Examination of Witnesses (Questions 80
- 91)
WEDNESDAY 15 SEPTEMBER 2004
RT HON
GEOFF HOON
MP, SIR KEVIN
TEBBIT KCB CMG AND
GENERAL SIR
MICHAEL WALKER
GCB CMG CBE ADC GEN
Q80 Mr Viggers: We were told by the
Ministry of Defence in its memorandum on defence procurement that
there would be no gap between the planned out-of-service dates
for the F3 and Jaguar fleets and operational deployment of the
Typhoon. My worry here is very similar to that that I had with
heavy armour, which is that we have a firm phase-out date for
Jaguar, which has been brought forward, but a degree of uncertainty
about the entry into service of new equipment of which a list
is given in Future Capabilities. Can you please tell us
whether there will be a gap before the entry into service of the
multi-role Typhoon. What kind of gap will there be, how many aircraft
and how long?
Mr Hoon: It is rather the same
question that I have answered in relation to another piece of
equipment, and I am afraid I am going to give you the same answer.
The judgment that we have made in relation to bringing forward
the out-of-service date for Jaguar, given that it was always to
go out of service, is simply based on our requirement for fast
jets today, and we judged that given the enhanced capability that
we have available to us that we can manage those requirements
with a smaller number of available fast jets. Obviously, as Typhoon
comes increasingly into service, as we look to JCA in the future,
we will have still more decisions to make of that kind. In a sense
it is the theme of our discussions this afternoon. We are consistently
enhancing our capabilities. The ability of our armed forces and
their equipment to do more and more with reduced numbers is something
illustrated by the transition from fast jet operations over Serbia
and Kosovo compared to the performance over Iraq, a remarkable
improvement in capability in that short time-frame. So we have
more and more capability available from each platform, but that
is the history of technology.
Q81 Mr Blunt: Secretary of State,
recent operations have demonstrated a crucial role played by close
support aircraft in preparing the battle space for land forces.
Operation Telic showed that more training was justified in close
air support. Given that, how can we justify paying off three squadrons
ahead of schedule and reducing the number of fast jet crews by
a fifth?
Mr Hoon: Forgive me, Crispin,
I have just answered that question but I will answer it again.
Q82 Mr Blunt: Fine. Let me give you
then a detailed point to address. On the current plans of the
Department you will propose a combined Tornado, Typhoon, Harrier,
Joint Strike Fighter fleet of some 500 aircraft, yet you have
decided to reduce the number of fast jet crews to 225. Bearing
in mind that the normal crew to aircraft manning ratio varies
from 1:1 to 1.5:1, how can you explain how these fast jets are
going to be manned?
Mr Hoon: Because we will make
those judgments as we go along, matching the numbers of air crews
we need to the number of aircraft we need to fly. There is nothing
new about this process. I accept that the challenge always is
to try and get the right numbers of people going into the pipeline
six years before they emerge as fast jet pilots, and that is a
huge challenge. It has not always been got right in the past.
Q83 Mr Blunt: If you are only going
to have 225 fast jet crews, surely there is an unannounced reduction
of some currently planned procurement, is there not? It is the
only way this makes sense.
Mr Hoon: No, because we do not
necessarily put into the front-line, as your premise rightly observes,
all of the aircraft that we have available, and we are making
judgments in the light of the aircraft that are available.
Q84 Mr Blunt: So we can assume that
if we lose aircraft we are not going to lose the crew?
Mr Hoon: But crews will not necessarily
always be flying fast jets. There is an enormous problem of managing
our trained air crew. It is a problem that the Royal Air Force
have had over a long period of time, trying to match people coming
out of the training pipeline with the aircraft we have available
at the time is a challenge. It is not something that has always
been done well in the past. It is something that we have to try
and manage for the future.
Q85 Mr Blunt: Why do I get the feeling
that we are not being told something about future procurement?
Mr Hoon: There are no difficulties.
We have a clear plan that I have set out in relation to our current
requirements of fast jets. We have Typhoon increasingly available
flying sorties coming into service. For that to happen, as the
number of aircraft increases we will make the judgments that are
required in relation to the numbers of aircrew we need, but those
decisions have not been taken.
Q86 Mr Hancock: The planes will be
stored with the Challengers and the ships, will they not?
Mr Hoon: We have a number of aircraft
that we to do not use in the front-line already—that is
a necessary part of maintaining a fast jet capability—but
I am not quite sure what—
Q87 Mr Hancock: If you are in a military
setting there has to be the obvious opportunity for you to be
able to deliver all of your capability, or the majority of your
capability, at some stage during that conflict. To do that you
have to have both the aircraft and the pilots. You will undoubtedly
have the numbers of planes but you will not have the crews. So
really Crispin's question begs the question: is this or at some
stage in the next year or so the Government reducing the number
of planes they are going to buy because they have not got the
pilots to fly them? Why would you spend such enormous sums of
money on acquiring these aircraft when you have, on your own figures,
not the required number of fast jet pilots capable of flying all
of the planes in your inventory?
Mr Hoon: That is a snapshot of
the position today. The position in future will we have to deal
with as and when, for example, we decide or not to acquire the
third tranche of Typhoon. That decision does not have to be taken
until at least 2007. We have not got a contract for the third
tranche of Typhoon; we have not actually signed the contract for
the second tranche; so we are still considering those issues.
That does not in any way qualify our ambition of acquiring 232
Typhoons. That still remains our ambition, but obviously we make
those judgments in the light of the kinds of requirements we have
at the time, but you will have to ask me that question in 2007.
Q88 Mr Hancock: If you were sitting
round this side of the table I think you would be as suspicious
as we are of how you can arrive at the response you gave to Mr
Blunt's question and to mine. You are on the stocks with a number
of planes which you have insufficient pilots to man. That does
not make sense, does it?
Mr Hoon: I have answered your
question already.
Q89 Chairman: What is the ratio of
fast jet crew to fighter aircraft?
Sir Michael Walker: It is a good
question. I need to go back, but I think it is about 1.2. It is
1.5, but that is on the front-line.
Sir Kevin Tebbit: Can I just add,
firstly, the Secretary of State has said . . . Going back to Mr
Viggers' question, the intention obviously is to harmonise the
phasing out of F3 and Jaguar with the entry into service of Typhoon.
That is a natural and sensible thing to be doing. Typhoon has
come along extremely well: 320 flying hours now; an extremely
successful deployment down to Singapore and back; it is proving
very successful; so we are reasonably confident about that. The
changes in fast jet numbers and pilot ratios still are based on
our judgment about what we will need given that precision guidance
changes the number of aircraft you need for precision ground attack.
Eighty percent of our deliveries in this war in Telic were by
precision guidance, only 20 per cent in Gulf one. That changes
the calculus of aircraft numbers.
Q90 Chairman: I am afraid my colleagues
have to go now, but would you have another crack at answering
that question and be more convincing because, as my colleagues
have said, the figures look a little bit off key there with twice
as many aircraft.
Sir Michael Walker: Where do the
figures come from, Chairman?
Q91 Chairman: Your report.
Sir Michael Walker: The ones in
there?
Chairman: Yes. Thank you very much. Because
we were deprived of an hour twenty minutes I am afraid we still
have a number of questions, but we will have to discuss the way
in which perhaps we can deal with them. It may be in writing,
who know, but thank you very much for your answers.
| 
