|
THE RAF is under fire for blowing nearly £2 million to take part in an air show in Ma
RAF hit by £2m bill row | The Sun |News|Campaigns|Our Boys
So easy to pick holes, wonder if they will get any sales which is the main reason they displayed.. |
That's a bit rich, when the hypocrites in the house of con men are still troughing on subsidised food and drink:*
|
To be honest, it's just a leftie politico and a retired guardsman having a pop. I won't start taking it seriously until I hear it from the Bearded Idiot.
|
Out of interest what are the operating costs of these aircraft and their support over the period if they simply stayed in the UK and operated as normal ?
In other words is the cost of the detachment really 2 mil or 2 mil minus above mentioned costs? Bit confusing I know. |
I don't think £1.85 mil is too bad considering how much money has been wasted on countless other white elephant schemes by some of our previous governments. In fact, as the RAF has had a pay freeze for so long (which effectively amounts to a pay cut in real terms) it's about time they had some perks.
I hope the girls and boys who went on this little trip had a jolly good time, they deserve it. Posted from Pprune.org App for Android |
Perhaps one of the biggest costs was the hiring of another country's tankers.
|
Sending 4 jets to an air show can be easily justified. What is criminal is sending 100 maintainers to look after 4 aircraft ! An outrageous waste of money. I'd love to see the business case for that one.
|
Perhaps one of the biggest costs was the hiring of another country's tankers. https://www.mcce-mil.com/ We trailed their (Italian) Tornados to South Africa a few years ago. |
Surely this must only be the bill for the hotels alone!
|
Sending 4 jets to an air show can be easily justified. What is criminal is sending 100 maintainers to look after 4 aircraft ! An outrageous waste of money. I'd love to see the business case for that one. |
Not really, it comes out of a 'pot' of hours via the MCCE European Agreement. One hears a rumour that the RTB could have been supported by a TriShaw, but that the reliability of the old beasts is nowadays so poor that pressure was brought to bear to ensure that the KC-767I was also used to support the recovery, so that the Typhoons could be reasonably sure of getting back on the planned date....:rolleyes: Still, at least the Italian air force actually has a 21st century tanker which can support its own front-line fighter deployments. As does Japan, Germany, Canada...... |
What is criminal is sending 100 maintainers to look after 4 aircraft |
Quote:What is criminal is sending 100 maintainers to look after 4 aircraft Probably 20 maintainers with the rest made up of 'Klingons' from Air Command to ensure no one paid more than 1 Ringgit too much on a curry :rolleyes: |
No one should expect such a rag to aim for balance or, indeed, total accuracy with any such reports. Have a look at this old link about the article's author - I think you'll agree that he's exactly the kind of upstanding member of society we want to have making reports about our armed forces....
Sun royal editor Duncan Larcombe held in 'illegal payment' raids - Telegraph. |
Sending 4 jets to an air show can be easily justified. What is criminal is sending 100 maintainers to look after 4 aircraft ! An outrageous waste of money. I'd love to see the business case for that one.
.......... and a pre planned exercise! You have no idea what it takes to maintain jets a long way from home, 100 sounds about right. Seadrills, one could argue a navy warship only has one steering wheel so why all the other 'hangers on':rolleyes: |
The RAF has a number of roles, and one is an expeditionary force, able to deploy and operate across the world.
Sending four aircraft to Malaysia seems like a great opportunity to work up many of the skills specific to expeditionary operations - and while sending 100 maintainers may seem like overkill, their training matters just as much as for the two-winged master race. Think through all the aspects of the task and you'll find that it probably was pretty cheap and will have tested quite important bits of the system. But that won't interest a journo with a political axe to grind ;) |
I completely agree with AA, foreign land-aways, and trails in particular are great training and if we aspire to having a expeditionary capability then we need the practice.
I do, however, suspect that the maintenance side of the house did not number 100, for if it had - it might be viewed as a little inefficient. The point about warships is worth exploring. I remember being alongside in a Type 42 with a gun, sea dart and a helo. Next to us was an Israeli Sa'ar class with Harpoon, Oto Melara, Gabriel, CIWS and more HMG than you could count. We had circa 300 on board - I think they had 60! I'm pretty sure our helo had about 8 chaps to mend it, not the 240 this might suggest. Have a good Sunday all. |
Seems perfectly reasonable to me - we'd spend the money on the crew in Leuchars or Malaysia, so the only difference is the T&S.
The Typhoon is an exceptionally capable aircraft which seems to stand a very reasonable chance of success at a number of export prospects, including Malaysia, and the value of which would massively dwarf the minor cost of T&S for the exercise. Its also worth remembering that its a bloody complicated aircraft, and that actually 100 people to support what is a complex bit of kit, presumably during 24/7 conditions at times, doesnt seem to be that bad to me. |
Here's a question.
If one is going on a 'sales orientated' detachment, do you take the troops you ordinarily would or do you over egg the maintenance slightly? Just thinking out loud - but if someone tried to sell you a wonder toy but appeared to require a lot of support then maybe you would ask questions. But then if you were selling one you would want all bases covered - just in case. |
The det would not have nearly 100 engineers. Having trailed with the Typhoons many times with 4 -6 a aircraft we took on average 18 Typhoon engineers. The exercise was designed to test many areas including;
1(Fighter) Squadron, based at RAF Leuchars, have been flying Close Air Support (CAS) training missions in Malaysia, working in conjunction with RAF Regiment Joint Tactical Air Controllers (JTACs), to further develop Typhoon Multi-Role capability. The JTACs – who provide a critical link between air assets and those units requiring air support on the ground – forward deployed to the Cameron Highland Mountains in the centre of the Malaysian peninsula. Having carried out a thorough reconnaissance of the area, the JTACs from RAF Honington’s Air Land Integration Cell and 16 Air Assault Brigade took up positions deep in the jungle, from where they could provide accurate control to the 1(F) Squadron pilots. The tropical terrain provides the Typhoon pilots from 1(F) Squadron and their ground-based colleagues with a rare opportunity to practice their skills in a difficult and complex jungle environment. I'm guessing total det was roughly 100 personnel. Edited to link to direct quote for P. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 00:27. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.