Red arrows to get new aircraft

[Vickers McFunbus]

I think Richard was suggesting that whatever 100 Sqn end up doing with their replacement aircraft (whatever it may be, and whoever fulfils their role), there was always the potential for a Hawk T2 purchase outside of the 28 operated under MFTS.

[RichardPrice]

1 hour ago, Ascoteer said:

But it doesn't. As I stated there are a mere 28 T2s in service.

 

 Yes, because BAE ain't making any more 

 

The point is that the RAFs replacement for the Hawk T1 is the Hawk T2.  That decision has already been made, further purchases will certainly be made in the future.  Moving one training squadron to Typhoons and reallocating that squadrons Hawk buy to the Red Arrows keeps it essentially cost neutral and achieves the goal of doing something with the early Typhoons that won't be upgraded (the recent SDSR mentioned something along similar lines iirc).

[Ascoteer]

Sorry, but are you saying that MOD will purchase Hawk T2 to re-equip 100 Sqn and then re-equip 100 Sqn again with Typhoon such that RAFAT will then get the ex 100 Sqn T2s?

 

That's just bonkers and not how MOD PE works.

[junglierating]

5 hours ago, RichardPrice said:

The way I read the long term plan several months ago, one of the Hawk training units that provides aggressor aircraft for training may be moved over to Typhoon F.2s, freeing up new or low hour Hawk T2s for the Red Arrows.  Not sure if that will come to fruition however.

Based on what authority  ..maintaining 10 typhoons(9) for an display team is mighty expensive

[junglierating]

3 hours ago, RichardPrice said:

 

 Yes, because BAE ain't making any more 

 

The point is that the RAFs replacement for the Hawk T1 is the Hawk T2.  That decision has already been made, further purchases will certainly be made in the future.  Moving one training squadron to Typhoons and reallocating that squadrons Hawk buy to the Red Arrows keeps it essentially cost neutral and achieves the goal of doing something with the early Typhoons that won't be upgraded (the recent SDSR mentioned something along similar lines iirc).

Rubbish a hawk is basically very simple to maintain typhoon is a whole different ball gain ...sorry nothing personal but having worked within in mod and industry for the last 6 years there is no money

[FIGHTS ON]

I'll throw in a controversial post here....... Disband them.

 

As a taxpayer, I fail to see what value for money the Dead Sparrows actually provide. The argument that they act as a sales promoter for BAe was true once, but surely not anymore (who still buys T1? and as pointed out above, way too expensive and difficult to justify the T2). Recruitment?? again, how does the Reds reflect life in the modern RAF - cheaper surely to do the odd flyby by a UAV over a school (perhaps working both ways and spotting all the lads having a crafty fag around the back of the bike sheds?). 

 

As aviation enthusiasts, I'm sure we all enjoy watching aerobatic displays, but maintaining a whole squadron (+ support, salaries EVEN a whole bloody Airbase) when the crabs have only got 6 or 7 frontline jet sqns is an extravagance we can no longer afford.

 

IF THEY WERE REALLY WORTH THE MONEY, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN SOLD OFF TO CONTRACTORS A LONG TIME AGO - like just about everything else in MOD.

 

 

[cngaero]

53 minutes ago, FIGHTS ON said:

I'll throw in a controversial post here....... Disband them.

 

As a taxpayer, I fail to see what value for money the Dead Sparrows actually provide. The argument that they act as a sales promoter for BAe was true once, but surely not anymore (who still buys T1? and as pointed out above, way too expensive and difficult to justify the T2). Recruitment?? again, how does the Reds reflect life in the modern RAF - cheaper surely to do the odd flyby by a UAV over a school (perhaps working both ways and spotting all the lads having a crafty fag around the back of the bike sheds?). 

 

As aviation enthusiasts, I'm sure we all enjoy watching aerobatic displays, but maintaining a whole squadron (+ support, salaries EVEN a whole bloody Airbase) when the crabs have only got 6 or 7 frontline jet sqns is an extravagance we can no longer afford.

 

IF THEY WERE REALLY WORTH THE MONEY, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN SOLD OFF TO CONTRACTORS A LONG TIME AGO - like just about everything else in MOD.

 

 

 

"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it".

 

Evelyn Beatrice Hall (1868-1956)

 

 

 

[upnorth]

I wouldn't be bothered by a smaller team as long as they kept to jets.

