It is blatantly obvious that all 3 forces operate in the air, numerically quite interesting ironic there, but, it seems there is a little less Joinery in the specific roles.

One force is air and ground
One force is air and sea
One force is air and, umm air and, well anyway.... we are specialists in umm, well anyway........

I can see why some might get a little defencive when they have a lot less flexibility, must be quite worrying?:hmm:

Gnd,

You could also re spin that to state

One force is a teeny weeny bit of air and ground
One force is a teeny weeny but oh so slightly bigger bit of air and water
One force is air and slowly but surely and quite successfully taking the air from the other two and a bit of ground and water

"I can see why some might get a little defencive when they have a lot less flexibility, must be quite worrying?:hmm:"

Correct, if you're green or dark blue of course :p

That is quite true but I don't think a bit of clever spin will get anyone too convinced their not in trouble? Me - I am not affected, so knock yourselves out.:8
Just to confirm -
One force covers 75 % of the worlds surface area and the air
One force covers 25% of the worlds Surface area and the air

How is this 'teeny-weeny' again??????

And confirm you are measuring success by the PVR rates as I can see nothing else the RAF is excelling at?

Baffled?
 

'As an ex-Rifleman myself I too am baffled by the continuing exsistance of the RAF Regt.'

Mike, sorry, HS.

How many aircraft do we need to lose on the ground to enemy action, when non-specialists are defending them, before your bafflement goes away? Surely, even you appreciate that as our aircraft fleet becomes smaller and the platforms become more effective, the loss of a single aircraft has an increased effect on the ability to prosecute campaigns from the air.

Couldn't the current role that the RAF Regiment under-take be performed by a similar unit within the Army?

Oh and just how specialist do you have to be to guard an airbase when the British Army in Iraq often has 'blunt' trades going out on the ground on infantry tasks?

Steady - numerically their a bonus. If they are there use them, we need all the help we can.:eek:

Then perhaps rather than eyeing up aircraft that the Army would like to get their mitts on they should stick with what they do best and subsume the RAF Regt into the British Army.

No loss of bodies on the ground and the Army will have control of something it understands.

Good idea HS but I think you added the word 'Regt' by mistake?

Gnd,

I think you forgot to add,

One force fly's the other two forces over 100% of the earths surface, which neither of the other two could could manage without, and operates on the ground

As regards "teeny weeny" surely you can work that one out :rolleyes:

This could go on and on so lets quit while I'm ahead :E

Soz, mate I thought virgin were going to do that?
I think you can have the AT fleet as they are always getting in trouble, a good venture capitalist would strip that very quickly!!! You have it and enjoy them.
PS - I am not sure the Navy want all the fast noisy things but I hear they have to put people in the new one to cover the short fall?

Do you mean Excel Air or Omni Air. Or was it the Ukranian heavy lift force you were refering to? ;)

The Fleet Air Arm invented the tank, so we should get some.

Were not talking about fish tanks!!!!

Not sure if the Excel or Omni etc contract includes dropping 16 tons of much needed kit/food/ammo etc onto a front line DZ, to mention but one thing the light blue do but hey if it does I know plenty of guys that would be happy to leave them to it :rolleyes:

Oh FFS,

This has to be the most utterly purile inter service willy waving I've ever seen on PPRUNE.

We need an independant RAF, and I hope the other 2 services maintain their own airborne capabilities as well. Perhaps if we focused on fighting the real enemy (ie the Treasury) rather than each other, we'd be in a lot better state.

In the meantime, you lot need to grow up.:rolleyes:

MM

... No they didn't - they invented the armoured car - its different :bored:
Magic Mushroom - Save wear on your keyboard mate, it's really not worth it:ok:
AL

Why the RAF Regt?
 

Kandahar (in an area nominally protected by the army):

Before RAF Regt arrival: multiple daily rocket attacks, 1 GR7 destroyed.

After RAF Regt arrival: weekly or monthly rocket attacks.

Perhaps that is the reason?

On aeroplanes again........... I like the big, obvious winding key at the back of the 350. Just right for pongo techies, then.

Point of order Mr Chairman,

One force is a lot of water, quite a bit of air and a lot of ground as well.

Up until March 07, 50% ofthe UK force in Afghanistan was Dark Blue!

50% (supposed to be) of UK GR7/A/9 forces are Dark Blue.
TLAM is Dark Blue
Mk7 ASACS which did so well in Iraq is Dark Blue
The Royal Marines are Dark Blue with a green lid
Most of the Tanks and heavy equipment is transported by Ships, dark blue or red duster.
A huge amount of Light Blue Merlin is flown by Dark Blue Pilots.
All the Green Seakings in the Middle East are Dark Blue.
4.5 inch gun which delivers highly accurate fire support for ground troops and bombarded the Argentine positions in 1982 on a daily basis is Dark Blue.


and a lot of other items that cannot be mentioned here.

