RAF forced to borrow planes

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by msr, Feb 3, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

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

  1. msr

    msr LE

    THE RAF is being forced to borrow American spy planes and paint roundels on them to replace its fleet of Nimrod R1 signals intelligence aircraft.

    The crews of the US Rivet Joint spy planes masquerading as RAF aircraft will not even be totally British with US personnel expected to take control on some missions.

    The move, forced by a Ministry of Defence (MoD) cash crisis that rules out the money for a replacement aircraft for the Nimrod R1, has provoked outrage among RAF air crew who say it will mean a major loss of capability.


  2. A2_Matelot

    A2_Matelot LE Book Reviewer

    Interesting but I don't for a moment thing Glen Torpy has lost sight of what is important. He unashamedly (and probably rightly) makes sure the light blue get the best wherever possible. I suspect, but don't know, that this is just a gap filler and the R1 fix or replacement will crack on.

    That all said I thought that it was just 51Sqn which operates them, so perhaps an RAF with an RJ capability, ASTOR, E3-AWACS and 'another platform that is in planning' won't be so bad after all. They are broadening and enhancing their ISTAR capability not reducing it.
  3. I'm surprised we're allowing foreign crews (even one's from a trusted ally) to operate on an aircraft like the RJ. That's one spooky plane.
  4. So the Nimrod replacement goes onto the same list as the A400M - will turn up at some point, but due to budgetary constriants not just yet. It will be interesting to see what else gets sacrificed to free up funding when the order for 2 x CVF is finally placed.
  5. Has anybody got any pictures of an Anglo-US 135 with the roundels painted on it?

    I'm in need of a good laugh!
  6. It's a very inaccurate article.

    RJ is not a step down in capability...assuming we intend to buy them. :wink:
  7. The use of RJ is not a reduction in capability, but it is a tacit admission that we do not have the aircraft or personnel to conduct the full gamate of operations required of us. I trust CAS was forced kicking and screaming into making this decison :roll:

    Would there be this level of fuss if we were obliged to use other nation's military or, dare I say it, civilian aircraft to fill our capability gaps in air transport, close air support or combat search and resuce? Apparently not.
  8. BC,
    I say again. It is an inaccurate article. Beyond that, it's not really appropriate to comment.

  9. Apologies, I was rising to the bait rather, but I hate to miss an opportunity to point out that the RAF is under equipped, under manned, under funded and struggling to maintain its reputation for doing a good job in spite of all of the above.
  10. [/quote]

    TACIT ADMISSION? Was that not one of the original stealth technology demonstrators?
  11. New Plane

    Attached Files:

  12. ahhh so thats why russian aircraft have been seen around RAF jets, we were hiring them..

  13. "I'm surprised we're allowing foreign crews (even one's from a trusted ally) to operate on an aircraft like the RJ. That's one spooky plane".

    We operate in theirs. They need our experience in order to learn!

    There is a big positive to this. As MoD (Browne) has admitted in the House of Commons that the airworthiness of the Nimrod fleet (and most others) has not been maintained (and it is now almost impossible to regain it) getting a replacement from a country whose product is relatively new and presumably airworthy (and I hope the MoD check this), then MoD avoid a lot of hassle.

    Of course, if they conduct business the same way as on Chinook HC Mk3, these "new" aircraft will be in long term storage for a mighty long time. Remember, the Chinooks were bought to US standards, but can't be released to service here because these standards can't be verified by Boscombe for airworthiness release.
  14. its a disgrace the u.s should be borrowing things from us. sure they have all the money but we are better trained and can us them better then americans. it has been known for centuries british troops are the best trained in the world and should pay the M.O.D a wedge just to let the yanks touch a jet a raf member has sat in
  15. Fuck off.