 

Prop based teams just don't do it for me at all.

 

[Vickers McFunbus]

9 hours ago, FIGHTS ON said:

I'll throw in a controversial post here....... Disband them.

 

As a taxpayer, I fail to see what value for money the Dead Sparrows actually provide. The argument that they act as a sales promoter for BAe was true once, but surely not anymore (who still buys T1? and as pointed out above, way too expensive and difficult to justify the T2). Recruitment?? again, how does the Reds reflect life in the modern RAF - cheaper surely to do the odd flyby by a UAV over a school (perhaps working both ways and spotting all the lads having a crafty fag around the back of the bike sheds?). 

 

As aviation enthusiasts, I'm sure we all enjoy watching aerobatic displays, but maintaining a whole squadron (+ support, salaries EVEN a whole bloody Airbase) when the crabs have only got 6 or 7 frontline jet sqns is an extravagance we can no longer afford.

 

IF THEY WERE REALLY WORTH THE MONEY, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN SOLD OFF TO CONTRACTORS A LONG TIME AGO - like just about everything else in MOD.

 

 

They aren't a sales tool for the T1.

[Latinbear]

9 hours ago, FIGHTS ON said:

I'll throw in a controversial post here....... Disband them.

 

As a taxpayer, I fail to see what value for money the Dead Sparrows actually provide. The argument that they act as a sales promoter for BAe was true once, but surely not anymore (who still buys T1? and as pointed out above, way too expensive and difficult to justify the T2). Recruitment?? again, how does the Reds reflect life in the modern RAF - cheaper surely to do the odd flyby by a UAV over a school (perhaps working both ways and spotting all the lads having a crafty fag around the back of the bike sheds?). 

 

As aviation enthusiasts, I'm sure we all enjoy watching aerobatic displays, but maintaining a whole squadron (+ support, salaries EVEN a whole bloody Airbase) when the crabs have only got 6 or 7 frontline jet sqns is an extravagance we can no longer afford.

 

IF THEY WERE REALLY WORTH THE MONEY, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN SOLD OFF TO CONTRACTORS A LONG TIME AGO - like just about everything else in MOD.

 

 

 

"Light the blue touch paper and retire.................."

 

 

[junglierating]

Hmmm actually although i agree to some extent about the affordability aspect I think they are great PR for UKPLC.That said two ruddy big CVS and 12 fast jets each oooooh.Even 801 and the other squadron whos name will not be mentioned had nine on illustrious etc.

Still go with the Blue Herons though....or maybe blue sh**ehawks lol

[magwitch]

11 hours ago, Vickers McFunbus said:

They aren't a sales tool for the T1.

 

What are they for then? I am baffled as to what return the UK gets for the 10m+/year it spends on them. There also over 100 full time service personnel assigned to them which seems ridiculous.

[Britman]

The Red Arrows are the pride of the nation.  If you have ever been near Manston when the Reds were operating locally you would have thought the the world and his dog had turned out just to see them arrive and depart! They DO promote air mindedness and evoke a pride that is difficult to measure. 

[PLC1966]

On 01/11/2016 at 11:44 PM, junglierating said:

Hmm well as the newish T2 will loose support from what I gather one can only assume that it will be  MLSP mk1,.....but sounds like complete bs to me  there are plenty of mk1 and 1a around.

Of course the sensible decision is to disband the crimson crabs and reform the BLUE HERONS.   It's obvious!!! FLY NAVY .

Ps I love them really

 

Only if we can get them up in Hunters

[PLC1966]

On 02/11/2016 at 8:52 AM, Duncan B said:

Bicycles! Some manoeuvres will have to be rejigged, for instance all that flying stuff but other than that it'll be a fine marker for British Governmental forward thinking (and we won't be able to get Visas to enter Europe by then anyway).

 

Duncan B

 

Written in jest (it would have to be tandems anyway)

Maybe not bikes....................http://www.redbarrows.org/

[junglierating]

3 hours ago, Britman said:

The Red Arrows are the pride of the nation.  If you have ever been near Manston when the Reds were operating locally you would have thought the the world and his dog had turned out just to see them arrive and depart! They DO promote air mindedness and evoke a pride that is difficult to measure. 

It's all soft skills I have no doubt that the far east tour that they are on is doing wonders for the UK.

If the RN had a tenth of the RAFs PR they wouldn't be in the hole that they are in now.Not that the RAF haven't got problems but if you are a navy you kinda need useful maritime platforms....ships.