A truly versatile force with worldwide capability, operating regularly without host nation support.

With CVF that reach will be even further. With CVF, the UK would be able to support operations within Afghanistan from the sea.

Not discounting the contribution of our light blue brethren. They provide a huge amount of CAS, large SH and transport, but they are not as fluid (scuse the pun) a force as the dark blue.

Oh, and they have possibly the best air display team in the world!!

The only real difference between us Army and you Air Force chaps doing anything is that we can generally support an aircraft with a handful of staff whereas it takes half of bloody Lincolnshire to support an Air Force frame.

As a footnote to all those budding RAF Kingair types whom may find themselves in an auto-piloted racetrack pattern somewhere less tolerant than Cranwell whilst having your downtime in a grubby room with no air con your welcome to it.

"The only real difference between us Army and you Air Force chaps doing anything is that we can generally support an aircraft with a handful of staff whereas it takes half of bloody Lincolnshire to support an Air Force frame."



You dont need many staff to look after all those U/S aircraft when they rarely fly!! Other than the Apache there is not much for the AAC to boast about. A couple of Lynx here and there that are extremely limited does not compare to the operational footprint of SH and the Jungly fleet

Standing by for standard Army witty reposte with regards to RAF Crewmen :rolleyes:

King Airs - back on subject
 

To save everyone re-reading the last 6 years worth of the RAF V Army same same message can we skip back to the B350 topic.

What fills the gap between now and next year? Continue with the current asset(s) the plural is in case we get another one. The UAV forum is a worrying combat indicator that upstairs hope no one sees the actual state of things untill all the new toys are up and running, mid - late next year

It really doesn't matter who operates them though; add it to the fleet where the current low level version comes from, that outfit seem to cope with a mixture of races and ego's ok.

Door Slider

come on now you need a fair few techies for all those blade strikes on flag poles !!!!:eek:

"The only real difference between us Army and you Air Force chaps doing anything is that we can generally support an aircraft with a handful of staff whereas it takes half of bloody Lincolnshire to support an Air Force frame."

The RAF would only take a handful of people if our fleet was as technical as a balsa glider!

effects - The Apache is a pretty technical piece of kit, as TWA are finding out the hard way.

BTW, how many RAF techies do you know of who took up the offer to transfer across to the REME as 'instant Sgts' when they were bringing the Apache into service?

Now here are a couple of questionable posts:

effects said - "The RAF would only take a handful of people if our fleet was as technical as a balsa glider!"

That is just plain silly, rotary have always been more technically demanding that fixed wing if only for the number of moving parts - nice wind up though effects!:ok:

Notso Helpful Stacker the fact remains that the Army are coping and name for me any new aircraft introduced to service that hasn't had problems? As for the transfer of RAF techies to 'instant' REME sergeants, apart from a very obvious step up in life, why would someone in a black shoes and overalls environment want to go out and live among the muck and bullets?;)

"That is just plain silly, rotary have always been more technically demanding that fixed wing if only for the number of moving parts "

That is why in the Army they have glorified motor mechanics working on them!

Any RAF FJ is more 'technically demanding' than rotary and yes before you ask I have worked on both.:)

I think you are confusing something thats looks complicated but has simple mechanical properties with more the sophisticated systems that are used in modern fixed wing aircraft that require 'real' technical ability to maintain.

"why would someone in a black shoes and overalls environment want to go out and live among the muck and bullets?;)"

eeerrrr.........because of the obvious step DOWN in life possibly :p

Just a point - how is changing black boxes at all hard??

It's not, trust me I did it for a few years. What is hard is knowing which black box to change :ok:

...and knowing what to do after you've changed all the black boxes and the fault is still there.

So, following that logic, isn't it the same for fixed and rotary?

and if that is true, is it not the case that the techs are all the same?

Is this not another non-argument we're in again?

Door slider....................... Do you just slide the door and peer underneath or do you have a real job like us poor SNCO PILOTS!!!!!!!!! in the AAC !hmmmmm! blah blah blah boringggggggggggggggggggg!:ugh:

Air International reporting four King Airs to be operated by AAC, but initially out of Waddington. Delivery expected aroundabout.. now

Air International reporting 4 King Airs
 

I think they are confused with the Nav trainers because the 350s are still flying around a parts bin in Kansas, and will be for several months at least.

But who ends up flying them is currently in the light blue corner.... once TWA have gone through the teething for us! (Cheers easy)

At the rate we are going through the Alberts in Theatre we better prepare the King Airs for freight ops as well!

THH - busy reading my 350 P.O.H. in anticipation.....

http://www.hawardenspotters.info/JENC_5e.jpg

Quoted as Beech 300C, rather than 350. Typo? Mistake?

Any news on who will operate them?

Reported by at least one press source as 5 Squadron at Waddington, under designation Shadow R1.

Those who DO know aint' saying!!!

The Shadow Knows.