Scrap the RAF? A letter to the Times.

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by Harold_The_Clever_Sheep, Sep 28, 2006.

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. Scrap the RAF?


    Sir, Regardless of how well or otherwise the Royal Air Force has performed in Afghanistan, is it not time that we considered disbanding the RAF as a separate arm? Since its strategic role has been taken over by missiles it now exists almost entirely to support the other two services, a situation which should surely be rationalised.
    The Fleet Air Arm and Army Air Corps could absorb aircrew and aircraft dedicated to specific sea and ground roles. A general in the field would have direct command not only over his armour, artillery and infantry but his air support as well. The admiral at sea would have absolute control not only over his shipborne aircraft but also those based in various Fleet Air Arm bases all over the friendly world. The initial costs of the reorganisation could be borne by the tremendous savings made in Whitehall by the closing down of MoD (Air).




    RICHARD NEED
    Cheam, Surrey
     
  2. What and get rid of all those lovely Prussian blue uniforms?

    Get real.
     
  3. What a good idea. And we could use the rock apes to add another RLC Bn
     
  4. Sadly this excellent suggestion has one small flaw (and several large ones): the RLC have been known to work on weekends, and even stay out over night on exercise/operations.

    The RAF Regt would be in shock after a few nights of not being allowed to pose in stripped down landrovers while watching barriers going up and down.

    Also, even the RLC has some standards and white socks (contrary to most rumours going around) are still frowned upon in RLC Messes (did I say Messes? I meant of course RLC Travellodges).
     
  5. Touche.
     
  6. But where would the Vulcans go?

    Oh, wait ...
     
  7. woopert

    woopert LE Moderator

    Wouldn't they prefer to join their brothers and lesser mortals in the SAS? :roll:
     
  8. No. Why? They are such big girls that they cannot grow the required 'Zapata' mexican bandito/70's porn star 'taches that are required for the secret squirrels.

    I know 'they' use Avon moisturiser to keep away mozzies in the jungle, but even they won't allow the use of Imac in the Boathouse.
     
  9. woopert

    woopert LE Moderator

    Because the Rock Apes genuinely (and they say this with a straight face and not a trace of irony) consider themselves to be up there with Hereford's finest and even that they form part of an SF orbat.

    I agree with the author of the letter though.

    A very good case was made in Lion's Donkeys, and Dinosaurs regarding the disbandment of the RAF on the following grounds:

    Heli fleet: Tactical airlift that could go to the AAC. JHC is dominated by senior RAF staff performing a task that could be done by the AAC. Joint rotary wing training could still be cnoducted between the AAC and FAA with no real need for RAF involvement.

    Harrier force: TAS, more often than not now conducted from the aircraft carriers. Hand them and JSF in its entirity to the FAA. When land based they fly under the control of the AAC at the behest of the theatre commander anyway.

    IDS: Tornado and Jaguar now obsolete, as is the real need for deep low level strike. The last time they were used in anger to any great effect (GW1) against a credible air defence the losses outgained the strategic benefits of having them.

    Ground enginnering, Air Traffic, POlice, Admin could all be outsourced to private companies with key people who might need to be deployed employed on a "sponsored reservist" basis and paid an X-Factor accordingly.

    That only leaves the RAF having any credible claim for:

    Strategic Airlift
    Reconnaissance (Maritime Patrol could easily and more sensibly go to the FAA)
    In-Flight refuling

    The RAF Regt could be absorbed into Arty to boost their air defence role
     
  10. And the sad thing is, I had this conversation with a RAF Officer a couple of years ago - he agreed.

    The money saved would be increadible - not to mention hotel bills.

    Just as an aside - when we were deployed to SL for the NEO (to begin with), the Frogs kindly gave us a bit of sand in Senegal, with some tents on. The army accepted them and we made ourselves comfortable - our colleagues in blue complained and were moved to the hotel in the city centre!!
     
  11. The RAF dress like postmen, what with the rather natty harrington jacket, so perhaps they could be used as post orderlies ?
     
  12. well strategic airlift and refuelling can go to the RLC for a start. then reconnaisance to whoever gets the strike force (FAA)
     
  13. Maybe then in BAS key light blue planners won't keep refering to live ops as an "exercise" while blokes are out on the ground and insisting we use their particular favourite aircraft whether or not it is up to the task or not.

    sssssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhh CGS will be calling us all "irresponsible" and our comments "regretfull" soon...
     
  14. Just a thought

    Does anyone believe that the money saved would go straight back into the defence vote?

    No, the money saved would go to straight to the Treasury in the same way as the money saved from 'Options for Change' went straight to the Treasury when 'smaller but better equipped' (as we were then promised) was dropped as a soundbite to be replaced with 'Peace Dividend' to justify plundering by the Treasury.

    Don't be naive!

    All you are doing by supporting a call to disband the RAF on the grounds postulated - good as they are - is to hand the Treasury a weapon to support those grounds on the basis of major strategic restructuring and then renege on them once the exercise is complete handing a gift to the Treasury.

    Such is the perfidious nature of British Politics.

    There are more Flag Officers in the Navy than there are ships and there are more Generals than the size of any formation they are ever likely to command - the Armed Forces are grossly 'over officered' at senior level and should be 'culled' - the money directed to the same exercise.

    But again, I doubt such a saving would end up in the Defence Vote!
     
  15. This genuinely is a good idea. Joking aside. It seems that all they bring is hassle and cost to the table. The blokes i.e the pilots are second to none as i'm sure the ground crew are. Its not like we are sacking them. We are just giving them better clothes and a beret that they actually need to shape!