[John B (Sc)]

On ‎11‎/‎3‎/‎2016 at 6:33 AM, FIGHTS ON said:

I'll throw in a controversial post here....... Disband them.

 

As a taxpayer, I fail to see what value for money the Dead Sparrows actually provide. The argument that they act as a sales promoter for BAe was true once, but surely not anymore (who still buys T1? and as pointed out above, way too expensive and difficult to justify the T2). Recruitment?? again, how does the Reds reflect life in the modern RAF - cheaper surely to do the odd flyby by a UAV over a school (perhaps working both ways and spotting all the lads having a crafty fag around the back of the bike sheds?). 

 

As aviation enthusiasts, I'm sure we all enjoy watching aerobatic displays, but maintaining a whole squadron (+ support, salaries EVEN a whole bloody Airbase) when the crabs have only got 6 or 7 frontline jet sqns is an extravagance we can no longer afford.

 

IF THEY WERE REALLY WORTH THE MONEY, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN SOLD OFF TO CONTRACTORS A LONG TIME AGO - like just about everything else in MOD.

 

 

 

 

Sadly, I have to agree with you. With our services being so diminished and the RAF now a shadow of its former self, to maintain an organisation of the size of the Red Arrows no longer makes any sense in either defence or economic terms. The only argument favouring their retention is nostalgia and sentiment, plus no doubt for politicians fear of the response of the knee jerk 'jingoistic' lobby amongst our national newspapers.

 

Perhaps we may get a return to small squadron based teams - that could be the only bright side. More colour schemes for us to dream of, tinker with?

 

John B

[junglierating]

2 hours ago, PLC1966 said:

Maybe not bikes....................http://www.redbarrows.org/

Ooh you would need a special projects PT for that:-)

As for red arrows ...ive got an idea paint 'em black like all the rest and call them the black arrows

 

[bzn20]

Nine Reapers controlled by a bloke on a Sony Play RAF Station P.Mk.1 from a shipping container in Knutsford services, M6.

Next option is 10 Lords a leaping

[FIGHTS ON]

A healthy debate amongst aviation enthusiasts, I think we are ALL agree that their display routines are polished and reflect a high degree of professionalism, but if there is difference in opinion amongst us (as stated, generally "pro-aviation") members, then how does the Junior Service think it will make a compelling case to a highly sceptable public? I think it is a particularly arrogant assumption that "£10m+year" is money well spent, I doubt Alastair Campbell could spin that one to some inner city voters who don't even see a need for any Armed Forces. I can assure you that there are other holes in Defence (and arguably NHS etc) where £10m+ a year would be better spent. Apart from London Ceremonial Duties (which generate Tourist income for UK PLC) EVERY other Public display function in Defence has pretty well long since dried up - and rightly so. I think the UK remains in the top 5 of Defence exporters (separate debate whether that is morally something to be proud of), but that is to sell Typhoon's (as if any nation would be that stupid!), ships (even more laughable) and cluster bombs (maybe not the last one anymore!). 

I assume the history behind the Dead Sparrows, Yellow Jackets, Blue Herons etc was frontline pilots using current trainers/frontline a/c at little additional expense to good effect. Somewhere down the years that connection has become very broken. (Certainly as hours become tighter and the cost per hour to fly more than 99% of us reading this earn in a year).

 

If they are really worth the money, then sponsorship or even outright bids to buy them like a Premiership Football team would be crawling over broken glass to own them.....

 

So to answer the topic question, "new Aircraft"....well either the Reds ARE being subsidised by the taxpayer to promote Foreign sales (therefore give them Typhoon) or disband them. Now the figure I've seen for Typhoon per hour is truly eye watering, I can't see any Minister signing off on that one.

 

[Edit: Just have to add how much I laughed at Bzn20's post above - I wonder how far from the truth that is!!]

Edited November 4, 2016 by FIGHTS ON
Loved Bzn20's comment!

[PLC1966]

3 hours ago, John B (Sc) said:

 

 

The only argument favouring their retention is nostalgia and sentiment, 

 

 

 

That, my friend, is absolute rubbish.  You've heard about the amount of business concluded on the Golf Course, well, in the big boys world, there is no question the Reds, Cocktail Parties on the back of Navy Warships and generally 'flying the flag' tasks raises the profile of the UK in many places for many different, and generally positive, purposes.  

