Future RAF/RN fleet

Latest stories are that the entire RAF Tornado fleet may be retired. The £7.5bn 'saved' may help pay for a Trident replacement.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1298871/RAF-Tornado-fleet-faces-axe-bid-save-7bn.html

This is still speculative (the 'leak' was hardly an agreed policy document) but it will come as no surprise (see my moniker) that I think keeping the Harriers a bit longer makes sense - Typhoon Tranche 3 with Storm Shadow to replace Tornado plus the small, flexible Harrier fleet for carrier use and for places you might not want to use a shiny new, expensive, Typhoon that might still have a few integration gremlins to emerge.

So, a future fleet of Typhoons and Harriers, plus a few (I doubt 138) JSFs later on, and maybe some 'sons of Taranis' at some point. Makes sense as Tornado is old, expensive to maintain, the only fast jet left with navigators to train etc. But it is the last vestige of the 'strategic bomber' idea that the RAF was set up for, and which justifies the Service's separate existence.

Are there other sensible/acceptable/likely options for the RAF and RN that other folk here can think of to save a lot of money in a hurry? I can't, unless the UK abandons a Trident replacement/upgrade. I doubt scrapping the carrier(s) will really save all that much, unless the JSF goes too. IMHO the UK is continuing its inexorable move to make its forces into a smaller, less integrated version of the US Marine Corps.

Update, from latest 'leak'.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/defence/7931465/RAF-to-shrink-to-World-War-One-levels.html

Seems Tornado will go and Typhoon fleet will be cut. No mention of JSF, Harrier fleet or carrier(s). Presumably the RAF will claim the last bits of the fixed wing FAA (just as Army will get the Royal Marines).

Much of this echoes work from the 1980s - Alan Clarke's paper, or the work of Simpkin in his book 'Race to the Swift'.

So, we finally get the real post-Cold War cuts. Ouch!

harrier said:

So, we finally get the real post-Cold War cuts. Ouch!

Click to expand...

You mean you didn't consider the last 20 years real post-Cold War cuts? Where is the outrage over this? The British military must be a glutton for punishment or something.

Why do the Trident subs have to be replaced so early it seems? Aren't they on average a good 15 years younger than the Ohio class?

Colonial-Marine said:

harrier said:

So, we finally get the real post-Cold War cuts. Ouch!

Click to expand...

Why do the Trident subs have to be replaced so early it seems? Aren't they on average a good 15 years younger than the Ohio class?

Click to expand...

They were designed with a shorter lifespan than the Ohios and not for SLEPing - its been suggested that the shorter lifespan and the inability to SLEP (at least not cheaply) was done to force new construction at a future date to keep submarine building alive - of course that was before the ending of the Cold War and everyone now being great friends with each other..... :

You mean you didn't consider the last 20 years real post-Cold War cuts?

Click to expand...

Of course they were, and often painful ones. But they tended to be piecemeal and an attempt to continue doing 'a bit of everything' on a global basis, although 'on the cheap'.

The forthcoming cuts seem to foreshadow an abandonment of that idea, and a cutting of cloth to match our means, which are currently much diminished. If a strategic nuclear role is to be kept, the rest will be even more severely squeezed.

Any outrage at whatever is finally announced in October is likely to be drowned by the anguished cries over the loss of welfare, education, health spending etc. to be announced at the same time.

Wouldn't a tactical fighter/strike force be enough to justify an independent air force? The Royal Swedish Air Force didn't have any bombers after the introduction of Saab A 32 Lansen, and yet it got a decent amount of resources during the Cold War. ???

I can see that the threat of strategic bombers aren't that high as during the Cold War (even though Blackjacks have begun sniffing at UK's borders again) but surely UK plans to keep on being prepared for peace keeping missions, and surely those will need strike fighters in future? ???

According to another story the Royal Marines are looking at losing their amphibious transport ships and being integrated into the Army, the Army is looking at losing one of it's two armored divisons. The number of Typhoons will also be cut along with two nuclear submarines and who knows what else. I may be American but this really disturbs me.

