RAF urged to cut new jets for cheap propeller aircraft

[CWOJackson]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00675/tucano_385x185_675669a.jpg

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/afghanistan/article6997720.ece

[JorisVandenBerghe]

'Cold war jets'...the Typhoon ?! The actual predecessor (EAP) of the Typhoon made it's first flight back in the 1980s, but calling it a real Cold War jet :rolleyes:...it barely took over the UK's QRA role...

I agree though that for wars like Afghanistan aircraft like a AT-6B or (Super) Tucano, are better suited than a Typhoon. The best one for such wars is the Thunderbolt (A-10, which are currently being upgraded to A-10C IIRC) in my opinion. Or a Harrier...along with some Chinooks and AH-64D's.

The advantage pure jets enjoy is the pure speed which may be needed if something has to be done urgently and IFR/AAR - the aircraft can stay around as long as the crew is still capable of flying the machine and as long as it still has some sort of offensive capability (a cannon, simple unguided rockets or bombs, AGM's,...).

I believe the US uses F-15Es for shows of force against the Taliban etc, no ?

Something like Tucano does the job for irregular warfare [of the future] and is effective and cost-efficient.

[stiz]

might as well just scrap the whole thing and whilst there at it, get rid of the army, navy, tax the broadband at more than the 6 quid their gonna to. That should save them enough money to buy themselfs a new sodding buck pond! :monkies:

[kilo delta]

'Cold war jets'...the Typhoon ?! The actual predecessor (EAP) of the Typhoon made it's first flight back in the 1980s, but calling it a real Cold War jet :rolleyes:...it barely took over the UK's QRA role...

I agree though that for wars like Afghanistan aircraft like a AT-6B or (Super) Tucano, are better suited than a Typhoon. The best one for such wars is the Thunderbolt (A-10, which are currently being upgraded to A-10C IIRC) in my opinion. Or a Harrier...along with some Chinooks and AH-64D's.

The advantage pure jets enjoy is the pure speed which may be needed if something has to be done urgently and IFR/AAR - the aircraft can stay around as long as the crew is still capable of flying the machine and as long as it still has some sort of offensive capability (a cannon, simple unguided rockets or bombs, AGM's,...).

I believe the US uses F-15Es for shows of force against the Taliban etc, no ?

The Typhoon's (EAP) design phase harks back to the early 80's (maybe before?)......and yep....the Cold War was still in full swing then. In fact we came very very close to WWIII on a number of occasions during the 80's.
Typhoon was never designed for operations in combat theatres such as Iraq and Afghanistan. It's primary role was as an interceptor tasked with downing as many inbound bombers as possible that would be coming from the former WarPac countries.
The Harrier is more suited to the CAS/COIN role although it's extremely expensive to operate...and rather unreliable (at least in it's earlier marques). Unfortunately the RAF's funds are at an all time low and while aircraft such as Super Tucano, PC-9, etc are more suited to today's combat roles ......what's to say that the goal posts will not shift in the near future?

[Henry]

tax the broadband at more than the 6 quid their gonna to. That should save them enough money to buy themselfs a new sodding buck pond! :monkies:
but they would have to buy broadband detector vans:applause:
then
H

[ndicki]

Oh dear... Look at Russia. Look at the way Putin (the Prime Minister!!) is posturing and sabre-rattling. We are still in a sort of cold war, I'm afraid. Admittedly the ex-Sovs are a bit under-par compared to the good old days, but they've learnt some solid lessons in Chechenya and are improving the quality of their armed forces quite successfully, I understand. So let's put all our cash in Tucanos and other Co-in stuff, scrap the Typhoon, cancel our subs and carrier(s), and sell all our Challengers, Warriors and light armour to the Gulf States. Brilliant. Nothing is more likely to encourage the ex-Sovs to get stroppy than total weakness on our part. It's bad enough as it is. I remember when the Argies invaded the Falklands, we had to hand over our choppers, 66s and Carl Gustavs, night-sights, Lannies, grenades, most of our GPMGs and half our SLRs even - and nearly all our ammo - to the Task Force. The Sovs must have been pissing themselves... Or at least, pissing themselves almost as much as when we were trying to be mechanised Infantry in Osnabruck with 432s that couldn't even run for one day without all breaking down. It was pathetic! But there were more of us then. Now, they still have the guts and the training, but they are so few... And always with the wrong kit for the war in hand. We need Typhoons, if only so we don't have to use them...

