CDS to go early

[AdanaKebab]

Chess moves at the top inbound.

Defence chief to be axed - Times Online (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7149104.ece)

[fincastle84]

Obviously he is being fired along with the senior MOD civil servant. I guess it's considered that he was too close to the old government. Never mind, he gets a pretty good pension.

Have a good rest Jock, you did your best.

[tucumseh]

Jeffrey, who has a salary of £180,000, has been permanent under-secretary since 2005, during which time the MoD budget spiralled out of control, creating a £36 billion “black hole”.

In financial terms, this is the key paragraph. PUS (Jeffrey) is the Chief Accounting Officer. It is his job to oversee the implementation of the rules requiring the scrutiny Fox talks of. This scrutiny is nothing new. It has been mandated since time began. The trouble is, successive PUSs going back over 20 years have failed miserably to ensure their own regulations are enforced - not just since 2005. The key report on the subject, issued by MoD's own internal auditors, is dated June 1996. 19 recommendations, none of which were implemented. Untold Billions have been wasted as a result; which, had it not been spent, would not have affected Operational Capability. That is the essential difference between true efficiency, which the scrutiny rules are designed to ensure, and the forthcoming cuts which are designed to compensate for incompetence.


“Officers have been willing to let themselves be politicised as a means of climbing up the promotion ladder,” he said.

This very true statement applies equally to senior Servicemen and Civilians alike. Can we now look forward to a similar cull of those in DE&S who issued instructions to ignore PUS's scrutiny regulations, just to avoid rocking the political boat? Jeffrey is taking the blame for his lack of leadership, but history tells us the real perpetrators won't change.

[Pontius Navigator]

Annularity used to be the elephant in the room. Save, save, save, surplus, spend.

Contractorisation was supposed to get round this and the Regional Prime for works was a step in the right direction but as 5 years was too short. But even before year one in our region was out came the cuts. Paintng was cut, demolition was cut and so on. They had a good contract but there we were meddling with it.

Landmarc OTOH had a long contract and a complacent approach. thought they were the bees knees and too complacrent to realise their customer hated them :mad:

The next big money saving scheme by the Queen's first son-in-law is one BIG overarching contract in 2013. But big contracts need lots of monitors at every level but had Defence Estates trained any Contract Monitors?

[dctyke]

failed his annual fitness test 3 times...................... ;)

[adminblunty]

If I remember correctly he was DCINC STC when Burridge was CINC STC, Burridge was tipped for the top job until he took his pants down with the wrong women and Stirrup got the job, says it all really.

[P6 Driver]

With the TV and radio coverage, the BBC seem to repeatedly state that he was a FJ pilot previously. Just wondering if that's supposed to be a "read between the lines" reference to his suitability to carry out the top job.

[[email protected]]

“Officers have been willing to let themselves be politicised as a means of climbing up the promotion ladder,” he said.

And that politicisation has spread downwards to the point where no-one seems capable of doing the 'right' thing in a given situation, instead doing everything in their power to avoid being seen to do the 'wrong' thing to keep their profile squeaky clean whilst spreading misery below them.

[Wensleydale]

And that politicisation has spread downwards to the point where no-one seems capable of doing the 'right' thing in a given situation, instead doing everything in their power to avoid being seen to do the 'wrong' thing to keep their profile squeaky clean whilst spreading misery below them.


You mean the promotion "Monkey Tree"?

Those at the top look down and see smiling faces looking up at them. Those at the bottom look up and see ars*h*les.:oh:

[Spanish Waltzer]

Would it not make more sense for a new CDS & PUS to be appointed now before the SDSR so that the decisions made are made by those who have to stand up & be counted for their decisions and they can lead the mil into the new regime they have created. At this rate some pretty nasty cuts will be 'blamed' on those just left and nobody will be in post to be held accountable...I predict a riot :ugh:

[Chugalug2]

Let us all hope that these sackings (well the closest to that you could hope for) are a prelude to a complete reform of this incompetent and corrupt ministry. If Dr Fox can achieve that then he will go down as one of the greatest SoS's that the MOD has had since Mountbatten had his great idea (which in keeping with all his other great ideas has wasted lives needlessly)

fincastle84:
Have a good rest Jock, you did your best.
Quite!

