RAF Problems with Airbridge acknowledged

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by H_FLASHMAN, Jul 5, 2007.

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. An old ARRSE story appears to have resurfaced so please feel free to have this moved to an older thread. But it appears that finally problems are being admitted with theb air bridge at higher levels


    See Defence Committe Chairman James Arbuthnots Comment.
  2. It has taken them long enough to notice; maybe the AFPRB's experience at the hands of us Crabs when they visited Iraq last year has helped matters!

    Our AT fleet has been on its last legs for years, the A400M is not a direct replacement for the C130K (it sits somewhere between the C130J and the C17), despite Lord Drayson's comments, we are only gaining one more C17 in addition to the four we have had on lease for the past 5 years and FSTA will be as much use as a Tristar in getting troops into theatre (i.e. not much) because it is unlikely to be fitted with defensive aids.

    Unfortunately the senior leadership of the RAF is more concerned about Typhoon than AT and appears incapable of realising that the RAF's major effort in current operations is transporting the Army fom one place to another, not maintaining air supremecy with an all singing, all dancing new air combat aircraft :roll:
  3. And this is precisely the reason why the RAF has a poor reputation with the Army, and why comments such as 'utterly, utterly useless' come to light. Top tip to RAF 'Top Brass', sort out your AT and the Army will like you a whole lot more!
  4. The FTSA will have DAS according to what is written on the air tanker website. Agree though that the gap in capability is unacceptable. There were reports that Marshall's had offered to procure for the MOD some Tristars from storage and refit them as an urgent project. Maybe they should be taking up that offer, as FTSA is taking an age.
  5. I think I'd rather wait for FSTA than let Marshall's loose on another bunch of Tristars! We still haven't forgiven them for the K1.

    I had been led to believe that there were issues over the fitting of DAS on FSTA because the civilian company involved wouldn't be able to maintain the DAS suite whilst the aircraft was being used to transport the general public to Malaga and Magaluf. The security classification of the DAS might also require extra security measures for the ac whilst parked up in the Balearics - unless they perfect a DAS that can be removed and replaced with ease!
  6. I believe the iron chancellor new this was on the cards but now he is in the frame the thought of stuff falling from the sky full of warm bodies on his watch is starting too bite .... or an i just being :x
  7. Latest Private Eye mentions the rather lengthy procurement of 'new' air to air tankers, points out that nothing has materialised yet. Has the first replacement machine been tested, has it flown? The RAF tanker fleet has a mix of VC10s, from the late 1960s, DC10s and Tristars from the mid 1970s. Is this another of Milord Drayson's responsibilities? On the other hand McStalin Broon and Twa Jobs Broone don't seem to be busting their guts to sort this mess out, after all they have had a hand in it.

    Have a think about the helicopter fleets for the services, Sea Kings, Lynes, Pumas, Gazelles are essentially throw backs to the late 1960s. When will they be replaced? Broon, Blair and Co like the power, but shy away from responsibilities to the forces.
  8. The politicians must take some blame, however successive CsAS have failed to identify that something needs to be done. Procurement of new AT and SH should have started in the late 80s. GW1 at least should have shown us that our AT was getting a bit long in the tooth, we have spent too much time and money on Typhoon.
  9. This is a good one. I was involved on the edge of the FSTA and the C-17/Antonov projects in the late 90's. It has taken far too long to get to where we are now - still flying around in the Antiques Road Show. Bottom line:

    We need to buy quickly and more C-17s, less A400m, more hercs, suitable tankers and passenger aircraft with DAS - in fact all fitted with DAS. Less Typhoon.

    And while we are at it - how about an updated A10?! Perhaps flown by the AAC?! And more helicopters - more Chinook.

    In fact lets have an RAF that is equipped to support good old expeditionary warfare in far flung and remote/nasty places.

    All comments by Ministers are spun and while not unture, they do not explain the whole situation. And Lord Drayson is brighter and more capable than most - his civilian record proves that.
  10. Unfortunately this is the case, but it still doesn't say much for him. On those times I have met him he has appeared more interested in enjoying corporate hospitality from BAE, Westland etc than talking with service personnel. I suspect he is only still in the job because no-one else wants to do it.
  11. raf will burble on about in depth strike capability and air superiorty etc etc.
    truth at the moment and for the forseeable future
    hm forces need a long range airliner and removal service
    a shorter range taxi service
    and an aerial survey service
    and the ablity to drop death from a great height on bad people
    the ablity to check 6 and shoot down other moustacheod egomaniacs not on the agenda.
    unfortunatly if we lose typhoon we loose typhoon and get nothing in exchange :cry:
  12. We have DC-10s? Fcuking hell. I wouldn't like to be the bloke with them on my inventory! :wink:
  13. As I understood it, the RAF is currently in the process of a massive overhaul to gear it towards expeditionary warfare.

    Is this incorrect?
  14. Organisationally - yes. Equipment wise - no.

    RAF Stns have been reorganised and allocated to Expeditionary Air Wings, but this is more to aid our deployment than any support to the Army. In short we need more AT, more Movers and better attitude towards the essentials of expeditionary support to our sister services.

    Edited for mongish spelling.
  15. I apologise for suggesting that DC10s were in RAF inventory.

    I have just looked at the spin from http://www.armedforces.co.uk/raf/listings/l0055.html

    on the tanker aircraft.

    Goodness knows when the replacement will actually take to the air, but will it do the job its supposed to in hot and cold climates?

    Broon and Blair have had no idea about sorting out this mess.