The Forces and the future?

[Arfur Dinari]

Like many others, I am dismayed by the SDSR. I always thought the forces were safer under the Conservatives (who I always voted for). Now I know they are not.

Given the rabid/rapid scrapping of the Nimrods, they are dead...can any of the other decisions be reversed or they gone for ever (i.e. Ark, Harriers etc)?

Recent events have shown the best in our forces (Libyan rescue missions) and the worst in our politicians.

[minigundiplomat]

We are screwed. I don't think we need another thread on why or how.

[Kluseau]

the Conservatives (who I always voted for).

Ah, so it's your fault, then...

[Rigga]

So, a sort of self-defence force then, but without the teeth for long or foreign ops?

[pr00ne]

Er, for an economy the size of the UK, from which we allocate £40billion per year for defence, one of the largest defence expenditures on the planet, currently sustaining one approx sub 10,000 person overseas operation, how exactly are we punching above our weight?

We have not had certain capabilities for decades now. So have not even pretended to try to do everything for some time.

[Yozzer]

Whilst we remain nuclear, we are playing at being important. Had nuclear gone under SDSR then I for one would have understood the Govt to have consumed a reality pill. If it is true that we have 'one of the largest defence expenditures on the planet', then that is neither reflected in the quality of equipment not in the volume of boots walking compared to other nations whose priority is Defence rather then Global politics.

The UK Military has survived thus far on the morale and quality of its military members regardless of colour or tone of uniform. But this in addition to the ethos of 'can-do' has been obliterated by the Govt whome we serve. The same Govt who wish to retain their presence on the world stage with short arms and deep pockets.

[Finningley Boy]

Er, for an economy the size of the UK, from which we allocate £40billion per year for defence, one of the largest defence expenditures on the planet, currently sustaining one approx sub 10,000 person overseas operation, how exactly are we punching above our weight?

We have not had certain capabilities for decades now. So have not even pretended to try to do everything for some time.


pr00ne Sir,

We have stumbled upon an agreement. I'd just like to know where much of that £40,000,000,000 ends up?:confused::E

FB:)

[Finningley Boy]

The Forces and the future?
Like many others, I am dismayed by the SDSR. I always thought the forces were safer under the Conservatives (who I always voted for). Now I know they are not.

Given the rabid/rapid scrapping of the Nimrods, they are dead...can any of the other decisions be reversed or they gone for ever (i.e. Ark, Harriers etc)?

Recent events have shown the best in our forces (Libyan rescue missions) and the worst in our politicians.


Arfur Dear Chap,

Its one thing to slash the Defence Budget because you place a low priority or are reluctant to rely upon them or fail to understand the wider picture within which they fit. But its an entirely different matter when having to explain to the countyr why a raft of public services are having to be wheeled into surgery for major financial amputations and not address a £38,000,00,000 deficit in the Defence Budget. Unfortunately the only way seems to be to cut operating costs here as well. This of course means removing great chunks from what , admittedly, is very little. Especially given the amount of money spent on it!:suspect:

FB:)

[Jabba_TG12]

Proone, as I'm sure you know, but choose to ignore, its not the actual total real cash amount that is spent its the percentage of GDP. IIRC, NATO mandates that its members spend a minimum of 2.0% and ours in the UK is around that figure, just to ensure we meet NATO Minimum Military Requirements.

Granted yes, its a not inconsequential sum. Yes, naturally, it could be better spent and there has been a phenomenal amount of wastage.

We were punching above our weight by pushing the Expeditionary model after the 1998 SDR, but without the investment necessary in both people and equipment to be able to fulfil it. Hence a lot of the legitimate complaints about overstretch during HERRICK and TELIC. Had these operations occurred during the levels of manning/equipment seen during the cold war, theres a good chance we would have got away with it/not had the overstretch complaints.

