Defence: Public ignorance, the media, and cutbacks
Thread Starter
The point(s) are:
There is a potential need for the RN to be ready to take charge of a task group in the Gulf/Middle East. A carrier (with jets) would have been more useful - but SDSR 10 said no. The USN considers that the RN is up to the task, and this deployment contributed to preparing for the new carriers.
The final confirmation of the RN’s ability to direct aircraft carrier strike operations – looking forward to the new QUEEN ELIZABETH ships joining the Royal Navy fleet - was a three-day exercise in the central Gulf involving four navies, 19 ships and ten helicopters.
“We have pushed the boundaries of what we can operate,” says Capt Pedre. “This deployment will stand us in good stead with the QUEEN ELIZABETH.”
During the same deployment she provided aviation training to Jungly Merlins, RAF Chinooks, and AAC Apaches, conducted amphibious training and defence engagement, and made diplomatic visits.
The Typhoon is deployed to support both the Northern and Southern flanks of NATO, provide QRA for the UK home base and the Falkland Islands, and is deployed on Operation Shader. Yet some in the media continue to insist it is no good, or has no air/ground role.
Despite what morons like Lewis Page insist, there is a very real need for properly armed frigates and destroyers, and the threats to both naval forces and merchant shipping are very real. If a single oil/LPG tanker was get hit, then the oil price would sky rocket, with worldwide economic effects.
In the last few months - the Royal Navy has taken control of CTF 50 in the Middle East, from HMS Ocean.
The final confirmation of the RN’s ability to direct aircraft carrier strike operations – looking forward to the new QUEEN ELIZABETH ships joining the Royal Navy fleet - was a three-day exercise in the central Gulf involving four navies, 19 ships and ten helicopters.
“We have pushed the boundaries of what we can operate,” says Capt Pedre. “This deployment will stand us in good stead with the QUEEN ELIZABETH.”
During the same deployment she provided aviation training to Jungly Merlins, RAF Chinooks, and AAC Apaches, conducted amphibious training and defence engagement, and made diplomatic visits.
RAF Typhoons have been commited to additional air policing tasks.
RN warships have been protecting shipping from anti ship missile threats.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
How many merchant ships, how many frigates or destroyers. The numbers don't stack up. I would not disagree we need escorts but defending SLOC is a joke.
In the forthcoming election, defence is not likely to figure. And yet the world is getting to be more dangerous and unpredictable. My biggest concern is that of our front line jets and more importantly the lack of numbers. When Tornado is retired in 2019 we will be left with only 100 or so Typhoon. F35 will not be available either in sufficient numbers or operationa capablility for years to come. No matter how good Typhoon becomes with the upgrades the raf will have fewer operational front line squadrons than ever. There remains a potential risk that a problem with Typhoon could result in grounding of sufficient numbers to lead to virtually no aircraft being available for all the operational requirents. Talk about running our defence capabilities on a shoestring. It is about time we faced up to the realities of recent defence cuts.
Defence will have no bearing on the election because Labour are terrified that Corbyn will be forced to get into a debate about it. He has no interest in defending the UK, and supports a number of groups who wish the UK and its people harm.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You think it won't figure? I remain sceptical. I see another SDSR in the midst to balance the forecast yet again. We're going to lose more stuff.
MSOCS. As usual you may well be right. Trying to keep party politics out of this, I was not impressed with Philip Hammoon as defence sec as he was far more focused on cutting than maintaing essential capabilities and his lamentable budget has in the main been kicked into the long grass. We may well have yet another SDSR but that will be after the election and not part of the manifesto or election discussion. I have worked in the defence aerospace industry all my life on some brilliant programmes and it pains me to see how it has been run down.
Thread Starter
A single oil tanker being hit would have serious economic and possibly geopolitical implications, such as an increase in shipping insurance and costs, shipping being re-routed around the Cape of Good Hope, loss of revenue to Egypt with implications for stability......
One presumes by him highlighting the disparity in numbers that he actually means the disparity in numbers, rather than your tangent of actual missile threats.
One small threat (men in dinghies vs commercial shipping) in one small area (NE coast of Africa) defended by many navies of the world did not equal assured safe passage.
Given the dramatic decline in warship numbers at a time of exponential growth in commercial shipping makes the idea of defending commercial SLOCs from anti-ship weapons implausible.
One small threat (men in dinghies vs commercial shipping) in one small area (NE coast of Africa) defended by many navies of the world did not equal assured safe passage.
Given the dramatic decline in warship numbers at a time of exponential growth in commercial shipping makes the idea of defending commercial SLOCs from anti-ship weapons implausible.
WEBF,
Have you any idea just how many full super tankers are currently parked up around the world owing to a glut of the stuff? It is a huge number!
We may have seen an increase in the price of oil of some 50% in the last year but when it was north of $100 there was still a glut.
Your nightmare scenario if a tanker was taken out would not happen. It didn't happen when tankers were hijacked and held for months on end and it wouldn't happen now.
