Defence: Public ignorance, the media, and cutbacks
Thread Starter
This thread from Jet Blast may interest you. It started with a link to an article from the LA Times...
Going it alone because we have to
This is an American perspective of current UK defence issues. This raises an important point, our ability to influence Washington is reduced by the cutbacks in our forces. After the tragedy of 9/11, it was said by some that Tony Blair was able to exert a restraining influence. Today, could the same degree of influence exist? Think of the things we had in 2001 we currently do not have? Sea Harrier, Canberra, SDR mandated force levels (eg 32 frigates/destroyers, 40 infantry battalions, five air defence RAF squadrons, etc etc).
Not only is our ability to influence events impaired, our ability to react to them is severely comprimised too.
Going it alone because we have to
This is an American perspective of current UK defence issues. This raises an important point, our ability to influence Washington is reduced by the cutbacks in our forces. After the tragedy of 9/11, it was said by some that Tony Blair was able to exert a restraining influence. Today, could the same degree of influence exist? Think of the things we had in 2001 we currently do not have? Sea Harrier, Canberra, SDR mandated force levels (eg 32 frigates/destroyers, 40 infantry battalions, five air defence RAF squadrons, etc etc).
Not only is our ability to influence events impaired, our ability to react to them is severely comprimised too.
Thread Starter
With a change of Prime Minister coming up very soon, what do people think the difference will be? tightening belts even more, or a more realistic approach to resources and commitments?
Thread Starter
I like to talk to myself.
The launch last Friday (8 June 07) of HMS Astute, our next generation attack submarine is worthy of note for a number of reasons. The project was delayed - partly by the skill fade at Barrow between the design/build of the last of the Trafalgar and Vanguard boats and the start of Astute work. A lesson for other naval projects, like CVF? Secondly, it is an example of what some may have considered a Cold War asset adapting to life in the new international situation. See SSN roles.
Finally, there will be less SSNs (or is it SSGN now that they have TLAM?) than before, which may cause trouble for Fleet planners.
On the subject of TLAM - could Tomahawk/TACTOM be used for defence suppresion?
The launch last Friday (8 June 07) of HMS Astute, our next generation attack submarine is worthy of note for a number of reasons. The project was delayed - partly by the skill fade at Barrow between the design/build of the last of the Trafalgar and Vanguard boats and the start of Astute work. A lesson for other naval projects, like CVF? Secondly, it is an example of what some may have considered a Cold War asset adapting to life in the new international situation. See SSN roles.
Finally, there will be less SSNs (or is it SSGN now that they have TLAM?) than before, which may cause trouble for Fleet planners.
On the subject of TLAM - could Tomahawk/TACTOM be used for defence suppresion?
Thread Starter
The RN now has Block IV Tomahawk. See here.
Linked to satellite communication systems the enhanced weapon will improve the long-range precision punch of the RN. With up to a third greater range than the current missiles they can hit targets over 1000 miles away, can be retargeted in flight and even send back images of the battlefield to boost intelligence gathering.
I recently found this article on the internet: TLAM and British Strategic Thought
Adam Ingram has left the MOD but has been asked to conduct a year long review into the military contribution to fighting terrorism. Will he consider things in the global context (some of which has been discussed here) I wonder, or simply current operations in the Middle East?
The fight against terror is intelligence led, which puts operational demands on the RN and RAF. It also demands a broad spectrum of capabilities, many of them not in the public eye.
Linked to satellite communication systems the enhanced weapon will improve the long-range precision punch of the RN. With up to a third greater range than the current missiles they can hit targets over 1000 miles away, can be retargeted in flight and even send back images of the battlefield to boost intelligence gathering.
I recently found this article on the internet: TLAM and British Strategic Thought
Adam Ingram has left the MOD but has been asked to conduct a year long review into the military contribution to fighting terrorism. Will he consider things in the global context (some of which has been discussed here) I wonder, or simply current operations in the Middle East?
The fight against terror is intelligence led, which puts operational demands on the RN and RAF. It also demands a broad spectrum of capabilities, many of them not in the public eye.
Aint nobody here but us chickens........................................
Last edited by pr00ne; 19th Aug 2007 at 17:56.
Thread Starter
Today, HMS Clyde left for the South Atlantic. See MOD news.
Clyde is one of the few ships ordered by this Government. Indeed, prior to the July decision regarding the new carriers, she was the only ship ordered in the last five years. So much for "the biggest shipbuilding programme since World War Two.....".
However, as this page shows, opportunities to build a more capable vessel were turned down.
Armament was expected to be a minimal, probably a 30 mm gun. However after the decision in July 2004 to reduce the RN escort (frigate/destroyer) force from 31 to 25, the merit of improving the equipment fit (communications, sensors, and perhaps armament and a basic command system) in order to allow the OPV(H) to undertake a wider variety of roles was briefly considered.
