**British Armed Forces Discussion Thread**

[RoboCod]

The TA are a joke.
Don't get me wrong. There are a bunch of them that are very good but on the whole they are under trained and nowhere near the standards of a regular soldier.
You get some that turn up regularly for all the training etc and some that just put in the bare minimum so they can get their bonus at the end of the year.
Also, don't forget those that are ex 22 year soldiers that are just in it for the social life etc.
I reckon no more than 20% of the TA are capable of deploying and doing a proper job other than just making up numbers.

This is of course my opinion and probably does not reflect the truth

I've found it a mixed bag, but that's just like regular servicemen!

 

[EdGey]

Oh, and on the issue of defending the Falklands? 5 Eurofighters against the whole Argentine air force?? Really?
As soon as they've took out the eurofighters they'd have a nice full sized runway (that we've built since the last war) to use as a base and could move all their long range bombers straight onto the islands. Once they did that, we'd never take it back.

Once they take out the Typhoons.... how?

Move what long range bombers in?

 

[MOOGLEYS]

It would be easy to cause havoc to our forces. Look at Brize Norton the RAF's super hub. There is only one runway. (Lyneham would have been a much better option to keep as it has two runways and more land available.)

There has been some silly decisions made and it's all about the money. It will go wrong at some point like it has before.

 

[Hedge]

I think Brize was chosen because it suits a lot of officers due to its location and posh spazzy nature lol .

 

[Eddie182]

Why are you getting out Eddie?

Time served, not leaving by choice. Although I'm quite happy to leave now and leave things to the younger guys who don't realise how bad things are now compared to a few years ago.

 

[Eddie182]

Also I seem to remember that our Typhoons...dont have a gun? They replaced it with ballast! Hope they have given at least some of them the cannon. America learnt that the hard way in Vietnam....

A myth and total rubbish. The Typhoon has the same 27mm Mauser as the Tornado and always has.

 

[EdGey]

Time served, not leaving by choice. Although I'm quite happy to leave now and leave things to the younger guys who don't realise how bad things are now compared to a few years ago.

It's really declined that much? :/

Also, well done and good luck with what ever you choose to do

 

[Eddie182]

It's really declined that much? :/

For many of us who joined before Herrick/Telic etc, yes. Hell the RAF is half the size it was when I joined and we're doing 2 or 3 times as much.

Now that I said, I'll still miss some things (the people being the main one), but overall I don't regret having to leave. Although I'm not looking forward to working for a living.

 

[EdGey]

A myth and total rubbish. The Typhoon has the same 27mm Mauser as the Tornado and always has.

Is it only the Tranche 1 that has the cannon though?

I read that originally the MOD decided against having cannons, and they only use it in Tranche 1 because it's cheaper to use it than it is to remove it (weight issue was causing instabilities), and that Tranche 2 and 3 don't have one.

Haven't a clue how accurate that is mind.. it was just a random website.

Could also be a decision which was made in the 90s and has since been revised, I don't know.

 

[Castiel]

Once they take out the Typhoons.... how?

Move what long range bombers in?

Exactly, what Long Range Bombers, they would have to buy some first......and the Typhoons don't act on independently, they are Air Support for the most advanced marine air defence platform in the World....The Daring Class Destroyer HMS Dauntless. Between them they are capable of tracking, targeting and engaging the entire Argentine Airforce (at least the offensive portion) four times over (at at a distance which means the Argentine Forces would have to close under heavy engagement before they could engage themselves)......why do you think the Argentines are all discombobulated about it showing up.

If they do manage to get past that lot, then what remains of the AAF (not much I would imagine) would then have to deal with the Rapier Air defence platforms and the ground defences.....then, and only then would the Argentines be able to mount any kind of offensive landing and that doesn't even consider the JRRF and the fact that the Argentine Airforce is largely made up of 30 year old fighters, and upgraded trainers.

The Argentines are vastly outclassed, even by the Falklands defences, let alone the rest of the offensive forces that the UK can bring to bear given time and/or intelligence.

 

[Eddie182]

Is it only the Tranche 1 that has the cannon though?

I read that originally the MOD decided against having cannons, and they only use it in Tranche 1 because it's cheaper to use it than it is to remove it (weight issue was causing instabilities), and that Tranche 2 and 3 don't have one.

Haven't a clue how accurate that is mind.. it was just a random website.

Could also be a decision which was made in the 90s and has since been revised, I don't know.

As I said, total rubbish, all blocks have the Mauser fitted. In fact at the moment trials are ongoing to qualify the aircraft to perform A/G gun strafing attacks.

It seems this myth stems from VERY early development when not fitting a gun was indeed considered by the developer nations.

 

[Eddie182]

Exactly, what Long Range Bombers, they would have to buy some first......and the Typhoons don't act on independently, they are Air Support for the most advanced marine air defence platform in the World....The Daring Class Destroyer HMS Dauntless. Between them they are capable of tracking, targeting and engaging the entire Argentine Airforce (at least the offensive portion) four times over (at at a distance which means the Argentine Forces would have to close under heavy engagement before they could engage themselves)......why do you think the Argentines are all discombobulated about it showing up.

If they do manage to get past that lot, then what remains of the AAF (not much I would imagine) would then have to deal with the Rapier Air defence platforms and the ground defences.....then, and only then would the Argentines be able to mount any kind of offensive landing and that doesn't even consider the JRRF and the fact that the Argentine Airforce is largely made up of 30 year old fighters, and upgraded trainers.

The Argentines are vastly outclassed, even by the Falklands defences, let alone the rest of the offensive forces that the UK can bring to bear given time and/or intelligence.

Indeed. What people seem to forget (or be unaware of) is that the Argentine Air Force have not updated or replaced their equipment since the 1982 conflict. In comparison we have had and replaced several generations of aircraft and other equipment.

They simply wouldn't stand a chance, even with the superior number of aircraft they could employ.

 

[EdGey]

As I said, total rubbish, all blocks have the Mauser fitted. In fact at the moment trials are ongoing to qualify the aircraft to perform A/G gun strafing attacks.

Good to know

 

[Nutella33]

But we weren't exactly 'prepared' for WW2 either, it's not like we had all those men and equipment on standby just in case and Hitler then attacked.

We were producing weapons and planes like nobody's business during the conflict so I'm sure in the unlikely event another World War did happen I'm sure the government and the people would react accordingly.

The fact is, after WW2 the world changed and whilst anything is possible I can't see one country having anywhere near the same threat level as Nazi Germany did. Throw in the UN and it is very unlikely.

equipment now is a lot more advanced, takes a lot longer to produce and is also out of the governments hands, with parts coming from all over the world (including potentially hostile countries such as china). the capability we have been loosing steadily for 20 years will take more than 20 years to replace.

and no offence but the UN is not a force, it relies on countries to back it up and a consensus is always highly unlikely nevermind actions after a agreement. we can see this in its actions in africa and syria, nevermind against a "top level" player.

It seems this myth stems from VERY early development when not fitting a gun was indeed considered by the developer nations.

it isnt a myth. britain originally ordered typhoons without the mauser, spent a load of money to develop weighted blocks to replace the cannon and then retrofitted the cannon later. i actually saw up close 3 sqn typhoons at coningsby without the mauser fitted 3 years ago.

The Daring Class Destroyer HMS Dauntless. Between them they are capable of tracking, targeting and engaging the entire Argentine Airforce (at least the offensive portion) four times over (at at a distance which means the Argentine Forces would have to close under heavy engagement before they could engage themselves)......why do you think the Argentines are all discombobulated about it showing up.

it still seems particularly shortsighted to have only bought 6 of them however, availibility and "depth" of any force should be considered and british forces are turning out to have as much depth as a carpark puddle. nevermind whole spheres of capability missing (MPA for example)

 

[Eddie182]

it isnt a myth. britain originally ordered typhoons without the mauser, spent a load of money to develop weighted blocks to replace the cannon and then retrofitted the cannon later.

All of which occurred during early development, and testing, prior to the aircraft entering active service.

i actually saw up close 3 sqn typhoons at coningsby without the mauser fitted 3 years ago.

Good for you. I've spent the past 6 years working with the things. There is a big difference between removing the gun for maintenance reasons and not fitting one to the aircraft in the first place.

 

[Castiel]

it still seems particularly shortsighted to have only bought 6 of them however, availibility and "depth" of any force should be considered and british forces are turning out to have as much depth as a carpark puddle.

compared to who exactly?.....You might want to take a quick comparison between the British Armed Forces and other comparable countries before judging how much depth they have...not to mention half the Armed Forces in the World are effectively trained by members of our own, particularly in specialist combat CI and heavy terrain tactics.

 

[RoboCod]

compared to who exactly?.....You might want to take a quick comparison between the British Armed Forces and other comparable countries before judging how much depth they have...not to mention half the Armed Forces in the World are effectively trained by members of our own, particularly in specialist combat CI and heavy terrain tactics.

He bleats the same old dross, of course we can all afford limitless armies like the US!

 

[MOOGLEYS]

In May 2000 the British MoD announced that Tranche-2 and 3 Eurofighter's in RAF service would have not been fitted with any cannon whatsoever, while Tranche-1 cannons would not be utilized. The recommendation for this was made by the Equipment Capability Organisation (ECO) which was tasked with finding the most appropriate mix of weaponry for combat systems. The official Government line is that the capability offered by ASRAAM equipped Eurofighter's leads to the cannon becoming operationaly and economically unviable [note that the correct reading of this statement is “we must cut on something because there’s no money. This sounded smart!”].
At the time, the British MoD had already spent £90M on the BK-27, while annual savings from not using it were put at a mere £2.5M (the costs of removing it were calculated at £32M). This, coupled with the problems in aircraft balance if the gun was removed (or swapped for a concrete ballast, as it was also proposed), which would have required expensive software redesign, led to the cancellation of this absurd cost-cutting measure plan. Typhoons all are fitted with their gun, and can use it and do use it, also thanks to the reports on the limitations of Harrier Gr9 without guns in providing fire support to troops in Afghanistan.

I'm sure I remember quite a few jokes going round at the time between the Tonka guys and Typhoons about missing guns and washing machine weights instead

 

[Nutella33]

He bleats the same old dross, of course we can all afford limitless armies like the US!

im not arguing for unlimited armies but nice extrapolation. im arguing for buying enough frames to cover our needs and to fufill all the roles a independant military should provide. we have NATO doing our MPA patrols, we are going to scrap our new ISTAR asset in the sentinel as soon as afghan finishes, we are (again) retrofitting hercs for refueling duties as FSTA wont be ready on time, FRES has been a distant dream for a decade so we are spending billions in stopgap vehicles. we are paying the same money but getting fewer frames on the typhoon, same with the a400m and in RivetJoint we are buying frames from the US on a "as new" price that are 50 years old. older than the aircraft they are replacing. nevermind we have kicked the arse out of our transport fleet because we have so few frames each one has flown so many more hours than comparible aircraft.

compared to who exactly?.....

well our own assessments stated we needed 12 to cover our strategic aims. the dutch have 4 to our 6 but they do not need a constant manning of the falklands and will not be expected to cover the carrier when it is built.

perversely it would actually be most cost effective buying more as the single unit price would decrease rapidily and our ability to absorb shocks and cover more potential threats increase.

pretending a ship cant be hit or lost or otherwise unavailable is not a sound way to enforce your strategy, surely you can see that? especially when it lacks in surface and below surface abilities.

not to mention half the Armed Forces in the World are effectively trained by members of our own, particularly in specialist combat CI and heavy terrain tactics.

im not talking about infantry or debating our skill and training. im talking about providing for force projection and capabilities that support the teeth arms.

call it dross if you want but its the reality we are facing, no matter how well trained we are, we cant do anything without that support and the support is shallow and constantly trying to patch up gaps.

 

[Von Smallhausen]

Didn't the Gurkhas take a big chop last time anyway?

And why ? They are arguably the most gifted troops on the face of the earth.