tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post3293548013251393821..comments2024-03-20T12:03:26.126+00:00Comments on Thin Pinstriped Line: Withdrawing the Harrier - Part Three - OP ELLAMY and beyondSir Humphreyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08704774192275240783noreply@blogger.comBlogger26125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-37643102519792442482012-09-18T21:45:47.411+01:002012-09-18T21:45:47.411+01:00Nice article Sir H, it makes me realise what a com...Nice article Sir H, it makes me realise what a complex monster defence is. For me the scrapping of the maritime recconnasance element of a maritime nation is pretty contentious. Anything to blog about the Nimrod?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-41598655681567321822012-09-18T14:38:44.346+01:002012-09-18T14:38:44.346+01:00Given the circumstances your conclusions may well ...Given the circumstances your conclusions may well be right. But what is truly staggering is that in just 12 years following the 1998 SDR we managed to get ourselves into such a pickle that it has resulted in a 10 year gap in our most core of core capabilities (I include in that the ability of the the RFA to fully support a carrier group). I hope to goodness the lessons have been learned and we get away with it over the next couple of years.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-54360859513535266172012-09-18T12:31:08.684+01:002012-09-18T12:31:08.684+01:00Should be DLI and CAP, obviously, pesky keyboard.....Should be DLI and CAP, obviously, pesky keyboard....Not a Boffinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-9762429410133528502012-09-17T16:43:49.338+01:002012-09-17T16:43:49.338+01:00I'm more than happy to agree that Ark + GR9 wo...I'm more than happy to agree that Ark + GR9 would have brought little to the party, compared to what GR4 and Typhoon contributed.<br /><br />However, this should be caveatted with the caution that it's very current system specific and should not be interpreted as "an aircraft carrier" would not have been as effective, full stop.<br /><br />QEC plus (say) somewhere between 12 and 20 F35 with Crowsnest would have been a completely different proposition. It's interesting that the above is the only post that references the original mission proposed - "No Fly" ie essentially something between OCA and DCA. Maintaining a two ship or more Typhoon CAP from Italy / Cyprus would have been a whole lot more taxing (in terms of sorties launched and probably AAR) than running what was essentially a CAS ATO.<br /><br />Running deck launched intercept or CAS of appropraitely capable aircraft from a ship 100 miles offshore would have been a lot easier than than running it from Italy.<br /><br />While the comments re RFA are also true, a shuttle run from Gib is entirely possible every three days if required. It's also worth noting that the only addiional costs for that would have been marginal costs beyond those already programmed. Nor did the RAF presence across the Med come for free. Lots of marginal accommodation, transport, fuel and airframe costs burned during Op Ellamy.Not a boffinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-66217866536840976622012-09-17T13:28:02.744+01:002012-09-17T13:28:02.744+01:00Very good piece. Thoroughly shredded my cherished ...Very good piece. Thoroughly shredded my cherished view. Bother. Does Sir H have any concerns about the RAF playing nice and sharing the F35 properly with the FAA given the slow death of the Harrier? viceroynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-33220313723162358482012-09-17T12:47:06.121+01:002012-09-17T12:47:06.121+01:00Hi anonymous
Let me reassure you. All figures use...Hi anonymous<br /><br />Let me reassure you. All figures usef and all dates referred to are open source. This blog only uses internet released material. Sir Humphreyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08704774192275240783noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-48862263600673418472012-09-17T11:58:31.488+01:002012-09-17T11:58:31.488+01:00I fully endorse your first paragraph, Anonymous