The matter of punching above our weight and deciding what we expected our forces to do was meant to be one of the questions that SDSR was meant to consider and answer. Not really sure that this particular brief was really met, but by default it seems that the decision has been taken and that this is the direction we are going to go in. Politically and strategically, compared to the rest of our NATO partner nations, we could argue all day as to whether HERRICK and TELIC have delivered any real tangible benefits to us or to the "host" nations, in the way that operations in Bosnia/Kosovo/Sierra Leone did.

My own personal view is that it will not be a bad thing for us to be a UK Self Defence Force, IF we do it properly and allocated resources both financial and personnel accordingly, from the Infrantry, through the somewhat creaky supply chain through to the shiny pointy FJ fleet. I'm not convinced thats happening at the minute, thanks to the usual combinations of political and ministry incompetence and infighting between the service chiefs, among other factors.

Frankly, I dont see the point in a nation our size being involved in expeditionary warfare. Particularly given the prevailing financial situation.

Next big decision, if this is the future structure that the UK forces are going to have to operate in, is whether it is the right thing to replace Trident with a like-for-like system.

FWIW, my own POV is that we should not.

[NURSE]

why is anyone surprised at the cuts they would have happened no matter which party was elected. Conservatives were all up for slashing defence in 1981 under Thatcher until the Falklands War and even then she had no idea about what the Navy had in service.
I would sugest that Brown would have slashed the defence budget by a much bigger margin and programes like Nimrod,A400M,FSTA,FRES,Typhoon Trance3, JSF and Carriers would probably have been cut. Astute would have stayed 4 boats, The Type 45's would have been sold and the frigate fleet slashed. The Army would probably lost all its heavy armour.

[cazatou]

"The Forces and the future"

Is that not something of an oxymoron?

[Heathrow Harry]

we try, sometimes for the best of intentions, to do to much

we try and keep a full capability industry similar to the Americans

we also, because it's a great excuse, to try on insist on "interoperability" with our American friends

So we buy the wrong sort of kit for the wars we actually finish up fighting at vast cost

We don't need Type 45 destroyers, nor do we need the Typhoon nor heavy armoured brigades

However politicians are scared s****** of telling the papers and the Great British Public that we no longer have an Empire

[teeteringhead]

What my dear sainted mother would have called a case of "Champagne tastes and four ale (ie 4d a pint) money...":(

[spectre150]

nor do we need the Typhoon

does that mean that you think that the jobs it does today dont need doing (for example QRA) or will not be required in the future when Tornado GR4 goes out of service (either through cost-cutting or at the end of its service life)?

[engineer(retard)]

We could also close the bases and operate out of heathrow, unless it snows :E

[Finningley Boy]

we try, sometimes for the best of intentions, to do to much

we try and keep a full capability industry similar to the Americans

we also, because it's a great excuse, to try on insist on "interoperability" with our American friends

So we buy the wrong sort of kit for the wars we actually finish up fighting at vast cost

We don't need Type 45 destroyers, nor do we need the Typhoon nor heavy armoured brigades

However politicians are scared s****** of telling the papers and the Great British Public that we no longer have an Empire


Just when did maintaining a comprehensive Tactical Military Capability become representative of Imperialistic ambitions? And would you criticise the rest of the world for pursuing similar Defence Policies and ambitions. Or is it just the plot of land with a Union Flag sprouting from it that gets your dander up? People like you, Heathrow old fruit, have advanced this very argument for decades, regardless of the state of the world and the state of the U.K.:bored:

FB:)

[backseatjock]

Yes it is true to say the UK has a comparatively large defence budget but part of our problem is that a relatively small percentage of the UK’s actual spend is on procurement or enhancement of equipment

[Arfur Dinari]

Some good and valid points there. Over the years I have watched dismayed as the bases have closed and equipment retired far too early. I know we all need to tighten our belts - it is rammed down our throats day after day. I also know the defence budget is quite big.

However, I am fed up with paying for things that do not benefit our country. I don't want to get into a politico type debate, but I wish we would cut the foreign aid budget (whatever happened to charity begins at home?) and cut the huge social security budget. It seems amazing that we attract so many (particularly from new EU countries) migrants who often end up on benefits - must be our generous benefits system?!

