Is This Really The Case? Combat Ready Aircraft
Discussion
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/584461/Royal-Air-...
I know it's The Express and so not the most amazing source, however if the quoted figures are accurate over a third of both Tornados and Typhoons aren't combat ready. I'm aware there will always be aircraft grounded for repairs and various things but that sounds like an awful lot to me.
I know it's The Express and so not the most amazing source, however if the quoted figures are accurate over a third of both Tornados and Typhoons aren't combat ready. I'm aware there will always be aircraft grounded for repairs and various things but that sounds like an awful lot to me.
If St Athan and its servicing facility was still open, the aircraft could have been serviced, it`s been known for a considerable period of time that aircraft have been sitting on the ground for various reasons. I think that defence cuts and the loss of manpower and aircraft has contributed to this.
Despite the lies and spin that Cameron and his team excel at, the only thing you get for less is less.
The next 'review' will herald yet more cuts. It's already confirmed we'll be losing Sentinel. In current times, what a great idea to cut an intell platform. Tornado is on borrowed time.
The Navy is staggering along. Shameful.
The next 'review' will herald yet more cuts. It's already confirmed we'll be losing Sentinel. In current times, what a great idea to cut an intell platform. Tornado is on borrowed time.
The Navy is staggering along. Shameful.
Elroy Blue said:
Despite the lies and spin that Cameron and his team excel at, the only thing you get for less is less.
Must've got the idea from Labour.But really, it's called peacetime and the fact that the public is not interested in anything military apart from Help for Heroes (which is very worthy but a small part of the big picture)
"Combat ready" could mean anything really, there are fleets within fleets across all aircraft types and some have all the modifications/upgrades fitted, others do not as some can only be installed during the longest and most invasive periods of depth maintenance not at the more regular front line maintenance periods. There are a lot of mods for Tornados so I would guess someone has asked the question "How many Tornados have all the mods fitted" and the answer is a third thus they have spun that round to two thirds not being combat ready.
Same for Typhoons, some will have greater capability than others.
Same for Typhoons, some will have greater capability than others.
pablo said:
"Combat ready" could mean anything really, there are fleets within fleets across all aircraft types and some have all the modifications/upgrades fitted, others do not as some can only be installed during the longest and most invasive periods of depth maintenance not at the more regular front line maintenance periods. There are a lot of mods for Tornados so I would guess someone has asked the question "How many Tornados have all the mods fitted" and the answer is a third thus they have spun that round to two thirds not being combat ready.
Same for Typhoons, some will have greater capability than others.
But the simple fact remains, we don't have enough aircraft or crews to fly them.Same for Typhoons, some will have greater capability than others.
What you have to consider is that there will be a number of Rectification states and Modification states within a fleet.
Rectification will be a mix of fixing stuff thats broken (Corrective Maintenance) as well as Preventative Maintenance (a bit like getting your car serviced), and there will be a number of different levels here.
Modification states will vary because it takes time to mod a fleet, also modifications/upgrades will vary with time and/or task requirement.
For eg. During my time on the C130 we had 62 a/c.
Of these, one was Snoopy (the W2)
About half a dozen were tankers (of which 2 were in the Falklands)
About 1/3 of the rest were stretched airframes (C3)
About 2/3 of the rest were unstretched (C1)
Of the main fleet (C1 and C3), on average you'd have about 40 (ish) on the line. So about a 60% serviceability state.
Of these, some were fitted for SF (Special Forces) tasks (eg Night Vision Goggle compatibility), some were fitted for Formation Airdrop tasks and carrying SKE (Station Keeping Equipment), some had IRCMs (Infra Red Counter Measures), some had Flare capability, some had MAWS (Missile Approach Warning Systems), some had Orange Crop ESM (Electronic Support Measures), and some were bare 'frames.
Thus, for any given Operational task you didn't have 62 'frames. You might have as little as 10, ie 16% of the fleet; which is a far different cry from the originally assumed 60% serviceability.
However it gets worse once you start reducing fleet size. While it might look good on paper to the Bean Counters in terms of costs, the figures actually get far worse because, unless you reduce the tasking level(s), you inevitably use each airframe more. This drives up unserviceability because each 'frame will require Maintenance (both Preventative and Corrective at ever shortening intervals.
Factor in the reduced fleet numbers meen reduced time to Mod that fleet (because you are using them all the time), and you can see why the reported serviceability figures are so low.
Rectification will be a mix of fixing stuff thats broken (Corrective Maintenance) as well as Preventative Maintenance (a bit like getting your car serviced), and there will be a number of different levels here.