[Henry]

Hmmmm i wonder if they have thought about Mossies:engel016:
H

[stiz]

but they would have to buy broadband detector vans:applause:
then
H

nah their just gonna tax anyone with a landline, because obviolsy if you have a phone you have broadband! :kilroy:

[JorisVandenBerghe]

While the design may be of 1985 and it's original requirement by the RAF dates from as early as 1971, in my opinion it's not a Cold War jet.

The actual first flight of a real Eurofighter (the prototype) was in 1994 - I was three years old at the time.

Consequently, calling it a Cold War jet seems the same to me as calling the 'Spad' (the Skyraider, not the WWI SPAD) a WWII fighter bomber, since it was designed in 1944...in my humble opinion.

But I'm just a post-Cold War nearly 19-year old...others may have a different view on this :rolleyes:.

Perhaps they could use some still flying T-28's and Skyraiders in Afghanistan :engel016:.

And I hate to see defence budget cuts...

[kilo delta]

Hmmmm i wonder if they have thought about Mossies:engel016:
H
:icon_lol:

If things get any worse they'll have to draft in the services of the BBMF! :monkies::engel016:

[JorisVandenBerghe]

:icon_lol:

If things get any worse they'll have to draft in the services of the BBMF! :monkies::engel016:
Exactly what I had been thinking about :kilroy:. Would be funny to see the Spits and Hurricanes head to Afghanistan and Iraq...fitted with flare dispensers, HUDs and AGM's under the wings :icon_lol:.

[kilo delta]

We need Typhoons, if only so we don't have to use them...

As the saying goes....

"Speak softly but carry a big stick!" ;) :)

[kilo delta]

Exactly what I had been thinking about :kilroy:. Would be funny to see the Spits and Hurricanes head to Afghanistan and Iraq...fitted with flare dispensers, HUDs and AGM's under the wings :icon_lol:.
:icon_lol:


Maybe they could re-activate the mothballed Jaguar's too.:kilroy:

[Matt Wynn]

having been in Afghanistan i want A-10's :icon_lol::icon_lol: nothing scares he with sandals, a herd of goats and a cigarette hangin out his mouth more than a 'hog overhead :icon_lol: see helicopters are still crucial out there, need ones that can deal with sand AND altitude, they sent Lynx's originally, not very good out there... and limited combat load, more nooks ooh yes please :icon_lol:

back on track, i remember watching Farnbrough '97 on TV, with Eurofighter 2000 as it was then (wasn't even called Typhoon) fly set to Robert miles - 'Children' song... good days, and we need the jets, i personally wouldn't want to be in a tucano when johnny-rag head decides it's a special occasion and digs out a MANPADS :kilroy:

[Bjoern]

i personally wouldn't want to be in a tucano when johnny-rag head decides it's a special occasion and digs out a MANPADS :kilroy:

Makes no difference to mud-moving Typhoons either. ;P




sell all our Challengers

Do it and replace 'em with a *real* tank for once. ;) :icon_lol:

[Matt Wynn]

leaopard is a can opener, Challenger is a can KILLER :icon_lol: Typhoon has 1 advantage a tucano doesn't.... Towed Decoy, oh and speed :icon_lol:

[Bjoern]

leaopard is a can opener, Challenger is a can KILLER :icon_lol:

Right, right...


The Challenger Lethality Improvement Programme is a programme to replace the current L30A1 rifled gun with the 120 mm Rheinmetall L55 smoothbore gun currently used in the Leopard 2A6.

:icon_lol:



Typhoon has 1 advantage a tucano doesn't.... Towed Decoy, oh and speed :icon_lol:

I don't think a MANPAD cares whether the target is fast or not. ;)

[cheezyflier]

downsizing the military (any branch) is a bad idea. see tom clancy's "debt of honor"

[kilo delta]

http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2009/10/27/129011396111114484.jpg

[Lewis-A2A]

scrap the lot and hire a small band of tiny people
(see 'J. R. R. Tolkien' Lord of the rings)









..sorry cheesy couldnt resist :kilroy:

[Piglet]

Hey, they can get Super Tucanos for free, right here at SOH! I'll even paint on RAF roundels for them!


