A handful of images from the RAF
A Tornado GR4 aircraft with 617 Squadron based at RAF Lossiemouth is pictured fitted with the Storm Shadow cruise missile, directly under the fuselage.
This long-range air-launched and conventionally-armed missile equips RAF Tornado GR4 squadrons and saw operational service in 2003 with 617 Squadron during combat in Iraq, prior to entering full service in 2004. Post deployment analysis demonstrated the missile’s exceptional accuracy, and the effect on targets was described as devastating. Based on this performance, it is arguably the most advanced weapon of its kind in the world.
Feasibility studies on a possible UK requirement for a Long Range Stand- Off Missile were originally commissioned in 1982, and work was eventually subsumed in 1986 into the NATO seven-nation Modular Stand- Off Weapon programme. This project was however aborted, and the UK subsequently withdrew. With the end of the Cold War the UK’s continued need for a stand-off requirement was reviewed and endorsed as part of the ‘Options for Change’ exercise. An international competition was launched in 1994 to meet the UK’s Conventionally Armed Stand Off Missile (CASOM) requirement, and seven companies responded
A Tornado GR4 aircraft with 617 Squadron based at RAF Lossiemouth is pictured fitted with the Storm Shadow cruise missile, directly under the fuselage.
A Tornado GR4 aircraft with 617 Squadron based at RAF Lossiemouth is pictured fitted with the Storm Shadow cruise missile, directly under the fuselage
A Tornado GR4 aircraft with 617 Squadron based at RAF Lossiemouth is pictured fitted with the Storm Shadow cruise missile, directly under the fuselage.
Its 2012 for goodness sake, were are the “propaganda” shots of Storm Shadow on Typhoon!
“Its 2012 for goodness sake, were are the “propaganda” shots of Storm Shadow on Typhoon!”
Who knows!
Just read in the Business Plan 2012 of the MOD that the Full Operating Capability of the Typhoon is still no less than 6 years away (March 2018) and it is not even clear if the FOC includes integration of Storm Shadow and other weaponry, and even less it is clear if the Tranche 3 will effectively come with conformal fuel tanks and AESA…
On the other hand, in 2012/13 Typhoon is once again the most expensive item in the budget, with an in-year expenditure of 0.74 billion, against 0.17 for the Type 45, 0.60 for CVF, 0.59 for Astute and so along.
At least, by March 2015 the 5th and last frontline squadron on Typhoon will finally hit IOC.
From Gabriele’s blog:
– http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-YM_M_WYs8Y4/TaSr8S4Qk2I/AAAAAAAAAGk/8Tp5vzZtij0/s1600/edmisstorm_b1.jpg
So once the ‘phoon has conformal long range fuel tanks will that curtains for the Tornado fleet? So long as we continue to invest in Typhoon can that platform ‘do it all’ for the RAF?
Getting enough F35 for a viable carrier air group is likely to empty the piggy bank so it would be pretty handy if Typhoon is in a position to pick up the majority of Tornado’s missions.
Theoretically Typhoon will be able to do it all and probably more with regards to the air to air functions. What it can not do is be in more than one place at once, so the reduction in numbers will cause some problems I’d imagine.
@Chris B
I agree in theory Typhoon will probably be a bit of an all singing all dancing platform as it matures.
I also agree that numbers are still important and a cause for concern.
How much use can you get out of 107 aircraft? QRA over the UK and Falklands is a must, but then what’s left over? Would for instance the remainder be able to do what the Tornado has done over the last couple of years in Afganistan and Libya, or would that be asking too much?
My guess would be yes it could with those numbers (and assuming the money for everything stays as planned) do something similar ops wise in years to come.
Also depends how long we can keep the Typhoon production line open. If the line is open beyond 2015 then a ‘scrap and build’ policy becomes possible.
By that I mean work the in-service planes hard, with minimal rotation. Use their hours up quickly and then bin them and replace with new.
As such a fleet of 107 planes could do a great deal. The increased capital cost would be offset by lower operating costs (ie not having to house, service and maintain attrition ariframes).
You also get the industrial benefit of an open aircraft factory allowing possible re-armament back to 200 airframes within, say, a 5 year timescale.
@Topman
I’m not so sure. With the demands of QRA weighing heavily on the Typhoon force I think it would be difficult to simultaneously deploy any kind of sizeable force for more than short bursts. I am sure the fleet could manage a dozen or so for a few months, but id be dubious on saying that anything else would be achievable without some kind of real all out painful effort.
After all, Tornado struggled to deploy 24 aircraft on front line ops out of a force of nearly 140!
