Sad Day As Sentry Aircraft Comes Home For Retirement

🗣️ "It's tinged with sadness but also with pride".
The Sentry aircraft has returned to its home base at RAF Waddington following its final mission - bringing to a close 30 years of operational service. 🛬
The Boeing E-3D Sentry aircraft flew its final operational sortie as part of the counter-Daesh Op Shader in July.
Read more here 👉 www.forces.net/news/raf-e-3d-...
Subscribe to Forces News: bit.ly/1OraazC
Check out our website: forces.net
Facebook: / forcestv
Instagram: forcesnews...
Twitter: / forcesnews

[@05carsm]

Apparently they are going to keep working in a good home, greetings from Chile

[@Andolf10001]

Typical British forces retire something before the replacement is in service

[@VanderlyndenJengold]

The UK will have to rely more on other countries to help defend it: this is not something new yet it is not very wise, especially in these days of 'global Britain'. (which we know is a sham anyway).

[@1chish]

When an aircraft reaches a certain number of hours and flight cycles thats it. Maybe they found something they didn't expect and it wasn't worth replacing / repairing. We have other air control assets that do a similar job but not as well. At least we are buying new kit like the E-7 Wedgetail and P-8 Poseidon.

[@TheMicroPilot]

Nearly 10 years between Harrier and F35

[@1chish]

@@TheMicroPilot Well not quite. The Harrier was retired in March 2011 and No 17 T&E Squadron was stood up with 3 F-35Bs in April 2013. No 617 (Dambusters) reformed in April 2018. Still a big gap but a) we had no carriers until 2017 and b) Typhoons and Tornados were the primary air defence and GA aircraft.

[@jjsmallpiece9234]

@@1chish unlikely to be a fatigue problem. Military aircraft usually fly many less hours than civilian equivalents. It would have been reported in the aviation/defence press if this was the case. I understand these aircraft are being passed to the US for training. The reason for withdrawal from service is an incompetent UK Government defence policy.

[@Decrepit_biker]

I can't understand the MOD. They seem to continually retire assets BEFORE the replacement is online. They did it with the carriers for example. Now with the AWACS, with the replacement not yet ready.

[@skylongskylong1982]

The only conclusion I can come to is that a foreign power is running the U. K. armed forces. U.K . Is the only nuclear Country that has Air Force, that has no free fall nuclear bomb capability.

[@northernleigonare]

@@skylongskylong1982 very skeptical of you. It's most likely budget constraints, or if anything, they have someone else like the Americans stepping in to fill the role of airborne surveillance in Eroupe until we get new planes.

[@skylongskylong1982]

@@northernleigonare what is the price of freedom? Ever served your Country?

[@squaddie67]

@@skylongskylong1982 I have, 22 years worth. The RAF hasn't had a nuclear capability since the end of the Cold War and for a good reason. There was no longer any need for it. We have a continuous at-sea deterrent in the form of the Vanguard-class boats and Trident. I am annoyed at the retirement of assets before the replacement is in service but no foreign power is running the UK armed forces. Put your tin-foil hat away.

[@blitz21]

@@squaddie67 Another one with their head firmly stuck in the sand. Look beyond your garden gate at the world in general, dumb people only see what they want to see.....

[@buzzabuzza3494]

Let’s hope one day we can view this amazing plane at a museum.

[@secret5070]

Going to miss seeing these iconic birds flying around here 🥺

[@fireblade8905]

Where is here?

[@tonykennedy8483]

@@fireblade8905 I'd imagine Lincolnshire

[@rocket3man]

I am really concerned at the lack of transition to the replacement system, another classic MOD/Government fiasco!

[@adam9041]

Sad to see such a beautiful aircraft be retired however we will be without this capability for 2 years until the E7 arrives, why not extend the service just for those additional years so we are covered?

[@northernleigonare]

Probably because the Americans have said they'd cover the gap, and maybe some budget constraints not able to keep it in service until replacement.

[@VanderlyndenJengold]

@@northernleigonare The French and Germans have helped cover the UK maritime patrol gap when the Nimrod was axed in 2010.