Have you any idea just how many full super tankers are currently parked up around the world owing to a glut of the stuff? It is a huge number!
We may have seen an increase in the price of oil of some 50% in the last year but when it was north of $100 there was still a glut.
Your nightmare scenario if a tanker was taken out would not happen. It didn't happen when tankers were hijacked and held for months on end and it wouldn't happen now.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MSOCS wrote:-
"I see another SDSR in the midst to balance the forecast yet again. We're going to lose more stuff."
Well Corbyn has said he will do another SDSR and the Times was calling for the Tories to do the same when they are back in - I think an SDSR every couple of years is really just replacing the annual budget TBH......... with more cuts every time
"I see another SDSR in the midst to balance the forecast yet again. We're going to lose more stuff."
Well Corbyn has said he will do another SDSR and the Times was calling for the Tories to do the same when they are back in - I think an SDSR every couple of years is really just replacing the annual budget TBH......... with more cuts every time
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chigley
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Allies Can Help US Lower Weapons Costs, Build New Force « Breaking Defense - Defense industry news, analysis and commentary
Its not just UK cutbacks; does the US accept the need to modernise and adapt foreign platforms to compliment their perceived outdated equipment?
"And there is no ambiguity in British or Australian minds about the shift to fifth generation warfare, as opposed to lingering debates in the US about remaining mired in a last-generation mentality."
Its not just UK cutbacks; does the US accept the need to modernise and adapt foreign platforms to compliment their perceived outdated equipment?
"And there is no ambiguity in British or Australian minds about the shift to fifth generation warfare, as opposed to lingering debates in the US about remaining mired in a last-generation mentality."
Thread Starter
One presumes by him highlighting the disparity in numbers that he actually means the disparity in numbers, rather than your tangent of actual missile threats.
One small threat (men in dinghies vs commercial shipping) in one small area (NE coast of Africa) defended by many navies of the world did not equal assured safe passage.
Given the dramatic decline in warship numbers at a time of exponential growth in commercial shipping makes the idea of defending commercial SLOCs from anti-ship weapons implausible.
One small threat (men in dinghies vs commercial shipping) in one small area (NE coast of Africa) defended by many navies of the world did not equal assured safe passage.
Given the dramatic decline in warship numbers at a time of exponential growth in commercial shipping makes the idea of defending commercial SLOCs from anti-ship weapons implausible.
The missile threat I spoke of was the use of anti ship weapons in the Gulf of Aden - a significant choke point. Also discussed on this ARRSE thread.
BTW when does purdah start?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you mean the pathetic excuse to put off taking any decisions at all it started the day after Mrs M announced the election - at least that was the excuse given by a Govt Dept to an outfit I know for putting off a decision for 3 months
Purdah was due to begin anyway in late April due to the local elections. It is an important rule to stop the Govt of the day taking advantage of the system to play it to its own gain for electoral purposes (e.g. the launch of the 4th Astute SSN happened last week). The timing for the general election means its been extended.
Frankly I would rather live in a country where Purdah stops things happening for a short time, than a country where the CS of the day is forced to be a political mouthpiece during an election cycle.
Frankly I would rather live in a country where Purdah stops things happening for a short time, than a country where the CS of the day is forced to be a political mouthpiece during an election cycle.
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: RPVI
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=WE Branch Fanatic;1092016]The greatest threat to security is the misconception that no such threat exists.
The problem is not so much that many people do not understand, so much is that there is a vast swave who wilfully choose not to understand and choose to turn a blind eye to the bleeding obvious.
The problem is not so much that many people do not understand, so much is that there is a vast swave who wilfully choose not to understand and choose to turn a blind eye to the bleeding obvious.
DANbudgieman, WEBF....
OR, just maybe, the general public see a country with the fourth largest defence budget in the world, a sophisticated and capable military that is, amongst other things, currently operating against dae'sh/Isis with Typhoons, Tornadoes and Predators daily in Syria and Iraq and wonders what on earth you lot are whingeing and moaning about?
OR, just maybe, the general public see a country with the fourth largest defence budget in the world, a sophisticated and capable military that is, amongst other things, currently operating against dae'sh/Isis with Typhoons, Tornadoes and Predators daily in Syria and Iraq and wonders what on earth you lot are whingeing and moaning about?
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You make a fair point Pr00ne. The issue is therefore more about convincing the public (actually a few politicos too) that Daesh isn't an existential threat, so doesn't and shouldn't be the capability standard we measure our military to.
There are bigger fish to be concerned about.
There are bigger fish to be concerned about.
MSOCS,
Surely if Daesh WAS seen as THE existential threat we wouldn't have the future equipment programme that we do have and wouldn't have many of the capabilities that we DO have?
Surely if Daesh WAS seen as THE existential threat we wouldn't have the future equipment programme that we do have and wouldn't have many of the capabilities that we DO have?