[aw ditor]

After seeing Dr Fox on the "box", why do I get the feeling he should have stuck to "prescriptions"?

[AdanaKebab]

Spanish Waltzer: It looks like you were 'on the money'. It appears he is being pushed to leave now! :eek: Hello General Sir David Julian Richards KCB, CBE, DSO, ADC .. don'tcha know... (I'll bet he's got a pair of red trousers). Well, come on, who else is it gonna be ..

Sir Jock Stirrup 'should go before defence review' | UK news | The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jun/13/jock-stirrup-go-before-defence-review)

[acmech1954]

A senior Pongo was on the news a couple of nights ago questioning the number of FJ for the RAF and Carriers for the Navy, but no mention about his Army, somewhat biased methinks. :rolleyes:

[cokecan]

acmech1954 wrote...

...A senior Pongo was on the news a couple of nights ago questioning the number of FJ for the RAF and Carriers for the Navy, but no mention about his Army, somewhat biased methinks. :rolleyes:...

possibly because the whole of the Army is involved in A'stan - AS90 Regiments re-roled to Light Gun, Challenger 2 crews re-roled to crew just about anything that moves in theatre - the Army has many 'traditional war' legacy systems that don't fit into COIN very well, but it has demonstrated that it is willing and able to put them (and the corresponding 'glamour and prestege' surrounding those roles) into storage and re-role in order to prosecute the war we are actually fighting. the RAF on the other hand, has created/allowed a perception (and quite a convincing perception) to evolve that it really isn't interested in A'stan - sure it makes some crumbs-from-the-table changes like Sentinel, RQ-9, RAPTOR, and a couple of extra C-17's - but that really the RAF is only interested in pointy fast jets, and the wars in which they are of use.

there is a balance to be struck between 'the war', and 'a war', but 'the RAF' as represented by Jockstrap got both the balance, and the presentation of that balance, badly wrong.

[vernon99]

acmech1954 wrote...

...A senior Pongo was on the news a couple of nights ago questioning the number of FJ for the RAF and Carriers for the Navy, but no mention about his Army, somewhat biased methinks. ...

possibly because the whole of the Army is involved in A'stan - AS90 Regiments re-roled to Light Gun, Challenger 2 crews re-roled to crew just about anything that moves in theatre - the Army has many 'traditional war' legacy systems that don't fit into COIN very well, but it has demonstrated that it is willing and able to put them (and the corresponding 'glamour and prestege' surrounding those roles) into storage and re-role in order to prosecute the war we are actually fighting. the RAF on the other hand, has created/allowed a perception (and quite a convincing perception) to evolve that it really isn't interested in A'stan - sure it makes some crumbs-from-the-table changes like Sentinel, RQ-9, RAPTOR, and a couple of extra C-17's - but that really the RAF is only interested in pointy fast jets, and the wars in which they are of use.

there is a balance to be struck between 'the war', and 'a war', but 'the RAF' as represented by Jockstrap got both the balance, and the presentation of that balance, badly wrong.

It is slightly easier to take a tank driver and give him something else to drive. Likewise take the AS90 crew and give them a field gun, not much training required, they are all soldiers, just with some specialised training. They could all just go as infantry at the end of the day.
The RAF is a lot more technical than that, and as such resources cannot easily be moved at the drop of a hat without considerable expensive retraining, and that applies to both air and ground trades.
Given that when we initially went into Afghanistan we were not expecting to fight(If you believe the politicians), you cannot expect the chiefs to have spent millions retraining people, and buying new equipment for roles that may not be required.
Look at the army, they have not sold off their battle tanks or AS90's simply put them to one side. How much squealing would there be if the Navy/RAF started complaining about the cost of these systems that are not of any use in the current conflict, sell them off, make some money.....
How much damage was done to the perception of the RAF by removing the Harrier? Was this a deliberate political decision by a green CinC?
The armed forces need to prepare for all eventualities, not just yesterdays. If that means we need air defence fast jets, maritime surveillance, MBT or simply 1000's of infantry soldiers then that is what we need, and the price we need to pay for the defence of the realm.