[@michaelcampbell2650]

I bet the E7's will be delayed as well so it will be longer

[@gusgone4527]

That would require planning and forethought. Recent track record demonstrates that neither are MOD strong points. Despite ancient myths to the contrary. No carriers for years, carriers without fixed wing aircraft. No inflight refuelling carrier borne capabilities or AEW. IFV bought without seeing and testing working examples, Ajax and Ares. The list goes on and on. Some of their cockups have cost lives and cease to be funny.

[@rajatdani619]

I don't understand MOD said they will be retired in 2035. Then they retire them 2 years before E7 wedgtail. I mean wait atleast for 2 years for E7 to come. Why is so much hurry?

[@archerry6457]

*has undertaken. *we've undertaken. Standards, Wing Commander. Standards.

[@darson100]

I had no idea the Poms had bought the Wedgtail, well done motherland it's a great piece of kit

[@Doug1885]

Thanks…..You won’t be far behind….Your starting to gear up too

[@richardpicking4459]

Absolutely barmy decision to retire assets without a replacement. If you are a foe of the UK now would be a great time to have a little dig.

[@walter32RC001]

WELCOME TO CHILE......2🇨🇱🖐🇬🇧

[@PJF62]

The Wing Commander did not answer the question about what will fill the gap between the aircraft types. She just spouted some corporate phrased BS about being really excited, blah blah blah. The RAF is not what I remember anymore.

[@Joshua_N-A]

With the retirement, where would the money be going to? Even the Japanese have more active aircraft than the Brits despite the comparable budget.

[@lmc5955]

we are getting e7 wedgetails as replacements

[@tripaycorazon1979]

🇬🇧🤝🇨🇱

[@bulletproofguy5112]

We cut the e7 orders to only 3…

[@lordcypher7922]

Very shortsighted again, another aircraft type retired without a replacement. Sounds familiar….

[@davidhouseman4328]

Other way round. Long sighted. Not caring about today for the sake of tomorrow.

[@MSkallywagg]

They did the same thing with the Harrier

[@tiadaid]

Isn't the replacement already ordered, the Boeing E-7 Wedgetail?

[@benjaminriches9736]

We have the Wedge Tail coming in to replace it…

[@howdo861]

Replacement ordered. E7 wedjet tail

[@marcelbigsmile7805]

sent it to Duxford so everybody can take a look in it.

[@AtheistOrphan]

I’m old enough to remember the fiasco that was the Nimrod AEW.

[@VanderlyndenJengold]

That was eleven years ago!

[@bobthebomb1596]

@@VanderlyndenJengold No, that was MR4, the AEW Nimrod was 30 years ago.

[@VanderlyndenJengold]

@@bobthebomb1596 Still in the body of the Comet. Odd how the US manage to fit modern tech in old aeroplane frames yet the UK found it beyond them.

[@bobthebomb1596]

@@VanderlyndenJengold You were still wrong. As for the AEW Nimrod the problem was not the airframe but integration of the radar. BAe were attempting to produce a new type of platform utilising two radars mounted in the nose and tail of the aircraft. Had it worked, the design would have eliminated one of the drawbacks of the E-3 type; namely a radar blind spot beneath the aircraft. The AEW Nimrod failed because they aimed too high.

[@VanderlyndenJengold]

@@bobthebomb1596 I'm fine with being wrong. I thought you were talking about the Nimrod that got axed... and seeing as the Nimrod was initially based on the Comet then later iterations of the Nimrod could validly said to be based on the Nimrod. I liked the shape of the aircraft, don't know why, it appealed to me.

[@sergio.delatorre]

second Life. thanks UK RAF. Chile welcomes you

[@ivanrobertobenavidesrojas]

We chileans will take care of those 3 beautiful aircrafts....

[@daemusic1]

Wena compare, aquí viendo a todos los ingleses encabronados y nosotros más felices que perro con dos colas.

[@BernieTheBoxer]

"We've undertook"...???? did she pass ISS??? Hope her RT is better than this. Seriously though, great job on a great squadron well done Ma'am.

