Last RAF air to air kill

[corsair]

Individual RAF pilots serving in the RN, did get kills in the Falklands. But nevertheless the RAF never got a sniff of a dogfight since 1948. They have seen plenty of action but it's all air to ground. Yet we have people here advocating the Air Corps getting fighters when there is no military threat to Ireland at all from anyone anywhere.

As for the hijack threat. After 9/11 that option was closed for the jihadis, simply because no set of passengers are going to sit still and be flown into a target. So bombs are preferred.

Ireland is not and never was a target for terrorists other than our domestic variety.

The Air Corps did consider the Aero L159 after 9/11, however for interceptors you need military radar which we don't have. Costs of £200 million were projected for the radar alone. Unaffordable.

So there are two aspects to the argument. We cannot afford jets, but in any case there is practically no scenario where we would need them. We do have aircraft which are practically useless militarily but are over the top as basic trainers for future helicopter pilots. The question is why? In my opinion the Air Corps took what they could get. The politicians in this country are fundamentally ignorant of military issues and went with it.

One of the earlier posters said this:

PS Maybe some other nations should feel embarrassed about having a bloated and under-utilised military thats main reason to exist as it is today is historical and the government hasn't the stomach to make politically unpopular staff cuts in what is essentially one of the main employers in the state.

It remains true.

[Paul McA]

Cosair; I don`t know where you got your information re "RAF Pilots serving with the RN"
What are you on about?
There were RAF and RN Harrier crews in the task force that went to the Falklands-my uncles best friend was one of them and he is credited with a kill of an Argentine A4-Skyhawk, so I`m afraid your "No RAF pilots have engaged in air to air combat since 1948" is total nonsense!

The RAF also engaged in air to air during the Gulf War and Bosina/Serbia.

Also if you seriously think that terrorists will not attempt to bomb or attack aircraft again then you are deluded.
To plant a bomb on a plane is still a relatively easy thing to do-if you have the right contacts and oppertunity.
Do not be fooled that airports are fortresses that cannot be breached.

[Baldonnel-boy]

There were RAF and RN Harrier crews in the task force that went to the Falklands-my uncles best friend was one of them and he is credited with a kill of an Argentine A4-Skyhawk, so I`m afraid your "No RAF pilots have engaged in air to air combat since 1948" is total nonsense!

The RAF also engaged in air to air during the Gulf War and Bosina/Serbia.

   Sorry Paul but Corsair is right .... the last official RAF air to air kill is by a RAF spitfire against a Egyptian air force Spitfire in 1948 during the Arab-Israel war when the British were pulling out from Palestine... that's the last time a RAF pilot in a RAF plane shot a enemy aircraft. .... There have been lots of kills by RAF pilots since then but they were never flying RAF aircraft.... At least 6 RAF pilots shot down migs during the Korea conflict but they were in USAF or RAAF aircraft as the RAF didn't deploy any aircraft to Korea so all the kills were credited to the air force they were flying with... and during the gulf war the RAF Tornado F3s were only tasked with defensive ops.... they never fired a missile in anger during the whole conflict....and the GR1s and Jags were only ground attack ops and the Americans provided CAP during these...and the same goes for Bosnia/Serbia ......As for your uncle getting a Skyhawk during the Falklands first of all well done to him...   ....but he wasnt flying a RAF aircraft as the RAF only deployed Harrier GR3s for ground attack..all the air to air stuff was by the Royal navy's Sea Harriers....and the highest scoring pilot was a guy called Dave Morgan with 4 kills who just happened to be a RAF piot on exchange with the Navy.....But because the aircraft he was flying was a RN one and the squadron he was in was a RN one all the credit for the kills goes to the RN....so the last Official RAF kill was 60yrs yes thats 60yrs ago......     Hope that make things a bit clearer.....    

[Paul McA]

It was my uncles best friend that shot down the Skyhawk,NOT my uncle-just wanted to clarify that.

I can not name him as he is still a pilot with an airline.

He was flying a GR3-they were modified to fire AIM-9 Sidewinders;his aircraft was one of a small number of RAF machines that were not on board Atlantic Conveyor when it was sunk.

