HMS Cumberland to deploy off Libya – yet again the foolishness of the SDSR is exposed

Dannat’s an ass. He gets fawned on because he’s a general. So what? Percival was a general, and he didn’t do much for Singapore did he? Dannat is a very limited man who was obsessed by getting FRES for the army, so much so that he neglected the urgent need for mine protected vehicles, even as our troops were being blown to bits in Iraq and Afghanistan in Snatches and Vectors. As far as I’m concerned he’s got their blood on his hands, but he clearly has no trouble sleeping at night, the sh1t.

Well they have been proved wrong within six months. If this situation had occurred six months later we would not have enough GR4 squadrons to commit as well as providing cover in Afganistan. On top of this our Nimrod R1’s would have gone. The Sentinel, which is going as soon we pull out of Afganistan, is ideal for policing troop movements in Libya, but was not seen as worth keeping. Regeneration of lost air and sea capacity takes decades whilst land force capacity can be regenerated far quicker yet we are going to be left with a disproportionately large army which we will not be able to fully exploit due to lack of supporting air and sea forces.

I never said I agreed with them, you’re preaching to the choir.

Actually what they said was more along the lines of needing less fast jets and ships.

Well they have been proved wrong within six months. If this situation had occurred six months later we would not have enough GR4 squadrons to commit as well as providing cover in Afganistan. On top of this our Nimrod R1’s would have gone. The Sentinel, which is going as soon we pull out of Afganistan, is ideal for policing troop movements in Libya, but was not seen as worth keeping. Regeneration of lost air and sea capacity takes decades whilst land force capacity can be regenerated far quicker yet we are going to be left with a disproportionately large army which we will not be able to fully exploit due to lack of supporting air and sea forces.

Dennant has already been on sky news, defending the focus of the defence cuts and minimising the UK’s contribution to policing the no fly zone. He said we should continue to focus on Afgan!! But then again he would say so as it was the generals who told Cameron that any future conflict would involve us sending the army and that we didn’t need any fast jets anymore!

Actually what they said was more along the lines of needing less fast jets and ships.

An ex admiral was just interviewed on BBC News. He was very cynical about the use of Tornado to attack Libya, he was of the opinion that the Tornado is being used to save it from defence cuts. I don’t entirely agree (except that I am sure the RAF is very keen to show its capabilities in the face of PR11) but the interservice fighting is kicking in again! I wonder how long before we get an ex general talking about boots on the ground?

Dennant has already been on sky news, defending the focus of the defence cuts and minimising the UK’s contribution to policing the no fly zone. He said we should continue to focus on Afgan!! But then again he would say so as it was the generals who told Cameron that any future conflict would involve us sending the army and that we didn’t need any fast jets anymore!

An ex admiral was just interviewed on BBC News. He was very cynical about the use of Tornado to attack Libya, he was of the opinion that the Tornado is being used to save it from defence cuts. I don’t entirely agree (except that I am sure the RAF is very keen to show its capabilities in the face of PR11) but the interservice fighting is kicking in again! I wonder how long before we get an ex general talking about boots on the ground?

Edit: Just noticed some mentions of Italian offers of base-in?. If this is confirmed obviously earlier comments become redundant.

If Sigonella is on offer (a mainly USN base but Italian-owned, SW of Catania), and/or Comiso (a formely military now civilian airfield but fAFAIK lightly used, & slightly closer than Sigonella – but with less runway) then Tripoli & western Libya would be easy to cover.

Benghazi is further, but still a much shorter (by almost 300 miles) flight than from Cyprus.

one thing i have noticed over the past year on this forum is that any set of circumstances can be used to justify your opinion.

This mini debate is a case in point. If the UK had a suitable floating airbase then they would be less reliant on land bases. However, because it hasn’t a carrier, it has arranged for basing for its landbased aircraft, and i would be surprised if they end up operating only from Akrotiri.

I can’t help but feel we pack more punch with Tornado and Typhoon than with a handful of harriers (capable though they were).

It is actual events that shape and validate opinions though surely?. In this case, until the Italian offer was made (if confirmed?), the nearest friendly landbase we could depend on, was more than 700 miles away.