1...I fully endorse your first paragraph, Anonymous <br />17/1044. There do appear to be two furture <br />'sub-texts'. The first, is that we cannot manage effectively with just one QE, and the second we won't have the capabilty to replenish either carrier at the <br />distances for which they're ideal. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-30200673474794456662012-09-17T11:45:29.865+01:002012-09-17T11:45:29.865+01:00Go away and re-read your own blog with a critical ...Go away and re-read your own blog with a critical eye. Some of it would properly be classifed at RESTRICTED but in places you have gone further. Remember that in many cases your position and your knowledge make your opinions themselves classified in nature.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-88288175181201544062012-09-17T10:44:55.621+01:002012-09-17T10:44:55.621+01:00The really worrying small print in this article is...The really worrying small print in this article is the pitiful size of the RFA. I'd be interested for an objective assessment of the RFA and whether we really do have any capacity in a Falklands type engagement, irrespective of carrier strike capability.<br /><br />On a broader point, gradual reduction of capability reduces economy of scale for suppliers of course, which is why we are now faced with the possibility of the BAE EADS merger. It is interesting that the aircraft which survived the so-called "strategic" defence review are those which are joint projects between BAE and EADS. Coincidence? <br /><br />A lack of national vision has brought us to this point: a slave to events rather than driving growth through vision. Can someone please make it a condition of being an MP that politicians are banned from having studied the PPE degree and have had at least 10 years' experience of real life work rather than how to dine out and backstab in Shepherds Bush and Islington?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-3208797642509700802012-09-16T19:31:14.655+01:002012-09-16T19:31:14.655+01:00I totally agree, it's very impressive when one...I totally agree, it's very impressive when one ignores the negative press and sits down to look at the facts.<br /><br />I know what you mean about Lightning, my personnel view changes weekly, often in relation to ideas/news about the relative Tornado/Typhoon situation. <br /><br />At the moment I believe that Typhoon T2/T3 will almost certainly get a midlife upgrade and soldier on in-to the distant future, probably to be eventually replaced by the F35A (or the equivalent) and drones. Couple this with the 48 F35B and I think the only intriguing question is what variant will replace Tornado and how many are eventually ordered. I think that B is probably the most sensible option but that RAF pressure, money and politics may result in the A. <br /><br />But hey, that's just my current view, it will probably change in a few days! I completely respect you're desire to not second guess with this very murky subject.Challengernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-79116672148887071732012-09-16T17:51:19.243+01:002012-09-16T17:51:19.243+01:00Thanks challenger.
I think observers often do the...Thanks challenger.<br /><br />I think observers often do the UK down, but last year there were two simaltaneous complex warfighting deployments going on, several thousand miles apart from each other and the homebase, with nearly 40 strike aircraft and a couple of dozen supporting aircraft deployed. <br />Very, very few nations could deploy and sustain this level of capability. <br /><br />As for Lightning - I'm not sure, I think the decisios have yet to be taken and I'm not keen to second guess experts on this sort of thing!Sir Humphreyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08704774192275240783noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-27992107652947306302012-09-16T17:49:13.353+01:002012-09-16T17:49:13.353+01:00Fair points on the ISD - I think my optimism can o...Fair points on the ISD - I think my optimism can occasionally run away from me. With hindsight, I'd suggest that in 2018, we'll see a CVF entering service as a functional platform (rather than just doing first of class trials). We'll all but completed the skills reconstitution for carrier operations by working with our allies, and we should be at a point where JSF is about to enter service. It would be a bit more time before we see credible squadron sized operations. <br />This is perhaps another point to make when considering the harrier - there was always going to be a 'harrier / JSF' gap in about 2016 onwards as the Harrier left service with the gap then until JSF came into full service.Sir Humphreyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08704774192275240783noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-36998357743078701262012-09-16T17:46:22.087+01:002012-09-16T17:46:22.087+01:00Very good points on the RAF deployment size. One t...Very good points on the RAF deployment size. One thing it is essential to understand is that it it almost impossible to envisage a scenario where the UK is committed to a military deployment without relying heavily on the RAF. The RN brings carrier airpower to bear, but this is only part of the equation. We have to consider the force as a whole. Sir Humphreyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08704774192275240783noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-32909569321972378772012-09-16T12:02:59.517+01:002012-09-16T12:02:59.517+01:00You're correct Derek that we haven't seen ...You're correct Derek that we haven't seen any other official reversals yet, and nothing has been formally dropped completely. <br /><br />However the Sentinel surveillance aircraft were intended to be scrapped after Afghanistan in 2015. Since 2010 they have given fantastic service over Libya and now are also committed as Britain's contribution to NATO'S alliance ground surveillance collaboration.