through, aren't you?:E

Why don't we concentrate on some jokes with a military theme ... A bit like the RAF you could say ...


I thank you..

As far as biggest bang for your buck goes I think 3 trident subs beats anything the crabs can muster several times over.

As far as Senior Service goes? Wouldnt that be the 'lady's' that hang around the back of Stonehouse barracks or the docks in Pompei? They have been providing a service for many years...so I am told.

Do they still have that damn foll rule where you cannot transfer from the 'senior service' to the junior? It is possible that I would be an ALM now if that had not been in place.

Why did the Navy change from using bars of soap to using soap powder?


Because it takes longer to pick up!!:hmm:

GPMG - Unaware that rule existed, know of several who have 'downgraded'!

Senior Service not as old as the 'oldest profession' although a regular sponsor (so I am led to believe:E ).

In order to settle this debate, i think it's only fair that we ask a third party as to their opinion....

So Major James Loden.... how would you describe the RAF?? :}


Shall we say no more?

Ahh but how did The Chief of General Staff, General Sir Richard Dannatt describe the RAF?

http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?...&id=1410152006

"THE country's top soldier has praised the Royal Air Force as "exceptional" in the wake of comments by an officer condemning its performance in Afghanistan as "utterly, utterly useless".

The Chief of General Staff, General Sir Richard Dannatt, lavished praise on the RAF's efforts in support of the ground forces and described the remarks made by Major James Loden of 3 Para as "irresponsible".

Your go again nick0021.

I guess you are not a team player then.

How very dare you! :eek:

Ill have you know I’m the captain of my local tidily winks team. I'm sure they would take issue with your last statement!

Well I guess that is as close to the Armed Forces that you have been.

A very good reason why 208, as an ex-Naval squadron (formed October 1916) and far "senior" to 800 and 801, should be one of the embarked JSF squadrons. Anyway, flying Meteor 8s & 9s out of Takali in '56 we used to have the 800 and 801 Sea Hawks on toast. And we shagged all the WRNS at Kalafrana too!

I noticed in your excellent link that a Syrian Meteor F8 splashed a Canberra PR7 at altitude. Now that must have taken a bit distinguished flying!

747

Posted by nick0021 - 6 Nov 06 - on a different thread....

So nick .... What have you done in the last 8 days then? Or are you a retread who didn't get aircrew first time round?:p

Actually its the Royal Navy. 'The Navy' is an American thing, possibly something to do with the film Hot Shots.

BTW,

Seems a few RAF pilots managed some air-to-air kills since Suez, in RN a/c admittedly but does that mean the RN pilots currently bombing lumps out of the Taliban in Afghanistan should be ignored as really they're RAF a/c?

Small-minded, single-service idiot.:mad: