FA2 for FAA Historic Flight
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tracy Island
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SOTB (you weren't friends with Billy Bunter were you?)
Would you add your comment re the SHar to the Sea Jet thread please.
Jacko seems to be plagued with problems regarding the SHar
Problem 1 - Italian Gearbox Syndrome, as many forward gears as reverse
Problem 2 - Gen 'Boy' Browning disease, dropping your men right in it
Problem 3 - Gen Haig military wisdom syndrome - horses and men are more expendable than bullets.
Comments from people who are actually at the coal face have far more pertinence as far as I'm concerned.
Have you been watching the BBC program where Ray Mears tries to re-enact the Heavy Water raids in Norway (a place I know well). They put one of the team through a broken ice drill. Note it wasn't the great survival expert that went into the freezing water, nor did he sleep outdoors with the rest of the team, but did pass on the benefits of his wisdom to them
. Same thing here.
(I'd love to hear what the bootknecks had to say about him).
FEBA
Would you add your comment re the SHar to the Sea Jet thread please.
Jacko seems to be plagued with problems regarding the SHar
Problem 1 - Italian Gearbox Syndrome, as many forward gears as reverse
Problem 2 - Gen 'Boy' Browning disease, dropping your men right in it
Problem 3 - Gen Haig military wisdom syndrome - horses and men are more expendable than bullets.
Comments from people who are actually at the coal face have far more pertinence as far as I'm concerned.
Have you been watching the BBC program where Ray Mears tries to re-enact the Heavy Water raids in Norway (a place I know well). They put one of the team through a broken ice drill. Note it wasn't the great survival expert that went into the freezing water, nor did he sleep outdoors with the rest of the team, but did pass on the benefits of his wisdom to them
. Same thing here.(I'd love to hear what the bootknecks had to say about him).
FEBA
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: near to the bar
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jacko.
your coment
'But if you know what I mean, you know and you'll know I'm right, and if you don't then you won't.'
Has an alarming resonance to the justification by Tony Bliar for GW 2. Sadly, he has done you an injustice because now whenever I hear a comment such as this, I treat it as highly dubious and whatever point that is being made is instantly devalued and lacks credibility.
Nuff said?
your coment
'But if you know what I mean, you know and you'll know I'm right, and if you don't then you won't.'
Has an alarming resonance to the justification by Tony Bliar for GW 2. Sadly, he has done you an injustice because now whenever I hear a comment such as this, I treat it as highly dubious and whatever point that is being made is instantly devalued and lacks credibility.
Nuff said?
Yes, good point.
I was just signposting a hint (which should be meaningless to most people) that there are other reasons why Jag may have particular suitability for SF support. The comment was aimed at Six otB, who I think will have known exactly what I was on about.
But it did look a bit Blairite!
I was just signposting a hint (which should be meaningless to most people) that there are other reasons why Jag may have particular suitability for SF support. The comment was aimed at Six otB, who I think will have known exactly what I was on about.
But it did look a bit Blairite!
6otB/Jacko,
One simply does NOT, EVER mention ANYTHING about SF on PPRuNe. Call the AOC a poof (he isn't), refer to SecDef as a tart (he might be, I don't know) if one will, but the code concerning SF is that we KEEP SCHTUM.
Because lives might depend on it.
One simply does NOT, EVER mention ANYTHING about SF on PPRuNe. Call the AOC a poof (he isn't), refer to SecDef as a tart (he might be, I don't know) if one will, but the code concerning SF is that we KEEP SCHTUM.
Because lives might depend on it.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beags,
You are quite right, which is why I go no further than mentioning the fact that they exist! (I would never call the AOC a poof or anything remotely rude!!).
Jacko,
Your riposte is taken, however, please don't come out with carte blanche statements like the one earlier in order to justify what we all know is an old, weary jet (admittedly with some tip-top avionics - spread around the cockpit mind). Same goes for the SHAR, HOWEVER, it does form a VITAL part of fleet defence (practically the ONLY part) and therefore, imho, it IS more crucial than le Jag (budgets and actual running cost differences aside). We all know that the UK operates with plop most of the time, and makes the best of it. Typhoon is not the panacea that glossy brochures might indicate, despite looking quite nice and having big donks. By the way, Your earlier mention of Raptor having problems is irrelevant in a comparison with the big T. The raptor is (when they sort out the problems - and they will) light years ahead of Typhoon in ALL respects. I digress. Sorry for the earlier attack. Certain people out there though DO know exactly what they are talking about. Be nice if you acknowledged this fact once in a while instead of riposting with an enormous list of what is installed on an ac type. One ac i've flown has a bitchin betty which is really cool, but it doesn't improve the CAPABILITY of the jet, does it?
SOTB
You are quite right, which is why I go no further than mentioning the fact that they exist! (I would never call the AOC a poof or anything remotely rude!!).
