British Military Pictures & Videos
- Thread starter Obi Wan Russell
- Start date
Last edited:
tomcat21
New Member
I was VERY impressed with all the photos above popeye! Thanks for the link! I do have a a question though. Are the Harrier GR Mk.9's used by the Airforce or NAVY? I Remember the Navy having the FA.2, but retiring them early. Do they slip the GR Mk.9 force between both services? I have always been confused about who owns and operates Britain's Harriers. Plus will each service, the RN and the RAF each have their own JSF's in the future?
I love the QUEEN ELIZABETH cutaways! They are awesome. Plus I have a carrier design concept I have been trying to post, can you give me tips to post it?
I love the QUEEN ELIZABETH cutaways! They are awesome. Plus I have a carrier design concept I have been trying to post, can you give me tips to post it?
The Harrier GR9s and 9a's* are technically 'owned' by the RAF but are operated jointly by the RAF and the FAA. Currently active are two frontline sqns, 1(F)sqn RAF and 800NAS, with training and support provided by 4(R) sqn (formerly 20(R) sqn), which is manned 50/50 by RN and RAF personnel. At the moment this is supposed to be the model for future F-35 operations but as the RAF has frequently been making noises about getting out of the STOVL game, by the end of the decade we could see an all RN F-35 force in the UK!
*The GR9a has the same avionics and weapons as the GR9 but has an uprated Pegasus engine for operating in hot/high conditions.
tomcat21
New Member
Thank you Obi Wan. That did help me understand ALOT more. Its a pity the Royal Airforce didn't upgrade the Harrier GR Mk.9's to the standard like the USMC, ITALY and SPAIN did with the AV-8B Plus. They should have put in the BLUE VIXEN radars from the FA.2's, only if it was possible. This would have been a good stop gap measure to give the RN an AMRAAM capable fighter, and an upgraded attack multirole fighter and attack aircraft.
I do hope the BOTH carriers get to be used to their full potential. It seems the 70's thinking of killing carriers is back in the UK government. USING THE RAF TO COVER THE NAVY, HA!:roll: The RN needs to have its OWN F-35's. I believe that will keep better flexibility when the RAF can't deploy, and HATES being on carriers, the RN can immediately deploy just as a US or other allied carrier can! I believe the FALKLANDS argument is still viable today for the RN. Even in Afghanistan the US deployed ENTERPRISE CVN-65 first and immediately to give the US combat aircraft presence.
I do hope the BOTH carriers get to be used to their full potential. It seems the 70's thinking of killing carriers is back in the UK government. USING THE RAF TO COVER THE NAVY, HA!:roll: The RN needs to have its OWN F-35's. I believe that will keep better flexibility when the RAF can't deploy, and HATES being on carriers, the RN can immediately deploy just as a US or other allied carrier can! I believe the FALKLANDS argument is still viable today for the RN. Even in Afghanistan the US deployed ENTERPRISE CVN-65 first and immediately to give the US combat aircraft presence.
Fitting Blue Vixen as part of the GR9 upgrade WAS proposed, either by fitting in the nose as in the AV-8B+ or to be carried in an underwing pod reminiscent of Dutch Navy Sea Hawks in the 60s. The radar sets were already bought and paid for as they would have been transferred from the FA2s, but the RAF managed to persuade the government that the cost of fitting them was too high (around £650million IIRC) and the RAF obviously wasn't interested in actually providing Fleet Air Defence in the firsrt place, they just want the budget allocated for it to be transferred to them. Also it meant the Navy's stocks of AMRAAMs could be transferred to the Tornado F3 and Typhoon fleets.
I hope that with the RAFs machinations showing their hand and purpose too soon that we eventually end of with an ALL RN F-35 force, composed as the FAA was in the 60s and 70s, all sqns and aircraft under RN control but with a percentage of the aircrew drawn from volunteers from the RAF. Those crabs who wish to get their feet wet, fly a real man's aircraft and actually have the prospect of shooting something down in combat (remember since WW2 ALL British air to air combat kills have been by the FAA, do you detect an element of jealousy there?) can serve a tour or two with the FAA and those who would rather work 9-5 and drive home for the weekend can stay with the RAF. It is a historical fact that the RAF has NEVER been able to fulfill it's promises to defend the fleet at sea which it constantly makes as an excuse for disbanding the FAA. Even in the North Atlantic during the 70s (which was the prime scenario they used to get rid of the Carriers last time), when the RN was just supposed to escort resupply convoys across from the US and Canada and tackle the Soviet Submarine threat, the RAF was incapable of defending the fleet from 1950's vintage Russian bombers carrying cruise missiles. A fleet defence fighter on deck alert let alone CAP could intercept that bomber in 10 minutes whereas the Scotland based RAF would take over two hours to arrive and at best could take photos of the aftermath. This inescapable fact persuaded the Governments of the 70s to buy the Sea Harrier in the first place, though the RAF managed to stop the accompanying Sea King AEW from being developed (until 1982 at least) at the time as well on the grounds that the Nimrod AEW3 would be able to provide constant cover for the North Atlantic... we all know how that worked out...