Regarding me voting conservative, well...hands up to that.....never again.

I have sat on the outside looking into these forums for years. Never plucked up courage to enter the fray before....just so disappointed with the way this country is going and particularly the whittling down of our forces.

Fox promised no salami slicing - well he is definitely not doing that!

Anyhow, keep smiling!

[Uncle Ginsters]

The main problem as i see it is that we have been involved in major expeditionary conflict now for over 10 years, with a 4 year period of having 2 ops on the go at the same time!

Where did the funding for that come from? Did the Treasury say "Hey guys, you're at war - here's a pot to help you out"? or was it more like "Ooooh, that sounds like dirty military work to me...best you pay for it!"?

Our hand on how and where to spend the Defence budget has been forced for that whole period, therefore reducing funds available for any other capabilities than those required today and playing catchup on UORs.

We're not necessarily punching above our weight, but our leaders may have forgotten 10 years on what we have undertaken, and still undertake!

[Halton Brat]

Well, we've pretty much arrived at the point I thought we sometime would:

1. We've got nukes, but no in-depth conventional capability to provide a worthwhile 'option buffer'.

2. Q: Why keep the nukes at the expense of conventional capability?
A: So that our Politico's can swan around the UN Security Council.

3. When will successive UK governments realise that we are a post-colonial declining power, and cut their (our) cloth accordingly. Our stock on the world stage has been massively devalued by the dubious actions of President Blair & his spineless acolytes - does any other nation now care what we think? If it was possible to do a 'Credit Check' on our National Integrity Rating, what would we score?

Must stop now; listened to BBC R4 'You & Yours' prog yesterday on UK Foreign Aid policy & destroyed a perfectly good wireless; blood pressure Master Caution illuminated. Had to check out YouTube 'Fascinating Aida - Cheap Flights' to calm down. Should be available on Prescription, old boy.

[grandfer]

The main problem with this country now is that nobody outside our Armed Forces (?) gives a toss about the defence of this country , their heads are full of cr@p such as "I wonder how Cheryl Cole will have her false hair done this week or isn't Wayne Rooney a lovely chap ? or I can't wait for the next series of X Factor to start , nobody bats an eyelid that 2 weeks of sports next year are ONLY costing us around £14bn !
It's about time we got our priorities right & looked after the defence & security of this country properly , I hope we don't drop a big bo@*ock & live (hopefully) not to regret getting rid of all our valuable military assets so quickly . There , I've said that , now I'll have to go into a darkened room to calm down !:mad::mad::mad:

[oldgrubber]

Well said Grandfer,

Judging by the moans about the fitness test on this forum no-one here would give a second thought to us not hosting the Olympics. Cornwall won't see the benefit, neither will most places other than London. We could have saved billions by utilising existing sporting venues across the country, sharing the benefits in an austere time instead of centralising everything.

Stay angry, it shows you care!

[Abbeville]

grandfer


I absolutely agree with you. My blood pressure now rising.

Well said!

Abb.

[Willard Whyte]

Judging by the moans about the fitness test on this forum no-one here would give a second thought to us not hosting the Olympics.

Hmm, not sure what your angle is on that statement, but given the choice I'd rather fly with skilled, if physically unfit, crewmates than a bunch of talentless gym queens.

[airsound]

Well, with the massive MoD overspend and deficit that ministers keep banging on about, perhaps Mod should take a leaf from the Oz book. Mark Thomson, who's a director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, said today
[Australian] Defence had significantly underspent because of continuing bungles with materiel supply contracts in the current financial year.

The four biggest culprits, which have a total underspend of $564 million between them are the Airborne Early Warning Aircraft, the Air Warfare Destroyer program, the Multi-Role Helicopter project and the Air-to-Air Refuelling Capability program.

''Because suppliers haven't done the job, Defence is not paying them as you would expect,'' Mr Thomson said yesterday.

