Tom A Sad day. I cannot say that I agree with the decisions made. Regards Tom Tom you have echoed my own thoughts on seeing this thread and the news of the Harriers departure, there is something undeniably sad about this news.
James, I believe that the Harrier was the worlds first true jet fighter with vertical take off capability. Also capable of thrust vectoring in midflight to shake off missiles or other enemy planes. No other plane like it in our arsenal now. I do not think that the Americans will scrap their bigger versions of the Harrier design and they are producing new generation designs. I can understand cost cutting, but to me this makes no sense to me. Regards Tom
I have always loved the Harrier because I was at Wittering when it first replaced the Hunter. They are making a HUGE mistake...
I'm astonished by the speed of the implementation as much as I am by the decision itself. It feels like an annoyed parent snatching something away from the kids because they're making too much noise with it, or in this case because they just got the bill. If we go a full decade without a situation arising where an Admiral can brief a politician and mention the necessary response would normally require a carrier, I'll be dumbfounded. By the by, is the F35 anywhere near completion yet, or like other defence projects is there some 'slippage' involved? Perhaps if it's ten years late they can feel a little more justified by such a 'brave' decision...
The bit of the equation that makes no sense at all is that we are losing the carrier crew expertise - for a very long period - most senior crew members will be retired before the new vessel comes on line and the juniors will lack the development of experience and expertise - another case of the British having to re-invent the wheel.
History has a strange way of repeating itself. Anyone remember pre-Falkland Tory cuts?.................................. What could possibly go wrong?
Sad news indeed, end of an era. Can anyone undertand the wisdom in this decision? If so could you please explain it to me? Mike
BBC News - Ark Royal's final return to home port of Portsmouth The commanding officer of HMS Ark Royal said it was a "sad" day as the ship returned to its home port for the final time before it is scrapped.
Every large defence capital item decommisioned should have the ceremony recorded, as they usually are but with the Defence Minister,making that decision, shown in attendance. Then, "we will remember them" who make these decisions with politics in mind rather than the interests of the nation.Perhaps this is what is referred to as "pushing back the boundaries of the state" As regards the Harrier option,an aeriel warfare dimension has been terminated by military philistines.
Emerging from the morning mist HMS Ark Royal arrives home in Portsmouth for the final time under the White Ensign....a very emotional experience. Paul
BBC News - Parade through Portsmouth to mark end of Ark Royal Axed aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal will be given a final send-off later. A decommissioning parade will take place in Portsmouth to mark the passing of the fleet flagship, which will be scrapped as part of government cuts. About 250 sailors will take part to celebrate the affiliation between the warship and its home port at 1120 GMT. The warship will be replaced by the Queen Elizabeth class of aircraft carrier, which will not come into service until the end of the decade. Council leader Gerald Vernon-Jackson said the vessel had a "very special" place in the hearts of the people of the city. "It's only right to mark the passing of such a great ship," he added. Continue reading the main story
Lots of army in various forms, a bit of RAF, some Navy and Marines - anybody heard of the Fleet Air Arm? Ednamay
Fleet Air Arm are the Naval Aviators in WWII they started of with flying boats, sea planes and the Fairy Swordfish, later in the war they had catapuly launced Hurricanes and Seafire fighters among other aircraft types. Today all that remains for them to do for the next few years is to fly helicopters - that is till and if the new generation of carrier aircraft are ordered, delivered, and actually work!