I can`t say much more because the incident is still classified

[corsair]

Paul, I do think you are the victim of a bit of storytelling. If you uncle's friend really shot down a Skyhawk in an RAF Harrier. It wouldn't be secret. All the names of all the pilots who got kills are freely available on the internet. Nothing is classified. If it was, you wouldn't know about it.

[FiannaFail]

What roles did the Vampires and Fougas have besides advanced training (for what?)?  I remember with great pride as a child the fly pasts by the Vampires at the 1916 Easter parades in the 1960s and thinking that no country would like to take us on with our Vampires in the skys above us!  Why were the Vampires and Fouges armed if not for a strike role?
FiannaFail

[Paul McA]

Corsair,who says you are the expert here? Do you believe everything on the internet is true?

There are several incidents involving UK military operations dating back to the 50`s that are still classified or partially classified,for various reasons,border incursions etc.

You have a nerve telling me I have been the victim of storytelling-I have met the pilot concerned many times and have seen the citation he received from his RAF Sqd-I have also seen the video footage of the incident taken from his on board gun-camera.

If you chose to believe the jottings of a bunch of anoraks who claim to have all the facts then more fool you-I prefer to listen to the people who were actually there,doing the fighting and sometimes dying.

[Taj]

Paul,

If the incident was "classified", there is no way the pilot who flew the mission would have a copy of the gun camera footage.There is no way that the man himself would be discussing it with anyone or indeed showing off vdeos of the event.
Before you get ratty with me let me say that Im not doubting that you friend did shoot down an A-4 during the conflict, but I would urge you to go back and check your facts. Is it possible maybe that he was a RAF GR.3 pilot that was on an exchange deployment with the RN flying the FRS.1? That would be altogether more plausible than some classified incident involving a GR.3. Think about it...classified why? The GR.3 is long gone at this stage!! Maybe check the internet youself and see do you come across his name.

Again Im not doubting that he scored a "kill" but it sounds like you might have the facts a bit mixed up. Unfortunately, there is no way the incident as you describe it took place. Go back re-check the facts, if they come back the same as you say, re check the individual.

TM

[Irish251]

I have met the pilot concerned many times and have seen the citation he received from his RAF Sqd-I have also seen the video footage of the incident taken from his on board gun-camera.

Was the Harrier GR.3 equipped with a gun-camera, given that the only guns it ever carried were for ground attack? 

Why would the combat you mention be classified unless it took place in circumstances that the British Government didn't want disclosed (such as the alleged C-130 & Sea King operations in Chile)?

[Paul McA]

I find it hard to understand why some people on this forum think that everything the Government tell them is the total truth.

The thing that gets up my nose is that some "Armchair Experts" here think that I am lying or have got the facts wrong-well I havent.

A small number of RAF Harrier GR3`s were modified to carry AIM-9L Sidewinders,part of the fitting of this kit is a video camera(standard on most modern Air to Air weapon systems.)
Pilots who have been involved in the firing of a weapon always manage to "Aquire" a copy.

The reason the incident is still offically"Classified", is that the Argentine Govt claim the Skyhawk was outside the exculsion zone and heading home.His wingman escaped and this is what he claimed.

On return to the UK the pilot concerned got a private note from his CO congratulating him but also telling him the incident was "Classified"pending investigation.He has yet to receive any offical recognition other that the hand written letter from his CO.

He was interviewed about the event twice,once on his own and once with his wingman;that was the last he heard of the matter,so as far as he is aware the matter is still classed as "Classified".

In war situations the whole truth does not always come out from the offical sources,slightly contentious events such as this one can be brushed under the carpet.
Rules of Engagment can be ignored,incursions can occur and other odd things happen in war.

The thing that bugs me is the fact is that some on here think the RAF is incapable of Air Defence which is simply not true.

[Taj]

Paul,

No one is disputing the capabilities of the RAF in terms of air defence. The RAF are massively capable in this area, being able to deal with most threats out there with the possible exception of the SU-30MK series which scored a hugely impressive kill ratio in this years air combat operations against US F-15 and F-16's.The fact is though that UK military operations now take place in thatres where air superiority is guaranteed and ground attack aircraft are much more useful assets. This may not always be the case and the increasing threat from a pointlessly reassertive Russia is one of the factors to be considered.
 
An interesting topic this is turning out to be. The Falklands conflict is an extremely interesting one in terms of military strategy.

With regard to the exclusion zone you mention, this was not rigid when it came to ROE. Any target inside the zone was fair game. However, cabinet approval was given for the sinking of the General Belgrano- a turning point in the war, even though it was indeed outside the exclusion zone. This resulted in the Argentine Navy heading back to port and all air operations coming from land bases. This incident is not classified.

The Brtish strategy was to deploy all shiping in task force formation, including Aircraft Carriers. They were mainly deployed to the North and East of the islands, the opposite side to where a returning Skyhawk would be. The Harrier GR.3 was extremely short legged and needed to be within a short hop of the islands to be useful, even for close air support.

An A-4 heading away from the islands would have been travelling West/North West and over water. There would have been no reason for a short ranged GR.3 to be in the area and it would not have had the legs to intercept a similarly paced Skyhawk heading away from it.

In any case, a combat aircraft returning from an operational mission regardless of it's position would have fallen well within the ROE and would therefore not need to be classified, but the fact remains that there were no UK aircraft deployed on the mission with sufficient range to either follow and engage it outside the exclusion zone, or indeed to be on a CAP mission in that area.

I can think of one or two scenarios where this could have been possible, before the official commencement of hostilies, an A-4 on a scouting mission could have been happened upon by a Harrier and shot down as an opportune kill. Remeber the A-4 was the longest legged aircraft in the Argie inventory due to the fact that it could buddy refuel. However, there would be a record of an Argentinian loss at the time to support this. Another factor working against this was that the Argies used Neptunes which could detect the task force at long range, outside missile and at the edge of Harrier range.

I suspect there is more to this than either of us know and it would be worth further investigation. The exclusion zone reasoning by itself just doesnt add up.

Rgds

TM

[Paul McA]

The Exclusion Zone part is what the Argeintine Govt mentioned-the pilot of the GR3 told me the incident happened to the Western side of the Islands-you can see land and sea in the camera footage as the wreckage spins towards the ground.

He told me very little about the actual location:in fact he told me could not,but I took it to be somewhere Northwest of Goose Green-of course I have no way of knowing.
True the Harrier is a thirsty machine but drop tanks were used,(which were jettisioned when the A-4`s were spotted) and the Falklands aren`t that big don`t forget.

I cannont say why the incident is/was classified-it could be simply that the powers that be forgot to shut the case file,or feared more reprisiles because of the General Belgrano sinking.

The point I am making here is that you cannot rely on Governments to tell us all the truth about absolutly everything.

[Baldonnel-boy]

Sorry Paul but too many things about the story you tell don't add up..... like if the Argentine Goverment had a plane shot down in what you have said was a unfair or disputed way I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have kept quiet about it..in fact i reckon they would have used it as anti British propaganda...Also all the planes that the Argentine Air Force lost during the whole Falklands campaign have been accounted for including friendly fire and accidents.....No Aircraft listed as missing .......and all the ones that were air to air kills have been credited to Sea Harriers......    One more point... no one here has ever claimed the RAF are not a capable and professional force that can not shoot down enemy aircraft........ Just the fact that the last official air to air kill by them is over 60yrs ago.....and unless the British Ministry of Defence decide to change that fact it will remain as that........ all the talking about what is as far as anybody knows a tall tale will not change that ......

[Taj]

Just one more point Paul,

If there was land in the camera footage, indicating the engagement took place over the islands, this would have put the aircraft well inside the exclusion zone, which extended well out to sea.

Nobody likes to be the victim of a tall tale but I suspect you might have been.

Rgds

TM

[Paul McA]

"I cannont say why the incident is/was classified-it could be simply that the powers that be forgot to shut the case file,or feared more reprisiles because of the General Belgrano sinking."

Would people please go back and read my postings again because some of you seem to have missed important points.

Let me make it clear-

1:It was the Argentine Government that claimed the aircraft was shot down outside the exclusion zone,so they DID make a fuss about it.

2:The pilot concerned was told that the incident was under investigation for the above reason-he was interviewed twice and that was the last he heard of it.

3:The internet is full of information-but it is important to remember that not all of it is accurate-people can easily set up sites and leave all sorts of info claiming it to be factual.
Therfore Offical records don`t always tell the whole story.

If people want to believe the offical line then that is fine,but do not try to tell me I am wrong or have been lied to regarding this incident,because I have seen the evidence for myself.