''That has left it with a whole lot of investment cash in its pocket. The combination of the two factors - the underspend and the plane purchase help them [Defence] alleviate their embarrassment of riches.'' The 'plane purchase' he refers to is the unexpected order 3 days ago for a fifth C-17, cost reportedly $230million. Wouldn't that sort of money be nice on the Brit end of the antipodes....

airsound

[Mac the Knife]

Eurofighter Typhoon: It's EVEN WORSE than we thought ? The Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/03/eurofighter_nao_analysis/)

:uhoh:

[engineer(retard)]

Aaah, that well known aviation author Lewis Page :mad:

[t43562]

Halton Brat,

I have no business posting here but I can contribute a small point since I come from outside the UK. Perhaps it will be helpful. You said: "...does any other nation now care what we think?"

The answer is a big mixed bag of yes and nos. You can ensure that it is 100% no by continuing to talk yourselves down.

Britain is envied and admired and hated and often the same person feels all three emotions. It has impacted many countries and British ideas are running around conflicting with more traditional ideas and generating the same feelings as when there was an Empire. There doesn't need to be any British person about for this to cause trouble.

There are also benefits because despite the non-existence of empire, there are people who look to Britain as a model or a way of getting society right. They listen to the World Service way out in the middle of nowhere and are reminded what civilisation is and what they stand for themselves. They put their money in British banks if they have any because they trust you.

Nobody respects what British politicians say since they get kicked out of office quite regularly and will do anything to prolong their stay.

Everyone knows that British people want to be liked and respected and feel that they are good people and can be duped into supporting crooks because of this. They think British people are naieve. This is something of an attraction as well as being frustrating.

When Britain does things like the Falklands or Iraq or Afghanistan, loads of sometime scummy, sometimes merely left wing people complain loudly. In the end though, anger is the greatest form of respect that many have to offer. Before Britain is reviled for taking action, it is considered pathetic for being passive. You can't be liked - mostly the choice is between hated, indifferent, derided with the tiniest sliver of "respected" in there somewhere by a very few people.

I think that even though they are the tremendous minority it's more satisfying to try live up to the expectations of the very few who will respect you.

It's pretty easy to do this in a way: don't betray your allies or your own citizens at any cost.

Regards.

[cazatou]

I have just taken one of my heresy pills so I take no responsibility for what follows.

I joined the RAF as a Student Pilot in 1965 and I did my Basic Training on Jet Provosts at RAF Acklington. At this time the RAF had some 300 Jet Provosts equipping 6 Basic FTS's as well as CFS and the School of Refresher Flying. In addition there were in excess of 100 Gnat Advance Trainers for "Fast Jet" training.

In 1968 whilst serving in the Gulf I met up with my BFTS Instructor who was serving "On Loan" with the Sultan of Oman's Forces flying "Strikemasters" which were at that time basically Mk 4 JP's with Guns and Weapon points. These proved very effective in the counter insurgency role.

There was, as far as I am aware, no plan whatsoever to prepare those 400 Training Aircraft for any support role in the event of hostilities - in contrast to the plans of 1940 when Invasion was a real threat. The scenario for a war in Europe in the 1960's was that it would be short and sharp with NATO defending against a Warsaw Pact invasion. I thought then, and I think now, that some 400 light attack aircraft could have made a difference and if you couple that with similar aircraft from the other NATO nations it could have made a significant difference to NATO's chances of success.

Still today the Training fleet is separate from the front line - but without the potential to be converted to even the most basic form of ground attack aircraft.

In these times of Financial Constraints perhaps it is time to reconsider our options.

[Fareastdriver]

Mk 4 JP's with Guns and Weapon points

Good theory but the JPs produced for the RAF were trainers. The Strikemaster came along later. These were the days when they were remanufacturing P51 Mustangs as COIN aircraft. There was no such thing as COIN when the Provost T1, the father of all JPs was designed so all your JPs would also have to go back to the factory to be remanufactured.

In 1939 there was no plans to arm Tiger Moths or Harvards.

