Defence: Public ignorance, the media, and cutbacks
Just Remember
Today is asrmed Forces Day, boys and girls - our country does (may?) love us. And, with tongue firmly in cheek, Must (or could) Refurbish C....rras Again!
But yes, in all seriousness, maybe there should be an independat Defence Rview by something like a Royal Commission to establish objectives and match resourcing to them - there's original!
Wander00
But yes, in all seriousness, maybe there should be an independat Defence Rview by something like a Royal Commission to establish objectives and match resourcing to them - there's original!
Wander00
Armed Forces Day
I just come from the generation which never expected to be doing its own typing, and where I am spell checker works in Fench, which is not a lot of help!
Happy Armed Forces Day to all - when will the greetings card industry latch on to that idea!
Wander00
Happy Armed Forces Day to all - when will the greetings card industry latch on to that idea!
Wander00
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed we should be looking at 5th Generation aircraft. But the JSF and the carrier are tied up so closley together the Treasury will see getting rid of one means getting rid of the other. And unless the preformance of JSF is improved it should be reviewed.
Max hastings on question time stated programmes like trident and the carriers would have to be sacrificed to preserve the armed forces for the future and JSF and some other programs may have to go the same way for the same reason.
Agree there needs to be reviews and redundancies from the top heavy officer corps in all 3 services.
And yeap the budget is now to tight and there needs to be a united front to sort the mess out and unfortunatley this is going to mean pain for all 3 services.
However this pain should not be suffered if it means loosing the flexibility of the armed forces by reconfiguring it for only COIN warfare.
The problem is the politicised nature of the heads of the armed forces and the civil servants that run MOD. Coupled with short term planning ie planning to election cycles not for the long term.
Max hastings on question time stated programmes like trident and the carriers would have to be sacrificed to preserve the armed forces for the future and JSF and some other programs may have to go the same way for the same reason.
Agree there needs to be reviews and redundancies from the top heavy officer corps in all 3 services.
And yeap the budget is now to tight and there needs to be a united front to sort the mess out and unfortunatley this is going to mean pain for all 3 services.
However this pain should not be suffered if it means loosing the flexibility of the armed forces by reconfiguring it for only COIN warfare.
The problem is the politicised nature of the heads of the armed forces and the civil servants that run MOD. Coupled with short term planning ie planning to election cycles not for the long term.
Deliverance
It's raining here so little else to do. You're quote
just didn't ring true. According to here there are 4226 S/L and above and 5550 F/L and below.
Time to open the beers I think.
It's raining here so little else to do. You're quote
How does it make sense that there are more Sqn Ldrs and above in the RAF than Flt Lts and below in the officer corps?
Time to open the beers I think.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: OTA E
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Deliverance,
I think quite a few Ppruners would have some sympathy with your argument that the rank balance of the RAF is out of kilter. But you need to have a little more respect for the facts if you want to be taken seriously.
4226 is no more nearly 5550 than 75 is nearly 100.
And what about the Sqn Ldrs who are specialist aviators - or doctors, or dentists, or chaplains, etc? Many hold the rank more for pay purposes than because they will perform command/staff functions.
I think quite a few Ppruners would have some sympathy with your argument that the rank balance of the RAF is out of kilter. But you need to have a little more respect for the facts if you want to be taken seriously.
4226 is no more nearly 5550 than 75 is nearly 100.
And what about the Sqn Ldrs who are specialist aviators - or doctors, or dentists, or chaplains, etc? Many hold the rank more for pay purposes than because they will perform command/staff functions.
Nurse,
You cannot compare the capability of HMS Ocean with CVF. The two are worlds apart. Also CVF is NOT reliant on F35/Dave/JCA/JSF. There are a whole host of other platforms that could operate of HMS QE and POW. The ships have been designed to have a flexible existence over a 50 year, yes 50 YEAR operational life. They will be the first platforms capable of operating Osprey, the first to be able to put Chinook into the hangar with the blades on etc etc and may well be operating UAVs in years to come. They will be a complete step change from CVS and LPH and far more capable than either. If you want a floating barrack block, the Ocean is the platform for you, if you want a strike asset, with the Int, C2 and other support elements in your golf bag, the CVF is the way ahead. Even if Dave gets canned, CVF will happen. It will be a shame if Dave does get canned, as mentioned earlier, it is a 5th generation aircraft
From WIKI.
