RN Fighters

More pictures of the dummy deck Sea Harriers here and here.

I remember when the mighty Sea Harrier was still in service. If only they had kept the Status Quo…

It all went Jam Side Down for the RN!

I’ve been reading The Secret War For The Falklands by Nigel West. To be honest I though it wasn’t the best of books and think he missed several key points, but it did confirm my belief that the major problem in responding to a developing crisis is not technical, nor personnel issues, but getting timely intelligence and it being acted uopn by the politicians.

Remember that the GR.3’s have been out of service for ~20 years though, so its understandable that they would be in bad condition.

There are lots of aircraft at the dummy deck at Culdrose. In addition to the Sea Harrier FA2s and Harrier T8s you can see here, there are a number of old Harrier GR3s which are in a poor state.

This album is from late 2006, but does show that the Sea Harriers look reasonable but the GR3s look awful. Additionally in 2007 there was a BBC South West news feature which showed the activities there – have a look.

When it was reported that India had expressed an interest in purchasing surplus Sea Harriers it must have meant that India thought that those stored aircraft were still in a decent condition. Hopefully that suggests the aircraft at the dummy deck at Culdrose are also in a good condition. I recently had a chat with a couple of friends who had returned from operations at sea in the Middle East. They both commented on how sea spray effects weapons – in that it makes them rust, so extra cleaning and lubrication is needed.

When equipment is intended for shipboard use it is modified for that environment, particularly with things exposed to the elements. When the Harrier airframe was modified to become Sea Harrier, the materials used in both the airframe and engine were adjusted to improve their corrosion resistance. Presumably other measures were taken to prevent water/salt ingress. Since they were designed to spend very long periods at sea, much of it up on deck, I would imagine that the Cornish weather will be less of a problem for the jets moving around the dummy deck than it would be to land based aircraft used for similar purposes at other places.

Some of them were only delivered to the RN in 1998/1999.

Nobody has ever said they would be immediately flyable and fit for operations, but that they could be regenerated given time and resources (and adequate intelligence warnings).

Additionally,Sea Harrier parts are being produced (under licence) for export to India. A recent edition of Air Forces Monthly notes that an Indian Navy Sea Harrier FRS51, damaged during a carrier landing in 2006, has been rebuilt by BAE Systems, and was redelivered in February this year. Presumably, in addition to BAE Systems themselves, a number of components (airframe and other) would have had to have been manufactured specially. Build to print is alive and well!

I can’t believe they’re at establishment! Must be a world first!
I’m curious as to whether those numbers are for those doing the job only, or includes those qualified but currently driving a desk etc. somewhere, I’m guessing the former as 33 seems about right to man two squadrons which is the intention.

Doubt, either in store for disposal & some being used as Flight deck operations training where I work, theose ones don’t look in a very good state certainly not for flying duties.

I meant the number of Lynx & Sea King pilots at establishment levels.

Doubt, either in store for disposal & some being used as Flight deck operations training where I work, theose ones don’t look in a very good state certainly not for flying duties.

Maybe they’re at establishment.

Definitely close enough to be relevant.

Yes, those figures do look more than a little worrying.

I don’t see Sea King or Lynx pilots in there, am I going blind?

Not quite on topic, but close. The RN has just 24 Harrier pilots, including 6 instructors. Establishment is 33, including 9 instructors. Both actual & establishment look scarily small, to me.

Scroll down to Armed Forces: Manpower

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm090428/text/90428w0001.htm

Even bigger shortfalls in Merlin pilots & other crew.

It is interesting how technologies such as Digital Signal Procesing have advanced since the early eighties (which would have made a substantial difference), and you could speculate on all sorts of what ifs – what if the Corporate task force had had more Sea Wolf armed frigates, or if the AEW Sea Kings had been present during the war?

Often wondered what Corporate would have been like with Type 23s sitting in and around San Carlos or if Phalanx had been fitted to even a couple of ships….

You may be interested in another thing I found on YouTube. In 1986, the BBC’s Horizon programme made a documentry about the lessons of the various Argentine air attacks against RN ships during the Falklands War.

In The Wake Of HMS Sheffield

The link takes you to the first of six parts, the rest are linked in the normal YouTube way.

It is worth thinking about which lessons were understood by no action was taken, or the lessons forgotten or ignored for reasons of saving money. Note the comments about the Sea Harrier – without which we would have lost the war. The limitations demonstrated in 1982 would lead to the upgraded FA2 version, yet now we have none, and no replacement until F35 comes along. This is why many discussed this issue at huge length on the PPRuNe Sea Jet thread.

The USN of course still has fighters – lots of them.