On the subject of the Harrier being scrapped - I too was 'a bit put out' by the news and wrote an impassioned letter to my local MP protesting the decision and its wisdom. Here was his response ================== Thank you for contacting me about the removal of Harrier aircraft from the military. The former Labour Security Minister and First Sea Lord, Lord West, argued that the Harrier Fleet should not be cut. Before comparing Harrier against Tornado its worth putting into context, thanks to the financial mess left by the Government he was part of, why such tough decisions had to be made. Labour took us to the brink of bankruptcy leaving us with the biggest budget deficit in the G20. To compound this there was no proper review of our armed forces had taken place for over 12 years and the defence budget we inherited had a £38bn black hole in it. Poor equipment accusation meant the top 15 equipment programmes were £8.8.bn over budget and have a cumulative delay of 32 years. Furthermore, the final year of the Labour government saw a record in-year increase of £3.3bn in the equipment programme. The new aircraft carriers will be in service for the next fifty years and will provide a ‘carrier strike’ capability which may be needed to counter future threats which today we are unable to predict. (The last officer to captain either of these new ships has yet to be born!) More immediately, we have assessed that there is no requirement for carrier strike since we do not have any basing or over flight restrictions where British troops are operating or are likely to operating between now and 2020. This is why we had a very reduced carrier strike capability taken off the carriers from 2006-2009 in order to assist in operations over Afghanistan. Unfortunately Labour introduced a series of unnecessary delays in the building of the carriers that added an extra £1.56bn to the overall cost that we got nothing for. We have decided to add “cats and traps” to our operational carrier. Although this will delay the entry of carrier strike capability by three years it will allow us to use the carrier variant of Joint Strike Fighter—which has a heavier payload and longer range than the variant planned by Labour. The absence of an immediate requirement for carrier strike means a capability gap can be taken whilst the cats and traps are fitted. Contrary to popular belief, there will not be a new Queen Elizabeth Class carrier in service without planes. The JSF and the carrier with “cats and traps” will enter service at the same time in 2019. The Harrier force has made an impressive contribution to our nation’s security for decades but tough decisions must now be made. It is not possible to retain three fighter platforms with a fourth (JSF) planned to come on line within the next few years. Thanks to Labour’s cuts the Harrier force is no longer sufficient in number to sustain close air support operations in Afghanistan. Compared to the Harrier, Tornado carries a larger payload, has a longer range and more advanced reconnaissance capabilities. Therefore, the military advice was to retain the Tornado allowing us to sustain operations in Afghanistan and maintain other contingent air power capabilities. Thank you once again for contacting me.
My immediate reaction is, I wonder if .............. Anyone prepared to complete this??? And my second reaction is, they killed the Royal Naval Air Service after WW1 ..... Ednamay
In any case that's a pretty coherent reply from your MP. If I were to write a similar letter to my MP most likely it would be binned as the said person has simply no idea of what he was beibg asked about. Count yourself lucky!
Ahh What price quality, Drew - well about £4m smackers a throw! Whilst I have every sympathy with the navy, the Ark Royal, Invincible and Illustrious were not aircraft carriers but through deck cruisers (12 - 18 Harrier/ship). Once again a cheap fix by the MOD to escort convoys from USA should the cold war go hot! But without these an an old girl called Hermes we would never have been able to attack the Falklands. I believe Hermes was on her way to the scrap yard and had to be recalled, whilst one of the Invincibles was on her way to Austrailia after been bought in the pound shop! If you want an aircraft carrier try Nimitz Class US Carriers 90 aircraft or even the French carrier, Charles de Gaulle 28 - 35 aircraft and there's are at sea now! although like American MBTs and cars we wouldn't be able to afford the fuel, let alone the armament. I believe someone said on the news the other day that Britains' defence forces would end up like Belgium with nukes. Which poses another question, why do we need nukes? I thought they were invented to ensure that when set off they would definatley get the target, or at least hold the enmy to a MAD stand-off. Since the advent of precision weapons, cruise missiles in particular along with fuel-air devices, we are now able to hit what we shoot at and destroy it, i.e. Baghdad precision missile strikes GW1&2 and therefore do not need these catastrophic area weapons. So dump the trident and clear all our national debts. It's not likely that anyone will want to nuke us soon, and anyway we can't launch without the Americans say so, and we have to buy the trident from them.
Well - it's good to hear that something will be salved from the Ark, see Palatine Beds set to refurbish Ark Royal mattresses - Business News - News - nebusiness.co.uk At least it's a British firm and also involved in supporting the Disabled; BUT What f*** does the MOD want with 600 refurbished mattresses and at what cost!!! PZULBA - Out of Africa (Retired)
So dump the trident and clear all our national debts. It's not likely that anyone will want to nuke us soon, and anyway we can't launch without the Americans say so, and we have to buy the trident from them. Argeed!