And all of this to pay for some sort of entitlements that will prove unsustainable even after this huge cuts? Once again I am thinking maybe everybody was safer back when we had the Soviet Union over there.

We've still got the Hawks.
The Tri-Star and the VC-10s could be replaced by the KC-17.
The BAe HS.125s could be used for other duties.
and don't forget the Grob Tutors and the tucanos along with the BBMF.

Recent reports (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/8060600/RAF-cuts-could-make-Britains-air-space-vulnerable-to-attack.html) are that the SDSR announcements next week will indeed see Tornado retired and the carriers go ahead, with a smaller JSF buy. Seems the latter will still be STOVL 'B' variants, if reports that the UK is funding more SRVL work are anything to go by:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/asd/2010/10/15/03.xml&headline=JSF%20To%20Develop%20Landing%20Technique%20For%20U.K.%20Carriers&channel=defense

Presumably this means the Harrier force will survive to bridge the gap (it would make sense).

So, the future RAF looks like being Typhoons & Harriers/JSF's, with the RN having part ownership perhaps of the latter.

What does this mean for the UK forces and industry? I would guess BAE will move all Harrier work to Warton, to fill the gap there, and maybe close Farnborough. That would be a terrible loss for what is left of the 'Hawker' design team there, and a small compensation for the loss of Tornado support work at Warton. With Woodford due to close soon, and Brough's future not looking good either, it really does seem that the end of substantial UK military aerospace design and production may be at hand, with JSF the key to retaining any major work it seems.

No doubt if the RN have some control over the aircraft flying from their new carriers the RAF will want to wrest it from them, especially as the carriers will represent a strategic air power element, allowing force projection in alliance with Typhoons/Storm Shadow/tankers.

The RN seems ready to lose many escorts/amphibs in order to get the carriers, and with those will go the helicopters they carry too, so not good for AgustaWestland.

There is also a silence on UAV's - they don't seem to be touted as 'the future' so much anymore (e.g. saving money over manned aircraft). With the yet to fly Taranis just unveiled, it really is unclear what happens next for BAE, apart from a big hit on O&S cashflow.

I suppose these are what are called 'interesting times'. Can't help but compare the SDSR to the similar convulsions of 1965/66. It seems the impact will last just as long, although there would seem limited scope for new programmes to emerge, as Jaguar/Harrier/MRCA did in the 1960s. All quite depressing!

40 JSF's for UK after cuts, Harriers to go?

Latest reports on the BBC Newsnight, who claim to have seen SDSR documents, say the following:

Both new aircraft carriers to be built.
One used as a helicopter carrier in the short term.
JSF order cut from 138 to 40 - presumably STOVL B models.
RN surface escort fleet cut from 24 to 15 or 16 - 6 Type 45 and 9/10 Type 23's?
Army reorganised into 5 brigades of 6,000 each - presumably these are mixed type combat brigades.
7,000 man cut in army manpower.

No specific word on the RAF fleet mix from the BBC but the Guardian report that the RAF is mounting a last ditch attempt to reprieve the Tornado force by getting rid of the Harrier fleet:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/oct/15/raf-fight-save-tornado-bombers

which would potentially leave the first carrier without aircraft for a time.

Seems a pretty extraordinary way to settle long term defence policy to me!

40 JSF's for UK after cuts, Harriers to go?

More:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/dca8b1a4-d8a1-11df-8430-00144feabdc0.html?ftcamp=rss

Latest summary:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5icv1H6p6sT7MlHcgklCEjR7vDzew?docId=N0300661287178985290A

The Falklands argument seems a bit of a red herring, but being unable to deliver 'Carrier Strike' to some location where UK airbases are not available for several years while having carriers seems absurd.

If the RAF have kept Tornado and got rid of Harrier that means the fixed wing Fleet Air Arm is finally dead. The Admirals must rue the day they gave up the Sea Harrier for a relative ha'porth of Pegasus 107s, which they did to pay for the 'aircraft' carriers!