[PLC1966]

3 hours ago, junglierating said:

 

As for red arrows ...ive got an idea paint 'em black like all the rest and call them the black arrows

 

 

And as per my early reply to you...only if we can the Hunters back  

 

3 hours ago, bzn20 said:

Nine Reapers controlled by a bespectacled fat kid, laying on his sofa with a Sony Play RAF Station P.Mk.1 from a shipping container in Knutsford services, M6.

munching on Pringles, Pot Noodles and Chocolate Bars while drinking cans of low-calorie Monster energy drink. 

Sorry Bzn20, just had to adjust the picture slightly

[PLC1966]

3 hours ago, FIGHTS ON said:

A healthy debate amongst aviation enthusiasts, I think we are ALL agree that their display routines are polished and reflect a high degree of professionalism, but if there is difference in opinion amongst us (as stated, generally "pro-aviation") members, then how does the Junior Service think it will make a compelling case to a highly sceptable public? I think it is a particularly arrogant assumption that "£10m+year" is money well spent, I doubt Alastair Campbell could spin that one to some inner city voters who don't even see a need for any Armed Forces. I can assure you that there are other holes in Defence (and arguably NHS etc) where £10m+ a year would be better spent. Apart from London Ceremonial Duties (which generate Tourist income for UK PLC) EVERY other Public display function in Defence has pretty well long since dried up - and rightly so. I think the UK remains in the top 5 of Defence exporters (separate debate whether that is morally something to be proud of), but that is to sell Typhoon's (as if any nation would be that stupid!), ships (even more laughable) and cluster bombs (maybe not the last one anymore!). 

I assume the history behind the Dead Sparrows, Yellow Jackets, Blue Herons etc was frontline pilots using current trainers/frontline a/c at little additional expense to good effect. Somewhere down the years that connection has become very broken. (Certainly as hours become tighter and the cost per hour to fly more than 99% of us reading this earn in a year).

 

If they are really worth the money, then sponsorship or even outright bids to buy them like a Premiership Football team would be crawling over broken glass to own them.....

 

So to answer the topic question, "new Aircraft"....well either the Reds ARE being subsidised by the taxpayer to promote Foreign sales (therefore give them Typhoon) or disband them. Now the figure I've seen for Typhoon per hour is truly eye watering, I can't see any Minister signing off on that one.

 

[Edit: Just have to add how much I laughed at Bzn20's post above - I wonder how far from the truth that is!!]

 

What year did the RAF turn you down ?

[AWFK10]

25 minutes ago, PLC1966 said:

 

That, my friend, is absolute rubbish.  You've heard about the amount of business concluded on the Golf Course, well, in the big boys world, there is no question the Reds, Cocktail Parties on the back of Navy Warships and generally 'flying the flag' tasks raises the profile of the UK in many places for many different, and generally positive, purposes.  

 

On the contrary, John is exactly right. I happened to leaf through a warship magazine today, which is very obviously edited and written by people who are enthusiasts for the RN. It includes an article about the current campaign to build a royal yacht: as you're probably aware, one of the arguments being put forward for that is the same as the one you're advancing here. The author's line was that the RN needs this further claim on its scarce resources like it needs a hole in the head, and that it would be an indefensible waste of money that's urgently needed to shore up such operational capability as the RN has left. Foreign governments aren't, by and large, fools. They can see what clout the UK can actually deliver and no amount of cocktail parties is going to convince them it's greater than it really is, however much of a jolly the parties may be for the participants or however gratifying they may be to people in this country who are prepared to accept posturing as reality (out of "nostalgia and sentiment"). Another article in same magazine points out that, out of the RN's already pretty derisory paper strength of 19 destroyers and frigates, only 17 really count as operational and that this allows maybe 5 or 6 to be actively deployed at any given time. I guess most people on here know the corresponding figures for the RAF. We can muster, what, just 20 fast jets to deploy against what the government termed "an existential threat", and their efforts have to be diluted over two geographically distant areas of operations. Do we expect our potential enemies, knowing this, to think "Wow, the UK can afford to resource a 9-plane jet aerobatic team - better not mess with them!"

[junglierating]

8 hours ago, PLC1966 said:

 

 

Scupper me the poop decks awash ,Starting to get nasty now.....in order to ask when rights on was turned down by the RAF presumably you have been in the armed services.