If only she had a 76mm gun, a hangar and an embarked Lynx, she would be far more capable, possibly for not that much additional cost. Now what was that about spoiling the ship for a ha'penny's worth of tar?
Clyde is one of the few ships ordered by this Government. Indeed, prior to the July decision regarding the new carriers, she was the only ship ordered in the last five years. So much for "the biggest shipbuilding programme since World War Two.....".
However, as this page shows, opportunities to build a more capable vessel were turned down.
Armament was expected to be a minimal, probably a 30 mm gun. However after the decision in July 2004 to reduce the RN escort (frigate/destroyer) force from 31 to 25, the merit of improving the equipment fit (communications, sensors, and perhaps armament and a basic command system) in order to allow the OPV(H) to undertake a wider variety of roles was briefly considered.
If only she had a 76mm gun, a hangar and an embarked Lynx, she would be far more capable, possibly for not that much additional cost. Now what was that about spoiling the ship for a ha'penny's worth of tar?
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 20th Aug 2007 at 23:04. Reason: Possible OCD
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WEBF,
That old drum of yours must be nearly worn out with all the banging you give it.
I admire you perseverance (and I am sure the webmasters for the MOD appreciate your work in keeping up the hit rates on their sites) however you could do with tempering it with a smidgeon of realism.
The Navy you want is never going to happen.
You have the luxury of wishing for this and that, and then lambasting those in power when they do not appear. However, you need to be aware of who we really are as a nation today.
Cheers
BHR
That old drum of yours must be nearly worn out with all the banging you give it.
I admire you perseverance (and I am sure the webmasters for the MOD appreciate your work in keeping up the hit rates on their sites) however you could do with tempering it with a smidgeon of realism.
The Navy you want is never going to happen.
You have the luxury of wishing for this and that, and then lambasting those in power when they do not appear. However, you need to be aware of who we really are as a nation today.
Cheers
BHR
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snippet from Lord King's text in a recent debate.
....."Recently in the other place a Question was asked about the Government’s definition of overstretch. The Answer given by Mr Adam Ingram was that overstretch would be if the Army was unable to fulfil the tasks asked of them. That is a very limited interpretation of overstretch. The Armed Forces are outstandingly good at taking on and meeting the immediate challenge of the moment—that is one of the challenges that they face. The duty of Government and Parliament is to see not just whether they are able to fulfil the tasks asked of them at this moment but whether they are going to be able to fulfil those tasks in two, three or five years’ time. That is my reason for raising this debate...."
link.
http://www.publications.parliament.u...70315-0002.htm
link.
http://www.publications.parliament.u...70315-0002.htm
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WEBF, shippers; that link to the LA Times only works if you subscribe to the thing. Why would one?
If the other side of the Pond life is bleating that nobody else is pulling their weight, perhaps they should look at a certain D Rumsfeld circa March '03; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2838593.stm ,
The UK general public read that, I believe, as the US could and would. This gives the British public subconscious the view that America is so big and strong that whatever we or any other European country does is insignificant. "We don't need strong defence because it's a shared danger and somebody else will cover it" sort of mindset. The Public is also obsessed with its own needs and ambitions and would probably swop a T42 DD, say, for more IVF clinics and drug rehabilitation centres any day.
Why should a change in PM make any difference? Once Cameron starts worrying about the "carbon footprint" of a Typhoon or a big Naval gas turbine, we're all buggered.
If the other side of the Pond life is bleating that nobody else is pulling their weight, perhaps they should look at a certain D Rumsfeld circa March '03; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2838593.stm ,
US ready to fight 'without UK'
Why should a change in PM make any difference? Once Cameron starts worrying about the "carbon footprint" of a Typhoon or a big Naval gas turbine, we're all buggered.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: United kingdom
Age: 65
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope you will not throw your g-suits out of the cockpit if a Sillyvillian and tax payer chimes in here in self-defence.
I think today’s news about the reappearance Russian Bears patrolling the North Atlantic will serve as a reminder to the public that not all threats are always obvious. In my view we face a real threat from China and Russia as well as from certain Middle Eastern states. It is by no means certain that our new economic interdependence with these countries will keep us safe. Even if the threat is created only for the sake of political posturing, this is still a threat that we must continue to meet if we intend to maintain our economic and political independence.
The present state of our armed forces is a REAL concern to me and is more important than more populist issues. I suspect that the same feeling simmers with a great many people. You can help yourselves by taking every opportunity you can to spread the message. I have attended lectures recently where RAF personnel have made clear to anyone who listened attentively as to the way things really are and at an RAF event last week a very obvious problem was demonstrated without the need for words. Most of us know people who have served at some time or are serving now and I feel there is a rising tide of anger about what the Politicians laughingly call “overstretch”. It is time for the armed forces to speak more openly even if that runs contra to your ethos.