Just wanted to clear up that area of mis-information. All the other issues about prioritisation of effort and money are for the wider debate. One of the most worrying comments is of canning Nuclear submarines. Whilst you can debate the utility of Trident, Nuclear attack submarines however, bring a whole host of benefits, most of which cannot be talked about in fora such as these. This is the difficulty, because you cannot openly debate the asset, it is easy for others to say the capability is worthless. Up until Iraqistan, those people with the most medals generally had dolphins on their chests.
You cannot compare the capability of HMS Ocean with CVF. The two are worlds apart. Also CVF is NOT reliant on F35/Dave/JCA/JSF. There are a whole host of other platforms that could operate of HMS QE and POW. The ships have been designed to have a flexible existence over a 50 year, yes 50 YEAR operational life. They will be the first platforms capable of operating Osprey, the first to be able to put Chinook into the hangar with the blades on etc etc and may well be operating UAVs in years to come. They will be a complete step change from CVS and LPH and far more capable than either. If you want a floating barrack block, the Ocean is the platform for you, if you want a strike asset, with the Int, C2 and other support elements in your golf bag, the CVF is the way ahead. Even if Dave gets canned, CVF will happen. It will be a shame if Dave does get canned, as mentioned earlier, it is a 5th generation aircraft
These aircraft are notable mostly for employing advanced integrated avionics systems, and feature other new technologies such as stealth technology, supercruise, thrust vectoring, advances in sensors, and VTOL.[1]
The advanced integrated avionics systems reduces the workload for pilots. This combined with advances in sensors allows them to observe the battle space more effectively (increasing situation awareness). Stealth technology reduces aircraft visibility to enemies.
The advanced integrated avionics systems reduces the workload for pilots. This combined with advances in sensors allows them to observe the battle space more effectively (increasing situation awareness). Stealth technology reduces aircraft visibility to enemies.
Just wanted to clear up that area of mis-information. All the other issues about prioritisation of effort and money are for the wider debate. One of the most worrying comments is of canning Nuclear submarines. Whilst you can debate the utility of Trident, Nuclear attack submarines however, bring a whole host of benefits, most of which cannot be talked about in fora such as these. This is the difficulty, because you cannot openly debate the asset, it is easy for others to say the capability is worthless. Up until Iraqistan, those people with the most medals generally had dolphins on their chests.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
widger
I know the 2 are worlds apart and I'm not trying to compare the 2 however. I would sugest the navy and airforce start planning a post cancelation stratagey as it looks increasingly likley thats what will happen. Not because the need for them has disappeared but the country can't afford them and maintain a realistic armed forces.
I know the 2 are worlds apart and I'm not trying to compare the 2 however. I would sugest the navy and airforce start planning a post cancelation stratagey as it looks increasingly likley thats what will happen. Not because the need for them has disappeared but the country can't afford them and maintain a realistic armed forces.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: bored
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It will be a shame if Dave does get canned, as mentioned earlier, it is a 5th generation aircraft
I happened to read the largely inglorious Typhoon definition on Wikipedia last night - this quote particularly struck me:
In 2005, a trainer Eurofighter T1 was reported to have had a chance encounter the previous year with two U.S. Air Force F-15Es over the Lake District in the north of England. The encounter became a mock dogfight with the Eurofighter allegedly emerging victorious.[103][104][verification needed]
In the 2005 Singapore evaluation, the Typhoon won all three combat tests, including one in which a single Typhoon defeated three RSAF F-16s, and reliably completed all planned flight tests.[105][106][verification needed] Singapore still went on to buy the F-15 due to uncertainty over Typhoon tranche 2 delivery dates.
During the exercise "Typhoon Meet" held in 2008, Eurofighters flew against F/A-18 Hornets, Mirage F1s, Harriers and F-16s in a mock combat exercise. It is claimed that the Eurofighters won all engagements (even outnumbered 8 vs 27) without suffering losses.[107][108]
The aviation magazine "Flug Revue" reports that in 2008 German Typhoon were pitted against French Rafales. The results are said to be "extremely gratifying", the main difference being the "much greater thrust of the EJ200 engine". [109]
In the 2005 Singapore evaluation, the Typhoon won all three combat tests, including one in which a single Typhoon defeated three RSAF F-16s, and reliably completed all planned flight tests.[105][106][verification needed] Singapore still went on to buy the F-15 due to uncertainty over Typhoon tranche 2 delivery dates.
During the exercise "Typhoon Meet" held in 2008, Eurofighters flew against F/A-18 Hornets, Mirage F1s, Harriers and F-16s in a mock combat exercise. It is claimed that the Eurofighters won all engagements (even outnumbered 8 vs 27) without suffering losses.[107][108]
The aviation magazine "Flug Revue" reports that in 2008 German Typhoon were pitted against French Rafales. The results are said to be "extremely gratifying", the main difference being the "much greater thrust of the EJ200 engine". [109]
Nurse,
I am not sure what your agenda is. None of your other options make any sense, you seem to be advocating a very much reduced and less capable Royal Navy. We are not the Norwegians, we are not the Omanis, we are a maritime nation with global economic interests.
