sidon55 said:I thought the Shar was de-throned years ago by the mullahs
Magic_Mushroom said:New to Rum Ration and congrats to all on getting it up and running.
Sad to see however the same old parochial willy waving going on as found in ARRSE and PPRUNE, and I say that with no particular criticism of any service, we're all as bad as one another.
In truth, we should all stop trying to score petty points, grow up and start embracing Jointery if we are to get the best for our respective services from that real enemy, the Treasury.
Both your service and my own (the RAF) have a world wide capability and are capable of projecting our influence considerably beyond our ships or air bases. To suggest otherwise is to ignore the proven capabilities of the UK armed forces. However, all 3 services complement one another and maritime and land based air power are a particularly good example of this.
You are not constrained by host nation support issues and can sometimes move out of bad weather (eg the Adriatic during the 90s) or reposition tactically. However, naval aviation can never go to war with the full range of combat support assets (eg AWACS, AR, SIGINT). Even the USN CVN CAGs rely upon the USAF or coalition allies for such support (eg Afghanistan, TELIC). In contrast, to land based air, we clearly need host nation support but air bases can generaly support higher sortie rates for longer and with the full variety of combat and combat support assets. I could mention numerous other pros and cons for both maritime and land-based air, but that misses the essential point that we are each complimentary.
Similarly, there seems little point in discussing early joint Harrier deployments, just as there is little point in me raising the poor awareness of the FAA in non-'Blue Water' ops of 10 or 20 years ago. That's ancient history and we've all moved on from there. JFH is a credible and proven capability which (IMHO) is benefitting both services.
Whilst few RAF Harrier personnel relish the chance of deploying to sea, there are few of their FAA colleagues who relish deploying to the Afghan desert on a regular basis. However, we are learning much about working in the littoral, and your crews are being exposed to ops in Afghanistan which they would not otherwise have been. As far as 'voting with their feet' comments, the RAF Harrier force remains the most sought after posting for RAF FJ pilots and from my experience their morale is excellent. What morale problems exist tend to be related to the current high op tempo rather than the requirement to conduct deployments to the CVS (which they're not doing much of currently due to Afghanistan).
May I suggest therefore, that petty back biting serves neither service. The RAF and RN comprehensively succeded in each shooting the others feet off in the 60s with the RAFs obstruction of CVA01 and Mountbatten's undermining of the TSR2 (to name but two examples). Let's avoid making similar mistakes in the next decade.
Jointery is the future whether you like it or not. I believe it's a positive move and even if it isn't, we have to make the most of it because that's what the UK can afford.
So let's work together. I sincerely hope you guys get 2 CVF with a credible CAG of F-35B and a decent C2/ASaC/ASuW capability. Likewise, that should be complemented nicely by our Typhoon, F-35B (CVF deployable when required), A330 tankers and updated AWACS, SIGINT, ASTOR fleets etc.
But if we fight one another with half truths and one-upmanship, we'll both loose.
3) GR9 may look good but does it have a radar like the AV-8B Harrier II Plus and does it have AMRAAMS?
jesse650 said:ahhhhhhh, fast jets.......sam anyone? or even, dare I suggest it CIWS? await incoming