Isn't it?

[Pheasant]

Surely Richards has compromised himself in the same way as Dannatt did. He is so far hard over on Army capability at the expense of the RN and RAF, and "we must win in Afgh whatever the mortgage to the future" that he cannot be seen as being someone who can give impartial advice to SofS and PM. He is also far too arrogant now that he has made 4*. Houghton has a more purple upbringing and is probably more acceptable to the other 2 Services.....but Stanhope is gaining plaudits in MoD as well.

[cokecan]

nobody is suggesting the RAF should divest itself of anything not immediately required - hence the Army not flogging off its AS90's or Ch2 - rather that it reconfigures its 'back-burner' and 'front-burner' priorities, and be seen to do so. the Army has done this - Armour and Arillery are vastly smaller percentages of the Army than they were in 1991 - capability is still maintained, but emphasis has shifted.

it is complete rubbish for the RAF to use the 'won't fire a shot in anger' excuse for its failure to adjust - the RAF fast jet capability has been the least used part of its fleet for the last 20 years, :mad: knows how many wars since 1991 have shown that the RAF's greatest contribution has been AT SH and ISTAR, yet those capabilities continually get the hind tit in terms of both cash and service priority, in contrast to the rarely used fast jets.

yes the RAF, not least to avoid skill fade and because of the long lead times of aircraft procurement, needs to maintain a rounded fleet - but what it can do, but seems unwilling to do, is to shift the emphasis it places on particular areas within that fleet, and, as i say above, this isn't 'knee-jerk, only-since-2007' stuff, this is 20 years of combined operations to which the RAF has consistently brought the wrong tool set so it can favour the wars it wants to fight, rather than the wars every other cnut gets lumbered with.

[ZuluMike]

I thought Dannatt was getting a House of Lords job or similar so he can be a defence advisor to the Conservatives? He came out of the closet rather publicly last year. He will cut a deal with Fox to ensure that there is a suitable Army man (Richards?) in the CDS post in time for SDR. Otherwise the RAF and RN might get to keep some capability.

Make no mistake, the Services are truly partisan now and the Army's focus on the current conflict at the expense of any generic credible future air or naval power will hurt us all.

With the recent rumours in the media (fuelled recently by Cameron and Fox) about us starting to withdraw from Afghanistan as soon as possible one wonders whether SDR will leave us with a capability tailored to that op only just as we bring a portion of our troops home from it.

Still, not to worry. Who needs air superiority anyway? I wonder if Joint Advanced Staff College has taught any of our 2+ stars anything about each other's services that will survive the spectre of the budgetary axe. :ugh:

[ZuluMike]

How about:

Gulf War 1
Gulf War 2 / TELIC (fast jets came home last year thanks)
HERRICK from 2004 - 2 years before the Army sent conventional forces
Bosnia
Sierra Leone
Kosovo

Not to mention patrolling Northern and Southern No Fly Zones in Iraq for 12 or so years in order that there was no requirement for any boots on the ground in Saudi to show a presence.

Whether you agree with our involvement etc isn't the point - the Govt sent the RAF and the RAF in the form of fast jets with bombs on, bombs which were regularly dropped in all of those conflicts (except Sierra Leone, where the Harriers used the noise of their jets for shows of force, and very effective, too, says an Army Officer I worked with who was on the ground and grateful).

[vernon99]

ZuluMike,

I think that is the problem, the news is all army this, army that, what air documentaries there have been have shown either SH or casevac, it might well be that fast jet ops do not make for good documentaries, no more gunsight video showing jets mowing down lines of Taliban at 1000 yards, tally ho. Back to the mess for tea and medals. The RAF are losing the propaganda war, not sure how they could turn it around though.

[Tourist]

I think you are all correct to be nervous as to what the future holds for the RAF, what with the loss of a light blue CDS just as the cuts are being planned, but don't lump the RN in with you guys. Army and Navy have always looked after each other just fine thank you, and I don't think this one will be any different.
The RN outlook is very positive at the moment, more than happy to have a pongo CDS

[fincastle84]

I'm hearing rumours of the RAF down to 25,000 within 3 years. Don't know about the other 2 services,

[wokkawarrior]

Vernon 99,

The news isn't all,
"army this, army that, what air documentaries there have been have shown either SH or casevac".