On the subject of CVF, the money is allocated, most of it is spent already, large elements of the ships are already being built and many thousands of ordinary workers jobs across the UK depend on this work. It is peoples lives, mortgages etc that depend on these ships and their support.
Yes the country is bankrupt but, I am an advocate of pulling the country out of recession with large civil engineering projects, which will provide jobs and security. We should be building tunnels, railways, bridges, ships, aircraft, rockets etc etc. Manufacturing and production - not investment banking.
JCA/F35/Dave/Lightning could well be at risk as the money is not yet spent, just like several other areas of procurement but I would contest, that the ship is more important than the aircraft that flies off it, although Dave comes a very, very close second. I am sure I will be flamed for uttering such heresy, but it is in the light of certain persons advocating scrapping the GR7/7A/9, one the most useful aircraft in our current inventory.
I am not sure what your agenda is. None of your other options make any sense, you seem to be advocating a very much reduced and less capable Royal Navy. We are not the Norwegians, we are not the Omanis, we are a maritime nation with global economic interests.
On the subject of CVF, the money is allocated, most of it is spent already, large elements of the ships are already being built and many thousands of ordinary workers jobs across the UK depend on this work. It is peoples lives, mortgages etc that depend on these ships and their support.
Yes the country is bankrupt but, I am an advocate of pulling the country out of recession with large civil engineering projects, which will provide jobs and security. We should be building tunnels, railways, bridges, ships, aircraft, rockets etc etc. Manufacturing and production - not investment banking.
JCA/F35/Dave/Lightning could well be at risk as the money is not yet spent, just like several other areas of procurement but I would contest, that the ship is more important than the aircraft that flies off it, although Dave comes a very, very close second. I am sure I will be flamed for uttering such heresy, but it is in the light of certain persons advocating scrapping the GR7/7A/9, one the most useful aircraft in our current inventory.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Widger I think we could be looking at a very much reduced armed forces in terms of both people and equipment and some of the equipment not being as capable as hoped.
The forecasts by the likes of the OECD paint a fairly bleak economic picture for the UK and the current govt is trying to spin its way out of trouble till the election when they will be out on their ear. I suspect the next govt will find the state of the countries finances are worse than they imagined and at that point I suspect the UK armed forces will have to scale back its wish list for a few years to come.
I hope I am wrong as I am accutely aware of how much the navy needs the carriers as the centre of the new Royal navy and both the FAA and RAF need JSF however I am suspecting that both services are going to be disappointed.
The forecasts by the likes of the OECD paint a fairly bleak economic picture for the UK and the current govt is trying to spin its way out of trouble till the election when they will be out on their ear. I suspect the next govt will find the state of the countries finances are worse than they imagined and at that point I suspect the UK armed forces will have to scale back its wish list for a few years to come.
I hope I am wrong as I am accutely aware of how much the navy needs the carriers as the centre of the new Royal navy and both the FAA and RAF need JSF however I am suspecting that both services are going to be disappointed.
Widger I think we could be looking at a very much reduced armed forces in terms of both people and equipment and some of the equipment not being as capable as hoped.
People- Can only be cut if commitments are trimmed also.We are as lean as it gets manpower wise.
This recession will not last forever, even the MOD know this and the last thing they want is a mass exodus whilst trying to meet stated commitments.
Equipment and procurement will be mercilessly slashed, but it would not surprise me if manpower was left as is, or even raised in some areas.
However, if our commitment to Afghanistan ends, all bets are off!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This recession will not last forever, even the MOD know this and the last thing they want is a mass exodus whilst trying to meet stated commitments.
I will be surprised to see any form of 'growth' (personally I see this as GDP greater than inflation by at least 1%) for the next decade. That is a LONG time to wait for all those defence projects we need. The only thing I can see changing in the medium term are our overseas commitments. UK defence force here we come...
The economy should start to grow from early 2011. Forget next year, though contraction will slow down over the course of the year.
2011 will see a small rise in GDP early on, leading to modest growth later in the year as the housing market, retail and manufacturing follow in it's wake.
However, public services are running about 18 months behind the private sector, meaning at the depth of public service 'recession', and in the midst of Tory spending cuts, people will be tempted into the private sector as they begin to recruit again.
(Thus returning some of those employed in the public sector to the role of wealth creator, rather than Zanu Labours efforts to employ the entire UK population in the public sector).