@Peter Elliot
I would love to see a scrap and build policy, almost as much as id love to see Typhoon numbers head up-to and stay at the 160 mark. It isn’t very likely though.
The Typhoon production line will really struggle after 2015 and I can’t see that amount of expendable cash being around for us to throw at this kind of project.
Everything for me hinges on the F35 buy. We can safely assume that the initial number will be somewhere between 40 and 60, but the crucial piece of information is whether any will be bought after that and how many if this is the case.
Id say that fast jet numbers should probably be around 200, any more is a luxury and any less is a problem. So as long as the long term planning assumption is to get 90+ F35 then I’ll be a happy boy!
@ Challenger
‘After all, Tornado struggled to deploy 24 aircraft on front line ops out of a force of nearly 140!’
It’s less the number itself as said above, it’s often the support structure, manning level, training and so. x number out of y number doesn’t always tell you a great deal, without looking at the why. More can be deployed and could have been, same as any fleet. But it’s the money to pay for it all that matters. You have to look at things in the round as more often than not it all depends on how much you are prepared to pay specifically with aircraft deployed on ops.
Don’t forget as well that we’re entering the brave new world of stand off weapons etc, where less is more. Typhoon can carry a similar weighted payload to a WW2 Lancaster. With precision weapons you get much, much better hit ratios, so it takes less sorties to deliver the desired effect.
And that’s the key. It’s not about aircraft numbers, its about effect on the enemy. If 12 aircraft can deliver that effect then happy days. Though I would like to see the UK investigate the US Small Diameter Bomb and some of the other septics GPS guided glide weapons. And re-establish our SEAD/DEAD ability with a replacement for ALARM. Oh, and anti-shipping, just for shits and giggles.
Wasn’t there also prop. shots of Nimrod MRA4 carrying Stormshadow?
I cant see F-35 carrying this…
What on earth was Nimrod ever going to do with a spastically short-ranged TLAM? Fly up to within 160 miles of the target in the 1950s non stealthy airframe and launch it? Sounds like a one way mission to me. On the other hand, it also sounds like a desperately cunning way of gaining political acceptance to extend the life of an airframe type, and therefore save Squadrons.
well if was it didn’t work very well…
160 miles at 100 feet gives you quite the radar horizon from the target. Low level attack is likely to come back onto the menu with weapons like Storm Shadow. The problems experienced in the Gulf for example were centered around having to fly over a target bristling with AA guns and short to medium ranged SAM’s. That’s where Storm Shadow comes in. Penetrate at low level and then turn away with out entering the kill zone. I wonder how much distance you could get out of toss bombing one of those new Yankee Glide bombs?
@James
‘What on earth was Nimrod ever going to do with a spastically short-ranged TLAM? Fly up to within 160 miles of the target in the 1950s non stealthy airframe and launch it?’
Ha-ha, would have loved to have seen that!
@Topman
I get what you mean about the number of aircraft deployed, that often the cost isn’t justified by the return and that it’s about balancing money spent with capability needed.
I also understand that the overall effectiveness of said airframe, including factors such as flight hours, pilots, maintenance, weaponry and more influences how effective a type of aircraft is and therefore how many are needed.
However that’s not to say that numbers aren’t important, of course not as a figure in isolation but as a fact that influences and is influenced by the above. As I said, my own personal opinion is that if we end up with a Typhoon + Lightning fleet with all the capabilities promised then a rough figure of 200 seems about right. Like anything they can’t be in two places at once but I reckon this number would be able to simultaneously handle QRA, some sort of Naval Strike Wing, a enduring commitment of a small amount of aircraft (Afghanistan) and then a surge ability in times of war (Libya). That’s what we need, although getting there is another matter!
@Chris B
As you say the new world of stand off weapons and laser guided munitions really is a bit of a game changer and I am sure will mean we can get the same levels of effectiveness out of a smaller fleet of aircraft. Hence why going down from around 400 aircraft a decade ago to a prospective half of that pretty soon isn’t as awful as some people make out.
If as you say 12 aircraft can get the job done on a specific type of operation then fine, but numbers still matter for two big reasons. Firstly because as we all know for every airframe being used you’re going to need several going through the maintenance cycle, on operational conversion or in reserve to spread out flight hours. Secondly because it never pays to be too thin on the ground, you will always want extra aircraft available as a surge to that pre existing commitment or to react to an unexpected scenario.
So yeah guys, I’m not disagreeing with you, just elaborating on the points made!
So if 200 FJ is the target figure, and if we judge that we are committed to 107 Typhoon and up to 60 F35B then there are at least 33 aircraft to find for Tornado repalcement, plus possible attrition replacements for high hours Typhoons after that.
