Defence: Public ignorance, the media, and cutbacks
Thread Starter
There seems to be an admision that the SDSR cuts are causing problems to current operations here:
RAF Tucanos support front line operations
With a readjustment of pilot training following the Strategic Defence and Security Review, the commitment of front line jets to operations over Libya and a general shortfall in JTAC currency, training using the Tucano for a task previously reserved for jets has proven an ideal solution for all concerned.
Ideal? Or the best way of coping with less jets?
RAF Tucanos support front line operations
With a readjustment of pilot training following the Strategic Defence and Security Review, the commitment of front line jets to operations over Libya and a general shortfall in JTAC currency, training using the Tucano for a task previously reserved for jets has proven an ideal solution for all concerned.
Ideal? Or the best way of coping with less jets?
WEBF
Thanks forthe link - it made me chuckle with...
...oh really! No MTS-B (the EO turret), no SAR/GMTI, none of the other sensors, no link into Blue Force Tracker or Link 16, no weapons simulation, no ROVER 3, no BLOS video feed, and it has a pilot! Yes, a very convincing impression I'm sure!!!
I guess it has a turbo-prop engine and 2 wings, though...
What a load of tripe
LJ
Thanks forthe link - it made me chuckle with...
The Tucano does a very good impression of a Reaper unmanned air vehicle (UAV)
I guess it has a turbo-prop engine and 2 wings, though...
What a load of tripe
LJ
Last edited by Lima Juliet; 26th May 2012 at 12:23.
Thread Starter
It was the way the story was sold as a positive story that struck me. I realise that this is understandable that everyone wants to be as positive as possible, but it risks confusing the public with the idea that the SDSR (and other cuts) had little impact, or that there is merit in the idea, put forward by some, that an armed Tucano could do the same job as a Tornado. Similarly PR stories about RFAs undertaking what ought to be done by frigates.
Janes seems to be running a related story: Retro chic: classic Hunters come back into fashion
Janes seems to be running a related story: Retro chic: classic Hunters come back into fashion
It could be a positive thing to an extent. JTAC training has to be phased, in the same way that flying training is. So at the end of the training, you need a pair of jets with pods, working ROVER capability, LTM at night, etc etc. You need to finish your training working with the aircraft you'll actually control for real, using realistic target sets and realistic concerns.
However, when it comes to the first stages, just talking to the aircraft, managing deconfliction, and doing talk-ons to help get eyes on, there's no harm at all in using a Tucano and it strikes me as a very smart move.
Your Tucano, flown by an ex-GR4 pilot, can stay on task for ages, and there are loads of them. No advanced capability, but the ideal training mule to allow a JTAC to practice controlling aircraft and airspace for real. Hard work for the crews to simulate having the appropriate kit to punch coordinates into, but a lot of the concepts are still valid.
Ideal stepping-stone to the Hawk and then Tornado, and a sensible use of under-used assets now that student numbers are lower? The PR fluff piece is a bit silly, as it's obviously never going to replace a Tornado and I can't imagine for a second how it'll imitate a Reaper in any way, but still a smart move.
However, when it comes to the first stages, just talking to the aircraft, managing deconfliction, and doing talk-ons to help get eyes on, there's no harm at all in using a Tucano and it strikes me as a very smart move.
Your Tucano, flown by an ex-GR4 pilot, can stay on task for ages, and there are loads of them. No advanced capability, but the ideal training mule to allow a JTAC to practice controlling aircraft and airspace for real. Hard work for the crews to simulate having the appropriate kit to punch coordinates into, but a lot of the concepts are still valid.
Ideal stepping-stone to the Hawk and then Tornado, and a sensible use of under-used assets now that student numbers are lower? The PR fluff piece is a bit silly, as it's obviously never going to replace a Tornado and I can't imagine for a second how it'll imitate a Reaper in any way, but still a smart move.
Thread Starter
Despite the predictions of some, the Armed Forces did play a major security role during the Olympics, and will do so during the Paralympics. The MOD link is here. In time there will be statistics of numbers of personnel involved, also ships/aircraft/missiles deployed.
Unlike many of those who got pinged at the last minute, I knew I was going, having had the mobilisation papers several months ago. As such, I had decent accommodation, no tents and thunderboxes for me. I must admit to having personal doubts about the Olympics - both because of the cost and disruption involved, and due to philosophical issues. Nonetheless, it was an opportunity to portray the UK in a positive light, with visitors from all sorts of places. In the week before the games, I read a newspaper article that claimed that the Government saw it as an opportunity to help do some business deals, so in that sense it hopefully contributed to national objectives.
