RAF launches dogfight for control of navy’s aircraft

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by chieftiff, Dec 21, 2008.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. chieftiff

    chieftiff War Hero Moderator

    Well this doesn't seem to have been done yet, slight twist on last week's story:

    From the Times' Mick Smith:

    "The RAF is trying to take over the Royal Navy’s historic Fleet Air Arm and assume control of all army helicopters in a plan to cut more than £1 billion from the defence budget.

    The navy clashed with the air force at a meeting of senior officials last week. Its admirals are furious about a campaign, waged under the slogan “one nation, one air force†which would see the Fleet Air Arm scrapped in 2013, a few months before its centenary."

    The Times
  2. Seaweed

    Seaweed War Hero Book Reviewer

    I hope someone has the balls to point out that a carrier's Air Group is its main armament and the ship is hardly likely to retain any high state of training on a basis of casual visits at infrequent intervals.

    Also Crabs don't understand that the ship isn't just a cross between an airfield and an hotel, and that air and ground crews need to see themselves, when embarked, as full players in the ship's activities. Do your best, folks, to crock the Crabs at deck hockey.

    First point also applies to amphib ships and their embarked booties!
  3. So does that mean the Carriers will be scrapped? Don`t hold your breath.
    And who will run the Flight Deck? Crabs on a part time basis?

  4. Isn't it the FAA centenary next year 2009!!!!!! :thumright:

    All the FLY NAVY 100 PR on RN website etc.

    Anyway FCUK the crabs :thumright: :thumright:
  5. Well spotted. :thumright:

    And endorse your last comment.

    Fcuk the Crabs. :thumright: :thumright:
  6. It's 100 since the birth of the RNAS, not the FAA.
  7. There's the Royal Navy/Royal Marines, the Army and yes that other lot says he racking his brains, oh yes the Royal Air Force.
  8. What's happening with the Merlin/Sea king if this crap goes ahead?
  9. The crabs are a f*cking joke. I think the generals and admirals should get the RAF scrapped, they are a waste of time and money. Is this seriously going to happen?.
  10. Was never a wafu and know little about air stuff but have to agree with our wrong-rule uckers playing shipmates.

    Leave it to the Senior Service and pongos.

  11. The RAF are clutching at straws, they are outnumbered by the generals and admirals, who will block this anyway. They also know that their service is not unique, i.e. the Fleet Air Arm and AAC carry out their functoin, (far more effectively in most cases). I believe the current chief of the army wears wings on his uniform, no idea whether that is becasue he is para or AAC pilot, but my bet is that he will tell those overweight lazy light blues to go take a running jump.
  12. They're pilot wings. They would not be on his chest if they were para wings. Apart from sneaky beaky para wings.

    This will not happen, too much opposition. The RAF was however called a 'hundred year experiment', and the hundred year mark is fast approaching. Time will tell chaps and chapesses, time will tell.
  13. FAA
    - Carrier borne Fighter & Bomber - because it is all about force projection with a capability for doing so without host nation support if necessary
    - ASW/organic air - essential part of the FF/DD weapons fit
    - Troop deployment (esp RM but also SF) - because most of the time it is insertion from sea - power projection/littoral warfare again!

    - Attack helos
    - Tactical heavy lift
    - Medevac

    - AEW/Nimrod - should be FAA in my opinion, they spend most of their time over the sea anyway!
    - Transport - could go to AAC (or semi-commercial even like the green and white transport ships (Hurst Point, Anvil Point etc!!!!)
    - SAR - all of it should go to the Coastguard (yes even the RN bit)

    What does that leave the RAF? The RAF Regiment - well FFS they're soldiers, what are they doing in light blue?

    There is a LOT MORE than £1bn to be saved by trimming the junior service!
  14. Masive savings can be made if the RAF get rid of Chef's, Stewards, Central Band, Make BBMF (Groundcrew) civvy (Like RNHF). That will be a good start.

    Why do they need service sterwards?
    The army can cook for them on Ops?
    No neeed for a dedicated band?
    Money wasting paying service wages for a load of easiliy civilianised groundcrew?
    Scrap 1(F) and 4(AC) Squadrons, form up 800/801 proper, move 20(R) to Cottesmore and rebadge as 899, problem solved. RAF no longer have Harriers to worry about. Spooky how they no longer want the harrier now Afghan is a Tornado det!!!
    Lets see the Harrier mafia moan about that.
  15. Are the RAF trying to kick up a fuss as they think that the £1 billiion will (quite rightly) come from them?
    • Like Like x 1
  16. At the risk of incoming...