Now we don’t currently know how much an F35A, B or C will cost but at this moment I would wager that a Tranche 3+ Typhoon will be cheaper than any of them, especially when you consider the tax take from what will be a high % UK build.
So I’d keep the line open and keep topping the Typhoon fleet up to 140 rather than buy any more F35 than we need for carrier ops.
Yeah, the airframe hours is an issue (especially given the nature of what they’re doing, carrying heavy loads and pushing the aircraft hard) and obviously you don’t want to get too short handed. Out of 107 Typhoon I imagine you could expect around 20 to be deployed for an enduring op and possibly between 30-40 if it was just a one off, fuck’em up and off we go type thing.
And don’t forget the allies!
If ‘scrap and build’ is politically unacceptable then the attrition replacements could be badged as ‘factory rebuilds’ even if very little metal gets from the old one onto the new.
Tubby, did you mention the Glorious Corps of Royal Engineers?
More handsome, intelligent, cunning and better in bed than any cavalry, white sock wearer or consumers of pussers rum I can tell you. Soldier, combat engineer and artisan, no other arm or service expects one man to cover three trades and go find me another unit in the armed forces with two Royals’s in their formal title, except of course the drop shorts, but we don’t count them.
Plus of course, there are the all arms euchre playing and piss drinking champions, several decades running.
White socks, plastic slip ons, bell bottoms and red trousers, come on, give me a break
@Peter Elliott
I totally agree with you in principle. More Typhoons would probably cheaper at that point and a fleet of 140 seems like a far more sensible approach. However from a purely political aspect it doesn’t seem likely, plus I think the RAF will very much be focusing on the next shiny toy and won’t be too interested in ‘yesterdays model’.
I also think it makes sense when looking at the likely amount of Lightning’s available. Anything between 40 and 60 isn’t really enough to do both carrier ops and be a serious force in the RAF’s inventory. Id rather they focused on the carrier aspect whilst be able to of course deploy on land if and when it’s necessary.
@Chris B
20 enduring and 30-40 for a quick surge sounds about right to me.
I really agree with Peter Elliot that if we are playing fantasy fleets here id really like to see a few more Typhoons, between 120 and 140 to widen the safety margins when it comes to availability and flight hours. Couple those with a maximum buy of 60 Lightning’s to keep the magic number of 200 and have them focus on being a bespoke strike platform involved in carrier ops.
But I know this will never happen!
James,
It was another idea for a ‘fitted for but not with’ lark…along with AIM-9 capability that was used in ’82 and in ’91, suppose it was some fantasy for Hunting ships/shore raid alla somalia.
Not so spastic a munition either, but I agree the idea was toff.
Its a shame the Harrier replacement wont be able to carry this munition, we should think of going for the SDB munition to up the punch of the B.
To repeat the quote from the Farnborough 98 copy of Aviation week article on FOAS “A Eurofighter derivative would likely involve conformal fuel tanks for increased range, a fuselage plug, an internal bomb bay & increased wing thickness for undercarriage storage”.
The idea of putting Storm Shadow on Nimrod was partly mine, as I was one of the public invited to the MoD as part of the 1998 SDR. It was sparked by the need in 1982 (unanswered) to take out Argentine jets in their airfields. Let the Nimrod fly the long bit over the ocean & let the Storm Shadow do the dangerous last bit through defended skies.
A Vulcan got away with overflying Stanley airfield & dropping 1000lb bombs. Bet they wished they could have stayed 160 miles away.
Why not? It seems to make military, economic and industrial sense. Sounds like just the sort of combination to tickle the fancy of the new ‘grown-up’ MoD.
“But I know this will never happen!”
@John Hartley: the Vulcan’s didn’t have to overfly Stanley, they were able to drop from 3 miles out. Thankfully the Roland crew was asleep or whatever. Bet they wish they could have hit the runway more than once
I think that conformal tanks are the best, most cost effective upgrade the Typhoon could receive. Bin the Tornado as the support agreement runs out and buy more Typhoons
The Vulcan crew had dusted off the RAF plan from WW2 on how to bomb airfields, hence the diagonal stick, so at least one hits the runway.
TD,
clearly, you haven’t had the pleasure of a good Cavalry shagging if you think the Sappers are any good at it, or maybe you only ever knew a Tankie. Sadly, I only have this on hearsay as lady Sappers weren’t invented when I was in to conduct a road test upon. They are however completely brilliant at everything else, if that helps with the burst pride.
I do believe that some collective mind bleach is in order at this point in time.