Generating so many personnel at short notice may have been a pain, but did it impress anyone? It impressed me, and I wonder did it help influence or deter anyone? The General who visited my site told me that the whole thing had given HM Forces a more positive public image than at any time since the Falklands War. Personally I found this to be slightly worrying given the involvement in various theatres in the last twenty or so years, as well as continuing operations, which sadly involved loss of life during the time of the Games.
The Government is grateful too for being bailed out - will this result in any leverage for the Service Chiefs? Certain aspects of post SDSR policy are in an incoherent mess but could easily be made into a success story - if only the politicians would listen to the advice offered. Does the deployment of HMS Ocean with embarked helicopters for possible use against light aircraft, or HMS Bulwark off the coast of Dorset (with several Lynx as well as various small craft) strengthen the hand of the First Sea Lord? Will the use of ISTAR assets such as the ASaCs Sea King or Merlin help preserve ISTAR assets that SDSR decided were no longer needed? Will the case for the RAF having some sort of maritime surveillance capability be boosted (I popped into a newsagents and saw a magazine talking about some proposal to fit some sort of sensor payload into the back of a Herc)? Will the use of Typhoon help safeguard aircraft numbers? Does the involvement of so many personnel indicate a continuing need to be ready for contingencies?
During the period of the Games, other international news stories were pushed far away from the front pages, yet the ongoing situation in Syria, and continued tensions over Iran's nuclear programme are of greater long term importance than a sporting event.
Unlike many of those who got pinged at the last minute, I knew I was going, having had the mobilisation papers several months ago. As such, I had decent accommodation, no tents and thunderboxes for me. I must admit to having personal doubts about the Olympics - both because of the cost and disruption involved, and due to philosophical issues. Nonetheless, it was an opportunity to portray the UK in a positive light, with visitors from all sorts of places. In the week before the games, I read a newspaper article that claimed that the Government saw it as an opportunity to help do some business deals, so in that sense it hopefully contributed to national objectives.
Generating so many personnel at short notice may have been a pain, but did it impress anyone? It impressed me, and I wonder did it help influence or deter anyone? The General who visited my site told me that the whole thing had given HM Forces a more positive public image than at any time since the Falklands War. Personally I found this to be slightly worrying given the involvement in various theatres in the last twenty or so years, as well as continuing operations, which sadly involved loss of life during the time of the Games.
The Government is grateful too for being bailed out - will this result in any leverage for the Service Chiefs? Certain aspects of post SDSR policy are in an incoherent mess but could easily be made into a success story - if only the politicians would listen to the advice offered. Does the deployment of HMS Ocean with embarked helicopters for possible use against light aircraft, or HMS Bulwark off the coast of Dorset (with several Lynx as well as various small craft) strengthen the hand of the First Sea Lord? Will the use of ISTAR assets such as the ASaCs Sea King or Merlin help preserve ISTAR assets that SDSR decided were no longer needed? Will the case for the RAF having some sort of maritime surveillance capability be boosted (I popped into a newsagents and saw a magazine talking about some proposal to fit some sort of sensor payload into the back of a Herc)? Will the use of Typhoon help safeguard aircraft numbers? Does the involvement of so many personnel indicate a continuing need to be ready for contingencies?
During the period of the Games, other international news stories were pushed far away from the front pages, yet the ongoing situation in Syria, and continued tensions over Iran's nuclear programme are of greater long term importance than a sporting event.
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 18th Aug 2012 at 14:18.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The Government is grateful too for being bailed out"
"Gratitude is a sickness suffered by dogs" - JV Stalin
I'm sure they'll be saying to themselves that the Armed Forces had nothing else to do for 17 days and so we, the politicians, not only gave them an interesting job instead of all that marching & polishing and playing rugby that they normally do but they also got free tickets to the events!!!
"Gratitude is a sickness suffered by dogs" - JV Stalin
I'm sure they'll be saying to themselves that the Armed Forces had nothing else to do for 17 days and so we, the politicians, not only gave them an interesting job instead of all that marching & polishing and playing rugby that they normally do but they also got free tickets to the events!!!
HM Forces a more positive public image than at any time since the Falklands War. Personally I found this to be slightly worrying given the involvement in various theatres in the last twenty or so years, as well as continuing operations, which sadly involved loss of life during the time of the Games.
Should they be issued with a more appropriate civilian battledress for such occasions? or does desert compfague highlight the point and thus the deterrent, that these boys have seen action?
Mickjoebill
Thread Starter
Not sure what we can learn from this, apart from being reminded of the fickle nature of public and media opinion.