[@MrMRTravac]

Very cool plain

[@mrobserver474]

They got rid of the big carrier's and with them the Gannet - no AEW in the South Atlantic - and look what happened there

[@f.u.c.k.climate.change5510]

I was so glad that I see flown right over my head when coming in to land at raf brize Norton it was a long time ago so don’t know why it was landing there but glad i was able to see it

[@NicholasJohnson57]

One E-3D Sentry will continue flying but with the U.S Navy. The U.S Navy will use the platform as a training plane for American E-6B aircraft.

[@dennis12dec]

There's an E-6B aircraft operated by the Japan Air Self Defense Force.

[@ianmcclellan7695]

Sad times, I worked on Mission Support Wing when the first aircraft were delivered. Hopefully, the MOD will realise we need more Wedgetail aircraft and buy a second batch, otherwise we'll end up overworking them in to the ground like we did with the E3Ds.

[@CFMLEAP]

I can’t believe I never even knew the RAF used these. I guess that just shows that we never really had enough of our own but mostly relied on the US.

[@Joshua_N-A]

With things happening in US right now, I don't think it is wise to keep relying on the US. You Brits need to show more independent manner in defence. Look at Japan now, it's seems like they don't want to rely on US too much. Japan recently launched the latest Mogami class frigates, they don't wait for long for a replacement, this also includes the latest Taigei class submarine. The Japanese fear that one day US won't be strong enough to shoulder the US-Japan Security Treaty responsibility. Every single American pesonnel that deployed overseas is costing the average American taxpayers. But then there's the guns and butter theory. I see some comments call for more reduction of guns (defence) and demand more spending on butter (public & welfare).

[@TheNinjaGinger]

Didn't the E-7 order get cut from 5 to 3?

[@TheNinjaGinger]

@@liamhemmings9039 He should've double checked that before recording the commentary.

[@nickmarshall7019]

The UK config for the wedgetail is untried as it differs significantly from the Aus version. Major integration issues expected. A repeat of MR4A debacle is possible which resulted in an off the shelf buy of the USA P8

[@mrpusser0348]

@@liamhemmings9039 you mean the 737 airframe right....P8 is just the MPA Version not the E7

[@airhabairhab]

We've finally retired the SA80 Rifle! But don't worry only 2 years until we get our replacement, we'll just use broomsticks in the meantime.

[@Orchardman53]

The bright spark who authorised scrapping one service without a replacement in place, should be fired without a pension.

[@mrpusser0348]

that will be the MOD Permanent Secretary then....political heads are just mouth pieces

[@MSkallywagg]

They did the same with the Harrier

[@VanderlyndenJengold]

does it not work any more?

[@crowbar9566]

A really really dumb decsion. so short sighted.

[@RipRoaringGarage]

Its even worse than at first glance. The rotodome could do things that the static one can not...But weakness is the new strength? I mean, theyre retiring the KC10 too here, and replacing it with a jet that can carry half the payload. Big brain...

[@phooogle]

So much stuff is getting retired lately. A sign of all the upgrades or just stuff being decom and not replaced?

[@davidhouseman4328]

It's from previous budgets being stretched. Without money for a future plan services lives were extended. Now there is a plan but to make it work kit needs cutting now.

[@rogerd777]

I noticed that the British fit it with a probe-and-drogue receiver. It must take forever to refuel that big boy that way instead of a boom.

[@madjock2878]

The centre line Hose drum unit on Tanker aircraft has a higher rate of flow than the wing pods used for the smaller aircraft. Yes the Boom is far quicker but not by much

[@ianmcclellan7695]

It can be refuelled either way, that Boom receptacle is right there if you look.

[@markmather4161]

So what is going to be happen with the 7 air frames? Surely we will keep one for a museum even if just the fuselage and the dish!??

[@kyberwolfuk]

Shame to see these out of service. Sad times . I'm sat looking at 2 across from me as I type

[@markmullins7990]

What will they do with them sell or scrap ?

[@garwhittaker3743]

Chile has bought 2.

[@shinvelcro]

so as the WC didn't say, what IS covering the 2 year gap?

[@biddyboy1570]

Luck, clear skies and good intentions.

