Reality v 'Contingency'

[Sun Who]

So, post-HERRICK, lots of discussions about planning for contingency. Lots of complicated issues around whether to reconfigure as a 'specialist' COIN/rapid deployment/light force or a smaller, but still full-spectrum 'conventional' force.
With activity like this about, I know what I'd do. Personally, despite the genuine and necessary focus on the economic priorities (growth, employment, housing etc) I think we need to 'up arm' toute suite.

Australia, Philippines scrambling to boost air forces- Nikkei Asian Review (http://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/International-Relations/Australia-Philippines-scrambling-to-boost-air-forces)

US Reassures Europe Of Nato's 'Ironclad' Support (http://news.sky.com/story/1250169/us-reassures-europe-of-natos-ironclad-support)

Sun.

[Evalu8ter]

Sun,
No money.

Therefore all we can afford is beer money kit, but we have a Defence Sector that demand Petrus level investment and VSOs that like to wave their metaphorical parts around in self-aggrandisement.

This thrust for the "exquisite" has hollowed out or removed balanced capability, but these high end assets allow Politicos, VSOs and Industry to blah on about "Full Spectrum", "4th largest budget" and "second to none" like delegates at the N Korean Communist party AGM.

Until we have an honest policy led SDSR we will forever be caught between these two stools. I won't hold my breath.....

[teeteringhead]

beer money kit, but we have a Defence Sector that demand Petrus level investment Or what my dear Mother would have called:

"Champagne tastes and four-ale* money!"



*A noted cheap libation of her time, costing 4d a pint. (that's 1.66p)

[MaroonMan4]

Until the British public and politicians actually see Sky News/CNN/The Sun reporting rounds landing on British soil, or foreign invaders on our shores or skies above, then they aren't interested one bit.

It appears that the British public see HM Forces as a National Defence Force with extra/surplus manpower for flood defences, driving fire engines, tubes or whatever 'crisis' situation pops up (that is their definition of contingency I believe).

It is painful to watch history repeat itself and the ultimate overall 'cost' at some point in the future will far outweigh the financial costs of defence discussed today.

All of us here can easily discuss and debate what should happen, and what we really need, but without one bit of political intent or public understanding it would be hot air.

That IMHO is reality.

[Biggus]

I posted this elsewhere on pprune a short while ago, and whilst I don't want to become a bore on the issue, it does apply to so many of the threads currently running on here that are discussing UK armed forces:

I don't want to turn this into another "Scottish Independence" thread (although I can see that happening.... ), neither is this supposed to be a comment about whether Scotland should/could become an independent country. Rather it supposed to be a comment about the effect on the rest of the UKs military forces if the result is "yes". I don't think many people on PPRuNe have fully realized the implications for a "yes" vote to the remainder of the UKs armed forces.

Quite simply, if the result is a "yes" it will drive a coach and horses through all pre-planned defence expenditure for the next 5-10 years as a minimum. MOD will have to absorb the costs of moving a variety of assets around, just a few examples of which include finding a new home for the SSBN fleet, indeed all the submarine fleet, perhaps beefing up Leeming as a northern QRA airfield, closing or reducing bases, moving manpower, etc. Given that the UK governments income will shrink by about 9% then the defence budget may face a 9% cut. Will all Scots currently serving be offered the chance for a "free" transfer to the Scottish defence forces, will there be compulsory redundancies as the MODs manpower requirement shrinks due to a loss of assets, etc, etc...... The mess that will require untangling just goes on and on.

West Germany funded the costs of reunification with East Germany, but the whole of the UK will fund much of the costs of the creation of an independent Scotland, if only because many of the costs will have to be met before the official independence day when Scotland goes solo.

And how likely is this scenario, well the latest polls show the two sides almost neck and neck, and the vote is only a few months away. It stands a pretty good chance of becoming reality. It is the elephant in the room, or people simply don't appreciate the impact it will have.

Discussions on buying an MPA/MMA, keeping Sentinel, how many F-35s we buy, post Afghanistan reductions, SDSR 15/16, all pale into insignificance in comparison to the result of the referendum in just 5 months time. If the answer is "yes" it will probably have the biggest impact on UK, across the whole spectrum of affairs (a UK parliamentary election in 2015 where 60 odd MPs will disappear just a year later in 2016, with a possible change/fall of government as a result being just one example), since world war 2.

As I said in the above text, I don't think many people south of the border have appreciated the impact a "yes" vote will have across the whole of the UK, and that certainly includes the UK military.

[Danny42C]

The Romans had it right 2,000 years ago:

"Si vis pacem, para bellum" (If you want peace, prepare for war).

Still right, always will be.

[TBM-Legend]

Don't forget to take Russian at school..

[Heathrow Harry]

from Tom lehrer



Gather round while I sing you of wernher von braun,
A man whose allegiance
Is ruled by expedience.
Call him a nazi, he won't even frown.
"ha, nazi schmazi," says wernher von braun.