As for uniform, if MTP is working dress then I guess that is what is worn, remember LOCOG wanted the service personnel to wear the same gear as volunteers. The naval contingent (with exceptions) stayed clear of MTP, and were easily recognised in our no3s. If you were not deterred by the large numbers of armed police, then I think a few guys/girls on uniform would not put you off.
As for uniform, if MTP is working dress then I guess that is what is worn, remember LOCOG wanted the service personnel to wear the same gear as volunteers. The naval contingent (with exceptions) stayed clear of MTP, and were easily recognised in our no3s. If you were not deterred by the large numbers of armed police, then I think a few guys/girls on uniform would not put you off.
I think it would be fair to say that the majority of the public do support the people of the Armed Forces.
But what we have little time for is the expanding budget, which has grown to contain an ever increasing proportion of 'remedial programmes' due to incompetence and overspends. The public does not see the Armed Forces as one homogenous unit, but sees it as a myriad of parts, which, like the Curates Egg, is good in parts.
If, and I know its a big if, the MOD had spent its budget more wisely, and not wasted so much of it, I suspect people would be less critical. I don;t think the public bemoan one Ł of money spent on active operations and would support more being spent in theatre, but debacles like Nimrod do wear the patience thin and we are a fickle lot. I know there will be those who claim industry is to blame, but it has ever been that OR change their minds regularly, the specification is incomplete and plain old wrong and the buck does stop with the client to say what they want in enough details for the supply chain to deliver.
Its not a case of us public wanting our cake and eat it, but we would quite like that if the MOD asks for money to develop capability, that it does what every other walk of life does - deliver that capability to time, cost and quality.
Sure, we want protection, but its hard to take some parts of the overall MOD seriously when we might conclude that stuff is being made up as they go along.
But what we have little time for is the expanding budget, which has grown to contain an ever increasing proportion of 'remedial programmes' due to incompetence and overspends. The public does not see the Armed Forces as one homogenous unit, but sees it as a myriad of parts, which, like the Curates Egg, is good in parts.
If, and I know its a big if, the MOD had spent its budget more wisely, and not wasted so much of it, I suspect people would be less critical. I don;t think the public bemoan one Ł of money spent on active operations and would support more being spent in theatre, but debacles like Nimrod do wear the patience thin and we are a fickle lot. I know there will be those who claim industry is to blame, but it has ever been that OR change their minds regularly, the specification is incomplete and plain old wrong and the buck does stop with the client to say what they want in enough details for the supply chain to deliver.
Its not a case of us public wanting our cake and eat it, but we would quite like that if the MOD asks for money to develop capability, that it does what every other walk of life does - deliver that capability to time, cost and quality.
Sure, we want protection, but its hard to take some parts of the overall MOD seriously when we might conclude that stuff is being made up as they go along.
Last edited by GrahamO; 3rd Nov 2012 at 11:45.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: UK
Age: 78
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Media ignorance
We should not castigate the public for being unaware of military matters when they are blanketed with duff gen from the media. This is not limited to the basic papers but extends to those who claim to write the facts
A small thing but very telling
The Daily Telegraph recently described the Duke Of Edinburgh as chatting to an officer and included a photograph. The "Officer" was holding a pace stick
No officer would take uppon himself the priveledge of holding a pace stick it is the badge of office of a drill instructor and anyone who has spent even five minutes at any military establishment with his eyes open knows that
This trivial example shows that those writing such articles know nothing about the subject they describe and even in that ignorance refuse to check their words with a person who does
A small thing but very telling
The Daily Telegraph recently described the Duke Of Edinburgh as chatting to an officer and included a photograph. The "Officer" was holding a pace stick
No officer would take uppon himself the priveledge of holding a pace stick it is the badge of office of a drill instructor and anyone who has spent even five minutes at any military establishment with his eyes open knows that
This trivial example shows that those writing such articles know nothing about the subject they describe and even in that ignorance refuse to check their words with a person who does
Last edited by Tinribs; 5th Nov 2012 at 17:50.
Tin ribs
I think you're being a tad unfair here. A defence correspondent would or should know the basic rank structure of the military but not necessarily a journalist who covers a general interest story. However, I agree that whenever I read about a subject that I do have some knowledge of it often appears that the journalists haven't always done their homework.
rgds
BBK
Ps don't take this the wrong way but have you proof read your own post?
