Examination of Witneeses (Questions 60-79)
AIR VICE-MARSHAL
KEVIN LEESON,
BRIGADIER JEFF
MASON AND
AIR COMMODORE
ANTHONY (TONY)
GUNBY
24 APRIL 2007
Q60 Mr Jones: But are you looking
at an alternative in case there is slippage, because you cannot
continue the C-130Ks for ever, can you? Would you have to bring
in another alternative?
Air Vice-Marshal Leeson: We will
have to look at everything subject to what those circumstances
may be. One cannot go through endless analysis exercises against
what might happen.
Q61 Mr Jones: The MoD is usually
good at doing that.
Air Vice-Marshal Leeson: I take
that as a compliment.
Q62 Mr Jones: It is usually a method
of delay.
Air Vice-Marshal Leeson: We have
done the numbers and we have a small dip in the number of airframes
available prior to the current A400 programme. Should the A400
slip any further that will most probably get slightly worse.
Q63 Mr Jones: In terms of this financial
year when will the first C-130Ks go out of service?
Air Commodore Gunby: The C-130Ks
that we are retiring from service are the ones without theatre
entry standard of equipment, so they are not of use to us in current
operations. We are not losing any operational output in respect
of current operations by retiring those aircraft.
Q64 Mr Jones: How many aircraft are
you talking about?
Air Commodore Gunby: We have announced
the retirement of four aircraft.
Q65 Chairman: You have announced
the retirement of four aircraft.
Air Commodore Gunby: That was
last year.
Q66 Chairman: When are those retirements
to take place?
Air Commodore Gunby: Those aircraft
will cease to operate when they reach the point at which they
require very major servicing that would otherwise be required
for continued service. I stress that those aircraft are without
the theatre entry standard of equipment.
Q67 Mr Jones: What pressure has there
been as a result of the loss of aircraft in Afghanistan and Iraq?
You have lost one in Iraq.
Air Vice-Marshal Leeson: We have
lost a total of three.
Q68 Mr Jones: Does that include the
special forces aircraft?
Air Vice-Marshal Leeson: The total
is three.
Q69 Mr Jones: What effect has that
had in terms of operational ability?
Air Vice-Marshal Leeson: We have
had the capacity to be able to backfill the lost frames with UK
fleet aeroplanes which are to theatre entry standard. We have
had to uplift the fitting of certain systems to aeroplanes that
were not to theatre entry standard to backfill that, but clearly
there is an issue over the airframes themselves. Whilst one can
do various neat tricks to extend capability and capacity, at the
end of the day sometimes one needs the aeroplane where one needs
it and therefore numbers rather than just activity or volume count.
At the moment we are looking at what is the best replacement.
As to the first C-130 for whose loss we were recompensed the money
was used towards the fifth C-17 as that was the most effective
way to deliver capacity.
Q70 Mr Jones: You are not necessarily
replacing like for like?
Air Vice-Marshal Leeson: That
is correct. We are very close to a conclusion as to the best way
to use the compensation for the most recent two, but we do not
have the absolute answer to that question.
Q71 Mr Jones: Obviously, I do not
want to go into detail, but in terms of the special forces C-130s,
are they separate from you? How are they managed?
Air Vice-Marshal Leeson: They
are all part of the main fleet but clearly they are tasked separately.
Air Commodore Gunby: They are
all available as part of the total fleet of C-130s, so they could
be used for routine tasks and other more discrete tasks; they
have utility across the range of potential tasks.
Q72 Mr Jones: You have lost three
and you have been recompensed for those?
Air Vice-Marshal Leeson: For one
so far, but we have not formally made a submission for the other
two until such time as we know the best way to replace them. As
we said, it is not necessarily two more C-130Js; it may well be
one C-130J and some range and capacity extension equipment to
make the best use of the ones we have got. We are still working
through those numbers.
Q73 Mr Jones: Is that part of the
larger review that you are conducting in terms of air lift capacity?
Air Vice-Marshal Leeson: Yes.
Q74 Mr Jenkins: On 9 January in a
Written Answer the Secretary of State said that of our 75 Hercules,
Tristar and VC10 aircraft only 41 were available for service on
that day; that is, 55 per cent of the total fleet was available.
I presume that in the short period since then there has been very
little difference in the figure, but when do we get to the point
where due to the stress and strains of operational demands on
these aircraft we no longer have enough aircraft to do the job?
Let us say we drop below 45 per cent availability. What is the
percentage?
Air Vice-Marshal Leeson: The number
of aircraft fit for purpose and available to be tasked by Brigadier
Mason's and Air Commodore Gunby's organisations varies with each
of the fleets because of the age of the aeroplanes and the various
maintenance and fleet overheads that go with those.
Q75 Mr Jenkins: I accept all that.
Air Vice-Marshal Leeson: Therefore,
with something like the C-17 we would have very high availability;
we would expect three or three and a half out of four on a daily
basis to be available to the lift programme. The point where we
would worry about availability, or not get ourselves into in the
first place, will be different fleet by fleet. Clearly, we have
been under great pressure to fit various systems to the C-130
fleet which has caused dips in availability and which are truly
complex to manage at the moment. I do not wish to go any further
with the equation for the fitting of urgent operational requirements
that we have at the moment, so there is constant tension between
my capability colleagues who wish to install new and useful facilities
to aeroplanes and those of us who have to operate the air bridge
in a sustainable and minimised risk fashion where clearly we would
like to maximise the number of aeroplanes. Therefore, it is a
constant process.
Q76 Mr Jenkins: To put the question
another way, we have an ageing fleet that includes VC10s and Tristars.
It used to be said, "Join the RAF like your father and fly
the same `plane", but now we work on the basis of, "Join
the RAF like your grandfather and fly the same `plane." The
way we are going it will not just be the same type; it will be
the very same aircraft. When does one get to the point where,
irrespective of the commercial side of it, one says that one cannot
meet all the requirements and there is such pressure that one
is failing to do the job that one wants to do? We are trying to
be helpful as far as putting the case as bluntly as we can to
government that it should be mindful of this. This is not a secondary
matter; it is a vital cog in the machine, but at times we forget
that. We have 55 per cent availability. The question is: if we
had 45 per cent availability would it function?
Air Vice-Marshal Leeson: I will
ask Air Commodore Gunby to answer it from the practitioner's standpoint.
He is the man who has to deliver day to day and he can explain
the challenges and pressures in the system. From my standpoint
of where we shall be over a number of years I am very confident
that the forward equipment programme looks very good in volume
terms for what we need to have available. The future strategic
tanker aircraft and the A400 programme will bring us to the end
of the job to which Mr Jenkins referred. It will be a seriously
modern and capable fleet. A lot of people are working in it extremely
hard at the moment and are truly proud of the range of equipments
they have, particularly with the arrival of the fifth C-17 which
volumetrically gives us another great leap. Four aeroplanes in
a fleet is a small number. If you add one more you are able to
deliver good flow patterns and you have some good capacity increase
as a result. The forward equipment programme is extremely attractive,
but there is a great element of jam tomorrow in that. We have
a very difficult period in front of us to continue to manage with
our older ladies. At the strategic level I certainly do not underestimate
the challenges faced by the guys out in the force. I do not want
to be pulled on the particular percentage number. I become very
concerned when we drop below 50 per cent availability because
to operate at that level is a reasonable yardstick. We have had
to do that because the fitting of defensive aid systems, explosive
suppressant foam and so on has taken rather more out of the order
of battle than I am reasonably comfortable to do because I am
a cautious kind of chap, but at the end of the day I can see the
great advantages of those systems going on because it makes my
situation in six months' time much more attractive in terms of
the number of aeroplanes with theatre entry standard equipment.
It is a constant balance.
Air Commodore Gunby: I am afraid
that I cannot offer a figure either in terms of the level below
which we would fail to do something. The fleet management of our
current air transport fleet is an extremely complex and dynamic
situation, as I am sure you appreciate. Both scheduled maintenance
and unforeseen occurances—things that happen out of the
blue—and a fairly extensive programme of capability grades
either through the current programme or through urgent operational
requirements need some very careful massaging across the totality
of the fleet to ensure that we can maintain an appropriate operational
outlook for the current demands which, as we all know, place us
beyond the planning assumptions such as they are. Just to focus
on a figure would be a little awkward. A forty-five per cent availability
on one particular area would be pretty disastrous; 45 per cent
availability somewhere else might be more manageable depending
on the compensatory factors from other portions of the fleet.
On literally a day-to-day basis we look at the fleet disposition
and at what has happened to each platform within the force and
veer and haul on programmes of maintenance and the capability
insertion. A lot of the work that we are doing at the moment is
to try to future proof some of these platforms to ensure we do
not run into issues of obsolescence as certain equipments become
unsupportable because they are no longer de rigueur in commercial
aviation. For instance, we are installing a new flight deck system
on the Tristar which will overcome some of those potential obsolescence
issues on which you may attack us in future if we do not do that.
It is a complex and very demanding process, but it is focused
on delivering output for current operations.
Mr Jenkins: I understand the difficulties.
When older aircraft are taken out of the system because they are
constantly being maintained and modernised they are not much use
to you anyway. Judging by the way you have couched your answers
it is getting close, is it not?
Q77 Chairman: For the record, I should
reflect for the record—otherwise, it will not be recorded—that
you nodded your head in answer to Mr Jenkins' question.
Air Vice-Marshal Leeson: Yes.
Q78 Mr Holloway: Referring to the
C-130s, were you implying that the shortage of aircraft in the
first place is drawing out the timelines for the fitting of UORs
by Marshalls?
Air Vice-Marshal Leeson: Do you
mean: if I put in more aircraft could be done more efficaciously?
Q79 Mr Holloway: No. Does the fact
you have so few aircraft in the first place draw out the timelines
in which Marshalls are doing this important work?
Air Vice-Marshal Leeson: Clearly,
if you give them only one aeroplane at a time it will take longer
than if one gives them two at a time, if they have the capacity
to parallel track that work.
| 