UK Harrier force to be retired

The BBC is quoting Liam Fox as saying that there will be a gap between the Harrier force being withdrawn and JSF entering service, leaving the carriers without fast jets for some years:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-11560711

The plans will be announced on Tuesday, 20th October. On Wednesday, 21st October, Trafalgar Day, it will be 50 years to the day since the first P.1127 hovered at Dunsfold. A real irony in the dates there!

A Harrier is a type of plane, a bird of prey and also a type of dog used for hunting foxes. However, the Fox got the Harrier this time it seems.

Harrier/Nimrod to be retired in cuts.

Nimrods to go as well.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/oct/17/next-generation-nimrod-scrapped

So, BAE Farnborough (Harrier design services) and Woodford to close I assume - the latter earlier than planned. The last vestiges of Hawker and Avro.

I wonder if the Harriers will make it to 2013? That would mark a century of Kingston (Sopwith/Hawker) designed aircraft in front-line UK service. The Nimrod would have given 'deHavilland' and 'Avro' a claim on a 'front-line' century too, but not to be it seems.

Of course, the Hawk, Dominie and 146 will likely still be in service in second-line roles then.

CVF to be Cat/Trap, end of STOVL JSF?

Another update, indicating the UK carrier(s) will be able to operate French and US aircraft, so may have catapults and arrestor wires:

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE69G0UW20101017?pageNumber=2


and also over at AvWeek from Bill Sweetman:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3aae3a49d1-74b9-48cb-ba47-8d7cac84992d&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

which indicates the final end of the STOVL F-35B for UK, and maybe USMC service.

Re: CVF to be Cat/Trap, end of STOVL JSF?

harrier said:

and also over at AvWeek from Bill Sweetman:
which indicates the final end of the STOVL F-35B for UK, and maybe USMC service.

Click to expand...

If you take Sweetman as gospel on the F-35 then the project ended years ago and what we are witnessing at Fort Worth and Edwards is some kind of strange Matrix brain in a vat virtual reality.

What is happening in the UK is the contraction of a medium power to a small power exacerbated by their ridiculous desire to maintain nuclear missile armed submarines to defend themselves from no one. They went through it all before in the 1960s and 50 years later its time for Mark II.

The MoD is desperate for any kind of massive cut to the force structure and any kind of massive cut to the next few and immediate financial year outlays. So what fits here is getting rid of the V/STOL force and pushing back the new carrier capability as far as possible. Which means they don’t have to spend money in the next few years on F-35Bs they can pay for their carriers and then start paying for the aircraft to operate them. Since the RAF has to buy 160 Typhoons and this is the high end of the size of the strike fighter fleet the UK can afford to keep there is no room for F-35B there either.

I doubt this will have significant effect on the USMC. While replacing the Expeditionary Strike Group’s fixed wing force with more Carrier Strike Groups makes great sense it doesn’t fit the Marines’ concept of self and the US Congress will keep paying for that until hell freezes over. The sensible push back on the F-35B schedule is already happening but with the UK out of the picture life will still go on. I wonder what will happen to the UK’s work share on F-35 when the one Level I partner will only end out buying (at best) 50 odd aircraft?

Re: CVF to be Cat/Trap, end of STOVL JSF?

sealordlawrence said:

What is actually happening in the UK is the worlds 6th largest economy (thus safely a medium sized power) progressively reducing its defence expenditure towards 2% of GDP compared with an average of 4% in 1988-91. Turns out that if you do that then there is less you can do militarily.

Click to expand...

The whole idea of planning for the future is realising that things change. The British economy has 1% growth, 3% inflation an aging population and is far from a centre of innovation like America. Currently the government’s austerity package is a desperate attempt to stave off a decline in credit rating. Hardly speaks well for the future that the most important thing the HM Government has to preserve is your ability to borrow money. So it is safely nothing. By 2020 the British economy will be in 10th place after Mexico. By 2030 the situation will be even worse for the British.

Hmm, I think I started this thread to consider what options may come to pass for the future RAF and RN. Credit ratings and the Mexican economy (both part of my past life, and both fascinating in their own way!) should perhaps go elsewhere.

I do hope that you two chaps aren't about to start 'round 3' of your recent discussions - quoting blocks of each other's text is a worrying sign! PM was invented for that stuff.

