Originally Posted by Chinny Crewman
(Post 10053308)
With 4 months to go before he announced it I'm sure he would have known it was on the cards! History will judge him on how the country shapes up post Brexit but for now he is looking like one of if not the worst post war PM.
Only months later we were tanking Tornados from a secret base in East Anglia all the way to Lybia and back every night, instead of having Jumping Beans on alert 20 miles off shore. |
Originally Posted by Mogwi
(Post 10053762)
I am reliably informed that the decision to chop Harrier vice Tornado was made by CAS only 3 days before the anouncement.
PDR |
you have to remember the backdrop to the 2010 SDSR, the country was broke and on the verge of bankruptcy. There were no "nice to haves", that's why Nimrod, Harrier, Cottesmore, Leuchars all went.
Doesn't make it any more palatable, but it was probably the only course of action back then. |
Originally Posted by andrewn
(Post 10053820)
you have to remember the backdrop to the 2010 SDSR, the country was broke and on the verge of bankruptcy. There were no "nice to haves", that's why Nimrod, Harrier, Cottesmore, Leuchars all went.
Doesn't make it any more palatable, but it was probably the only course of action back then. |
In hindsight, have they been proven correct though?
Could the Harrier Force (down to less than 60 airframes and two front line Squadrons) have been able to carry out operations in Libya and Afghanistan at the same time? Maritime currency had been lost whilst the HF was committed to Afghanistan and was only just being regained. The Tornado had already taken over the Herrick deployment. Realistically, how many Harriers could you have deployed to a carrier off Libya? There were 16 Tornados deployed to Italy, as well as operations from the UK . Neither Harrier nor Typhoon could carry Storm Shadow at that time, so the stand off strikes would have been impossible, same for Brimstone. How many times in the last 8 years have we been unable to do something because of a lack of ship board fast jet capability? Harrier would have been a useful additional capability, but if they had to axe one type, I think they made the right decision. Maybe it was a gamble, but in this case I think they got lucky. |
Originally Posted by Davef68
(Post 10053850)
In hindsight, have they been proven correct though?
Could the Harrier Force (down to less than 60 airframes and two front line Squadrons) have been able to carry out operations in Libya and Afghanistan at the same time? Maritime currency had been lost whilst the HF was committed to Afghanistan and was only just being regained. Neither Harrier nor Typhoon could carry Storm Shadow at that time, so the stand off strikes would have been impossible Because, of course, Gerald had been lied to by that centre of excellence for Mendacity and political B/S, Dr Fox. It seems that his lies still persist... PDR |
Cottesmore, Leuchars all went |
Pegasus,
Whats’s your point? They were no longer operational flying stations and therefore Air did not pick up the bill for them. That means savings on fire, medical, ATC, radar and comms coverage as well as lower infra maintenance costs for the HASs and hangars. Although the Army picked up the routine running costs (as you rightly say, the bases stayed in MOD ownership), they were already committed to the garrison costs for the units that went into both Leuchars and Cottesmore. Units that had to be housed somewhere (I think they were returning from Germany) so there WAS a significant saving to MOD. As for Harrier carrying Storm Shadow, PDR, it’s all very well having some piccys of a jet carrying drill weapons, but did Harrier have the RTS to carry, fire and jettison the live weapon? Did it have the mission planning tool, the on-board software, the pylons and the test equipment? Were the aircrew and groundcrew trained and have 7 years of experience with loading, flying with, firing, downloading and dealing with weapon misfires? Did it have the same combat radius with the weapon as Tornado did, or did the carrier, (if you presume that it would be used aboard) have the magazine, the lifts, the procedures to handle the weapon? And was Harrier cleared to use the ski-jump with the weapon? Did it have all of the bring-back trials completed and cleared? Maybe Fox wasn’t such a liar after all.... It’s a little pointless trying to re-fight a battle that was decided 8 years ago. But having been there at the time, please do not think that this decision was the work of a single mendacious individual. Lots of debate was had, with various degrees of impartiality, by people who were honestly trying to do their best for Defence at a difficult time. To reduce it to accusations of simple bias and ignorance is purile. |
Originally Posted by NutLoose
(Post 10049375)
Simple, they do not buy everyone else's crap, the French buy and operate French aircraft.
Which is what I said earlier, start buying the likes of US aircraft at the detriment to you're home built product and your industry must shrink as orders dry up and you lose the technology battle... Happened Civi wise with the UK airlines buying 707 and the Governments misshanding over the Tridents technical data by gifting it to Boeing thus solving Boeings intake issues and allowing the 727 to flood the markets. .. Now with BAe decimating it's blue collar workforce you have a company staffed with clever suits and PC's [and all working to process of course].. |
Originally Posted by Vendee
(Post 9885231)
I beg to differ. I work on them daily. The airframes are in relatively good condition and they have fairly low airframe hours. They don't actually fly a lot these days.
|
Originally Posted by glad rag
(Post 10053994)
I was trying to work out how they could be "worn out" unless boing have a cunning plan....:uhoh:
|
Originally Posted by Red Line Entry
(Post 10053922)
As for Harrier carrying Storm Shadow, PDR, it’s all very well having some piccys of a jet carrying drill weapons, but did Harrier have the RTS to carry, fire and jettison the live weapon?
PDR |
Pretty sure it was never in the RTS. And the idea of flying with one and a cbu/540 on the other sideas ballast was barking. And it barely fit!
|
Crown Jewel Giveaways.
Ministers did what seemed a good idea at the time. - Whittles to US (and radar and more...) In1940/41 UK needed US industry for 2 reasons: to wean US from isolationism towards our side, denying kit to the Axis; and to supplement Home industry, being bombed. Step 1 was the Lend/Lease Act, 3/41; Step 2 was US/UK Patent Interchange Agreement, 24/8/42, which deferred royalty/licence fees while we did other things. All of this was settled in US Reconstruction Loan to UK, 15/7/46, $3.75Bn (cleared 5/07). That extinguished charges from US-UK Lend/Lease, Reverse Lend/Lease, UK-US and the Patent Agreement. J.M.Keynes led the negotiation for UK. The sum taken into the deal for Whittles to GE/Allison was $800K. - Derwent/Nene to USSR. Before the 7/46 Loan, UK was broke. £ was Exchange Controlled (and would remain so to 24/10/79!). Few Nations cared to sell to us except for $ and we had none. Canada gave us a C$ Loan parallel to US', used for timber (and for BOAC's C-4M Argonaut airframes). What could we sell/barter? Ah: Aero! Our Prime Customer for some years was that nice J.Peron, who bartered Fray Bentos corned beef 5/47 for 100 Meteor F.4 and Lincolns and lots more. We did not fear reverse engineering there, to undercut us with Third Parties, but we did with our valiant Ally's request for Derwents, Nenes and Meteors. So 10/46 we bartered Ukraine wheat and timber for 10 each engines (3/47 to total 30 Derwent/25 Nene: $600K). These centrifugal engines 11/47 were moved from Unclassified to Restricted after Uncle Joe was seen no longer to be our valiant Ally. - F-111K/East of Suez Withdrawal. F-111K was cancelled after £ collapsed again, and Ministers chose to permit petro-economies/emerging Tigers to spend their own money on their own defence. |
Originally Posted by PDR1
(Post 10053858)
Huh? The Harrier deployment to Afghanistan was 8 aircraft (a mission requirement for six plus two attrition spares). Eight aircraft from a total of four front-line squadrons. How could that lead to a "loss of marritime currency"?
To quote Lt Cmdr James Blackmore , just a few days before the axe fell: OVER THE PAST 12 months we have started a period of regeneration where the force focuses on regaining many of the skills that were put on the backburner. For example, Night Low Level Flying, consolidated periods on board the CVS and Operational Low Level Flying at 100ft to name but a few. When searching for the above, I also found this, which gives a good outline of the situation - the part on the comments on the resources needed to sustain an 8 aircraft deployment for a year https://thinpinstripedline.********....rawing+harrier Missing part is pprune's refusal to link to blog s p o t In an ideal world we would have kept both Harrier and Tornado, especially after the GR9 update, as they offered different capabilities, Storm Shadow as a Harrier capability had been cancelled aorund 2003/4 if my memory is bearing up. Something to do with weight constraints on VL on carriers. Torndado could use it for Land ops. |
Originally Posted by downsizer
(Post 10054030)
Pretty sure it was never in the RTS. And the idea of flying with one and a cbu/540 on the other sideas ballast was barking. And it barely fit!
|
Have you ever been in a command role? If so, you would know exactly why he praised those boys and girls - |
Originally Posted by Davef68
(Post 10054154)
In an ideal world we would have kept both Harrier and Tornado, especially after the GR9 update, as they offered different capabilities, Storm Shadow as a Harrier capability had been cancelled aorund 2003/4 if my memory is bearing up. Something to do with weight constraints on VL on carriers. Torndado could use it for Land ops. Harrier was indeed a fine aircraft but it simply did not poses the flexibility and capabilities that the GR4 did and still has. |
PDR
If I recall correctly the Cap D was for Brimstone integration? The Harrier integration of SS was to be on the inboard pylons - the same ones used for the big fuel tanks? There were worries about vibration and thermal damage from the nozzles. Whilst it was doubtful if Harrier could take a pair of SSs off of a short CVS with a ski jump with the required EW Countermeasures and air-air weapons, there were more doubts as to whether it could bring them back on board (they are expensive and we don’t want to throw them away so that others can round them up off of the sea bed!). Anyhow, the carriage of SS on Harrier had been pushed back on so many occasions due to the expense required that even if we had kept it over Tornado then SS probably would not have been integrated before OSD and the arrival of Lightning in 2018. The ground fitment trials were as far as it ever got and there was a long and expensive road ahead, due to a number of issues, that meant it probably only ever sat upon a dream sheet along with some photos of the dummies on a jet. |
Thanks Tornadoken - I'd forgotten just how strapped we were for cash immediately after WW2
Winning both WW's really finished us of economically................... |
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:36. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.