My ideal solution is for a FAA force of five F-35C sqns to provide two standing air groups (one on call, one in training/ reserve/ ready to 'surge') with two 12 aircraft sqns each and an OCU (my pick of numberplates would be CAG1 with 800/892 and CAG2 with 801/893 and 899 for OCU) whilst the RAF can have a force of up to 60 F-35Bs to reinforce/surge as required. The B model alleviates the need for deck qualification to the same level as the 'B' (since the RAF will only occassionally visit the deck), and in an invasion scenario once the landings have been successful the RAF sqns can transfer to (captured/improvised) shore bases and operate from there. There wouldsd also be no need to form a seperate RAF F-35B OCU in this case, as 899 could be a 'Joint' sqn. The 'B and 'C are essentially the same aircraft from a pilots POV, once in the air they fly much the same way with identical cockpits and weapon systems. Only a specialist flight withing the sqn would be needed to train pilots on the STOVL requirements so the sqn itself would have a mixed complement of C's and B's (12/6) with most parts of the syllabus being covered on the Cs. Impossible? Hardly, been done before. Between 1968 and 1972 all RN and RAF Buccaneer crews were trained by 736NAS at Lossie (then RNAS not RAF) before going on to their new sqns, and likewise between 1969 and 1972 all RN and RAF F-4 Phantom aircrews were trained by 767NAS at Yeovilton (the sqn included a number of RAF FG1s still in their camo but with 767 badges and RN style modex numbers on the fuselage). RAF Sea King training was handled by the RN for quite a while as well, seeing as how the RAF only had a small fleet for SAR compared to the RNs SK fleet. The crabs who 'served' alongside the dark blue all seem to have enjoyed the experience and speak fondly of it to this day...
tomcat21
New Member
I must admit I understand some more about the RAF and RN now! Thanks again Obi Wan. I love the look of the ratings and ranks on the uniforms of RN personnel. It looks "neat" and has a style about it that catches your eye.
Whats is this that I here the Navy is now looking into the Electro Magnetic Cats for the Queen Elizabeth class? Does that mean F-35 C's or even F/A-18 E\F's are a possibility? How likely is that to happen?
Whats is this that I here the Navy is now looking into the Electro Magnetic Cats for the Queen Elizabeth class? Does that mean F-35 C's or even F/A-18 E\F's are a possibility? How likely is that to happen?
Going CTOL for the CVFs with EMCATs and EMTRAPs (did I just coin a new word there? Cool!) has been plan B from the start of the project. F-35B remains the ptrferred option, primarily for reasons of operating costs aboard ship (fewer personell required for a STOVL carrier as Ski Jumps have no moving parts...) and carrier quals are easier with STOVL aircraft. Even the crabs can be trained to land on the deck! Also the original reasoning was essentially that if the RN combined their Sea Harrier replacement program with the RAFs Harrier replacement program then that would to a degree remove a potential major opponent to the purcahse of new carrier aircraft. After that a lot of justification for STOVL over CTOL was created to make the decision look sensible. To a degree it is, but the RN hedged their bets by making the CVF essentially a Midway sized CTOL carrier with the cats and wires left out, though with space and weight reserved for them. Retro fitting them should invilve no more than a six month refit as it would be basically a 'plug and play' situation. Earlier in the design process, steam cats would have been an option, as space and weight were also reserved for auxilliary boilers to serve them, though this would also require additional personell to run and maintain them. Remenber it was the personell requirements that were the deciding factor, as the STOVL CVF has a crew much the same size as an Invincible class CVS (CVS= 685+air group, CVF=682+air group!)
Hi Obi Wan, one thing that actually seems wiered to me is why is the RAF still so keen on STOVL capability?
Is expeditionary warefare such a great possibility for the RAF that they want the capability to operate from forward bases that don't even have a runway yet?
C models for everyone seems somewhat more usefull to me. I guess they might also be a little cheaper to operate. And then I've come across something saying with the C models higher playload / range, fewer numbers might actually be required.
What's yout take as the UK shadow minister of defense in that ... ?