It is interesting how technologies such as Digital Signal Procesing have advanced since the early eighties (which would have made a substantial difference), and you could speculate on all sorts of what ifs – what if the Corporate task force had had more Sea Wolf armed frigates, or if the AEW Sea Kings had been present during the war?

I’d just be happy if the Sea Harrier was still in service, it would help with maintening skills and making the transition to CVF in a few years time easier. Best of all, there would be no capability gap with fleet air defence.

Hence yet another link to the PPRuNe Sea Jet thread. We might not have ben able to stop it being retired, but perhaps we did help keep a decent number of aircraft in MOD/RN hands.

In the 60s we had the personnel, infrastructure and training and logistical train to support five CVAs and two LPHs. Once the political decision was made to axe the carriers a large scale redundancy program was instituted. The 70 onwards difficulty with manpower are a direct result of this, as it’s hard to recruit new people for a job with no percieved future. It’s the same problem now with the Harrier force/JSF/CVF. Until potential recruits see a more positive future they are unlikley to join up. Naval Harrier pilots didn’t join the FAA to fly RAF missions from RAF bases, different culture for a start.

Maybe all RAF Harriers should have been turned over to the RN in the 90s……hmmm…..just a thought.

Well, how about canning the entire MRCA program through the Blackburn P.150? That might have released funds in the required time frame?
On the other hand, i can imagine the Royal Air Force CAS (circa 1975) having a heart attack if the government forced the P.150 on the RAF!

Watching on the wing with interest. Read somewhere Eagle was to be refitted same as Vicky but due to cost this wasn’t done. Also note Harries flew of Eagle in early 1970.

Eagle was refitted to same standard (and beyond) as Victorious between 1959-64. Harrier trials took place aboard Eagle in 1970 to gain a service clearance for the operation of GR1 Harriers at sea. Trials were repeated every year throughout the seventies, Ark Royal in 71, and Bulwark and Hermes later on. P1127 trials and Kestrel trials had taken place during the sixties aboard Ark and Bulwark. Eagle post 64 was the most advanced carrier in RN possesion until she paid off, best radar fit, heaviest missile and gun battery of any class of ship in the RN at the time. Ark Royal’s Phantomisation was to make her Eagle’s running mate through the seventies. Eagle’s Phantomisation (six months work/£5million) was cancelled in 1968 and her Phantoms were handed over to the RAF. Had the RN known the Labour Government would only let them keep one carrier in the seventies they would have chosen Eagle over Ark Royal.

As Obi Wan suggest, possible fleet attack carriers Eagle & Ark Royal keep Sea Vixens & Buccaneers for power projection alternating commissions, keep the two smaller Vicky & Hermes for ASW and rapid back up as both could operate the attack aircraft & employ harriers in their standard CAG. Would keep fixed wing capable into early ’80s.

Sea Vixens with AWG10/11 radars and Sparrow missiles could ‘hold the line’ until the early eighties, and the Buccaneer was probably the best low level strike aircraft of the period. Tornado derived avionics could give the Buccaneer the necessary edge to remain in front line service until relieved by Hornets(?) in mid 80s to 90s.

Watching on the wing with interest. Read somewhere Eagle was to be refitted same as Vicky but due to cost this wasn’t done. Also note Harries flew of Eagle in early 1970. As Obi Wan suggest, possible fleet attack carriers Eagle & Ark Royal keep Sea Vixens & Buccaneers for power projection alternating commissions, keep the two smaller Vicky & Hermes for ASW and rapid back up as both could operate the attack aircraft & employ harriers in their standard CAG. Would keep fixed wing capable into early ’80s.
Also read somewhere RN considering CODOG propulsion in ’60’s. Possible standard CODOG over whole surface fleet. Multiple units reduced cost. Single shaft frigates, twin shaft destroyers triple shaft for new carriers to come online 1980+. Increase dims of invincibles by 20% would give you approx 50,000 ton. normal running on 3 standard diesels approx 65-70,000 shp =15knots? boost of GT similar shp =30K+?No sea Dart =more reduced cost. SHAR now in service & upgraded S2 with Tornado avionics RN still very capable power projector.

Hmm.

In the 60s we had the personnel, infrastructure and training and logistical train to support five CVAs and two LPHs. Once the political decision was made to axe the carriers a large scale redundancy program was instituted. The 70 onwards difficulty with manpower are a direct result of this, as it’s hard to recruit new people for a job with no percieved future. It’s the same problem now with the Harrier force/JSF/CVF. Until potential recruits see a more positive future they are unlikley to join up. Naval Harrier pilots didn’t join the FAA to fly RAF missions from RAF bases, different culture for a start.

The money was there. The decision to can the CVs was political……the politicians of the time can claim they were unaffordable….but…in the end….it was a political decision. If they had gone ahead with them the money would have be forthcoming.