[@TT-hd3zi]

The shared NATO AWACS fleet.

[@HMSVanguard46]

Well we only have to wait 2 years, yes it is a gap of significant time, but it's better than not having a carrier in service for 4 years

[@R.R.1979]

Chile buy the aircraf to have cover falklands island lads ! anyway AWACS continues service to UK but with our friends well done Chile allies

[@Gordonfreeman5653]

Chile 👎🏻👎🏻👎🏻👎🏻👎🏻👎🏻👎🏻👎🏻

[@R.R.1979]

@@Gordonfreeman5653 🇬🇧🤝🇨🇱 Argy 😎🍸

[@WECR]

​@@R.R.1979oye RR; wena onda y todo el webeo, pero recuérdale a tus amigos anglomasones que la Antártica (el continente entero) es tierra Chilena, heredáda por la Capitanía General de Chile a través de la Corona Española. Mira, si se Murió Scott ahí en su competencia con el Vikingo Amundsen no es culpa de ningún Chileno, yó lamento lo que le pasó al equipo angloladrón en su competición pero éso no les dá derechos a apropiárse de territorio avistado por la Corona Española en 1603 por una expedición del Almirante Don Gabriel de Castilla, quien partiéndo desde Valparaíso avistó el helado continente ése año. Te lo dígo con respeto sí. Me gustaría sabér de qué parte estará tú lealtad el 48' cuando vénza el tratado Antártico. Aquí támos tapáos de pxta masonería de obediencia angloladrona que nos ha tenído ré cagáos por siglos desde que se fué el Español. El súbdito de la Pérfida Albión jamás te verá como aliado ní como amigo. Te lo dígo con respeto. 🇨🇱👍

[@patricioalfonsoaguayocabre4203]

AUQUE tengan 30 AÑOS de USO igual están geniales para CHILE Ppor unos años más y PODER repotensiarlos en su MOMENTO a esos 2 JEMELOS 😋😋😋💪💪💪✌✌✌

[@daemusic1]

Lo mejor es que los van a ceder y nos costarán 0 peso.

[@robblowers9925]

Sooo what's plan on its replacement? Pretty sure nothing at present can operate as effectively and efficiently

[@davidhouseman4328]

E7 wedgetail. In service with Australia, more advanced radar.

[@Keyswiz71]

Did you watch the whole video?

[@buzzabuzza3494]

I’m guessing they will be cut up in no time at all gone forever.

[@Sterlingjob]

Probably be converted! B

[@maxsido2149]

1 is going to fly for the US Navy as an E-6B Crew Trainer

[@scarecrow108productions7]

​@@Sterlingjob and Chilean air Force actually bought a handful. 3 of these.

[@ThatCarGuy]

I would have just kept the E3. The US is designing the E7 from the 737 but wont be using it themselves, they have no orders as of yet, leading to believe the E3 should is still in the same realm of capability and it's not a huge jump. Unless the E7 will be cheaper to maintain(which is could be do to aging frames needing more maintenance) I don't see why they would do it otherwise.

[@pvp64]

The average US E3 aircraft is 42 years old. What makes you think they won't use it? There have already been calls from various US Air Force Command staff to procure the E7 as a replacement. It's under study and they will probably announce what the replacement will be within two years.

[@ThatCarGuy]

@@pvp64 "What makes you think they won't use it?" "they have no orders as of yet, leading to believe the E3 should is still in the same realm of capability and it's not a huge jump. Unless the E7 will be cheaper to maintain(which is could be do to aging frames needing more maintenance) I don't see why they would do it otherwise." "There have already been calls from various US Air Force Command staff to procure the E7 as a replacement" There have been 2 people out of hundreds and one was only reported to have said it, with no proof to back it up. But ill still say 2... " It's under study and they will probably announce what the replacement will be within two years." You can buy these right now.. UK, Turkey, South Korea and Australia already all have them in use. If these were a much better option then the E3, the US would have made the switch, the US is likely eyeing something else.

[@pvp64]

@@ThatCarGuy Procuring the aircraft, specking them out to US requirements and actually seeing the first one built, flown and certified would take years. The Navy already uses the 737 airframe for the P8. It's more than likely the Air Force will choose the E7 for availability of parts and maintenance, just like the Navy.