SH and casevac functions are being done predominantly by RAF crews and aircraft. The RAF are losing the propaganda war because they are still fast jet centric with little love for the 'ginger bastard sons of the RAF', the SH crews. If you think i'm being over the top have a look at the RAF website's Operational Update sometime, you will find no mention of the RAF SH assets working their arses off. Even though the 32 Sqn get mentions!

Fast jet mates are going to have to accept that the days of large fleets of role specific aircraft: Recce,interceptor,ground attack, etc, are over. We as a country cannot afford it. The airforce needs to adopt the use of 1 type of jet to fit the vast majority of their needs, just like the USN use the F-18 E/F for theirs.

I believe that fast jets are essential for the UK military but they need to be jack of all trades aircraft, with the associated reuction in capability associated with that. The airforce also needs to publicise what it does better, especially its role in Afghanistan because if we don't we're going to miss out in a big way compared with the army and navy.

ww

[vernon99]

WW

That is exactly what I mean, there is little or no propaganda about the role the fast jets are playing either at home with air defence or in theatre, I suspect the public think all they do is airshows(might be right considering some of the threads on here about hours flown:}).
I think you are right about selecting one aircraft to do all roles, ok it might not be the best at each, but only needing one set of spares, one training programme, should allow us to have more, but need less of the expensive things like aircrew. You can have a common pool of aircrew type rated for what ever it is, and then rotate them through various roles. Come back from mud moving on the frontline to UK air defence(should be more mundane and allow time with family etc).
I know that there is some publicity about SH, but then again just how many people if stopped and asked could answer correctly, who the chaps in green are? Arguably could you take the same approach there, and only have one helicopter type? Is there enough reason for wokka and the eurothing(ok navy like it) Should RAF operate a larger fleet of Chinook, all at the same mod state, likewise the navy operate one helicopter type. Sure it might be wasteful(and not as comfortable) to move some bigwig by Wokka, but surely the longterm savings are greater. Again from a crew perspective you should need fewer aircrew, but as they are all of the same ilk, less time would be spent in theatre.

[ZuluMike]

So, we would just have Typhoon for FJ, swing roled to fit everything, specialised for nothing?

The RAF's SH capability could be flown entirely by the Army, no reason why not. Our UAVs (or whatever they're called this week) can certainly be flown by any service or even civilian, doesn't even need to be aircrew (and in many parts of the world isn't). The Army already fly their own.

The Army can take over airfield defence from the RAF Regt. SAR is already being civilianised. Obviously, the RN would take over the CVS-borne jet. Can't get rid of that jet or you'd have to get rid of the CVS.

So the RAF would be a (small, often civilian-contracted) AT fleet and Typhoon. When we're home from Afghanistan we won't need so much AT anyway. The Typhoon would not be optimised for any role but OK at most things - but we will have so few airframes you'd struggle to put more than 6 jets anywhere for anything. Fine, if you're happy with a fourth-rate air force and don't really expect them to do anything much. We would be a bit like Greece, but with a much better (second-rate) Navy and Army.

The other European countries turn up at Air exercises with their OK capability, put up a reasonable performance, are embarrassed by the Americans' ubiquity. They have some of the add-ons to their (often) F16s that make them a bit more EW-specialised, or a bit more A-G specialised or a bit more AD specialised. Few can get a look in on CAS. But talk to the pilots and they're happy - they know they're not going anywhere to do anything! Who, apart from us, contributed a meaningful FJ presence to Afghanistan? The French supported their own troops exclusively. The Germans remained based in the safe area and did some medium-level recce (nowhere near the capability of our dedicated recce capability, DJRP and RAPTOR). There were some Dutch F-16 doing a bit (but not much kinetic).

If we were to have troops on the ground anywhere, they would be supported by US air power. So we can't send our awesome Army anywhere the US aren't going to be with us and agree to support us. Unless you can get a handful of (no doubt exclusively RN) F-35s on the CVS in range with any meaningful payload/AAR (again, would probably have to be US AAR). The bigger picture is that a less-capable air force directly means a less-deployable, less independent and less capable Army.