Don't say that he's hypocritical,
Say rather that he's apolitical.
"once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down?
That's not my department," says wernher von braun.


Some have harsh words for this man of renown,
But some think our attitude
Should be one of gratitude,
Like the widows and cripples in old london town
Who owe their large pensions to wernher von braun.


You too may be a big hero,
Once you've learned to count backwards to zero.
"in german oder english I know how to count down,
Und I'm learning chinese," says wernher von braun.

[teeteringhead]

Gather round while I sing you of Wernher von Braun One recalls the von Braun BioPic of the early 1960s, starring Kurt Jurgens, called "I Aim at the Stars".......

The posters in the London Underground were usually defaced with the addition "... but sometimes I hit London" :ok:

[Royalistflyer]

Well I'm presently living in Scotland - and I WILL move south if they try to go independent. Taxes in Scotland will skyrocket and services will be downgraded. The defence implications for UK are enormous. But there's worse. Scotland will effectively become a one-party state since neither Labour nor Conservatives can win government there. And that one party? The SNP - is pure Marxist. Salmond is a Marxist. A one-party Marxist state - does that ring any bells? There is another complication, there is a Scottish election due a year later. Should by some miracle, Labour manage to claw its way to power it would almost certainly halt the independence immediately and remain in the union - otherwise there may never be another Labour government in UK. So it is all going to be very interesting.

[melmothtw]

Well I'm presently living in Scotland - and I WILL move south if they try to go independent.


Also known as playing the Andrew Lloyd Webber card BBC NEWS | VOTE2001 | Are you still here? (http://news.bbc.co.uk/news/vote2001/hi/english/newsid_1320000/1320850.stm)

[Stendec5]

The F.35 is an obscenely expensive pile of ess-aich-one-tee (lots of good stuff on YouTube about this Turkey) Withdrawing from this cash-drain would be an
excellent first step on the road to a sane Defence Policy (possible replacement
could be the Gripen in which BAe have an interest).
Of course it won't happen as long as these congenital idiots are running/ruining what's left of the UK...

[MaroonMan4]

What I did stumble upon which might be relevant to this thread is the link below on the HCDSC's attempt to look ahead and advise on the next (S)DSR. The majority is common sense stuff that you just wonder why it takes a Select Committee to enlighten the political decision makers. However, some of the independent (?) think tanks and academics consulted put forward some bold suggestions.

Initially I baulked at one of the recommendations formally recorded for the Army to take over all Rotary Wing, less the Dark Blue and Amphibious stuff, but when I saw the overwhelming evidence suggesting that F-35 was a very expensive white elephant in comparison to Super Hornets, Hawk Eyes etc etc I realised that the next SDSR may see some bold political decisions.

I most certainly am not going anywhere near the whole Carrier, F-35, should we, shouldn't we debate. What I am saying is that maybe the 'Arab Spring' and Ukraine may re-align the politicians decades of blinkers and manipulation to finally recognise that the world is MORE unstable, with asymmetric, cyber and terrorist warfare not the only threat to this country in the coming years. Also, when Mr & Mrs Joe Bloggs either have their gas (from Russia) turned off or having to pay through the roof prices for either energy, food or both, then the British public might just recognise the value of a true cross spectrum Defence capability.

Handing over all our Rotary Wing to the Pongoes (even more than the current JHC/Army HQ arrangement) fills me with dread, BUT if the next SDSR is truly strategically led, with a long term view (10 years +) then I welcome the open transparent discussions, without emotion, or patronage, or nostalgia. Whether that is the Fisheads losing their beloved F-35 or us losing our Rotary Wing, if it is genuinely in the interests of the country, then I am willing to listen (rather than throw my teddies out of the cot and vote with my feet).


http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmdfence/197/197vw.pdf

[Wensleydale]

"Well I'm presently living in Scotland - and I WILL move south if they try to go independent".


Not if UKIP hold the balance of power - immigration will no doubt be stopped and you will not be allowed in!!

[Biggus]

Wensleydale,

Don't be daft man!!!

You use all that military cunning, and move south in the time window between the Scottish vote in September and the UK national election in May - simples!! :ok:

[Wensleydale]

Actually, much will depend upon the timing of "independence". If Scotland becomes independent before they have joined the EU, then in theory, will the Scots be allowed to migrate without controls? Less right to enter England than the Romanians and Bulgarians perhaps?


No doubt, all this is to be "sorted out after the vote" like the vast majority of the detail denied to voters by the Scottish Assembly?


Just a thought.

[Wander00]

HH - have you seen the newish book on OP PAPERCLIP, the collecting of German scientists, including WvB, to the US after the war

[Heathrow Harry]

no - but I'll take a look

[Blue Bottle]

What an intresting link that is, thanks for posting..
Can't wait to see the comments flow in, but there is a lot of truth in there. Hope and trust it's taken onboard in the next SDSR

[Alpha Whiskey]

MM4 - I wouldn't say the 'fisheads' see the F35 as 'beloved' at all. I have no doubt my dark blue comrades would be delighted to go for a handful of Navy owned and operated Super Hornets. The F35 issue in this context is more about the rather incredible cost of the Cats'n'traps conversion for the QE Class.


