Air Forces Monthly: Is the Tornado Up to it?
 

ZZZZZZZZZZ

Of course it is But then again I believe Gordon Brown is as honest as the Winter Day is long.:rolleyes:

8 hours!?

You give our glorious leader too much credit, ZH. :}

The Editor bloke asks whether the Tornado can "take off safely with a 'war load' of weapons, with the same broad effects as the Harrier?", and he also calls into question "the service (serviceability?) levels of the 'tired' Tornado". He finishes off with the question "will the Tornado continue to save the lives of NATO troops on the ground in the same way that the Harrier is now doing?".

No, it has a gun which the Harrier does not but no rockets which the Harrier does.

As the Tornado has been in theatre for some years I imagine its serviceablity will be a known factor.

Did he have an opinion? Anyone can ask a question.

I read the same editorial yesterday, and was all ready to start a thread almost exactly like this one. However, having re-read the article, and thought about the Herrick Misreps I read last month I would say that it is very clear that the AFM editor is writing from a Lay point of view - which is how it should be. Leave the worrying to those who know the ins and outs, and write some more about the 'phoon! :}

Poor journalism
 

More to do with the fact that so few of the pertinent questions relating to the deployment of Tornado to Herrick were answered at the Crown Condor Press Day last month that the attending journalists left with few facts, just the PR spiel and wondering what was really going on.

The Crown Condor press day gave an excellent insight into the operations, capabilities and plans for the Swedish Gripen fleet.

As a platform for the Tornado, for Shiny Twelve, and the RAF, however, it was an embarrassingly shocking farce. The RAF looked as though it had been given a PR makeover by the best of New Labour's spin doctors.

Mark Lancaster MP - Questions in da house!
 

Somebody is on a mission. Hansard details a series of very telling questions being tabled by Mark Lancaster MP (Milton Keynes!) on why Tornado should be replacing Harrier, the answers to which, if answerd honestly would result in Harrier's extension on the Op:

:D
18
N Mr Mark Lancaster (North East Milton Keynes): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what estimate he has made of the anticipated cost of urgent operational requirements for the Tornado aircraft in order to meet theatre entry requirements for Afghanistan.(235904)
19
N Mr Mark Lancaster (North East Milton Keynes): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, when the Harrier aircraft is due to be withdrawn from Afghanistan.(235905)
20
N Mr Mark Lancaster (North East Milton Keynes): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether Harrier will be subject to a programme review in 2009 if it is withdrawn from Afghanistan (a) before and (b) after 1st April 2009.(236193)
21
N Mr Mark Lancaster (North East Milton Keynes): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, for what reasons the Harrier force is being withdrawn from Afghanistan.(236194)
22
N Mr Mark Lancaster (North East Milton Keynes): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the technical ground abort rate was for (a) Harrier and (b) Tornado aircraft in (i) operational and (ii) non-operational environments in each of the last five years.

;)


House of Commons website reports scheduled discussion in da house on why Tornado is replacing Harrier (11am 19 Nov) led by Mark Lancaster! The questions are not those of a layman but those of someone in the know.

Who is feeding him the questions and the argument?

The AFM editor is also adding to the debate but can't possibly be coming to these conclusions without assistance.

Somebody is pulling strings and we demand to know who and why.

Q20 is a bit naughty. As is whoever is feeding him the questions - did they ever track down the individual (I believe from the 5th floor) who was feeding lines, photocopied documents etc to the Daily Telegraph around about this time last year?

IMHO Mr Lancasters Q21 is the most pertinent question. Shame he is not asking, for example, how many Harrier crews are fully qualified, and current, to undertake carrier operations. If you don't have the crews qualified to fly off the decks why have carriers in the first place? I'm sure the answer would come back as 100% qualified but I suspect that would be more spin, smoke and mirrors etc.

Where is our well informed HARRIERPILOTWALT (or whatever he called himself) when you need an answer!

Is not a more pertinent question why the Typhoon is not ready yet for the role?

"The Crown Condor press day gave an excellent insight into the operations, capabilities and plans for the Swedish Gripen fleet.

As a platform for the Tornado, for Shiny Twelve, and the RAF, however, it was an embarrassingly shocking farce. The RAF looked as though it had been given a PR makeover by the best of New Labour's spin doctors"

Ouch! Well Jacko, as I was there (on the Ex CC Media Team) I'll have to take that one as a direct hit. I didn't think it was that bad at all!

There was one bright spot - one PR minder who went the extra mile to try to respond to the needs of the journos. If Toddington Ted is Squadron Leader C****** P******n, then he needs to take a bow.

But I hope that I never again talk to an RAF pilot or nav who answers an innocuous question with a half relevant pre-prepared piece of PR (party line) spin.

Aircrew don't need to be pre-prepared in this way - they have the sense not to talk about tactics or parametrics, and the caution to avoid talking about problems to unknown journos. But a little bit of bias in favour of their own unit/type/community (and gentle teasing of Harriers and Harrier mates) is what we expect and appreciate - since its a reflection of their confidence, esprit de corps and unit pride.

Jacko

I'm the same rank but not he, although he kindly asked me to attend to assist with the training (we were on Herrick together). I have to say that I do not disagree with you entirely as "spin" should not be our aim on this, or any occasion and its regrettable if it comes across as such. Enough said from me.

The PR types there on the day were by no means the cause of the fundamental problems, and were, I'm sure, as keen as the journos to promote the RAF's interests. Now that I know who you were (elimination) I know that I thanked you, and I meant it.

Sooooo.....

Back to the question.....is the Tornado up to it?

Jacko - I could tell you who TT is, but I'd have to kill you afterwards...however, TT is easily recognised as the tall slim one with the debonair looks, a sort of cross between Roger Moore and Daniel Craig with a touch of Roger Lazenby :}

TT - 30 years ago tomorrow I passed Grading at Roborough :ok:

sooms/LooseArticle

seems to be some stuff on this now at:

Hansard - Commons | Houses of Parliament

haven't had time to read it all yet, but seems to be to do with the same thing as questions above

Wrathmonk - perhaps the Harrier Mates can now get back to carrier work and back up to speed. They have been concentrating on Afghan for too long now. The USMC is doing the same thing - remembering that they should be afloat - so are going back to carrier work so they don't forget - fight a war, not the war. I have no problem that most guys are probably not carrier-current, but can be.