Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (Jim WH) — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 06:41:49 GMT

Anthony, I doubt there are actually 42 fully mission capable GR.9/9A available at present. Poor planning on the part of somebody, but that's the way it is for the minute.
And the TOE for the squadrons is 2x9 aircraft RAF squadrons and 1x12 aircraft Naval Strike Wing (i.e. 30 aircraft in total). In the mid term that'll transition towards 4 squadrons of 9 aircraft each (i.e. 36 aircraft in total). Therefore, using the 1.5:1 ratio this implies a total of 54 pilots needed within the...

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (Anthony58) — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 00:59:28 GMT

On the governments plan of 12 aircraft x 2 RAF Sqns and 9 aircraft x 2 RN FAA Sqns equate to 42 aircraft, we currently have the RAF Sqns and 1 x RN FAA Sqn and 48 pilots. So even at full complement of 42 operational aircraft, the UK will have a deficit of aircrew needed in a high intensive war fighting complement, especially as only 19 Harrier pilots are qualified for night-time landing on deck.

At 36 operational aircraft we need 54 pilots for high intensive war fighting and sixty...

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (Jim WH) — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 23:30:28 GMT

Well Wabpilot, the allocation should be as follows:
-45 pilots in operational squadrons flying a total of 30 aircraft
-45 pilots elsewhere
Now, some of those 'elsewhere' pilots aren't going to be in JFH, they'll be banging around the rest of the RAF and RN, although some should be in JFH. It is unclear from the original posted information whether non-flying pilots within JFH are included in the total, but it is clear that students aren't (use of the words...

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (wabpilot) — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 18:55:49 GMT

Jim WH wrote:
Twice as many? Seems a bit excessive, although I absolutely agree that you need more pilots than just those you have on the frontline in order to run training and rotate through other postings. WRT to JFH, note that it says there are 48 pilots within JFH. That means that non-flying postings outside of JFH aren't included within that total (and there'll be a...

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (Zen9) — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 00:01:58 GMT

Interesting what numbers tell you.

16 Air Defence fighters is half of 32 and 32 is the number the RN thought it needed for Tactical air unit in 1962. Curious one that since AMRAAM gives a AD fighter the ability of a flight of four AD fighters of the 60's at least. You'd expect the number to have reduced to a quarter the 1962 size to just 8 fighters.
However 4 AD fighters on QRA is not that dissimilar to the RNs thoughts on a flight of 4 for a standing CAP.

...

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (Colin Mc) — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 13:48:25 GMT

A couple of quotes from the 2004 Defence Review which sheds light on the pilot/plane ratio:

"....we will need the ability to deploy up to 16 air defence fighters within the air expeditionary task group. When standing quick reaction alert tasks are taken into account this translates into a front line force of 55 crews"
"We judge that, as a result of these and other improvements, an air expeditionary task group capable of deploying up to 64 offensive fast jets will...

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (Jim WH) — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 08:38:11 GMT

The bit I don't understand is why Tornado aren't being deployed to Afghanistan... at all... Sure, they need a better runway than Harrier, but there are good strips around (e.g. Kabul, Kandahar and Bagram off the top of my head), and the Tornado can actually make far faster transits. And they have a back seater, which would have to be quite helpful in a congested environment.
If the Tornado force were put into the pot for 'ghan duties, then suddenly the pool of available...

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (BenRoethig) — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:56:43 GMT

Jimlad1 wrote:
Once the GR9's are out of the Stan we'll have a chance to regenerate the force properly. At the same time though this does raise serious questions in my mind about the sustainability of generating a credible CVF airwing.

The only people who ever thought it would were are in the British Parliament house and I doubt very many of them are well versed in military affairs. Its really the...

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (Jim WH) — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 05:43:45 GMT

Twice as many? Seems a bit excessive, although I absolutely agree that you need more pilots than just those you have on the frontline in order to run training and rotate through other postings. WRT to JFH, note that it says there are 48 pilots within JFH. That means that non-flying postings outside of JFH aren't included within that total (and there'll be a few knocking around). From that total of 48 need to come the front line flyers for...

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (wabpilot) — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 03:44:28 GMT

hulahoop7 wrote:
Well you need around 1.5 pilots per aircraft.

4*9 = 36

36*1.5 = 54.

Are they seriously saying that they are only 6 short?

Make that 108. For every pilot in a squadron, you need one in training, training others, at a school or on some other duty away from the squadron.