<br /><br />I see the above two developments as happy indicators that Sentinel is here to stay!Challengernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-85100293825549584352012-09-16T11:54:45.119+01:002012-09-16T11:54:45.119+01:00Thank you for as ever a very interesting and enjoy...Thank you for as ever a very interesting and enjoyable article Sir H!<br /><br />Past the initial shock of SDSR I have been sold on the relative benefits of retaining Tornado over Harrier for some time. The latter paired with Ark Royal was a suburb capability and a tragic loss, but it was a direct choice between one or the other and I believe that under these circumstances they made the right decision.<br /><br />I'm trying to be optimistic about the future as well. Even with all the limitations and problems it looks as if we will end up with one carrier on call with the ability to surge the air-group to something like 24+ jets for a Libya style operation. That's capability which is roughly equivalent to the French, and although not ideal it's certainly respectable. <br /><br />Out of interest how do you see the numbers, type and service ratio of Lightning ending up?<br />Challengernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-82444803907577679182012-09-15T21:30:36.768+01:002012-09-15T21:30:36.768+01:00A superb analysis of a complex issue which illustr...A superb analysis of a complex issue which illustrates the difficulty of decision making in a multi-dimensional theatre and in which the ticking of the clock is another dilemma.<br />Which chicken begat which egg?<br />So far the much-maligned SDSR has covered over two years of it's term without something dropping off except the initial choice of carrier aircraft and that merely involved a change of mind in time. <br />Derek McBridenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-10886694482846902262012-09-15T12:30:32.705+01:002012-09-15T12:30:32.705+01:00I agree,
As with the previous article - the Navy ...I agree, <br />As with the previous article - the Navy currently has a lower priority on the fixed wing FAA than its other branches, understandably so with the level of funding ect.<br /><br />2018 is an optimistic date for a flying F35 in the UK, let alone beggining to relearn carrier aviation routines with a wholley new type of aircraft and ship.<br /><br />IOC for F35 in land based ops at 2020 seems a more realistic - if still optimistic date - with all large pieces of kit, especially aviation and maritime; getting IOC and FOC takes longer than many realise.mikenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-10709958287542070072012-09-14T21:25:24.667+01:002012-09-14T21:25:24.667+01:00'We delayed a big chunk of work on Typhoon whe...'We delayed a big chunk of work on Typhoon when we opted for tornado over harrier'<br /><br />Did we? What work?<br /><br />Topmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-30849337697524311352012-09-14T21:17:29.439+01:002012-09-14T21:17:29.439+01:00"Well they aren't cleared to fire SS"..."Well they aren't cleared to fire SS"<br /><br />As I said<br /><br />"It was a choice between Tornado supporting delayed upgrade typhoon, and Harrier supporting ***enhanced upgrade*** typhoon."<br /><br />We delayed a big chunk of work on Typhoon when we opted for tornado over harrier<br /><br />Anon<br />"If none, then surely it would have been politically difficult to deploy Harrier - as an obviously Ground Attack aircraft, Even if privately the decision had already been made to assist the rebels through Close Air Support, the Government did appear keen to pretend that it was merely enforcing the No Fly Zone initially."<br /><br />Yeah, erm, where was the commando brigade.....