I think today’s news about the reappearance Russian Bears patrolling the North Atlantic will serve as a reminder to the public that not all threats are always obvious. In my view we face a real threat from China and Russia as well as from certain Middle Eastern states. It is by no means certain that our new economic interdependence with these countries will keep us safe. Even if the threat is created only for the sake of political posturing, this is still a threat that we must continue to meet if we intend to maintain our economic and political independence.
The present state of our armed forces is a REAL concern to me and is more important than more populist issues. I suspect that the same feeling simmers with a great many people. You can help yourselves by taking every opportunity you can to spread the message. I have attended lectures recently where RAF personnel have made clear to anyone who listened attentively as to the way things really are and at an RAF event last week a very obvious problem was demonstrated without the need for words. Most of us know people who have served at some time or are serving now and I feel there is a rising tide of anger about what the Politicians laughingly call “overstretch”. It is time for the armed forces to speak more openly even if that runs contra to your ethos.
Thread Starter
BHR
Once upon a time, on the Sea Jet thread, you offered the opinion that we no longer needed a Navy. You invited as to compare ourselves to the Germans and Japanese. When I said I thought France, Italy and Spain were better comparisons you replied that you had picked Germany and Japan carefully, although you did not say why. You asked me to say what I knew about the size, capabilities and plans of the Navies of all five countries. I did. You did not reply.
You also said that if we cut most of the RN we could spend the money on "basics for the troops", yet you didn't say what these are.
I wonder why? Could it be that reality doesn't fit your arguments?
ISO100
The politicians deny overstretch. Wibble!
GBZ
But then, surely disaster relief (such as this) must appeal to Cameron? And since newer ships use less fuel.....
Once upon a time, on the Sea Jet thread, you offered the opinion that we no longer needed a Navy. You invited as to compare ourselves to the Germans and Japanese. When I said I thought France, Italy and Spain were better comparisons you replied that you had picked Germany and Japan carefully, although you did not say why. You asked me to say what I knew about the size, capabilities and plans of the Navies of all five countries. I did. You did not reply.
You also said that if we cut most of the RN we could spend the money on "basics for the troops", yet you didn't say what these are.
I wonder why? Could it be that reality doesn't fit your arguments?
ISO100
The politicians deny overstretch. Wibble!
GBZ
But then, surely disaster relief (such as this) must appeal to Cameron? And since newer ships use less fuel.....
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 24th Aug 2007 at 21:59.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WE Branch Fanatic,
you are not alone ! I despair when I see patrol vessels, quite decent sized, without even a serious gun or more importantly helicopter facilities.
I suspect we are heading into a dark time, we've had our bit of peace - aged 45 I've never known war thanks to the efforts of my dad ( still with us ) & his compatriots - I'm a civilian though spent 14 years working on military aircraft trials.
With the appearance of the new Russian sub etc, they & China getting uppity, and our forces stretched in the meantime, things don't look so good.
If anyone has brains at all, we need to invest in the Navy and forces in general ( pardon the pun ) - accelerate CVF & get more not less T45 - pronto as well as helo & tanker / airlift boosted.
I'm all for more hospitals etc, not closing down the ones we've got, but no-one can kid me this country can't afford both if funds aren't squandered.
It was interesting to hear that the inheritance tax could be dumped ( I happen to agree with the idea ) as it " only raises the small sum of £4 billion P.A. " - isn't that about what CVF is costing, so presumably that's small beer too ?!
In any future conflict, there will be no quick build programme for ships or aircraft - and the lack of manpower in the forces would right now be quite easily sorted, or at least moderated, by intelligent treatment of people who are not willing to live an early 20th century life.
For instance even 'old' gits like me, and more importantly experienced ex-services people I know, would be happy to join a reserve if the bloody system let us...
you are not alone ! I despair when I see patrol vessels, quite decent sized, without even a serious gun or more importantly helicopter facilities.
I suspect we are heading into a dark time, we've had our bit of peace - aged 45 I've never known war thanks to the efforts of my dad ( still with us ) & his compatriots - I'm a civilian though spent 14 years working on military aircraft trials.
With the appearance of the new Russian sub etc, they & China getting uppity, and our forces stretched in the meantime, things don't look so good.
If anyone has brains at all, we need to invest in the Navy and forces in general ( pardon the pun ) - accelerate CVF & get more not less T45 - pronto as well as helo & tanker / airlift boosted.
I'm all for more hospitals etc, not closing down the ones we've got, but no-one can kid me this country can't afford both if funds aren't squandered.
It was interesting to hear that the inheritance tax could be dumped ( I happen to agree with the idea ) as it " only raises the small sum of £4 billion P.A. " - isn't that about what CVF is costing, so presumably that's small beer too ?!