With the above picture, we wouldn't even need 25,000 people. Without the aircraft, we can get rid of bases, support staff, adminers, ops people etc etc. Most of the people at DE&S... Again, fine if you're happy with an air force that does TLP and every other Flag and doesn't show up for conflicts like Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, Sierra Leone, Bosnia. Do we have a foreign policy to match such limited aspirations? Doesn't seem to fit with our perception of our role in the world, but suits me!

[Wyler]

That is exactly where we are headed IMHO. UK Defence Force as soon as they can get us out of Afghanistan. There is no appetite to get involved in another conflict like that and I doubt whether Parliament would ever vote for it again. Our doctrine is already based on us acting like a mosquito on the American rump - token effort, nothing else.

There will be more civilianisation, more FTRS and more 'outsourcing' to industry for certain training. Regular strength will shrink way beyond 25000 in the RAF and may hit 15000 within 10 years.

I doubt whether Messes will survive and, with the closing of Stations, we will see limited service accom; what is there will be charged at market rates. Much less movement ( there will be nowhere to go) means no need to send kiddies to Boarding School etc etc. Home to duty and the like? Forget it, if you choose to live 100 miles away, your problem.

I fully expect the other services to take similar hits although the Army may well get a (very) short period of growth for all Afghan related kit.

Sadly, now we are nothing more than a tiny Island (bankrupt) Nation off the Northern Coast of mainland Europe.

It is just a shame the politicians have not got the balls to come out and say it.

I really hope I am proved wrong, really...really .:sad:

[Pure Pursuit]

Wyler,

I fear you are spot on. Sat in a room with AOBM a while back whilst he sat and told us what to expect over the next 15 years or so. Not good listening.

Sitting at work a little later I opened my bag, took out that job offer, logged onto JPA and applied for early termination. No arguments, no welfare chats, just a message in my workflow a few days later offering me an exit date.

For those of you staying in or perhaps even looking to join, good luck and stay safe. The hierarchy are powerless to do anything about the upcoming cuts and the RAF is about to become a none effective branch of the Armed Forces, despite the excellent people who work tirelessly to see things through.

CDS and his chiefs are nothing more than yes men. SoS for Defence is talking about changing that however, you have to ask yourselves why? Simple. In 5 years or so, we will be unable to sustain Herrick & the politicians will start to pull us out on the 'advice' of the chiefs who have been encouraged to tell the truth. Just my humble opinion of course!

[ZuluMike]

:sad: Oh dear.

Who (or what) is AOBM, by the way? Excuse ignorance.

[Descend to What Height?!?]

Air Officer Battlespace Management

or in English

Head of the old Fighter Controlers

[vecvechookattack]

Seeing as though the CDS was a firm advocate of the RAF in Scotland, do you think this will spell the end of Lossie and Kinloss?

[Biggus]

How can you justify keeping an airfield open for 9 aircraft? Logic would dictate that you either need to move more aircraft in from elsewhere (start a "Reds to Kinloss" rumour anyone?) and close where those aircraft came from, or close Kinloss itself.....

The one showstopper is that closing an airfield is costly in the short term, costs are only re-couped over 5+ years. So if you are actually trying to save money then closing bases sometimes isn't really an option!

[minigundiplomat]

Seeing as though the CDS was a firm advocate of the RAF in Scotland,


Of course he was, his best mate is still MP for Fyfe and Kirkcaldy.

[althenick]

...Rather than close the major bases whether they are air or otherwise would it not make more sense to incorporate smaler nearby units into them - eg:TA, RNR, etc. For example, I never understood why there was a TA unit less than a mile from RM Condor.

[Wrathmonk]

closing an airfield is costly in the short term, costs are only re-couped over 5+ years

Really? I thought the whole argument for trying to squeeze JFH into one MOB was because of the need to make immediate savings. Much the same reasoning was also used (IIRC) for moving the Jag force to Coningsby despite it having 2 (?) years left in its Service life.