[Wander00]

ISTR that I have read of Tiger Moths being armed with 20lb bombs for coastal patrol in the very early days of WWII

[A4scooter]

Re grandfer
Not everyone who is outside the armed forces is interested in Cheryl Cole, Jordan, X Factor etc etc. - I hate these "celebrities" and reality programmes.
It makes me really angry when I hear or read about what the politicians are doing to our armed forces I fear for the future.
I am in a minority but some of us "civvies" do care and are fully supportive of our servicemen and women so please assume all civilians don't care (although a good percentage don't care about anything)

[cazatou]

Fareastdriver

The Jet Provost Mk 3 and 4 production ceased in 1964 by which time the RAF had received more than 300 aircraft. The Jet Provost Mk 5 did not enter RAF Service until 1969 with orders for more than 150 aircraft. That was after the events I described and the aircraft were new build.

The RAF also had more than 100 Gnat trainers with supersonic capability. I seem to remember IAF Gnat Fighters giving a good account of themselves against Pakistan AF Sabres in one of their frequent Wars in the '70s.

[GrahamO]

£38 billion overspend says it all for me.

We are back to the kid in the sweet shop who is pretending to be an athlete, but in reality cannot move as fast or as effectively as the smaller more nimble kids. And the fat kid is taking others money to squander more. Thats not to say you wouldn't want to be on the side of the fat kid in a fight :)

This is not to say our troops are not the best in the world, but they are poorly let down by both the procurement chaps and also their own ability to deliver to time and cost. Quality is not in doubt too often.

Depending upon which list you read, we are the 7th or 8th largest GDP country in the world. but have the third largest defence expenditure. Thats not 'punching above our weight'. That is not maintaining an empire, but is fighting against reality.

We spend 2.5% of GDP on defence, and I thought that the NATO base limit was much lower than that - nearer 2% or below - perhaps someone can clarify.

Like adherence to EU Legislation, we seem to go too far as its the British thing to do, when all the others are doing the absolute minimum and getting better value for money in keeping their 'Empire'.

[MarkJJ]

Do we stand any chance?

MPs' Expenses,
MP's as board memebers for companies with vested intersests,
Even the London School of Ecomomics is in on it!

[just another jocky]

Still today the Training fleet is separate from the front line - but without the potential to be converted to even the most basic form of ground attack aircraft.

In these times of Financial Constraints perhaps it is time to reconsider our options.

Unless you want to use dumb bombs or dumb rockets, the cost of re-engineering the trainer fleet to be able to use smart weapons would be prohibitive. And no-one in their right minds is using dumb weapons any more.

[cazatou]

jaj

True, but nobody in their right mind would fly a Heavy Bomber at 60ft at night directly towards a defended target (whilst showing lights) and try to bounce their bombs across the water towards the target - would they?

[Halton Brat]

t43562

Thank you for your considered response to my original post.

Like you, I view the UK from an external perspective; I am based in mainland Europe & have spent 15 of the past 25yrs thus.

On my visits to the UK, I am struck by the decline of standards in many aspects of UK life. This is evident in a broad area of the spectrum; social/moral/educational/political/economic (thread drift alert).

Whilst I do not view the past through rose-tinted optical aids, I mourn the passing of what once put the 'Great' in Great Britain. The present decimation of the nation's defences, in an increasingly perilous world, are but one symptom of this decline.

Best regards

Halton Brat

[Navy_Adversary]

The future:confused:

RAF to be 2 or 3 squadrons in the USAF.
Fleet Air arm to be similar in the USN.

At least you guys will get some flying time in.:8

[Halton Brat]

Navy Adversary,

You are clearly an impertinent Colonial.

I intend to petition Her Most Gracious Majesty to dispatch a Gunboat forthwith to the New World, in order to retake those Settlements which had the temerity to defy the lawful writ of the Crown.

Arm yourself, Sir.

HB

[Winchweight]

Gunboat..... like we have any left. And even if we did, like we could afford to send it to the Colonies. Have you seen the price of diesel? :(

[Halton Brat]

Just wait until they see HMS Victory short-tacking up the Potomac, old boy. Put the fear of God up them........