tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post7802809124174438933..comments2024-02-29T11:45:01.870+01:00Comments on UK Armed Forces Commentary: Written Answers and news of interestGabrielehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-80133054083732114402011-09-09T20:28:23.174+02:002011-09-09T20:28:23.174+02:0080 F35s would already have me jumping all over the...80 F35s would already have me jumping all over the place for the joy...!<br /><br />But for the future, RAF or not, PLEASE, let's buy ONE fleet of planes and ONE fleet of UCAS/UAVs, which can work on carriers. <br /><br />Look at the Apache, and how useful it proves to be able to work ashore and at sea. <br />It really should be done with other platforms too. At least, whenever and wherever they are needed, they'll be able to deploy.Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-24644503130403830132011-09-09T18:34:56.548+02:002011-09-09T18:34:56.548+02:00Hi Gabriele,
Thanks for your reply.
Lets hope they...Hi Gabriele,<br />Thanks for your reply.<br />Lets hope they have the money for 'about a 100' F35C's. It would be nice to have another sqn, even if it was an another OCU/reserve one!<br />But I think you are correct in thinking the fleet number will be around 80.<br />As you say, we should no more on how things are looking on the order front later this month.<br />Lets hope for some good news, on P8's, F35's, the carriers, and hopefully not to much bad news about the army.<br />Regards<br />PhilAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-68665255919496643172011-09-08T22:34:37.378+02:002011-09-08T22:34:37.378+02:00Despite the apparent crazyness, the 96 Tornado fle...Despite the apparent crazyness, the 96 Tornado fleet, 5 squadrons plus OCU and 18 Force Elements at readiness is the plan that was announced, more than once, post SDSR. <br />136 have been maintaining in the last few years 40 force elements at readiness, a ratio of 0,294. <br />Now, a smaller fleet of aging planes is planned to maintain 18 FEaR, ratio 0,187. Which is not so amazing, once you compare the data. <br /><br />But availability of the airframe is not the whole thing, i believe. A bit more could probably be done. Personnel has a big part in that, so the reduction in Force Elements at readiness is effectively a choice, for keeping cost low, by financing readiness only in a limited numbers of planes and associated deployable support. <br /><br />It is to be expected/hoped that in (relatively) short time, a further share of planes would be deployable. <br /><br />A few years ago (2005 i believe), the requirement (Tornado + Harrier) was for 64 Strike planes at readiness. <br /><br />Like with everything else, you can truly see the reduction... <br />And it will decrease further, in the 2017/18 period, i'm guessing (unless further cuts speed up the phasing out) as the F35 starts entering service. <br /><br />The "80 planes" carrier fleet plan that's been around at least since 2005 despite the "150" and "138" figures, called for 4 operational squadrons of 12 plus an OCU of 14, for 62 active planes, with the remaining 18 airplanes to be spares/rotational airframes.Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-6970820946470179382011-09-08T20:55:16.025+02:002011-09-08T20:55:16.025+02:00Hi Gabriele,
"Elements at readiness to 18, b...Hi Gabriele,<br /><br />"Elements at readiness to 18, but retaining a total fleet of 96 planes in five squadrons plus OCU at least until around"<br />96 air frames equals 18 operational aircraft?<br />That is crazy!<br />I would suggest that, 2 operational sqns of 12, with an OCU/reserve sqn of 18, with a further 12 air frames in the workshop, would be more than enough to maintain a strike capilbilty?<br />I the watched select com interview, in which the RAF said air frame life was good on the Tornado and not a problem?<br />It would be nice to replace the Tornado in similar numbers with the F35, 24 opertaional RN FAA, 24 operational RAF, and a joint 18 OCU/reserve. Giving a total of 48 operational aircraft, with a further 18 in reserve which could provide a further operational sqn if required. The rest of the fleet it seems would be in the workshop? <br /><br />Regards<br />PhilAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-4067653753960940792011-09-07T19:14:00.035+02:002011-09-07T19:14:00.035+02:00Honestly, i don't know how the cuts are to be ...Honestly, i don't know how the cuts are to be rolled out. <br /><br />Basically, in terms of manpower, we have 692 men in each Commando group. <br /><br />Fleet Protection is at least as big, with:<br /><br />HQ (including boat squadron), <br />O Rifle Squadron<br />R Rifle Squadron<br />S Rifle Squadron<br />P Squadron Royal Navy (a sub-unit created in 2010 comprising 145 Royal Navy personnel charged with protecting RFA ships, Mine warfare ships and MOD-owned ferries transiting dangerous waters, such as the Gulf)<br /><br />The RN put the cut in these terms in the briefing it released to personnel post SDSR: <br /><br />"Government decisions mean there will be a reduction of around 600 in Corps numbers, but in the period covered by the review there will be no changes to RM combat units involved in Afghanistan. This is a reduction in the number of billets over a five year period and is likely to be met through application of normal manning levers (e.g. natural wastage, recruiting fewer people, stopping extensions of service, PVRs, medical and other discharges). At this stage it is not clear whether redundancies will be required." <br /><br />So the cut should not involve deletion of units, even the "newcomer" P Squadron, which is anyway son of operational reality, and indeed we could well say that it should be expanded. <br />Units will probably be a bit more lean manned, and supporting posts will be lost, along with possibly personnel of the famous Royal Marines Bands and all that. <br /><br />I also have to express huge doubts about the feasibility of removal of the RM company from SOF force, when Special Forces and related activities are one of the very few things that were spared/expanded, and because the press, and furthermore the US, would protest very loudly at any reduction in the force of the UK's Special Forces, the one thing that, possibly, the US value the most in the UK's capabilities.Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-80946566524269194462011-09-07T18:49:58.381+02:002011-09-07T18:49:58.381+02:00Hi Gabriele,
How can a cut of 650 from the RM str...Hi Gabriele,<br /><br />How can a cut of 650 from the RM strength not be a unit? Sorry but I can't see how you can cut 650 from the fleet protection force alone? But I can't find a breakdown of the RM strength by numbers. We must be missing somthing? I have heard that the RM company in the special forces support group was being withdrawn. That would have a strength of about 150?<br /><br />Regards<br />PhilAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com