All will be ok, but it's 18 months away as I see it.
2011 will see a small rise in GDP early on, leading to modest growth later in the year as the housing market, retail and manufacturing follow in it's wake.
However, public services are running about 18 months behind the private sector, meaning at the depth of public service 'recession', and in the midst of Tory spending cuts, people will be tempted into the private sector as they begin to recruit again.
(Thus returning some of those employed in the public sector to the role of wealth creator, rather than Zanu Labours efforts to employ the entire UK population in the public sector).
All will be ok, but it's 18 months away as I see it.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: OTA E
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We need a Defence Review
That says it all really. HMG currently wants us to do more than they are prepared to pay for. Sec Def after Sec Def has shirked the hard decisions required to balance the books, with the result that we are just sinking deeper and deeper into the mire. Planning round follows planning round with no time to draw breath. Because too little was cut last year (and the year before, and the year before that) Defence's financial position just gets worse and worse. The only way to clear the log jam is to have Defence Review.
Will it happen? Not before the next election.
Will it happen? Not before the next election.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Transiting the M27
Age: 50
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bunker, I've said it before on this forum - SDR 2010 after the next election. It'll happen without a doubt. Hopefully the authors will be sensible and instead of focusing upon purely Afghanistan-type ops (thereby cutting the Type 45s, carriers and most of the RAF) and being thoughtful on emerging threats.
But being blunt about it, UK PLC hasn't got any money in the bank. We can't afford the Armed Forces we need, but it doesn't help having a single service Chiefs' bunfight every time someone mentions cuts.
But being blunt about it, UK PLC hasn't got any money in the bank. We can't afford the Armed Forces we need, but it doesn't help having a single service Chiefs' bunfight every time someone mentions cuts.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easy way to save money:
1.CEA...Severe tightening of entitlement rules.. I.E you need to be posted out of any instead of just being eligeable, OR complete stopping
2. Flying Pay...Only paid on days flown. No reserve rate for those driving desks.
3. Complete review of higher/lower pay band and realignment so that only those trades that truely deserve to be in the higher band actually are.
1.CEA...Severe tightening of entitlement rules.. I.E you need to be posted out of any instead of just being eligeable, OR complete stopping
2. Flying Pay...Only paid on days flown. No reserve rate for those driving desks.
3. Complete review of higher/lower pay band and realignment so that only those trades that truely deserve to be in the higher band actually are.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2. Flying Pay...Only paid on days flown. No reserve rate for those driving desks.
MGD,
viewing here:
A Second Mortgage Disaster On The Horizon? - 60 Minutes - CBS News
This will be worse than subprime. (these were above sub-prime in their status yet they are already hitting 60% default rate in the USA).
you can dream on about a 2011 recovery. We will still be going through the worst of it then. Further bank write downs, with higher interest rates (otherwise gilt buyers will be going on strike) and increasing taxation (debt servicing is costing Circa over 100% of the defence budget per annum, S&P are estimating government debt is due to quadruple over the next 20 years) is going to kill any rapid recovery. Its going to be long, painful and drawn out.. And defence will not be exactly benefitting from any of this. Even with a Conservative government. The last 10 years were about having a free lunch on the plastic. The next 10 will be about paying our debt hangover.
Last edited by VinRouge; 28th Jun 2009 at 18:56.
Perhaps another avenue to focus on is the apparent belief that only capital spending should be cut in any forthcoming spending review. Time and again you hear figures along the lines of "£20BN to be saved (or 10% of government spending)".
Last time I looked, government spending was marginally south of £600BN pa - the difference of course being the resource budget. Seems to me that one of the reasons defence is always being held up for cuts (apart from Cyclops & his ilk despising the Forces) is that it is capital intensive. Call me simplistic, but surely you can't ring-fence 2/3 of total spend at the expense of desperately needed equipment that will be around for 20-50 yrs? I realise that huge chunks of the resource budget are salaries etc, but once you've paid HMAF, plus "doctors, nurses & hospital staff, teachers" etc, where's the rest?
Last time I looked, government spending was marginally south of £600BN pa - the difference of course being the resource budget. Seems to me that one of the reasons defence is always being held up for cuts (apart from Cyclops & his ilk despising the Forces) is that it is capital intensive. Call me simplistic, but surely you can't ring-fence 2/3 of total spend at the expense of desperately needed equipment that will be around for 20-50 yrs? I realise that huge chunks of the resource budget are salaries etc, but once you've paid HMAF, plus "doctors, nurses & hospital staff, teachers" etc, where's the rest?