Exactly what I had been thinking about :kilroy:. Would be funny to see the Spits and Hurricanes head to Afghanistan and Iraq...fitted with flare dispensers, HUDs and AGM's under the wings :icon_lol:.

Iron Eagle 3? Or was it 4, or 5?

[hewman100]

I'm keeping my mouth shut. I'll only get on my:a1451: and politics is frowned upon.

[casey jones]

I think if the RAF is low on funding, lets keep the Tornado in production and just continue with this great airplane.

Cheers

Casey

[Bjoern]

Iron Eagle 3? Or was it 4, or 5?

I think it was 4, not sure though.




I think if the RAF is low on funding, lets keep the Tornado in production and just continue with this great airplane.

The Tonka is still in production? ;) :d

[Matt Wynn]

Tonka is upgraded, out of production now i believe, Typhoon is stepping up to the hotplate, Tornado has 2 variants for 2 roles,. the F.£ and the GR.4, typhoon is 1 plane combining the roles as such is designated Typhoon FGR.4... to keep tornado in parts and flying would be more expensive than typhoon, as would starting production up and having to buy 1 of each to meet the needs...

[Quixoticish]

having been in Afghanistan i want A-10's :icon_lol::icon_lol: nothing scares he with sandals, a herd of goats and a cigarette hangin out his mouth more than a 'hog overhead :icon_lol: see helicopters are still crucial out there, need ones that can deal with sand AND altitude, they sent Lynx's originally, not very good out there... and limited combat load, more nooks ooh yes please :icon_lol:

back on track, i remember watching Farnbrough '97 on TV, with Eurofighter 2000 as it was then (wasn't even called Typhoon) fly set to Robert miles - 'Children' song... good days, and we need the jets, i personally wouldn't want to be in a tucano when johnny-rag head decides it's a special occasion and digs out a MANPADS :kilroy:

Can we refrain from "rag head" comments and their ilk please? No matter what people say it's a perjorative term that a lot of people find offensive.

[Tako_Kichi]

Hey, they can get Super Tucanos for free, right here at SOH! I'll even paint on RAF roundels for them!
I already painted roundels on a few Tim...and very nice they look too! :icon_lol:

[TeaSea]

So, you're trying to figure out what you want to fight the next war with, and what would be the most efficient use of resources.....

Good luck.

The only assumptions you can make that are valid are....

1) you will fight another war

2) it will not be in a time and place of your choosing if you're a citizen of a Republic

3) you will have the wrong stuff

4) it will be made by the lowest bidder

Is there anything I've missed?

[Matt Wynn]

Can we refrain from "rag head" comments and their ilk please? No matter what people say it's a perjorative term that a lot of people find offensive.

my apologies on that one... slip of the fingers, i mean Johnny-insurgent :icon_lol::icon_lol:

again my apologies, just that sometimes my mind is in ops mode and my fingers follow suit :salute:

[cheezyflier]

Can we refrain from "rag head" comments and their ilk please? No matter what people say it's a perjorative term that a lot of people find offensive.


everyone has something that offends them.

for example, i get offended when people fly airplanes into buildings and kill americans. i'm sensitive that way.

[Quixoticish]

Cheers Matt, completely understandable. :salute:

And as for that remark cheezyflier; it's so disgusting that I won't even bother trying to formulate an appropriate response. Absolutely atrocious.

[Piglet]

Man up, Chris H!:ernae::applause:

[TeaSea]

Piglet's new avatar offends me....but yet, I'm strangely fascinated at the same time....

:jump:

[Quixoticish]

Man up, Chris H!:ernae::applause:

Sorry Piglet but no, I see no reason to "man up". Intolerance is a major problem in modern society and if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

[Piglet]

if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem

Sorry cliches will not work in the real world. Having said that, I will not comment any further. If I see something I don't like, I'll go on to something else.

[jmig]

Gentlemen, a word to the wise. Let's keep the personal comments to ourselves or PM.

