dark light

The Village Idi

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 221 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: UK Defence Review Part I #2409186
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    But will it? Will the review be based on operational needs, or by the demands to cut costs?

    in reply to: Sea Viper & SAMP/T #1804363
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    Roll on the next test. Incidentally, sometime this year there will be a one off documentary about the Type 45 on Channel Four. I expect it will be viewable from outside the UK via the web.

    in reply to: UK Defence Review Part I #2412180
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    I guess this debate will really hot up after the election.

    in reply to: UK Defence Review Part I #2416267
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    We need forward looking politicians, for example wouldn’t it have been better that this was done decades ago?

    UK space agency raises industry hopes

    We need politicians who can look beyond the things staring them in the face. It would be nice if the public could also see beyond their noses too, although I fear the dumbing down has gone too far.

    in reply to: Naval aviation video's #2000653
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    I am nice!

    A YouTube search for “Navy Pilots” produces this result, note this way made back when the Sea Harrier was still in service. Discussed at huge length here on PPRuNe: Sea Jet thread.

    Other episodes of the same series cover other aspects of RN aviation. Or try entering words like “Carrier” as a search term, or an aircraft type (Tomcat, Intruder, Super Eterndard), or a carrier name, or just “naval aviation”.

    There’s lots out there. Enjoy!

    in reply to: Naval aviation video's #2000705
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    Try YouTube.

    in reply to: BBC series "Sailor" #2002039
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    Not even with RVL….?

    in reply to: BBC series "Sailor" #2002221
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    Hawkdriver05

    But the RN didn’t cease to be a proper Navy after the big carriers went, as events in the South Atlantic in 1982 proved. I think it was the loss of the Sea Harrier (noting a few were kept in RN hands and are almost like a war reserve) that did that, it meant that for the first time i we assumed that if UK maritime forces need air defence then an ally will supply it. Therefore MOD was assuming that no UK only operations could take place. I think Hermes and Invincible did alright in 1982.

    However, since then things have sadly declined.

    With new carriers on the horizon, we should be ramping up our flight deck capabilities. Indeed there have been occasions where one of our present carriers has had sixteen or more Sea Harriers and Harriers embarked. Also, the Sea Harrier has been retired early. This decision was discussed in lots of places like PPRuNe (particularly the very long Sea Jet thread). This was one of the issues raised, in fact it was pointed out to me by someone experienced in carrier operations. Since then things have got worse, with the RN struggling to find Harriers to embark.

    I apolegise for posting a link to PPRuNe but this thread is about naval aviation and this particular issue has been discussed there. Unfortunately it would appear some of the predictions regarding skill loss and the issue of “jets on the deck” have been proved right. Naturally it is also mentioned in the Future Carrier thread.

    The run down of the Fleet Air Arm in the 70s meant that using fighters to defend a task force from air attack had not been properly practised for many years prior to 1982. Like the lack of AEW this was to have lethal consequences.

    Do we learn from our mistakes? It would appear not.

    See also this ARRSE thread: Ark Royal landings

    in reply to: The not quite naval stand off with Argentina #2002499
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    No, it’s the same old crowd making hot air. We hope….

    in reply to: US Aircraft Carrier Vulnerable #2003221
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    Que?

    in reply to: UK Defence Review Part I #2403762
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    Try GEMS.

    GEMS is the MOD-wide staff suggestion scheme that recognises and rewards ideas which are implemented. The GEMS scheme encourages all MOD civilian and Armed Forces personnel, ex-employees, directly employed MOD contractors and their staffs to contribute constructive ideas for improving efficiency and organisation anywhere within the Department, and recognises the value of their contribution.

    The GEMS Scheme launched in 1996, benefits from the full support of the Chief of the Defence Staff and the Permanent Secretary, as a means of promoting staff initiative and improving efficiency throughout the MOD and the Armed Forces. GEMS supports the Defence Vision requirement for us to be first class in the way we lead and manage the business of defence.

    The operation of the GEMS Scheme is overseen by the GEMS Scheme Team, based in MOD Main Building, Whitehall, London and administered through a network of Award Groups, which are located at most MOD sites in the UK and overseas.

    The scheme is designed to capture any suggestion that satisfies one or more of the following:

    Achieving greater efficiency or savings to the MOD
    Improving opertional effectiveness
    Raising quality
    Improving the design, use or maintenance of equipment
    Improving health and safety
    Benefiting the environment (including Sustainable Procurement), and
    Removing unecessary bureaucracy
    All individuals submitting suggestions have direct access to the GEMS Scheme without the need to consult their line manager.

    The GEMS Scheme is not a substitute for reporting shortcomings in material, design or procedure, which should be made through the normal administrative channels.

    Alternatively, Ask A Minister, or write to your MP. To be honest though, you would also need to convince the public…

    in reply to: The not quite naval stand off with Argentina #2004509
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    This is a reminder, if one was needed, than unexpected events can and do happen. We need to maintain forces to deter aggression, including the big stick type forces based back in the UK. We need to retain the capability to respond rapidly to influence events, for example, deploying a SSN to a area sends a message and acts as a deterrent due to the potential of her weapons.

    in reply to: UK Defence Review Part I #2412285
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    There does seem to be a lot of producing/supporting theory x and ignoring events that did not support the idea. One such theory is that conventional conflicts between nations with air forces and navies will not happen. Another is the idea that assymetric opponents will not employ sophisticated weapons.

    in reply to: UK Defence Review Part I #2422265
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    You guys do have a point that we should be wary of placing too much faith in technology.

    in reply to: UK Defence Review Part I #2426902
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    The Paras would argue that the psychological aspects of parachute training, together with P Company, make them special.

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 221 total)