[@ThatCarGuy]

@@pvp64 "specking them out to US requirements and actually seeing the first one built, flown and certified would take years." They were built to US spec originally and use US sensors for the nations that did buy them. It uses the Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems Multi-role Electronically Scanned Array (MESA) radar. The E7 first flew in 2004 and was introduced around 2010, the US is likely choosing something else, maybe even on the same frame, as by the time the US retires the E3 the E7 will be 30 years old.

[@pvp64]

@@ThatCarGuy Agree to disagree.

[@carlseddon2392]

It's not like the MoD to scrap an access to saves money is it.

[@paulmcgee1867]

Which aircraft will do this now ? Took ? Please better English.

[@TT-hd3zi]

E7 Wedgetail.

[@vrsmartin2981]

Typical UK military. Phase old kit out before we have a replacement.

[@Joshua_N-A]

Budget.

[@lukedelport8231]

Sad day but a happy one knowing that the RAF will get an ugraded aircraft

[@bobthebomb1596]

@@Unknown_Ooh Manufactured in 1989 and been in RAF service since 1991.

[@drinksnapple8997]

What's the betting line on how long it will take for the RAF to ask the US to send some E-3's to cover the UK airspace.......at no cost to the UK?

[@davidhouseman4328]

NATO itself runs more than a dozen in Europe, that would be the more likely port of call.

[@Keyswiz71]

The NATO AWACS fleet are going to be covering the gap until the E-7 enters service.

[@Unknown_Ooh]

Can I buy this aircraft? 😁

[@carolempluckrose4188]

Depends where you want to pad it!

[@carolempluckrose4188]

Oops, park it!

[@David291]

I honestly don't understand the logic of retiring this aircraft so early. The Nimrod I could actually understand (the airframe was severely outdated and difficult to source parts for) - but given that the Sentry was originally slated to remain in service until 2035, I am completely befuddled.

[@davidhouseman4328]

Money. Although you might be able to run a plane longer it gets more expensive. Chances are buying an running E7s became cheaper than running E3s. The gap sounds like it because the crews are off trainng on the new aircraft.

[@andrewaustin5678]

With the new aircraft not due until 2023 why retire the E3 now? Makes no sense.

[@MrShadowfax42]

Some well-known terrorist groups: So-called "Islamic State" So-called "Taliban" So-called "Al-Quaida" So-called "Boko Haram" So-called "IRA" See how dumb that sounds? I don't know just who you are trying to avoid offending with this "so-called Islamic State" nonsense, but it is one of the most cringe things I've ever experienced. Just saying.

[@JammyDodger45]

It doesn't sound quite as dumb as you. The "so called" aspect relates only to the 'state' part of Islamic State as no such autonomous area exists, it was occupied territory of existing sovereign states such as Syria, Iraq & Kurdistan. "Just Saying" 🙄

[@MrShadowfax42]

@@JammyDodger45 And no such "army" as the "IRA" officially exists. And you have zero idea why they really call Islamic State "so called". You have no idea if you are correct, or if they are doing it so as not to offend Muslims etc. I think you should check your own arguments and actual evidence before you call others dumb. PKB and all that. Just saying.

[@JammyDodger45]

@@MrShadowfax42 - it's got nothing at all to do with not offending Muslims, how is saying 'so called' a sop to Islam? Your point makes literally no sense. Other terrorist organisations weren't referred to as 'so-called' because they weren't claiming statehood. If that's too complex for you then you're beyond my help.

[@MrShadowfax42]

@@JammyDodger45 "it's got nothing at all to do with not offending Muslims" You can't know or evidence that. "how is saying 'so called' a sop to Islam? " I don't know what you mean by "sop", if you mean how would it offend muslims, it's because Islamic State do evil things, and they have the word "Islamic" in the title of the organisation. Are you being deliberately obtuse? Why is the alternative name of "DAESH" not prefixed with "so-called"? Apparently DAESH stands for "D dawlat=state in English, A or I = Iraq, e= and , SH= al-Sham, a term for a region encompassing Syria and Lebanon.", so why is THAT ok? It's obviously pandering and if my explanation of why is too complex for you then you genuinely are beyond my help. Stop being so damn naive.