Re: UK Harrier force to be retired

The plans will be announced on Tuesday, 20th October. On Wednesday, 21st October, Trafalgar Day, it will be 50 years to the day since the first P.1127 hovered at Dunsfold. A real irony in the dates there!

Click to expand...

I was a day ahead of myself (makes a change!) - the SDSR is on Tuesday 19th, the main spending review on 20th, 21st is Thursday. But the point is it does seem like a highly ironic 'anniversary present', two days ahead of the 21st.

Capability holiday. Another one of those terms like 'fitted for but not with'. Orwellian nonsense.

It does seem that a Tornado/F-35C Cat-trap CVF deal will emerge, although the RAF may have more of an eye on more F-35C's long term, either with or instead of 'son of Taranis'. Presumably the Tornado fleet will have to be smaller as its reported 7.5:1 operating costs ratio to Harrier (over different years admittedly) will be hard to justify in spending cuts otherwise.

In any case, fifty years of UK STOVL work seems to be drawing to a hasty, premature end. A very sad outcome.

UK defence cuts - Harrier/Ark Royal/Nimrod to go in weeks

Latest reports from BBC/ITN:

All Harriers to be taken out of service in 2010/2011

No fixed wing aircraft on new carriers until 2019

One carrier to be converted with catapults and arrestor gear

All Nimrod MRA.4's to be 'grounded'

HMS Ark Royal to be taken out of service and scrapped within weeks or months

Total RN surface fleet to be 19 ships (2 CVF, 6 Type 45, 11 Type 23?)

Chinook order cut from 22 to 12

Navy to lose helicopter 'platform' (HMS Ocean?)

5,000 RAF, 5,000 RN and 7,000 service personnel to go, along with 30,000 civilian MoD staff

Many jobs in industry to go, with, for example, BAE Systems estimating 3,800 jobs in the North West to be lost, based on Typhoon Tranche 3B cancellation and JSF work moving to the USA.

UK defence cuts - Harrier/Ark Royal/Nimrod to go in weeks

BBC report:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11570593

Today the government's security review announced that among the major threats that the armed forces will be reshaped to face are cyber terrorism and global pandemics.

This is a timely warning as the World Health Organisation is tracking an outbreak of a serious medical condition in Argentina.

Apparently many people there are laughing their heads off.

By 2020 the British economy will be in 10th place after Mexico. By 2030 the situation will be even worse for the British.

Click to expand...

And I hope yopu have money on that.

UK economy is currently slow, assumptions on future growth are just that. European average is higher, and so is the that for Russia, Africa, both north and south Americas and China.
Problem with your assumption is that the UK growth is somehow disconnected from the rest of the world, which is clearly not the case.
Since Sterling floats free, the hard reality is the cost UK labour is falling, as it is in the US. Part of a long term relief of the pressures built up by China and its still artificialy low currency. Inevitably China will experience wage and price inflations correcting its imbalance too.

UK might become stagnant in merely matching Europzone growth, but its clear the politicians and the City see other areas of the globe as more potent in terms of a return on investments and trade.
Austerity package is about politics.
The real finances are noware near as bad as proclaimed, which is more about the relationships in circles of the media and political. In that UK governments decision to reduce funding for defence, is a false economy, but one that will meet expectations of 'pain all around', while being effectivley meaningless comapred to the budgets for Health, Pensions, and other areas of government spending.

Naturaly being defeatist and pessimistic about the UK is has a long history, and clearly for some it has covered itself on glory in succeeding in limiting the scope of UK ambitions. Perhaps some think it is a good thing to diminish a Union of 60 million people and attack their belief in their county's future?

Re: UK defence cuts - Harrier/Ark Royal/Nimrod to go in weeks

harrier said:

Hmm, I think I started this thread to consider what options may come to pass for the future RAF and RN. Credit ratings and the Mexican economy (both part of my past life, and both fascinating in their own way!) should perhaps go elsewhere.

Click to expand...

If this issue of the current round of MoD cuts were say small and tailored then perhaps you’d be right. But they are a significant and long term downsizing of the British Forces from a medium to small power strength. With the exception of the nuclear capability the future British forces will not have significantly more combat power than those of Canada or Australia.

While there are many good reasons for this policy reappraisal by HM Govt. one is the comparative downsizing of the British economy compared to the rest of the world – and importantly the cost of military capability. This may not be pleasant for a self image inflated by Jeremy Clarkson but it is a reality. So it is relevant.

harrier said:

I do hope that you two chaps aren't about to start 'round 3' of your recent discussions - quoting blocks of each other's text is a worrying sign! PM was invented for that stuff.

Click to expand...

Clearly while a relevant point to mention it is uncomfortable for some. The reoccurring over reactions and vicious responses to any suggestion that upsets a certain forum members self esteem is not my responsibility.

harrier said:

All Harriers to be taken out of service in 2010/2011

No fixed wing aircraft on new carriers until 2019

One carrier to be converted with catapults and arrestor gear

All Nimrod MRA.4's to be 'grounded'

HMS Ark Royal to be taken out of service and scrapped within weeks or months

Total RN surface fleet to be 19 ships (2 CVF, 6 Type 45, 11 Type 23?)

Click to expand...

Welcome to the small powers club.

Re: UK Harrier force to be retired

harrier said:

It does seem that a Tornado/F-35C Cat-trap CVF deal will emerge, although the RAF may have more of an eye on more F-35C's long term, either with or instead of 'son of Taranis'. Presumably the Tornado fleet will have to be smaller as its reported 7.5:1 operating costs ratio to Harrier (over different years admittedly) will be hard to justify in spending cuts otherwise.

Click to expand...

I think with you can scrap Taranis as anything more than a demonstrator or a small scale 1-2 squadron replacement for Reaper and Sentinel. Also a joint RAF/RN F-35C force is unlikely to be more than 2 squadrons (48 aircraft).

harrier said:

In any case, fifty years of UK STOVL work seems to be drawing to a hasty, premature end. A very sad outcome.

Click to expand...

It is very unfortunate. But V/STOL will live on with the Marines, Spain and Italy. The RN will also have a 10 year carrier gap and then a joint carrier force with France. Perhaps the Aeronavale will be looking at replacing Rafale M in the 2020s with F-35C?

I keep reading that the European Union is an emerging super power, or has already arrived as a super power. Is it possible that we might see a common European Security and Defense Force and when might we see such a force? Does it really make sense for twenty seven member nations to continue to maintain twenty seven separate militaries?

Though the United Kingdom may not like the fact that it may have to subordinate its national interest and pride to the wishes of the continent.

Triton

They are still 27 different nations just most with a common currency. Combined defence is pointless at present as it would be virtually impossible to make any decision on swift action quick enough to be even worth while, and there is such a disfunctional difference between states that they would veto any potential military action on either ethical grounds or self interest to protect either their interests in said 'opposition', or an unwillingness to risk thier own men and resources in a conflict.

The only way Eurodefence would ever work is against a direct threat to member states by an external aggressor and even then half would still sit on the fence.

This is the old world don't forget forged by centuries or war, conquest and trade, those feelings will take decades or longer to fade away.

With the UK's cancellation of its F-35B order, is the F-35B program in jeopardy of cancellation? Or is the US DoD committed to purchasing this aircraft for the Marines? Further, have other countries expressed interest in acquiring the F-35B? Spain, Italy, India? Is it possible that the F-35B might be operated by Japan aboard its new helicopter carriers?

Triton said:

With the UK's cancellation of its F-35B order, is the F-35B program in jeopardy of cancellation? Or is the US DoD committed to purchasing this aircraft for the Marines? Further, have other countries expressed interest in acquiring the F-35B? Spain, Italy, India? Is it possible that the F-35B might be operated by Japan aboard its new helicopter carriers?

Click to expand...

The USMC requirement for F-35B is in the hundreds so unlikely to be affected in anyway by the British withdrawal from "West of Suez". Spain and Italy have both built carriers for the F-35B so will be highly likely customers when it is available.

Who might be interested in purchasing the de-commissioned Invincible-class aircraft carriers?