Typhoon production line will be open to 2017-18 for uk jets. the Saudi Order which will now be completed entirely in the uk as will most likely the Oman one this should keep it going this decade. The tranche 2 onward typhoon have relatively low hours as tranche 1 have been hammered and will go relatively quickly. So no reason why a 5 sqn fleet with a suitable upgrade path (possible hear more at farnbough in a months time) can’t do tornados role for the most part. why would you want to replace old typhoons with new ones post 2030.
Tornados done really well for the uk. Force generation I know little about but typhoon can do hot turnarounds better than tornado so possibly less active deployed airframes. pilot numbers more an issue as a plane can do 2/3 sorties a day but due to crew flight hour restrictions a pilot cannot. I think I read the US mandated a 2 to 1 crew to a/c ratio for Iraq in 2003
F35 will cover the rest particularly in the more threat intensive areas( more tha 50 will be ordered) They will be cheaper across the board that typhoon bar a total collapse of US airpower.
“clearly, you haven’t had the pleasure of a good Cavalry shagging”
And the winner for TDs most soul shudderingly disturbing comment goes to…
I thought the cavalry were all mouth and no scarlet trousers?
wf,
That’ll be the Life Grads and Blues and Trews, both of whom are more interested in nags and drill than girls. Mummy buys them their wives from Harvey Nicks when they are 27.
What you need to be able to do is to drive through Friday night from BAOR to arrive in London on Saturday morning, work your way through 3 girls over the weekend without revealing each other, and be back in Fallingbostel at dark o’clock on Monday morning for a gunnery camp lasting five days, followed by another weekend in London. And also not let the local German Tuesday to Thursday girlfriend know anything. In other words, Golf GTI, no kip and an extensive address book. Sometimes, you get caught out but there’s always more.
Hi Chris B, RE
” I wonder how much distance you could get out of toss bombing one of those new Yankee Glide bombs?”
Well we get the “B” so we should really look into the SDB II, as in
“Raytheon’s GBU-53/B SDB-II is 7” in diameter around the tri-mode (laser, IIR, radar) seeker, with a clamshell protective door that comes off when the bomb is dropped. A GPS receiver adds a 4th targeting mode. The bomb tapers to about 6” diameter beyond the pop-out wings, and is about 69.5” long. The wings remain swept back when deployed, and are about 66” across with a 5 degree anhedral slope. The bomb weighs about 200 pounds, and all of these dimensions are important when trying to ensure that the US Marines’ *F-35B, with its cut-down internal weapon bays, can still carry 8 of them per bay.* It also fits on BRU-61 external bomb racks.
Range is expected to be *up to 40 nautical miles* when launched at altitude, thanks to a high lift-to-drag ratio in the design. Since SDB-II is an unpowered glide bomb, its actual range will always depend on launching altitude and circumstances.”
- http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Raytheon-Wins-USAs-GBU-53-Small-Diameter-Bomb-Competition-06510/
So, we will be back in the SEAD game, standing off 40nm or much less if a low-level approach is a must (and the “famous” stealth pylons can still carry the stealthy ASRAAMs for self-defence, and the more central pylons I think are “wet” so range can be extended, too)
@james: a Blue’s and Royals married my cousin, so I would be biased. Three kids later, he does seem to have some lead in his pencil
Of course, he was a one woman man, so probably not Lancer material
wf,
one woman at a time. Of course, anything less would be completely immoral.
Now, how do you divide your time? In my case, it was into small chunks, until Mrs J managed to nail my balls to the floor, after that the timeslots are measured in eternities, and quite happily so.
What was odd is that I’d asked 3 ex-GFs to come to our wedding, which Mrs J was quite happy with. I hadn’t counted on her taking them out to supper a few days before and (1) telling them where they went wrong, and (2) giving them the gypsies’ warning. Mrs J can be a bit formidable.
@james: nailing of balls to the floor? Down with that sort of thing
WF,
quite natural, you just convert a sex drive into school fees and an unfeasibly large mortgage which can only be met by leaving the Army and making your way in business, but at least you know there’s a slightly sympathetic hearing on the other side of the mattress. Golden, that is. It’s also quite cool to not have to try to remember names.
“So, we will be back in the SEAD game, standing off 40nm or much less if a low-level approach is a must.” Aye, the similar Rafale/AASM combo showed how viable that approach can be.
BTW, I love my Typhoons but that middle pic above reminded me what a handsome bird Tornado is.
How the hell did we get onto marriage decisions versus a life of debauchery on a post entitled “RAF Tornado and Storm Shadow“? This TD blog is weird, and there are too many Kevin topics.
