Scrapping the wrong aircraft

Bob Ainsworth’s statement on 15 December 2009 was proof that the future planning of the Royal Air Force’s fast jet capability is still on the wrong track.

The decision to disband a Harrier squadron reflected a policy that has been around for some time — to make the Harrier top priority for cuts if these have to be made. From the Secretary of State’s statement it looks as if some lessons have been learned from the very public inter-service spat that took place when the abolition of the Harrier force was last proposed. The retention of two Harrier squadrons, presumably one RAF and the other the ‘Naval Strike Wing’ (a squadron in RAF terms), which will be co-located at Wittering, is specifically put in the context of the maintenance of ‘our joint carrier combat air capability.’

All well and good but the next sentence refers to plans ‘to reduce our Tornado and Harrier force by a further one or two squadrons.’ The inclusion of Harrier is odd. One Harrier squadron less would presumably leave just the ‘Naval Strike Wing’, in effect dissolving the Joint Force. The obvious thing then would be to transfer the Harriers to the Royal Navy at Yeovilton where they could be operated more economically again as the two Naval Air Squadrons, 800 and 801. Aircrew would nor be a problem; when disbanding the RAF Harrier force was previously on the cards, RAF Harrier pilots, who are very proud of the unique capabilities of their aircraft, were sounding out transfer to the RN.

The Air Force’s fixation with hanging on to the bomber version of the Tornado, of which there are still seven squadrons, is hard to understand in rational terms. It is an obsolescent third generation jet that needs considerable, expensive modernisation. Its crews are almost ashamed of it when put beside more modern aircraft.

The Harrier, while not having the range or total payload of the Tornado, is a more advanced ground attack aircraft in the roles for which we are planning in the short and medium term. In these you do not need long range or huge weapons loads, rather the responsiveness, basing flexibility and capability for small precise strikes that the Harrier offers —- and provided in Afghanistan until the fatigue suffered by the small and over-utilised squadrons made replacement by Tornado a necessary evil.

The obvious way forward would be to re-equip a reduced number of Tornado squadrons with Typhoon (Eurofighter), a fourth generation aircraft whose crews are rightly proud of their fighters. There are more than enough Typhoons available and the improvement programme stressed in Bob Ainsworth’s announcement will produce excellent multi-role capability. Reductions in Tornado squadrons could begin now and complete replacement of Tornado by Typhoon made a central feature of next year’s SDR.

With long-term policy still articulating a Typhoon/F-35 mix it seems odd that the RAF does not want to maintain its case for as many squadrons as possible that will convert directly from STOV/L Harrier to STOV/L F-35. I have detected a slight disdain in certain quarters of the RAF for F-35, perhaps because of carrier basing being the primary reason for its acquisition. If this prejudice really does exist it is very misplaced. The F-35 will be the basis of the RAF’s claim to be a first-class air force in the future. It is a fifth generation jet in terms of stealth and networked connectivity. Without it the RAF will look technologically very threadbare in the 2020s.

The UK needs a first-class air force. Scrapping Harrier and keeping Tornado is not the way to go about it.