I'm surprised that it hasn't happened before. I knew that the MoD (the army in particular) small units dotted around the place, but TBH I never realised there were so many. Although reading the list there's an awful lot of 'TBC', I wonder where they'll all end. Looking through the list, not much to ...

It's the more realistic scenerio though.

In a land of unlimited budgets you two would be right, but we don't. This a/c will be the most expensive we've ever had, I guarantee you they'll be a whole number of day to day things that we'll struggle to afford. It'll be even worse if we start wasting money on half hearted attempts to fund once i...

ArmChairCivvy wrote: The canards on Rafale only provide extra lift (to maximise payload/ weapon load) whereas the canards on Tiffie can operate independently, to maximise the manoeuvreability, especially at supersonic speeds.

You're thinking of the foreplanes, they move together not independently.

Hopefully it'll be something pushed right back onto the back burner. There will be all manner of more important priorities than that. Stuff like that at this stage can take away focus and time from first figuring out the basics.

I doubt we'll bother, austere* is expensive to operate. Comes with a lot of problems which take lots of money and people.

*Austere, as by it's definition.

I would expect them to be there longer than 2020s, they both won't be up and running for a couple of years yet, more like 2030. However like anything, things can do change. But let them get up and running first before worrying too much about when they are going to be disbanded!

More likely to be a change in how they operated and who 'owns' them rather than changing the uniforms of who refuels, flies them etc. Although I wouldn't be surprised to see them move bases.

The numbers of Typhoons originally planned had a similar ratio. We have always had a large fleet of replacement aircraft to conserve airframe hours, cover for aircraft in deep maintenance and/or modification programmes. However as nearly all maintenance is now done at unit level I would like to see...

and doesn't have the necessary siz e to take the new larger military vehicles. Lockheed don't have a replacement for the C130J in design. Although the C130 will continue in service with many air forces for years. I think all the advantages are listed in the intro on p1... I don't think thats a mass...

The Armchair Soldier wrote:The PM has just claimed in Parliament that the Tornado's RAPTOR pod accounts for 60% of all surveillance intel against ISIL. Quite impressive if true.

It shouldn't surprise many, it's very much an impressive bit of kit and therefore in high demand.

I've written about the joint maintenance facility for Typhoons in the Gulf (promoted/ bankrolled by the Saudis) before, so the Oman & Kuwait deals do lift the prospects for future sales. In want of such a shared facility, split buys would become disproportionately expensive (for lack of special...

And I'm sure he would feel chuffed to bits at the cost of possibly having to payout replacing/f-35s after they are burnt out after doing x amount of long cas missions attacking very low priority targets , we don't have the luxury of numbers , so options to take the strain of cas missions away from ...

I guess it depends on your enemy or the target , firing very expensive Missiles from a very expensive aircraft burning ££££££££££ of fuel and adding ++++++++ flying hours to hit 2 guys in a pickup truck for example isn't very cost effective , I'm sure Osborne crys a little every time he sees the co...

Recently I've noticed an increase in people using the fees paid for at uni amongst those with enough years in to qualify. In get a few years experience and leave with chance of a free degree appeals to a few. Not sure yet if it's long term, we'll have to wait and see. That and how NEM effects things...

Which they did. Want to change the terms, money please! No, thats not how it works. Air tanker should recognise that we will soon have a large fleet of US aircraft that can only accept a boom. They should note that those aircraft along with many other NATO aircraft are customers they are unable to ...

Which we agreed to pay for. Bottom line we want something extra on voyager then we pay for it.

marktigger wrote:probably replace Jaguars and tornados at RAF SoTT's

Very unlikely, more likely a buyer would be found for them. Although I doubt a final decision has been made yet.

How do the RAF folks really feel about being based on the carriers from time to time? Just curious is all! Although the question wasn't aimed at me I'll add my tuppence worth for what it's worth :) , some looked forward to the carrier dets, some it's just another det, a few found it dull and uninte...

I thought it funny half the report was given up to concerns about spotters and their lack of spotting opportunities. Because that's the only reason waddo is there

downsizer wrote:There isn't enough money in the world to make Marham anything other than a shithole.

Oh I don't know I quite enjoyed my time there, mind you it was/is a marmite camp. Lossie, now there's a dump in the middle of nowhere!

Think Defence wrote:I think I might have read somewhere they didn't have the right lifting tackle, an easily rectifiable issue!

Well it's not a show stopper, a good question might be why didn't they have it?

No mention of changing the engine at sea though...

downsizer wrote:Listening to Fallon on R4 at lunchtime was interesting. A shafting is inbound troops.

What did he say?

TD It depends on what you mean by forward deployed, there are defintions of bare/austere/well founded (although I can't remember the exact definetions right now). I think when people think of 'forward basing' people tend to think of Harrier operating from fields and supermarket car parks. TBH I thin...