… I blame TD for his filthy insinuations about Sappers. That’s where it all went wrong. Of course, Sappers like being filthy, but that’s filthy in the muddy sense, as opposed to the normal sense of mating. That’s the problem with Sappers….
I wonder if lady Sappers like mud baths?
After reading several months worth of comments I really think that James is missing a trick. He could sod off the business lark and make his millions writing the modern (well 70′s/80′s version) Flashman! The first book would of course be titled Flashman on the Rhine. I can just see it now, the eponymous anti-hero is a young slightly unscrupulous cavalry officer who spends his whole time trying to get out of duties, get into any money making scheme and getting young fillies out of their proverbials. All the while having to deal with over officious higher ups who seem to think the whole thing is not about bagging as much totty in as short a time as possible, whilst also finding time to put one over the self obsessed Kevin. The plot could run wild with Soviet Spies (female of course), angry burgomeisters (owners of property to whit one Saracen driven through) and of course his arch nemesis The Dastardly Andrew. Foiling his every move, financial or amorous, even that Dutch generals daughter, whilst having his own evil plot of forcing the regiments to have “gasp” one uniform!
You know it would be a winner.
Stay tuned for more.
@ mark when you say hot turnarounds are you talking about flight servicings ? In what way do you mean better?
I think the anti radiation missile a thing of the past now, this seems the way to go
@Fromafar: I think you forgot the Burgomeister’s daughters. Chuck in the occasional Yank and perfidious Frog, and we’re there
@James: please God don’t mention school fees
@ Fromafar and wf,
I’m deeply disturbed that you believe that putting Queen and Country first was not foremost in my mind. Why else join the defence industry on leaving? It’s just another form of service, after all (even if BAE S appear to work for OPFOR with their cost overruns and generally shoddy product).
Also upset with the perfidious Frogs remark: I slaved my guts out for Comd UNPF in Yugoslavia as his MA, and he was French. I had 6 spare weeks at the end of my time with him until the next posting, and he wangled me a month attachment to his old Foreign Legion battalion in Sarajevo as the anti-sniping Platoon Commander. Christ on a Bike, those boys had never heard of the Yellow Card, but fun nevertheless. Also, by sheer and total coincidence, completely unplanned, his secretary Isabelle happened to be taking a week of holiday up the coast from Split while I had a last week to spare and needed to get some rays in. She had the sexiest rank in the world “Adjutant Chef”, and we had a completely professional relationship while we worked together. She looked good in a bikini though, and better out of one.
@James, combining Queen and country with fun is the highest form of art. Since the French were “in and out” of NATO during this era, I think we can assume them to be perfidious. For the sequel, Flashman Does Love and War, set in the Balkans, I’m sure we can work in Isabelle and the Foreign Legion however. Demerdez vous!
wf,
it’s going to be boring, this book. There would have to be several chapters on ROE and poor UN procedures, and a horrifying chapter on how despite best intentions, the UN enabled the Srebrenica massacre. There would need to be mention of how Dutch F16s failed to release bombs at a critical time due to a lack of the correct laser codes with SAS observers (that UKNL Landing Force clearly did not turn itself into total interoperability), and of how the SAS were reporting to London only, the “dual key” did not work, and that Naples and the CAOC were several pages behind on the script. Also some technical arguments as to why that was the UN’s fault, not NATO’s.
But I do have a photo of Isabelle on the beach. I took it after I splashed her with water and she’s looking up and laughing, holding her arm across her chest to protect her modesty. Will that generate sales? I’d want to get her permission first though. We exchange Christmas cards, and Mrs J and I stayed with her for a night on our honeymoon. She runs the very best private guest house on the Seychelles.
@James, we’re clearly going to have to play fast and loose with reality. But how about several bedroom farces where the brave cavalryman is “forced” to have it away with various (female, one hopes!) NATO and UN staff members, plus the odd ambassador in order to get ROE changes?
“Its a shame the Harrier replacement wont be able to carry [Storm Shadow]“
Storm Shadow is intended to be carried on an F-35′s external pylons.
Pylons 9 and 3 are most often pictured, not sure about 10 and 2, I imagine the reduced carrying weight precludes it.
wf,
that would be too fast, and too loose. The truth is that various national capitals did not get their shit together, and bad things happened. Bugger all the UN could do about it on the ground.
There was one offsite event that stuck in the memory. One of the NATO one stars was a USAF officer who had been a Blackbird pilot a couple of decades before. He took me up in a slightly bigger than Cessna plane, and we did some aerobatics around Naples. No reason at all for it, just he was a USAF Kevin, there were 4 hours between meetings, and none of us had anything better to do. Looking at Vesuvius upside down is slightly odd, but good fun.