The U-turn back to STOVL after the last SDSR came about because of those costs (I know, I was there). At the time, mitigating those costs with a switch to Super Hornets was not allowed to be mentioned. I'd love to believe someone would be brave enough to take the bold decisions we all recognise are needed in the next SDSR, but I won't be holding my breath.

[MaroonMan4]

AW,

Apologies, I was attempting to be flippant, and all of the passionate Carrier and F-35 threads and posts are well out of my comfort zone, experience and at times interest. I personally see lots within the light blue singing the praises of Typhoon, but very few that look forward to or are enthusiastic about Lightening II.

I was merely trying to highlight that irrespective of our individual passion and the bat and balling of arguments for and against certain options on this web site, that if the politicians really did want a threat led, long term SDSR then any sacred cows, red lines or subjects which (because of our individual Service background) just don't seem right, then we should embrace open and transparent discussions.

Without sounding too altruistic, short term pain (to us on the shop floor) for long term gain (for the nation)?

[Kitbag]

short term pain (to us on the shop floor) for long term gain (for the nation)?

I agree... if you can be sure you have one team behind you and around you, unfortunately in this country the team captain is a politician and therefore national interest is anethema to him/her (of whichever party).
Harold Wilson said a week is a long time in politics, how far ahead will a Defence Review really matter to the winners of the next general election?

And please will people recognise that F35 will be majority manned by the light blue; the Navy are an add on.

[Sun Who]

This thread certainly didn't go as I expected. First it veered off onto the Scottish independence debate and currently it's exploring the issues around F35. I'd hoped it might follow the OP around how hard it is to do meaningful contingency planning. Heh-ho, I guess that's what happens with online fora.

WRT F35, it's worth being aware that at the highest level of cap planning it's just one component in a programme called Future Combat Air System (FCAS). Currently, there are a number of options in FCAS, all of which include F35, with an associated mix of extended, upgraded Typhoon and contender future aircraft, including several possible UCAS variants.

Nothing, and I mean nothing, has been decided in terms of the future shape and size of FCAS beyond 2030, including the RN/RAF/variant mix - but it is being discussed and planned for at length and in depth by some very serious people. Yes, Defence does try to plan out that far (and beyond) and spends real, significant money doing so.

Much debate on this forum is based on the papers, the telly and what's heard in the crewroom - and that's right and proper (and more than half the point - and definitely the major attraction). However, associated assertions should be made with a due sense of self awareness.

Yours in Defence capability planning,

Sun.:)

[MaroonMan4]

Hey Kitbag,

Regarding comments on who owns/operates/flys F-35....wrong thread I think my friend and will be lost in the grass here!

That is unless WEBF or another Fishead wants a bite!

SW - you beat me to it by 4 minutes!

[Fintastic]

Hmmm......the F35;

Just for a moment, let's suppose back at the turn of the 80's, instead of Tornado, we took the risk of buying a new, unproven fighter from the Americans, based on cutting edge technology and featuring advanced fly by wire and a futuristic cockpit, coupled with impressive aerodynamic performance.....

Now picture what our airforce could have been like during the past 30+ years if we had bought the same number of F16's as we did Tornado GRs and F3s......I dare say the image of what that would have meant in terms of capability is quite an attractive thought to many on this forum.

The F35 is the F16 of today. Yes it may seem like a white elephant at present, but then so did the F16 during its own development. If anyone thinks that we can do without the F35s capabilities in the future airborne warfare environment, they are gravely mistaken. Yes, it will probably be one of the last manned platforms we ever buy, but if we are only able to afford to run a handful of combat AC, they MUST be the best, the silver bullet option is the only one we can have if we are to survive.

Clausewitz was quite correct when he stated that "quantity has a quality all of its own.." But when you have a company of men armed with SA80s going up against a platoon of concealed snipers with Barrett .50 cals...well, I know which team I'd prefer to be on.....:ok:

[Not_a_boffin]

Now picture what our airforce could have been like during the past 30+ years if we had bought the same number of F16's as we did Tornado GRs and F3s......I dare say the image of what that would have meant in terms of capability is quite an attractive thought to many on this forum.

Or F14s or F18s for that matter...........

[RAFEngO74to09]

Or indeed the F-15E which the UK was offered for GBP 15M each around 1990 (much less than Harrier GR5 was costing at the time).

[GeeRam]

The F.35 is an obscenely expensive pile of ess-aich-one-tee (lots of good stuff on YouTube about this Turkey) Withdrawing from this cash-drain would be an excellent first step on the road to a sane Defence Policy (possible replacement could be the Gripen in which BAe have an interest).

BAe haven't had any connection to Saab and the Gripen for almost 3 years.

BAe had been reducing it involvement for a number of years and all links were finally severed in June 2011 when BAe sold their remaining shareholder stake in Saab.