September 25, 2003 at 11:49 am
I don’t know if you have read this article but I was wondering if anybody else noticed what I did. The Italian officer who wrote the article was arguably distainful of the type and in one instance was even distainful of RAF maintenence abilities. He claimed that the Tornado fleet was in a pretty bad state when they were received. He didn’t use the word but I think the Italians call British engineers ‘garigiste’ or something like it because they think we cobble stuff together in a particularly unprofessional manner.
He also stated that an RAF exchange pilot said the AMI were lucky because RAF aircraft were rarely in such good condition. Well it could be off the cuff and he wasn’t naming any names so his claims cannot realistically be confirmed. He went on to say that during the Kosovo War the AMI could only keep 6 Tornado F3s operational out of a fleet of 24 and that at Red Flag excercises they were being constanlty ‘shot down’. He said it was because the aircraft were being utilised in an wholely unsuitable manner (offensive counter air). This sounds like a more realistic comment.
I just wanted some opinions on this because when I have spoken to RAF Tornado F3 crews, though they reckon the aircraft could be better, it had acheived some startling results and serviceability was a damn sight higher than the 25% rate that the AMI was getting. They are never specific so, again, their claims cannot be confirmed easily but they also claim that against USAF F15s the RAF Tornado ADV does remarkably well, particularly in BVR combat.