In any future conflict, there will be no quick build programme for ships or aircraft - and the lack of manpower in the forces would right now be quite easily sorted, or at least moderated, by intelligent treatment of people who are not willing to live an early 20th century life.
For instance even 'old' gits like me, and more importantly experienced ex-services people I know, would be happy to join a reserve if the bloody system let us...
00,
> For instance even 'old' gits like me, and more importantly experienced ex-services
> people I know, would be happy to join a reserve if the bloody system let us...
The Royal Auxiliary Air Force takes civvies up to 50, provided all the bits are there (55 for ex-service)...
> For instance even 'old' gits like me, and more importantly experienced ex-services
> people I know, would be happy to join a reserve if the bloody system let us...
The Royal Auxiliary Air Force takes civvies up to 50, provided all the bits are there (55 for ex-service)...
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UK troop numbers fall in Armed Forces crisis
Amazing, the people running the show are so spineless they cannot prvent a huge drawdown in the size of the armed forces at a time of war.
In full here
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...ntroops124.xml
By Thomas Harding, Defence Correspondent
The military is in the grip of a personnel "crisis" as figures showed yesterday that a substantial number of troops have left in the past three months.
.........Morale at some bases has been described by some RAF commanders as "fragile" with issues over old equipment and not enough training as well as the constant operations.
All three instructors teaching pilots to fly Nimrod reconnaissance aircraft have resigned at RAF Kinloss. No instructor will be available until the end of the year. Fourteen aircrew from the base died over Afghanistan when their ageing Nimrod MR2 crashed last year.
Hercules pilots, who work one month on, one off, during operations, are suffering. One senior flier said: "My wife told me either get another job or we divorce."
Families have also been affected by repatriation ceremonies for dead Servicemen at RAF Lyneham.
A source at the Wiltshire base said it seriously impacted on morale each time a hearse went past wives at the station's creche.
Casualty rates in Iraq and Afghanistan have soared this year, with 67 deaths and hundreds of wounded. Rates for front-line units in Afghanistan are now thought to have passed Second World War levels.
Helicopter pilots are also working flat out in Chinooks and Merlins and ground staff are becoming overwhelmed by the workload. "We are now beginning to see engineering mistakes creep in that we have not seen for 30 years," said an RAF source. "People simply don't have time to develop skills that they did before."
The stress is also starting to tell on Harrier pilots, who have been flying difficult missions in Afghanistan since 2004, two years before the main British force deployed.
RAF numbers have plummeted from 50,000 three years ago to 42,000. The Ministry of Defence is aiming for a figure just below this level next year as part of "restructuring".
As with the Army and Navy, the decision has been taken to cut numbers at a time when the military is at its highest operational tempo in 50 years.
In full here
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...ntroops124.xml
By Thomas Harding, Defence Correspondent
The military is in the grip of a personnel "crisis" as figures showed yesterday that a substantial number of troops have left in the past three months.
.........Morale at some bases has been described by some RAF commanders as "fragile" with issues over old equipment and not enough training as well as the constant operations.
All three instructors teaching pilots to fly Nimrod reconnaissance aircraft have resigned at RAF Kinloss. No instructor will be available until the end of the year. Fourteen aircrew from the base died over Afghanistan when their ageing Nimrod MR2 crashed last year.
Hercules pilots, who work one month on, one off, during operations, are suffering. One senior flier said: "My wife told me either get another job or we divorce."
Families have also been affected by repatriation ceremonies for dead Servicemen at RAF Lyneham.
A source at the Wiltshire base said it seriously impacted on morale each time a hearse went past wives at the station's creche.
Casualty rates in Iraq and Afghanistan have soared this year, with 67 deaths and hundreds of wounded. Rates for front-line units in Afghanistan are now thought to have passed Second World War levels.
Helicopter pilots are also working flat out in Chinooks and Merlins and ground staff are becoming overwhelmed by the workload. "We are now beginning to see engineering mistakes creep in that we have not seen for 30 years," said an RAF source. "People simply don't have time to develop skills that they did before."
The stress is also starting to tell on Harrier pilots, who have been flying difficult missions in Afghanistan since 2004, two years before the main British force deployed.
RAF numbers have plummeted from 50,000 three years ago to 42,000. The Ministry of Defence is aiming for a figure just below this level next year as part of "restructuring".
As with the Army and Navy, the decision has been taken to cut numbers at a time when the military is at its highest operational tempo in 50 years.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Far from the madding crowd
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Helicopter pilots are also working flat out in Chinooks and Merlins and ground staff are becoming overwhelmed by the workload. "We are now beginning to see engineering mistakes creep in that we have not seen for 30 years," said an RAF source. "People simply don't have time to develop skills that they did before."
"We are now beginning to see engineering mistakes creep in that we have not seen for 30 years," said an RAF source.