In the short term you've got savings in civilian staff (slightly offset by redundancy payments), utilities, maintenance of the airfield and airfield services etc. In the long term you may get some cash if you can sell the real estate and buildings (HMP Kinloss anyone?).

do you think this will spell the end of Lossie and Kinloss

Perhaps Leuchars and Kinloss but I think Lossie is fairly safe (although it may become HMS Fulmar again;). Unless JSF gets binned of course ....

[AdanaKebab]

Descend to What Height?!? : Don't forget that Air Officer Battlespace Management, whilst being an old FC himself, is also head of the Air Tragic as well as ABM (read FC).:E

[ZuluMike]

I was rather hoping cokecan would come back after I responded to his claim:

the RAF fast jet capability has been the least used part of its fleet for the last 20 years, :mad: knows how many wars since 1991 have shown that the RAF's greatest contribution has been AT SH and ISTAR, yet those capabilities continually get the hind tit in terms of both cash and service priority, in contrast to the rarely used fast jets.

and that by turning up with fast jets we turn up with nothing much useful.

Also: cokecan claimed that we had made changes in some way by fielding RAPTOR - can you shed more light on what you meant by that? We were always planning on fielding RAPTOR, it's just that it didn't work for 4 years so we couldn't send it to Iraq.

Come on then: we provided fast jets for GW1, TELIC, Kosovo, Bosnia, Siera Leone and HERRICK (+ over a decade of no-fly zone enforcement in north and south iraq) but you seem to be saying that fast air has not been much use since 1991.

And by the way, we spent 2 years (since 2004) with fast jets dropping bombs in CAS in Afghanistan before the UK's green army turned up in 2006. We were also providing fast tactical recce with the same jets. The US and (separately) NATO asked the UK to provide CAS and tactical recce. What would you suggest we sent? A Tri-star perhaps? A chinook for the americans that already had more helicopters than they wanted?

No, we don't publicise all the uses of fast air since 1991. Doesn't mean it didn't happen, just that you are ignorant of it.

[Boris1275]

And by the way, we spent 2 years (since 2004) with fast jets dropping bombs in CAS in Afghanistan before the UK's green army turned up in 2006.

I think you'll find the British Army has been operating out there nonstop since 2001! :rolleyes:

[ZuluMike]

Boris: fair point. What I should have said was green army (in which I include Royal Marines) in need of CAS. The PRT at Masar-e Sharif never truly needed CAS after the initial stages, so no/little requirement for fast air support.

Had they been sent to Helmand or Kandahar instead of Masar in 2001 then they would have been crying out for fast jets for CAS, as they were when they did in 2006.

[vecvechookattack]

I understand that Sir Jock's replacement will be made this week. My money is on David Richards who as a Brigadier was one of the most charismatic and formidable leaders I have ever had the honour to work with.

[Gnd]

My money is on David Richards

Very good Vev, correct.

Heads down FJ mates!!!!

[vecvechookattack]

Some say that he hates all things rotary which may include aircraft and possibly lawnmowers.

Others say that he hates all things that float which may include ships but may also evacuated material.....


All we know is that he is called......

TICKLE

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2008/11/06/james4.jpg

[Lima Juliet]

Isn't that Corporal Daniel James behind the new CDS? You know, the Iranian spy???

[Two's in]

Blue Badge of Courage and the Dettol award, at least he's been around a bit when he was a Gunner.

[Wyler]

And most definitely not a fan of commissioned aircrew I'd wager. :hmm:

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Another political puppet no doubt, doubt we will see anything of any substance till his memoirs :(

[Gnd]

You hope!!!!! I bet not

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

You hope!!!!!

What a silly thing to say :=

[Wander00]

Is this the next round in the Caption Competition?

[The B Word]

So in post for late Oct 10 just in time to take the "hospital pass" of 33% reduction of ALL 3 services by 2020 (well that's the rumour I'm hearing!).

I can't imagine Sir Jock will be that sad to go without having that mess to sort out!

[Gnd]

Another political puppet no doubt

"You hope" as it will mean he will do what he is told - I bet not!!

What is silly about that??:ugh:

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Why would I hope that he would do as he was told, thats whats silly about it :rolleyes: