Armed Forces: Aircraft

House of Lords written question – answered at on 25 June 2012.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Lord West of Spithead Lord West of Spithead Labour

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, further to the response by Lord Astor of Hever on 31 May to the Freedom of Information Act request by Lord West of Spithead (MSU/01/02/01/01/DH), the "unacceptable material damage" that was apparently being inflicted on the Harrier force, leading in part to the decision to replace Harrier planes with Tornado in Afghanistan, was related to direct airframe or engine damage or related to shortage of spares.

Photo of Lord Astor of Hever Lord Astor of Hever The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence

The unacceptable material damage referred to in the document does not relate to any direct physical airframe or engine damage or shortage of spares. It relates to the damage incurred in the ability of the Harrier force to undertake wider Harrier capabilities, beyond those which were being undertaken on Op Herrick. This included skill fade and the need to regenerate wider contingent capability, including complex multinational formation operations in a contested air environment and for utilisation of Harrier weapons systems that were not deployed in Herrick. In 2008, there was also material damage to the provision of a robust Harrier carrier operating capability and the ability to generate additional Harrier force elements at readiness to undertake a small-scale focused intervention.

Does this answer the above question?

Yes0 people think so

No0 people think not

Would you like to ask a question like this yourself? Use our Freedom of Information site.