[Bjoern]

Intolerance is a major problem in modern society

Something like that coupled with lack of sense of humour (the latter not being aimed at you or anyone else here).

[Matt Wynn]

guys lets get it back on track here... Tucano... insurgents will love that you'll hear it coming, sound echoes in the mountains and valleys of Afghanistan like you can't believe! plus key thing is loadout in my opinion having been there, A-10 being my guardian angel out there :icon_lol:

[Piglet]

Seems the greatest aircraft are the ones the Brass, or other "experts" want to get rid of. :isadizzy:

[hewman100]

Going to pop in although I said I wouldn't.

It's not down to the 'Brass'. The Bean Counters have said you've got only this much to spend at the end of the upcoming 'Defence Budget Review'.

The Afghanistan/Iraq equipment (or lack of) debacle has meant that politicos want money spent on that.

Thankfully sense has prevailed in some cases, a 25% reduction in our nuclear capability with on 3 subs instead of four.

Some factions are wondering what use is a conventional Navy and Air Force when fighting wars like we are at the moment. How can the new carriers, type 45 destroyers be justified etc.

There is a possibility that the Harriers are going in this Review, as well as some Tonkas. That completely wipes out the RNs fixed wing capability until JSF reaches service.

This country which 65 years ago was 'the Unsinkable Aircraft Carrier' is likely to have it's number of RAF Stations reduced further as well.

[Skyhawk_310R]

I don't think a MANPAD cares whether the target is fast or not. ;)

Oh yes it does!

Speed is a huge advantage in defeating any threat, but especially so for a MANPAD which due to the requirement of low enough weight to be man carried and employed, has a finite time of flight due to finite fuel onboard. Speed vastly shrinks the amount of time for target acquisition, targeting, and weapons release.

About the only advantage going slow can provide is such a small heat signature that the MANPAD cannot get a lock.

It is sad for me to see countries like Great Britain yeild themselves to the false premise of cutting their defense budgets to the bone!

Those "cheap propeller aircraft" are cheap in relative terms only. In reality, they are expensive to operate and their maximum capabilities are limited to put it mildly. As engineers learned in World War II, there are known performance limits for anything powered by a propeller and World War II very much saw those limits achieved.

A nation should be prepared to spend for its defense in accordance with its society's value. That value is mostly human but also economic. In short a society should keep a proper ratio. It makes perfect sense for a nation like Afghanistan to spend its lower resources on an attack aircraft like the lightweight turboprop being worked by the US's acquisition program. But, a nation with the wealth and social value of Great Britain can certainly afford much more and has vastly more to lose if it's defenses fail at the critical hour.

When you fail to put the best technology on the ramp in peacetime, it means vastly more blood is shed in combat. Put another way, there is nothing more expensive in the long run than a second best Air Force! In the interwar years between WW1 and WW2, Great Britain's penny pinching Parliament actually instituted a plan where if no projected threat was envisioned for a set period of years in the future, there would be no significant assets allocated for defense. It was a disaster as Great Britain came perilously close to entering World War II with biplanes vice the Hurricane and Spitfire. But worse, that inadequate preparation was a certain factor in provoking the rise of the threat itself.

I sincerely hope the current penny pinching climate throughout so many nations does not provoke a similar future miscalculation. I think to a certain extent, we can rely upon the sobering influence of the vast destruction and agony seen by World War II's lesson. I just hope it's enough! Cutting defenses to the bone makes it clear this is the sole remaining deterrent to future miscalculations that lead to war. Because, in the balance, human life and democratic societies are far more valuable than any amount of money spent for the proper balance of national defenses. If a nation chooses to abdicate that duty, then they should hope they can place their future in the hands of a most generous and moral other power with the temperment to hold its status of protector most sacred. I for one would prefer having allies of similar values and defenses who can work in equal partnership to ensure mutual peace and security.

Ken

[Allen]

You know this is 2 year old right?

[Skyhawk_310R]

You know this is 2 year old right?

Actually, no I did not. I appeared at the top of the thread listings on my browser, so I never thought it would be that old! Must have been some technical glitch!

Ken

[Allen]

Must have been. Last post before yours was made in 2010...