Navy Net - Royal Navy Community

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

Disband the RAF?

I suspect you'll find they had a degree in "systems engineering", could find no "requirement" for strafing troops (not quite transformational enough, not to mention against their human rights) and had a picture of a "high-tech" USAF B2 on their wall.

As someone who does have a degree in ship construction, I would add that I'd put guns in everything given the chance. Preferably 16" 50 calibre in multiple turrets.......
 
Dunno about that but I do remember when they were building the T21's and their infamous aluminium superstructure.

We highlighted the fact that in the event of a major fire there could be serious problems but were told to hush "You know nothing of ships construction chief"

So all that time I spent in training learning ships construction and ships stability calculations etc - I must have dreamed ! Not to mention the properties of metals - including melting point - or am I just twitter and bisted now ?
 
ThePunisher said:
RAF has already been cut to the bone; at any one time, only half the RAF's jets can fly. They have to use the other half for spare parts. Robbing Peter to pay Paul.
The RAF, like the rest of the Armed Forces, somehow manage to turn out some of the best people in the world at their prticular speciality - in spite of being shafted by the MoD and the Treasury.


Ah at long last you lot have caught up with the rest of us, the only thing that kept the old Ark going for so long was the Eagle and after the Ark was decommissioned she kept the type 12`s going.
All this is seventies vintage.
 
Not_a_boffin said:
No mate, you're bang on. Chap who told you that was probably either Royal Corps and intent on being transformational as well, or worked for Thorneycroft and had no other way of making their commercial off-the-shelf design work. Unfortunately, they'd designed and started the 21's before they found out what could happen........

http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/04012605.jpg


Oh so very nice of them, at long last they have got something useful to do (sic) but don’t hold your breath your `beckhamships` I doubt that they will turn up on time or even turn up at all!
 
I am in agreement increase defence spending at the same rate of NHS spending paid for by cutting civil servants . Disband the crabs procure carrier capaple aircraft for land and carrier ops on new class of v big carrier with increased defense budget . helos to the pongoes and the heavy lift , refueling and transport to be transfered to the same initial as the crabs the RFA all sorted apart a new border defence force will have to work on that . Oh hold on the RAF Reg can do that as we will still have the same politicians so we need a guard of honour to welcome any illegal immigrants
 
flatbackpinky said:
I am in agreement increase defence spending at the same rate of NHS spending paid for by cutting civil servants . Disband the crabs procure carrier capaple aircraft for land and carrier ops on new class of v big carrier with increased defense budget . helos to the pongoes and the heavy lift , refueling and transport to be transfered to the same initial as the crabs the RFA all sorted apart a new border defence force will have to work on that . Oh hold on the RAF Reg can do that as we will still have the same politicians so we need a guard of honour to welcome any illegal immigrants

WE could do that by reintroducing conscription and conscripting people into the public sector. Then we could introduce weekly pocket money of fifteen shillings for all public sector workers (including service personnel) and invest the money saved on submarines. :twisted:
 
"On a serious note though I personaly think that The best thing would be as follows.

Keep the RAF, but take all of their helicopter capability from them. Give the helo's to the FAA (they are the only ones who know how to operate the damn things in rough weather). Take fast jets from FAA and leave the RAF to play with them and the troop transports."

... But the problem is that the crabs dont want to go to sea! It was one of the reasons why Inskip gave the FAA back to the RN.
 
Up until those words left his mouth, I had a lot of regard for yer man Collins. Just because the 1st World War was a long time ago and a few of the IGS weren't overly bright, it does not mean that the likes of Smuts, Sykes and Trenchard were idiots. It was recognised then that the air battle space and its exploitation was totally different to land or sea warfare.

Nothing has changed in the meantime and the execution and outcome of the 2nd World War may have been different without the RAF. The Americans soon learned the lesson and formed the USAF. Arguably, Fritz lost the War because the Lufwaffe was an element of the Army. If you let an Army run an Air Force, its needs will always be dictated by what non aviators think they can get away with and forever being squandered as mobile artillery.

An Air Force run by a Navy would be slightly more efficient but, there again, the Navy views an aeroplane as just another gun, missile or torpedo. Naval air power in the Falklands do was not used to the best advantage because Sandy Woodward had a submariner's mind set. Interestingly, his boss, John Fieldhouse was also a submariner. Sharkey Ward records in his book (and, OK, he slags off the RAF as well) that 800 Sqn were used to even less best advantage to his own by virtue of being in the Flagship.

The Air Force, the oldest in the World, attracts people that may not otherwise join either the Navy or the Army (and too much jointery will sod that up as well). They have pride in their own Service and they are brilliant at what they do. Let’s learn from the Canadians and leave things alone.
 
With regard to the gun on the Typhoon: the design change must have been requested by the customer,,,,oooops.....asa cost cutting idea.And using flat tops to replace the air force....ummm let's see that gives all of 30 possibly operational a/c MAX
 
I think you'll find that 30 a/c is more tacair than the crabs have operational in theatre worldwide (as opposed to sitting in UK training / recovering post op tour) at the minute. 6-12 Tonkas in Iraq/Gulf, 6 GR7 in the Stan and the 4 F3s down south. (Happy to be corrected with better info..)

The real issue is whether future tacair should ever be procured without being carrier compatible. Performance is not an issue (provided we buy a proper carrier with cat n trap) as your average carrier aircraft F14, F18, Rafale etc is just as capable as its land-based equivalent. Whether our light-blue brethren would ever put up with regular ship-based deployments is another issue and thats where we need to think about expanding the F/W FAA.
 

Latest Threads

Top