The anticarrier debate immediately pre-SDSR was, from the light blue side, that there would always be friendly local base-in. Here is case in point that, at least for a while, there wasn’t. By the time that a general accord has been reached for military action and basing agreed events have moved on, in this instance, to make the military response appear a day late and a dollar short.

The lesson is a salutory one despite the fact that, ultimately, local basing has been worked out.

one thing i have noticed over the past year on this forum is that any set of circumstances can be used to justify your opinion.

This mini debate is a case in point. If the UK had a suitable floating airbase then they would be less reliant on land bases. However, because it hasn’t a carrier, it has arranged for basing for its landbased aircraft, and i would be surprised if they end up operating only from Akrotiri.

I can’t help but feel we pack more punch with Tornado and Typhoon than with a handful of harriers (capable though they were).

This unique and fortuitous set of circumstances (coupled with extreme short-term memory) will be used to justify SDSR – and further cuts – won’t it?: ‘See, we don’t need carriers after all!’

I’m a firm believer in the utility of STOVL carriers – more than for CVFs to be honest. Who’s for building Harrier III and Invincible Class II?!:diablo:

Will Egypt not allow any of their bases to be used? Mersha Matruh is pretty close to the border?

i think to be honest this is what i was talking about (as well as Malta).

Agreed. This is what the carrier strike mission is about.

Nearest RAF runway 700 miles+. Nearest french land base 1000 miles plus. No friendly local base-in agreed yet so no logistics ramp up even started yet. Plus a dynamic local conflict scenario that demands rapid and adaptable response. This is exactly the sort of tasking that STOVL proponents have been talking about for months. It doesn’t need a full CVN with all the bells and whistles. An LPA or a STOVL strike carrier carrying a couple of dozen competent strikefighters though would be just about perfect.

Edit: Just noticed some mentions of Italian offers of base-in?. If this is confirmed obviously earlier comments become redundant.

The airbases arent that close and arent that great.

You have Ark Royal off the coast with the GR9’s with Sniper Pod, you have the ability to be making sure that Benghazi aint being hit by artilery.

RAF tornadoes fly from Cyprus – 700 miles there and 700 back. You need to re arm to have fighters ready to respond to tanks driving what 30-40 miles you need some good loiter time and no 700 miles to cover to get to the mission zone.

I would rather have The Harriers.

really? at some point the harriers will be less useful than they were in the Balkan campaign. I think there is no major need to send aircraft off a carrier in this case with a wealth of airbases within easy distance and no airstrikes undertaken yet…

Oh to have those ground attack Harriers would be nice right about now. Stupid RAF.

HMS Ark Royal sat out from Banghazi with 12 Harriers operating would have been nice.

If they want to carry out operations they need LHAs and transports, not so much escorts.

I suspect the major reason is as much about domestic political consumption much as anything else . For much of Canada’s history ,Canadian foreign policy can described as the victory of symbolism over style .
In other words the Government of the day wants to look good, I’m actually surprised the PM wasn’t there to see them off.I hate to say but more and more our politicians view the Canadian Forces as a uniformed PR firm.

Previously mentioned in this flexible thread was the army getting their own way with air transportable vehicles.Might I ask the question Great but within 5 years what do they intent to chUck em out of or transport them in ?.Its a bit embarrasing turning up at terminal three and trying to put three armoured vehicles down as hand luggage !!!!.

So what chance that a Nimrod is in the area operating out of Cyprus ? Apparently they don’t all officially stand down until 31st March

Nimrod R.1, serial XV249, has been noted working out of Cyprus since last week. Radio and ATC enthusiasts have been monitoring the movements of the various aircraft deployed in and around Malta and the Med area.

http://forums.airshows.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=31334

http://www.fightercontrol.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=28625

TJ

Thanks Swerve for the info, the bits and pieces I had read suggested Italy was keeping a rather low profile, though this sounds like its selective bias in newspapers articles rather than reality based on what you said, I guess it’s not really news if Italy has ships in the Mediterranean. For example the only story I found today with regard to Italy was about several more boat loads of illegal immigrants from Tunisia turning up on an Italian island.

Still I do wonder why RN selected Westminster over Albion to send, or did not send some of our Bay’s to Tunisia, or why we did not just hire a cruise ship, or some ferry’s if we plan to help move by sea Egyptian refugees from Tunisia to Egypt.