Modification states will vary because it takes time to mod a fleet, also modifications/upgrades will vary with time and/or task requirement.
For eg. During my time on the C130 we had 62 a/c.
Of these, one was Snoopy (the W2)
About half a dozen were tankers (of which 2 were in the Falklands)
About 1/3 of the rest were stretched airframes (C3)
About 2/3 of the rest were unstretched (C1)
Of the main fleet (C1 and C3), on average you'd have about 40 (ish) on the line. So about a 60% serviceability state.
Of these, some were fitted for SF (Special Forces) tasks (eg Night Vision Goggle compatibility), some were fitted for Formation Airdrop tasks and carrying SKE (Station Keeping Equipment), some had IRCMs (Infra Red Counter Measures), some had Flare capability, some had MAWS (Missile Approach Warning Systems), some had Orange Crop ESM (Electronic Support Measures), and some were bare 'frames.
Thus, for any given Operational task you didn't have 62 'frames. You might have as little as 10, ie 16% of the fleet; which is a far different cry from the originally assumed 60% serviceability.
However it gets worse once you start reducing fleet size. While it might look good on paper to the Bean Counters in terms of costs, the figures actually get far worse because, unless you reduce the tasking level(s), you inevitably use each airframe more. This drives up unserviceability because each 'frame will require Maintenance (both Preventative and Corrective at ever shortening intervals.
Factor in the reduced fleet numbers meen reduced time to Mod that fleet (because you are using them all the time), and you can see why the reported serviceability figures are so low.
Edited by Ginetta G15 Girl on Wednesday 17th June 13:54
Hooli said:
Elroy Blue said:
The forthcoming changes to the RAF's training fleet show just how small they now are.
Basic training fleet 10...yes TEN.
Multi engine training fleet 5...FIVE.
Mind boggling figures
That is mental. I had no idea the figures had got so small.Basic training fleet 10...yes TEN.
Multi engine training fleet 5...FIVE.
Mind boggling figures
Are we really surprised? Britian isn't the superpower it once was I'm afraid plus there is the question of who are we actually going to fight with our expensive war planes? The only real enemies we have left are ones of our own making and I doubt they'll be flying over the UK any time soon and using jets\missiles against mud huts is not a winner in the cost vs reward scenario.
I'm not a leftie lentil muncher either but I'd rather see the money spent on REAL issues effecting the country rather than wasted in an attempt to pretend that we have the military power to make a real impact on the world scene. Better to leave the sabre rattling\world policing to our American cousins IMO, let them stick their noses in (where it's not wanted) while we sort out our own backyard.
I'm not a leftie lentil muncher either but I'd rather see the money spent on REAL issues effecting the country rather than wasted in an attempt to pretend that we have the military power to make a real impact on the world scene. Better to leave the sabre rattling\world policing to our American cousins IMO, let them stick their noses in (where it's not wanted) while we sort out our own backyard.
pablo said:
They havent, I dont know what we are including in "the RAFs training fleet" but to me its Tutors, Tucanos, King Airs, T1/2 Hawks, Vigilants and Vikings, all part of what most would refer to as "training fleet"
You will note I said 'forthcoming'. When the Hawk T1 is withdrawn, proposed numbers are as follows:
New fixed wing training fleet expected size according to NAO: elementary 23 Basic 10 Multi-Engine 5
Number of instructors (Military + Civilian): Elementary 35 + 23 Basic 15 + 5 , Multi-Engine 14 + 6
pablo said:
to me its Tutors, Tucanos, King Airs, T1/2 Hawks, Vigilants and Vikings, all part of what most would refer to as "training fleet"
Most of the Tutors are AEF/UAS. There's one Sqn at Cranditz for Elementary trg. The other Sqn (115(R)) is for Instructor trg. The ones at Barkston are not RAF.The King Airs are leased.
Hawk T1 is on its last legs.
Vigilant and Viking are for the Air Cadets (and grounded until at least the middle of next year because SERCO couldn't service them properly).
The thing is that RAF flying Training is in the process of being civilainised which will:
a. Cost a packet.
b. Be ineffective when they run out of ex Service QFIs.
Guvernator said:
I'm not a leftie lentil muncher either but I'd rather see the money spent on REAL issues effecting the country rather than wasted in an attempt to pretend that we have the military power to make a real impact on the world scene.
You don't agree with the statement: 'Si vis pacem, para bellum' ?Given the increased tensions in the world I find that a rather worrying attitude.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff