Royal Air Force [RAF] discussions and updates

swerve

Super Moderator
Swerve, when you say 3 spare MRA4 airframes, is it the case that the airframes have already been fabricated and were awaiting MRA4 equipment instalation. My understanding is that the procurement of MRA4s has been reduced from 12 to 9. So I am guessing that we have 9 complete MRA4s including equipment and 3 spare improved airframes.
The three development airframes have been fully converted to MRA4 configuration, & used for developing & testing the MRA4 equipment & its integration, not just the airframes, so they must have some of the equipment, though probably not a complete fit each. As I understand it, the problem is that they aren't production standard, & would need some money (I've seen £100 mn quoted on PPrune - total, not each) spent to bring them up to standard.

But I expect that the plan is to recycle whatever mission equipment is on them into the 9 production standard airframes which are now being built (at least the first two are complete, & in testing ), leaving pretty near bare airframes.
 

Pingu

New Member
I thought i'd stir up a bit of a debate about the retirement of Tornado F3 as well as the GR4s new commitment in Afganistan.

It seems strange to me that the F3 fleet has been cut early, given that this will create a serious strain on the Typhoon fleet, and if my understanding is correct, actually leave the UK with a capability gap in terms of maintaining QRA (I say capability in terms of quantity rather than quality). I find it odd that the F3 fleet has been cut when the GR4 fleet is at nearly 140 aircraft.

I also find if odd that the GR4 requires twice the maintainence hours that the Harrier GR9 requires. Does anyone have an ideas why this is the case? This is one of the reasons for some opposing the decision to replace the Harriers with Tornados in Afganistan.

I personally agree with the decision to have GR4s in Afganistan as it allows GR9s to focus on carrier ops training: the very thing that JFH was set out to achieve. Discussions have been made about axing the Harrier and of course the F3 has already been axed. I however, feel that it would have been wiser to have cut the GR4 numbers. This will allow for a more balanced force of Harriers and Tornadoes. The main benefit I can see from this though, would have been that the money saved could be spent on future GR4 upgrades and with fewer airframes to upgrade, this would be more affordable.

I wonder how the RAF intends to keep the GR4s flying until 2020-25. They must surely require some stuctural modifications to keep them flying to their OSD. I guess that keeping the GR4 numbers high achieves a similar effect to stucturally upgrading fewer airframes, in that a greater fleet equates to a lower usage per airframe. I think the GR4 has plenty of upgrade potential and I hope that its potential is met.

I would like to see a Synthetic Aperture Radar installed to replace the very obsolete TFR. I have also wondered about the possibility of installing the EJ200s onto the GR4, if RB199s fitted into development Typhoons then surely the reverse is not impossible to imagine, although I am probably wrong. I now struggle to see the relevance of the FLIR sensors installed as part of the MLU when podded systems such as Litening III and RAPTOR (in the case of the GR4A) must have rendered these obsolete. Does anyone know if the integrated sensors are still used? If they're not, then it is perhaps worth considering replacing them with something new. Maybe a SAR would require some of this space although I am unsure of the space requirements of the intended SAR. One thought I considered was to have the guts of the Litening III installed in a fairing under the nose in place of existing sensors, in a similar configuration to the F-35s EOTS with Sniper's guts. This would free up space on the Torandos relatively narrow fusalage for a more flexible weapons load. Finally, we have seen the BOZ pods replaced by a new pod as a UOR in Afganistan. I wonder if there are intentions to upgrade or replace the Tornado's Sky Shadow pods for radar countermeasures.
 

outsider

New Member
I'm curious what happened to the RAF Tornados that were purchased.

According to wikipedia, originally 152 F3's and 228 GR1's were ordered.

142 GR1's were upgraded to GR4 standard.

What happened to the remainder of the GR1's. Are they in storage or were they sold or scrapped?

Same question for the F3, as the RAF has been operating far less than 152 F3's for a considerable time.

Obviously some aircraft were lost through attrition or donated to museums but that doesn't account for all of them or does it?
 

swerve

Super Moderator
... would like to see a Synthetic Aperture Radar installed to replace the very obsolete TFR.....
There's been a project to do this for several years, under the heading ARTS (Advanced Radar Targeting System). I've not been able to find any details of the proposed new radar except that it is AESA & Selex is involved. That suggests a variant of the Vixen family, presumably (given the large amount of space in a Tornado nose) a large one. There is frustratingly little news. Mentions of flight trials in 2007 have popped up.

MOD awards contract to QinetiQ primed team to demonstrate Advanced Radar Targeting System (ARTS) on a Tornado GR4A

It may have been quietly shelved.
 

Lopex

New Member
RAF Operational Update??

Having looked back at most of the released updates since the GR4 took over from the GR9 the only weapon fired seems to be the 27mm Mauser cannon. This was one of two stafing runs against an enemy firing at allied troops. Not one single bomb or missile ?

But what is a show of force? It is different than a show of presence. Is a show of force to surpress an enemy another way of saying we dropped a 500lb Paveway IV on the enemy?

Hopefully someone can clear this up for me.
 

Waylander

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
A show of force is done by flying low and fast over enemy positions. Add some flares to this and it might very well scare the enemy away or at least make him think about the vulnerability of his position anf force him to maneuver in order not to get a LGB onto his head.

The suspected decline in heavy CAS missions might be a result of the new US/ISAF agenda which is heavily enforced by General McChrystal.
Less bombs is the motto of the day...
 

StevoJH

The Bunker Group
Having looked back at most of the released updates since the GR4 took over from the GR9 the only weapon fired seems to be the 27mm Mauser cannon. This was one of two stafing runs against an enemy firing at allied troops. Not one single bomb or missile ?

But what is a show of force? It is different than a show of presence. Is a show of force to surpress an enemy another way of saying we dropped a 500lb Paveway IV on the enemy?

Hopefully someone can clear this up for me.
They've used at least one brimstone as I understand it, most likely more then that though.
 

riksavage

Banned Member
They've used at least one brimstone as I understand it, most likely more then that though.
I also believe the change in doctrine is partly due to the increase in troops on the ground in Helmand. The FOB's are under less pressure allowing for more aggressive fighting and standing patrols to push out the ink spot. Troops are relying less on CAS and more on their own indigenous firepower (60mm mortars and Javelins) and that provided by the dispersed 105mm's and 81mm mortars. Recent own goals in the hearts and minds campaign have also forced a rethink, nothing worse than seeing dead civi's on TV as a result of a stray 500 pounder.
 

StevoJH

The Bunker Group
I also believe the change in doctrine is partly due to the increase in troops on the ground in Helmand. The FOB's are under less pressure allowing for more aggressive fighting and standing patrols to push out the ink spot. Troops are relying less on CAS and more on their own indigenous firepower (60mm mortars and Javelins) and that provided by the dispersed 105mm's and 81mm mortars. Recent own goals in the hearts and minds campaign have also forced a rethink, nothing worse than seeing dead civi's on TV as a result of a stray 500 pounder.
Definately, the addition of the Marine Expeditionary Brigade effectively doubled the firepower of the forces in the province (added a second brigade group) and the extra rotory winged support that the marines brought with them has made the brigades more flexible in deployment and has given more options for offensive operations then would otherwise exist.
 

kev 99

Member
They've used at least one brimstone as I understand it, most likely more then that though.
Definitely have:
A Taliban fighter was killed by an RAF Top Gun who fired a missile through a hole the size of a grapefruit.

The Harrier jump jet ace spotted the sniper waiting to kill Our Boys from thousands of feet up over Afghanistan.

The insurgent had planned to take out troops as they entered the compound from a tiny "murder hole" in the wall.

But after fixing his cross-hair on the gap the soldier had made, the RAF hero unleashed the new Dual Mode Brimstone Missile with devastating accuracy.

This is the first operational use of the radar-guided supersonic speed weapon.

Three of the 1.8 metre long missiles - which can hit static or moving targets - can be carried by the Harrier GR9 and the Tornado GR4.

Tornado Force Commander Gp Capt Colin Basnett said the "incredibly precise" Brimstone is a vital tool.

He added: "It's significantly increased the capability of Tornado Force to strike targets."
This story was posted on the MOD website on 26th September so it's quite possible more have been used since then.
 

riksavage

Banned Member
The following report claims the UK will rush through the purchase of 30 odd Chinooks, bringing the entire fleet to 70 in number. Knock on result being the future medium lift '2020 vision' purchase will be cancelled. Merlins will all be marinised (no doubt to replace the aging SeaKings) thus giving 3-Commando a much more versatile platform (increased carrying capacity and rear ramp) leaving the Joint Helicopter Force with four models - FutureLynx, Merlin, Chinook and Apache.

Afghanistan helicopter shortage: government to buy 30 Chinooks - Telegraph

Pretty sensible option IMHO, Chinnok brings so much to the table - range, speed and capacity. Merlin and FutureLynx will provide the smaller platform option if and when required.

The following Quote made me laugh though: "But some military commentators believe that the move ahead of the general election might be good politically but is “stupid” tactically as it could make a platoon of 30 soldiers in a single helicopter more vulnerable to ground fire than spread among three helicopters." .

The Chinook represents the primary workhouse in A-Stan, plus the financial and manning burden of training 3 x crews (Merlin say), when 1 x crew (Chinook) will suffice to carry the same number is a no brainer.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
The following report claims the UK will rush through the purchase of 30 odd Chinooks, bringing the entire fleet to 70 in number. Knock on result being the future medium lift '2020 vision' purchase will be cancelled. Merlins will all be marinised (no doubt to replace the aging SeaKings) thus giving 3-Commando a much more versatile platform (increased carrying capacity and rear ramp) leaving the Joint Helicopter Force with four models - FutureLynx, Merlin, Chinook and Apache.

Pretty sensible option IMHO, Chinnok brings so much to the table - range, speed and capacity. Merlin and FutureLynx will provide the smaller platform option if and when required.
I'm rather worried that this would leave the army & navy with a very top-heavy mix. If the future medium lift purchase is to be cancelled in favour of more Chinook, I think it should be accompanied by more AW159.
 

kev 99

Member
I'm rather worried that this would leave the army & navy with a very top-heavy mix. If the future medium lift purchase is to be cancelled in favour of more Chinook, I think it should be accompanied by more AW159.
No argument with that here, but I've always thought the RN's share of the purchase was small anyway, but we don't really know how this will affect the force structure at all yet, one report suggests that the RAF Merlins will be 'marinised', maybe the RN get these to replace their Seakings, but then what happens to the Pumas?
 

riksavage

Banned Member
No argument with that here, but I've always thought the RN's share of the purchase was small anyway, but we don't really know how this will affect the force structure at all yet, one report suggests that the RAF Merlins will be 'marinised', maybe the RN get these to replace their Seakings, but then what happens to the Pumas?
With money being tight, the Chinook represents the best compromise 'bang for buck' option, particularly if Osprey is ruled out. Range, load carrying capacity and speed is outstanding. It already forms the backbone of the SF rotary flight and is deemed absolutely essential for long-range missions requiring the insertion of troops, kit and wheeled vehicles. The UK has already zero-houred older versions to extend their life-span, the knowledge and infrastructure is already in place to absorb more units so to me it would make complete sense. Plus cost savings will be made by reducing the need to absorb a brand-new airframe training programme.

The AW149 has been pushed before as a cheap solution, though smaller than the Merlin and larger than the Wildcat (AW159), it does not offer a capability jump or fill a much needed requirement gap, it certainly doesn't compare with what an extra couple of Chinook sqn's brings to the table. Wildcat will also take up the liaison / armed-recce role currently enjoyed by army Lynx/Gazelle's to compliment the Apache, thus negating the need for a AW149 sized airframe or more AW159's.

Puma currently forms the backbone of the RAF'S battlefield taxis. I'm sure battlegroup commanders would much prefer to have the added capability of Chinook on call, after all Pumas can't lift vehicles, 105mm's + ammo, sustain a full trauma medical team and still have room for casualties.

The current Chinook crew of three operates a machine, which carries so much more than a medium lift helo, so adding capacity without increasing crew numbers with all associated knock-on financial implications makes sense. Merlin can provide the much needed support for RM operations, it has a much greater capacity than the SeaKing, Blackhawk (being forced to crouch down is right royal pain) or NH90 and comes with a very useful rear-ramp.

The new QE class lifts will be large enough to take the Chinook (QE could host 25 according to press reports?), and I'm sure any Ocean replacement will do the same. I'm also convinced the UK will be smart enough to specify folding rotors as they did with Apache (the only nation operating the machine to do so thus far).
 
Last edited:

StevoJH

The Bunker Group
Riksvage,

I would hardly call Puma's the backbone of the RAF's transport fleet. They have exactly 1 more Puma then they do of Merlins, and giving a lot less lift then the Merlins. They have 17 less Puma's in operation then they do Chinooks at the moment.

Hopefully the RAF AAC and FAA will end up with a fleet consisting of:
1) Apache
2) Wildcat
3) Merlin
4) Chinook
5) [Insert Training Helicopter Here]
 

kev 99

Member
Riksvage,

I would hardly call Puma's the backbone of the RAF's transport fleet. They have exactly 1 more Puma then they do of Merlins, and giving a lot less lift then the Merlins. They have 17 less Puma's in operation then they do Chinooks at the moment.

Hopefully the RAF AAC and FAA will end up with a fleet consisting of:
1) Apache
2) Wildcat
3) Merlin
4) Chinook
5) [Insert Training Helicopter Here]
That's what I would like to see but it would require more Wildcats and Merlins even with this speculated Chinook order.
 
Top