Jacko,
Your riposte is taken, however, please don't come out with carte blanche statements like the one earlier in order to justify what we all know is an old, weary jet (admittedly with some tip-top avionics - spread around the cockpit mind). Same goes for the SHAR, HOWEVER, it does form a VITAL part of fleet defence (practically the ONLY part) and therefore, imho, it IS more crucial than le Jag (budgets and actual running cost differences aside). We all know that the UK operates with plop most of the time, and makes the best of it. Typhoon is not the panacea that glossy brochures might indicate, despite looking quite nice and having big donks. By the way, Your earlier mention of Raptor having problems is irrelevant in a comparison with the big T. The raptor is (when they sort out the problems - and they will) light years ahead of Typhoon in ALL respects. I digress. Sorry for the earlier attack. Certain people out there though DO know exactly what they are talking about. Be nice if you acknowledged this fact once in a while instead of riposting with an enormous list of what is installed on an ac type. One ac i've flown has a bitchin betty which is really cool, but it doesn't improve the CAPABILITY of the jet, does it?
SOTB
SOTB:
Someone asked: "I'm trying to remember the last time I read about a Jaguar in the press. Ah yes, GW1. Why does the RAF need three types of mud moving equipment anyway?"
On these threads this is usually shorthand for 'what has that tired old antique the Jag ever done, and why should it be retained instead of the SHar which is so uniquely useful'.
It's an old and weary jet, right enough, but it's given more useful service in recent years than SHar, and promises to do so for the future. And what is installed in it is what makes it useful (as well as its rugged dependability, deployability and low operating costs) - it's certainly little to do with the under-powered, tiny winged airframe.
Which is why they've decided to can the SHar. That's not to say that SHar isn't a formidable aircraft, nor that it doesn't have useful capabilities, but the small size of the CVS does make things difficult. Deploy enough SHars to do their job and you can't do anything else. Deploy too few and there's no point.
Personally, (and don't let WEBF hear this) I'd retain them for land based AD, at least until F3/AMRAAM is sorted sufficiently to send it on ops...... and then if you did need to send an AD carrier anywhere then you'd have that option. But then I'd fund the forces rather more generously than is ever likely to happen.
Someone asked: "I'm trying to remember the last time I read about a Jaguar in the press. Ah yes, GW1. Why does the RAF need three types of mud moving equipment anyway?"
On these threads this is usually shorthand for 'what has that tired old antique the Jag ever done, and why should it be retained instead of the SHar which is so uniquely useful'.
It's an old and weary jet, right enough, but it's given more useful service in recent years than SHar, and promises to do so for the future. And what is installed in it is what makes it useful (as well as its rugged dependability, deployability and low operating costs) - it's certainly little to do with the under-powered, tiny winged airframe.
Which is why they've decided to can the SHar. That's not to say that SHar isn't a formidable aircraft, nor that it doesn't have useful capabilities, but the small size of the CVS does make things difficult. Deploy enough SHars to do their job and you can't do anything else. Deploy too few and there's no point.
Personally, (and don't let WEBF hear this) I'd retain them for land based AD, at least until F3/AMRAAM is sorted sufficiently to send it on ops...... and then if you did need to send an AD carrier anywhere then you'd have that option. But then I'd fund the forces rather more generously than is ever likely to happen.
Suspicion breeds confidence
Thread Starter
Shar for land based point defence
An interesting suggestion that I've toy'd with before. It has some uses.
1. Point defence of London. Base some at Northolt for quick cover over London S/E. How long would it take for F3's to get over central London - probably too long.
2. Take over Falklands Islands defence from F3s.
3. Dispersed air defence for sensitive installations.
4. It can still move some mud if need. On this last point, if you haven't read Sharkey Ward's book on the Shar, he points out that even the FRS1 of 20 years ago had an excellent avionics package that allowed accurate bombing even at night.
1. Point defence of London. Base some at Northolt for quick cover over London S/E. How long would it take for F3's to get over central London - probably too long.
2. Take over Falklands Islands defence from F3s.
3. Dispersed air defence for sensitive installations.
4. It can still move some mud if need. On this last point, if you haven't read Sharkey Ward's book on the Shar, he points out that even the FRS1 of 20 years ago had an excellent avionics package that allowed accurate bombing even at night.
In Sharkey Ward's day, the SHar's A-G capability may have been adequate, but in today's world of PGMs, self designation etc. it is equivalent to no more than a reversionary/secondary capability.
Nor is its unrefuelled range terribly impressive, so while your 'Northolt Station Flight' idea is interesting, sticking them on the Falklands in place of F3s is more dubious.
Nor is its unrefuelled range terribly impressive, so while your 'Northolt Station Flight' idea is interesting, sticking them on the Falklands in place of F3s is more dubious.
Suspicion breeds confidence
Thread Starter
HMS Sheathbill
Jacko,
When Shars were able to operate from a steel strip on the Falklands rather than from the CVS 250 miles away, its time on station was considerably improved. Now we have even bigger drop tanks than the FRS1s had during the FW. They don't need to fly to Argentina but just far enough to get their 4 AMRAAMS on target. I think it would be ideal for the job.
When Shars were able to operate from a steel strip on the Falklands rather than from the CVS 250 miles away, its time on station was considerably improved. Now we have even bigger drop tanks than the FRS1s had during the FW. They don't need to fly to Argentina but just far enough to get their 4 AMRAAMS on target. I think it would be ideal for the job.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tracy Island
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beagle
Of course this excludes ex members who cash in on their special status by appearing on the BBC and C4 giving away all their field craft, equipement used, interrogation techniques, favoured tattoes etc etc.
Presumably that's Ok then?
FEBA
One simply does NOT, EVER mention ANYTHING about SF
Presumably that's Ok then?
FEBA