<br />"Training" near cyprus?TrThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07316335177828136131noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-79148338938292804642012-09-14T20:43:19.107+01:002012-09-14T20:43:19.107+01:00Thanks, Sir H. for a very interesting series of ar...Thanks, Sir H. for a very interesting series of articles. That said your final paragraph is, I think, hopelessly optimistic:<br /><br />"Looking to the future, the UK will, on current plans, regain a carrier borne capability within the next six years as JSF begins to enter service"<br /><br />The RN with a carrier capable of operations by 2018? HurstLlamahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01086351645473769872noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-84691638566430734482012-09-14T20:25:35.959+01:002012-09-14T20:25:35.959+01:00Nice article, interesting to see things from a RN ...Nice article, interesting to see things from a RN perspective from someone who is serving and give a different viewpoint from most pro-navy blogs. The RFA point and how it works and the need for land/air based support is interesting, something I've not seen. Do you have any plans to do some articles on how the RFA operates day to day? <br /><br />@TrT <br /><br />It's not really clear where the money saved from removing Harrier went, not doubt into various areas. <br /><br />'Would 6 Harriers operating from Illustrious and 6 Apaches from Ocean have been better than Tornado from Norfolk?'<br /><br />Since they did different jobs it wouldn't really be 'better'. The Tornados from Marham did a very specific task that neither Harrier or Apache could perform. <br /><br />'Even if thats a coin toss, once you throw in Typhoons from Norfolk lobbing storm shadows, whats not covered?'<br /><br />Well they aren't cleared to fire SS. There aren't any Typhoons in Norfolk either...<br /><br />Topmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-75967218916150254712012-09-14T20:20:12.741+01:002012-09-14T20:20:12.741+01:00Very interesting. I always found it ironic that so...Very interesting. I always found it ironic that some claimed ELLAMY as evidence for why Harrier should have been kept when it was quite the reverse.<br /><br />One point I don't think you developed completely was how little a difference deploying at sea vs deploying on shore would have made.<br /><br />Just like Tornado GR4, choosing Harrier GR9 would still have meant Typhoon deploying to enforce the No-Fly zone. So the RAF would've had a fast jet presence in the Italy anyway. Then add all the support aircraft you mentioned (Sentry, Sentinel, tankers, transport) and the RAF presence would still have been sizeable.<br /><br />Presumably the individual deployments (Tornado, Typhoon, Sentry, etc) benefited from synergies by sharing capabilities - perhaps a transport bringing Brimstone also carrying parts for Sentry - and therefore sharing some of the costs.<br /><br />So simply swapping GR4 for GR9 would not have reduced the overall cost of the land deployment that much (let alone removed it altogether). And that's before you consider the additional costs of operating at sea as you mentioned.<br /><br />Incidentally to what extent was GR4 force involved in the planning from the very beginning in the ground attack role? The mission was originally supposed to be just enforcing a No Fly Zone wasn't it? So deploying Typhoon was a necessity from the beginning.<br /><br />I imagine GR4 may also have been required from the beginning to dismantle the Libyan Air Defence System, using Storm Shadow principally. But if the mission was only supposed to be a enforcing No Fly Zone (and had remained so), would GR4 have had any significant role beyond the initial strike and possibly reconnaissance role?<br /><br />If none, then surely it would have been politically difficult to deploy Harrier - as an obviously Ground Attack aircraft (no Storm Shadow, reduced reconnaissance capability) - initially? Even if privately the decision had already been made to assist the rebels through Close Air Support, the Government did appear keen to pretend that it was merely enforcing the No Fly Zone initially. Wheras for GR4 it was more of a natural progression as the capability was already on hand as part of the No Fly Zone mission.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-59324607483483756972012-09-14T20:14:31.507+01:002012-09-14T20:14:31.507+01:00"The carrier would also have been dependent o..."The carrier would also have been dependent on host nation support – a fact often forgotten. "<br /><br />This ^<br />People often cite basing as a problem for aviation...its the same with ships. The French struggled to maintain C de G's tempo of operations...even though being in her 'backyard'...<br /><br />Excellent article, though already got one narrow comment (read more into the Norfolk Operations please...).<br /><br />Well done SirH, no doubt this will loose some 'freinds' on the naval-minded blogsphere, but I applaud this series. A balanced and clear comment from someone in the loop.mikenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-13145473545643639262012-09-14T19:16:53.141+01:002012-09-14T19:16:53.141+01:00Excellent stuff.Excellent stuff.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-15196307259687133642012-09-14T18:49:56.315+01:002012-09-14T18:49:56.315+01:00Excellent stuff Sir H, completing an excellent ser...Excellent stuff Sir H, completing an excellent series.Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18182426936194426623noreply@blogger.com