[@JammyDodger45]

@@MrShadowfax42 - when Cameron was PM the Govt were referring to ISIS & ISIL, a MP complained that this legitimised the terrorists and so the Govt sought another official term. This is where Deash comes from, it's Arabic description is as you say BUT when pronouncing Arabic vowels using a 'hard' or 'soft' pronunciation changes the whole word (unlike in English). Detractors of Daesh use a hard E which makes the term derogatory, there isn't a direct English comparison but it sort of means person who tramples all others (irrespective of their faith/nationality/beliefs) which in Islam is a terrible thing to be. As many English speakers in the media and Govt etc couldn't get this right it sounded like they were supporting and legitimising Daesh. So the BBC decided to go back to IS but with the modifier 'so called' to indicate the illegitimacy of the claims. These Govt activities are recorded in Hansard and can be looked up by anyone. The BBC statement is out there too if you want to search for it. But given that you can't Google what sop means I don't imagine that's going to happen. I have served in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria throughout my 24yr military career so trust me when I say I have no sympathy for these people no matter what title is used but their beliefs are not about religion, they're about hate and they dress them up as a religious system so that foolish people believe they have a just cause.

[@user-py2ik5ho9n]

Good bye century.

[@petesheppard1709]

Perhaps the aircraft have reached their fatigue life, and continued operation is becoming unsafe.

[@northernleigonare]

30 years running and probably no mass amounts of spare parts too.

[@mrrolandlawrence]

@@northernleigonare its developed from a boeing b707. the b707 fuslage still lives on in the b737 so im sure there are mountains of spares & making new is probably fairly easy too. the electronic components on the other hand are most likely very dated indeed. 30 years ago was 486sx computer chips from intel.

[@petesheppard1709]

@@mrrolandlawrence The major structural members are not easy (and rarely economical) to replace. The fact that the Wedgetail is a B737 derivative should help keep that plane's maintenance costs in check, though.

[@1chish]

@@mrrolandlawrence No. The Sentry is devised from the KC-135 and (like the RC-135 Rivet Joint) is derived from the Dash 80 not the 707 fuselage. The 737 has nothing in common. But you are right about the rest. Its just got outdated and probably now too far gone on flying hours and cycles.

[@2.718e]

@@1chish No, the E-3, E-6 and E-8 are all modified B707s. The prototype Sentry was even designated EC-137D. The C-137 and C-18 variants are simply military variants of the Boeing Model 707, but the C-135 variants are not, being Boeing Model 717. An exception is the RC-135. The RC-135’s are mostly Boeing Model 739, except the RAF RC-135W’s as they are converted KC-135R’s, and hence based on the 717. Both the B707/C-137 and B717/C-135 are based on the Boeing Model 367-80 prototype. Adding to the confusion B717 was later used as a marketing name for the DC-9 derived MD-95.

[@strudders2112]

Ugh again our capability has been cut yet again. No AWACS for two years until the wedgetail, which we all know will be late. . Just like getting rid of the Harrier force, The Nimrods both MR2 and R1 and the Carriers no immediate replacements. We could not fight our way out of a paper bag on our own anymore. Out of interest who will be looking after the north sea approaches now?

[@bobthebomb1596]

NATO

[@1chish]

You forget we had to bin the Harriers because the country was left in a huge economic hole in 2010 and some hard choices had to be made. Two of the Invincible carriers were already laid up and forgive me but the Nimrod MR4 project was an utter disaster, 9 years late and £ Bns over budget and earlier Nimrods were flying coffins by the late 2000s. And in answer to your question: Poseidons out of Lossiemouth as Northern Approaches are a Maritime area of responsibility. Sentry's were never used in that role.

[@strudders2112]

@@1chish That hole has gotten bigger and was never filled, so that point is moot. Poseidon’s are not AWACS but you all ready know that. The MR4 project was over budget but would at least given us capability and not relying on the other EU nations to cover our backs. Irrespective of your personal political views, we are once again without a capability that we have the equipment to cover but are choosing not to. Yet spending 250 million on a floating gin palace.