    If there is anything in this at all, the RAF are simply doing what the RAF do very well - playing the political game. The RAF understand that you have to fight for slices of the pie in a way in which the Navy Board never really seems to have got its head round - 'Carrier Decision' notwithstanding. This is probably just an opening salvo to protect RAF interests.

    The irony of all this is that the RAF probably is in a better position than the RN (and perhaps even the Army) in being able to take on any tasking across their designated sphere. The Army's capability has been seriously worn down by stretch, whereas the RN cannot even pretend to offer capability in a significant number of areas. The fact that the RAF (love them or hate them) has preserved a good degree of capability is partly down to their senior officers knowing how to operate in Whitehall. The RN equivalents seem like a bunch of amateurs at times.

    If people (quite rightly) want to defend organic maritime air power in the RN then I'd suggest they do so by making the case for it rather than slamming the RAF - which is a considerably more popular service both in Whitehall and the public sphere more generally. Talking about scrapping the RAF in a country obsessed with the Battle of Britain myth is not going to cut any ice with the public or ministers. They also have a tradition of fighting for their own survival which dates back to the 20s and 30s and Hugh Trenchard which is hardwired into them. They are good (to the point - as we all know - of painful inaccuracy) at demonstrating their relevance and usefulness to policymakers. The Navy, traditionally, hasn't been.

    I also find the idea that 1SL has threatened to resign over it unlikely...From what I understand he is not massively swayed by the need to retain the FAA. I have also heard FAA types - serving and retired - frequently say that JFH was phase one in the end of fast jet aviation in the RN, so none of this is a massive surprise. There has been a lot of muddle over who will - in the end - operate F35 but I have heard a few WAFUs say it will be the RAF. And I thought the use of RAF fighter controllers onboard CVF was pretty much taken as read now?
  17. hear, hear..... :thumright:
  18. chieftiff

    chieftiff War Hero Moderator

    Why quite rightly? In fact should the £1Billion come from anywhere? You may remember that the government crowed about this years defence budget proclaiming: "The defence budget has seen the longest period of increased spending in a generation." and "there will be an extra £2Billion to support frontline operation"

    What's happening here is that instead of taking a sharp intake of breath, going away and actively demonstrating that the budget is insufficent by doing some mathematical, political and value analysis the RAF AND RN management have become entrenched in playground politics (which no doubt suits the mandarins just fine!) Instead of showing the schoolboy mentality they should be demonstrating some grown up management, sometimes that involves working together and sometimes it means demonstrating what value you can offer. My own experience of JFH leads me to believe that the RN as an organisation couldn't give a flying feck about the FAA's fixed wing capability in any case, if they do they certainly do a bloody good job of concealing any significant interest beyond the PR they've spun out of NSW's significant involvement in Afghanistan.

    I suspect much of this is just plain old spin and bollox, both services are very aware that the Army are currently untouchable due to their operational tempo and struggling capability (struggling because the conflicts they are involved in were never perceived at the last comprehensive strategic review and therefore aren't financially fulfilled)

    We will see what happens, I also doubt anybody will be resigning over any of this. Defence spending is insufficient across the board but it's not soldiers, sailors and airmen that need to step on the outrage bus, they need to convince joe public that a helicopter in Helmund is better value than another Drug Counsellor in Dover, an Assistant Deputy Head in Berking or an MP's second home in London. Sadly that's unlikely to happen any time soon because joe/jane just doesn't see the connection between terry taliban and the undergound or Glasgow airport - or the millions of pounds of heroin arriving in the Uk, or the completely unacceptable level of corruption in all levels of government in the very countries we seek to help. It's a big picture, bigger than strictly come dancing anyway and that's just too hard to absorb....... I haven't even touched on the power of the Unions in all of this, their bankrolling of the Labour party makes them an influential player in our defence capability (even though they couldn't spell it)
  19. Seaweed wrote............."I hope someone has the balls to point out that a carrier's Air Group is its main armament."
    Quite agree, but to who? this question should be put to naval command, who, under normal circumstances ignore, underestimate, and belittle the FAA, then when one of thier toys is threatend with a takeover bid by the crabs all they can do is tearfully pull out the old resignation ploy. Not only do the simple sailors at the top of the navy tree not deserve a FAA they don't deserve a navy, after all the effort thier men put in to the service they are quite happy let them go down the plughole, whilst they retire on ludicrous golden handshakes and pensions. To be frank I don,t think thier lordships are the least bit interested in aviation, with a far from perfect track record, 1918 lost the RNAS, 1966 lost fixed wing and carriers, 2009 lost the lot, maybe!!
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page