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (Jimlad1) — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:50:24 GMT

Once the GR9's are out of the Stan we'll have a chance to regenerate the force properly. At the same time though this does raise serious questions in my mind about the sustainability of generating a credible CVF airwing.

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (Colin Mc) — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 09:12:03 GMT

Here is an quote from the 2008 Defence Select Committee report on procurement:

"The MoD expects to have 36 JSF aircraft on each aircraft carrier. We asked if the MoD could afford 36 JSF aircraft. Mr Gould was confident that the MoD could afford that number, but noted that there "would be an additional number for training, attrition and so forth". We asked if the original figure of 150 JSF aircraft was "cloud cuckoo land". CDM told us that he was "not...

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (Obi Wan Russell) — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 03:33:04 GMT

Carrier qualls for otherwise trained Harrier pilots is what I was referring to.

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (BenRoethig) — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 18:20:59 GMT

Obi Wan Russell wrote:
4 sqns? If only! we currently only have three (1sqn, 4sqn and the 'Naval Strike Wing', 800 and 801 combined but operated as a single unit) to do the official work of four and the realistic work of seven. It proves once again any claims that the RAF can provide Naval air cover is a damned lie. JFH was all about stealing the SHARs budget and pilots to fill the gaps in the RAFs harrier force inorder...

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (hulahoop7) — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 16:37:07 GMT

So we're probably looking at between 65 and 70 pilots to get full manning?

Such a small number in the scheme of things. You'd imagine that they'd be paid a fair wack to keep them all interested... cus 70 * alot still isn't that much. Particularly as it's such a crucial profession.. i.e. fast air being at the very crux of our ability to go anywhere do anything.

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (Jim WH) — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 14:58:32 GMT

Hulahoop 7, a couple of curve balls in the equation:
1 and 4 Sqn RAF: 9 aircraft each
Naval Strike Wing (800 and 801 NAS): 12 aircraft
=30 aircraft
30*1.5=45 pilots.
BUT you also need qualified pilots to run the OCU (20(R) Sqn), and not all the pilots are flying all the time.

HOWEVER, there is a point, JFH currently has more pilots than it does aircraft, and that's a pretty good start. The biggest hole is probably the FAA, which was (last time anyone saw...

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (hulahoop7) — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 14:31:16 GMT

Well you need around 1.5 pilots per aircraft.

4*9 = 36

36*1.5 = 54.

Are they seriously saying that they are only 6 short?

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (Jim WH) — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:44:43 GMT

It actually seems to me like there is a bit of nested good news in there:
-After 3 years in the 'ghan, JFH can still field 48 pilots. That's not bad given that you'd expect them to be leaving the service in droves.
-Harriers (small, old, difficult and overworked ) are competing with Typhoon (shiny, new, easy to fly, and never used) for air crews, and they've managed to get 48 blokes/lasses who are qualified to fly Harrier. That's not bad.
-The recruiting...

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (Obi Wan Russell) — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:26:39 GMT

4 sqns? If only! we currently only have three (1sqn, 4sqn and the 'Naval Strike Wing', 800 and 801 combined but operated as a single unit) to do the official work of four and the realistic work of seven. It proves once again any claims that the RAF can provide Naval air cover is a damned lie. JFH was all about stealing the SHARs budget and pilots to fill the gaps in the RAFs harrier force inorder to meet THEIR committments and ignore the RNs needs. At least deck landing training in...

Re: Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (BenRoethig) — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:40:31 GMT

This is a taste if things to come. First off, you're giving 4 squadrons the dual role of land based CAS for the RAF and carrier based strike. In other words, you're basically having 4 squadrons do the work of 7-8 and running them continuously to have it done. Not only will this wear out pilots and equipment, it will lead to a lot of infighting about how those assets will be deployed should they be needed in combat. Second, the whole idea that RAF pilots don't need special training...

Lack of Carrier Qualified Harrier Pilots

feeds@yuku.com (lutzow) — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 23:54:13 GMT

By Thomas Harding
on HMS Illustrious, Arabian Sea

Britain's aircraft carrier force is facing major difficulties in training pilots, with less than half of fliers qualified to land on the vessels, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.
Some pilots who have been flying almost non-stop combat missions in Afghanistan have not landed on a harrier in three years. Only 19 Harrier officers out of a force of 48 have passed the extremely challenging test of a night-time landing on...