[@Joshua_N-A]

There's NATO but I don't think the other members would want to lend their AEW/C capability for the British for too long as it might limit their AEW/C capability at home. The Western militaries are spreading thin with reduction these says.

[@ulfpe]

A big gap for NATO that will be more reliant on the US.

[@unbearifiedbear1885]

And the replacement is....?

[@TT-hd3zi]

E7 Wedgetail.

[@unbearifiedbear1885]

@@TT-hd3zi (where?)

[@TT-hd3zi]

@@unbearifiedbear1885 what do you mean ‘where’?

[@unbearifiedbear1885]

@@TT-hd3zi *and the replacement is where?

[@TT-hd3zi]

@@unbearifiedbear1885 being built

[@robc8892]

Undertook -why does it sound weird when she says that?

[@AtheistOrphan]

Nope. Doesn’t sound weird at all to me.

[@clacicle]

It should have been: “we’ve undertaken…”

[@JammyDodger45]

She said 'the UK undertook' as such she is correct. A singular entity such as a kingdom can't act in the multiple form defined by undertaken.

[@jej3451]

@@JammyDodger45 Wrong. Back to grammar school with you.

[@JammyDodger45]

@@jej3451 - since you've just tried to 'correct' me on another thread and failed miserably I'm going to disregard your comment because once again you're utterly incorrect. But I like your consistency, 2 posts, both wrong.

[@brianjones2899]

Wonder what she undertook the next day.

[@pivottech8881]

NOT THE SENTRY

[@pollyllwynfedwen8763]

For a Wing Commander, her grammar is atrocious. "We have undertaken" not "We have undertook".

[@bigtony4829]

I don't think a high standard of English Grammar is a compulsory requirement to be an officer nowadays I seem to recall those officers in WW1 who sent the lads over the top to their glorious deaths all spoke with a posh public school accent and perfect diction

[@JammyDodger45]

She said 'the UK has undertook', as such she is correct. A singular entity such as a kingdom can't act in the multiple form as defined by undertaken.

[@jej3451]

@@JammyDodger45 You are confused. Singular/plural is irrelevant.

[@JammyDodger45]

@@jej3451 - 'a singular entity' has nothing to do with pluralisation it means a union of organisations i.e. the UK is a s.e. formed by multiple countries.

[@jej3451]

@@JammyDodger45 You are talking complete rubbish. Cite for me such a rule anywhere on any reputable web site.

[@yan24to]

The most politically correct armed forces know to man.

[@nkawtg4]

Well, hopefully these go to the boneyard and add to the parts stock for the US and NATO E3s that apparently will be picking up the slack world wide. Thanks MOD for deciding to just quit while you're already behind...

[@maxsido2149]

They will work as US Navy E-6B Crew Trainers

[@icarus_falling]

And no replacement in service yet again. And we're buying yet another 737.

[@marknorville9827]

The planes are pretty useless anyway, yes they do a job, but you could fly a whole squadron of planes underneath this craft and not be spotted. I am ex RAF by the way so I know what I am talking about and no I am not a cabbage either. However, having the radar above the aircraft has been the major downside to the planes themselves as it does not fire downwards because if it did then it would fry the crew inside.

[@davispen]

LOL. What did you do in the RAF?

[@ianmcclellan7695]

The blank area is fairly standard for radars as they a) get a lot of clutter (interference) close to the antenna and b) you don't want to have a RADHAZ and that's the same for a ground based Radar. But your penetrating analysis has forgotten one vital point - the aircraft is constantly moving. So I'm sorry, you don't know what you're talking about.

[@exploreandunravel5773]

Why to send defence forces , when you can have te rrorists at home 😂

[@andrewfranklin7773]

The RAF slides further and further down the drain.

[@arealbobbydazzler2520]

Stupid move by the time boris is finished the navy will be smaller and the air force and army will be smaller

[@davidhouseman4328]

The Navy will be bigger, the army will be smaller. Air force is up in the air.