I think you're being a tad unfair here. A defence correspondent would or should know the basic rank structure of the military but not necessarily a journalist who covers a general interest story. However, I agree that whenever I read about a subject that I do have some knowledge of it often appears that the journalists haven't always done their homework.
rgds
BBK
Ps don't take this the wrong way but have you proof read your own post?
Last edited by BBK; 6th Nov 2012 at 13:18.
Thread Starter
Ignoring the argument about standards of Journalism for a moment, the Telegraph today carries a thought provoking piece:
Future rememberence
Tomorrow, Armistice Day and Remembrance Sunday coincide. The nation is now more united than for many a year in commemorating all those who have given their lives for the peace and freedom that we enjoy. This is not militarism, but gratitude for courageous sacrifice. In 1960, when Beyond the Fringe satirised the stiff upper lip attitude celebrated by British war films, it was only 15 years since the end of the Second World War – long enough for a generation to emerge with no direct experience of it, but not long enough for a truer perspective to develop. Today, young people much less close to wartime events willingly wear poppies, observe a short silence, contribute to charities such as Combat Stress, take part in Armed Forces Day – in short, relate history to actual life. That is remembrance.
It would, however, be a sad paradox if notional support for the Armed Forces is accompanied, as Max Hastings suggests on page 27 today, by a real dwindling of Britain’s traditional role as a warrior nation. By cutting manpower relentlessly, so that the Armed Forces can no longer fulfil the kind of task for which they have been thanked in the past, politicians may be forcing the Navy, Army and Royal Air Force to the margins of national experience. That will not stop us expressing gratitude tomorrow for the past, but it may endanger Britain’s role in shaping the world and guaranteeing future liberties at home.
Future rememberence
Tomorrow, Armistice Day and Remembrance Sunday coincide. The nation is now more united than for many a year in commemorating all those who have given their lives for the peace and freedom that we enjoy. This is not militarism, but gratitude for courageous sacrifice. In 1960, when Beyond the Fringe satirised the stiff upper lip attitude celebrated by British war films, it was only 15 years since the end of the Second World War – long enough for a generation to emerge with no direct experience of it, but not long enough for a truer perspective to develop. Today, young people much less close to wartime events willingly wear poppies, observe a short silence, contribute to charities such as Combat Stress, take part in Armed Forces Day – in short, relate history to actual life. That is remembrance.
It would, however, be a sad paradox if notional support for the Armed Forces is accompanied, as Max Hastings suggests on page 27 today, by a real dwindling of Britain’s traditional role as a warrior nation. By cutting manpower relentlessly, so that the Armed Forces can no longer fulfil the kind of task for which they have been thanked in the past, politicians may be forcing the Navy, Army and Royal Air Force to the margins of national experience. That will not stop us expressing gratitude tomorrow for the past, but it may endanger Britain’s role in shaping the world and guaranteeing future liberties at home.
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 15th Dec 2012 at 10:11.
Thread Starter
Here's an interesting find.
Many MOD publications are freely available via the direct.gov website, including a few Development, Concepts and Doctrine Centre papers.
I find this on interesting: A Guide To Red Teaming
If you are leading, commanding or managing a planning, development, or acquisition activity then red teaming should be used.
Sound advice.
Defence products such as the Defence Reform Review, Future Character of Conflict, British Defence Doctrine and the 2010 Defence Green Paper were scrutinised and challenged using a strategic red teaming process known colloquially as the ‘concept test’.
No mention of the SDSR though! So is this an admission that certain parts of policy, such as scrapping the MPA capability with only a vague idea of regenerating it at some future date, or ignoring the advice from the Admirals and scrapping the Harrier without first having worked out how skills would be retained and developed for the future (still an unresolved issue), or opting to switch to F-35C and a CTOL future without investigating the issues, were not subject to critical review?
Many MOD publications are freely available via the direct.gov website, including a few Development, Concepts and Doctrine Centre papers.
I find this on interesting: A Guide To Red Teaming
If you are leading, commanding or managing a planning, development, or acquisition activity then red teaming should be used.
Sound advice.
Defence products such as the Defence Reform Review, Future Character of Conflict, British Defence Doctrine and the 2010 Defence Green Paper were scrutinised and challenged using a strategic red teaming process known colloquially as the ‘concept test’.
No mention of the SDSR though! So is this an admission that certain parts of policy, such as scrapping the MPA capability with only a vague idea of regenerating it at some future date, or ignoring the advice from the Admirals and scrapping the Harrier without first having worked out how skills would be retained and developed for the future (still an unresolved issue), or opting to switch to F-35C and a CTOL future without investigating the issues, were not subject to critical review?
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 20th Jul 2013 at 10:16.