Defence: Public ignorance, the media, and cutbacks
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JTO - indeed, I couldn't have said it better.
WEBF: The Guardian piece is certainly accurate in one respect - there is very little clarity in the public domain over what the costs will be for:
(i) decommissioning the existing Trident infrastructure;
(ii) what the Trident-specific infrastructure is (eg, would we need to retain Vulcan and RR nuclear expertise for SSNs?);
(iii) how much the fully absorbed running costs for Trident are (ie, the V-boats, the Trident specific infrastructure, Trident's share of the shared infrastructure - eg Faslane, the AWE costs);
(iv) what the planned spending profile for the successor programme is;
(v) close down costs at Barrow if successor is cancelled.
It's a bit glib to say that "it's unlikely to save any cash immediately" as (i) and (v) will come due at some point - just not now. And the £100bn or so through-life cost of Trident has not been disputed by MoD, they simply prefer to talk about the £15 - £20bn capital cost of successor, which is like comparing the cost of growing grapes with the cost of buying champange.
So (given that this a rumour network) I Don't Know what the actual savings would be in the near term from (a) abandoning successor & Trident replacement and (b) from scrapping the V-Boats now and going down a different nuclear - or indeed, non-nuclear - road.
However, it is clear that over the next 30 years, binning Trident would save approximately £100bn.
S41
WEBF: The Guardian piece is certainly accurate in one respect - there is very little clarity in the public domain over what the costs will be for:
(i) decommissioning the existing Trident infrastructure;
(ii) what the Trident-specific infrastructure is (eg, would we need to retain Vulcan and RR nuclear expertise for SSNs?);
(iii) how much the fully absorbed running costs for Trident are (ie, the V-boats, the Trident specific infrastructure, Trident's share of the shared infrastructure - eg Faslane, the AWE costs);
(iv) what the planned spending profile for the successor programme is;
(v) close down costs at Barrow if successor is cancelled.
It's a bit glib to say that "it's unlikely to save any cash immediately" as (i) and (v) will come due at some point - just not now. And the £100bn or so through-life cost of Trident has not been disputed by MoD, they simply prefer to talk about the £15 - £20bn capital cost of successor, which is like comparing the cost of growing grapes with the cost of buying champange.
So (given that this a rumour network) I Don't Know what the actual savings would be in the near term from (a) abandoning successor & Trident replacement and (b) from scrapping the V-Boats now and going down a different nuclear - or indeed, non-nuclear - road.
However, it is clear that over the next 30 years, binning Trident would save approximately £100bn.
S41
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Shed
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The following letter in Mrs S's Daily Mail this week:
It's about time that Joe Public smelt the coffee and realised that, yes, things really are that bad!
Incidentally, on the subject of Wimbledon, I thought it was volunteers on leave. Is that right? If not, then yes bin that commitment too.
Reading about the possible withdrawal of the guard at Balmoral due to savage defence cuts, are things really that bad? What it costs to provide the guard for a few months of the year must be a drop in the ocean compared to the billions wasted on bad procurement, contracts and poor financial management throughout the Mod.
Is it only the guard at Balmoral who are in the firing line, or have they included the guards at Holyroodhouse, Edinburgh Castle, Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle? Push come to shove, they could also save money by not participating in the likes of the Tattoo, trooping the colours or any other royal tournaments.
Wimbledon has come and gone -- what do the number of Navy, army and RAFpersonnel you see standing around there really do? Is the Mod paying them as well?
Is it only the guard at Balmoral who are in the firing line, or have they included the guards at Holyroodhouse, Edinburgh Castle, Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle? Push come to shove, they could also save money by not participating in the likes of the Tattoo, trooping the colours or any other royal tournaments.
Wimbledon has come and gone -- what do the number of Navy, army and RAFpersonnel you see standing around there really do? Is the Mod paying them as well?
Incidentally, on the subject of Wimbledon, I thought it was volunteers on leave. Is that right? If not, then yes bin that commitment too.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LFFC today raised the subject of public perception which set me thinking.
I have no idea whether the defence budget should or should not pay for Trident, in fact I don't know whether we should retain the system. I suppose if we need it for defence of the realm we must find a way to pay for it but if we need it merely to pay for politicians to sit at the top table I'm not so sure.
Public perception of our armed forces has surely rarely been as far removed as it is these days. I know very few in the policeforce, they tend to keep themselves to themselves, ditto the armed forces. I read the prune pages most days and am sufficiently interested in defence matters to seek to retain some semblance of knowledge of what transpires and above all where we might be headed.
There has been much interesting and no doubt well informed opinion here on the vexed subject of senior officers. This civvie completely fails to appreciate whey we need so many of Air rank, indeed why we need more than say 40% of the Wing Commanders and Group Captains we have. Squadron Leaders ? All I can get my head round is that £50K in the private sector is a hell of a good salary and whilst the slings and arrows of Service life should ensure personnel are well paid, seems to this ole civvie it's unsustainable on anything approaching the present ratio.
To return to the subject of public perception ,most these days rarely come across a Serviceman which I feel is unfortunate. I have had the pleasure of knowing such stalwarts as Chris Ashworth and Dave Rostron amongst many others. My view over decades has been that amongst the very best and most competent and can do people I have met have been in the military whilst many others have been fully deserving of their rank......... but I have felt over the years that a small proportion have been a major disappointment and would probably not have survived in any plc I have worked in over the decades.
Contributors here denigrate the Red Arrows and perhaps to a lesser extent BBMF. Don't ever forget they are the public face of the RAF and we are proud of them just as we are truly proud of OUR Royal Air Force. It would be nice to read a trifle less about boarding school allowances and pension allowances, figures quoted make my eyes water to be perfectly honest.
Good luck and best wishes to all serving personnel, hopefully the coming months will prove to be somewhat less harsh and damaging than anticipated.
Final point - on a comparative basis with other air arms, how do we compare, I'd like to think relatively well .
I have no idea whether the defence budget should or should not pay for Trident, in fact I don't know whether we should retain the system. I suppose if we need it for defence of the realm we must find a way to pay for it but if we need it merely to pay for politicians to sit at the top table I'm not so sure.
Public perception of our armed forces has surely rarely been as far removed as it is these days. I know very few in the policeforce, they tend to keep themselves to themselves, ditto the armed forces. I read the prune pages most days and am sufficiently interested in defence matters to seek to retain some semblance of knowledge of what transpires and above all where we might be headed.
There has been much interesting and no doubt well informed opinion here on the vexed subject of senior officers. This civvie completely fails to appreciate whey we need so many of Air rank, indeed why we need more than say 40% of the Wing Commanders and Group Captains we have. Squadron Leaders ? All I can get my head round is that £50K in the private sector is a hell of a good salary and whilst the slings and arrows of Service life should ensure personnel are well paid, seems to this ole civvie it's unsustainable on anything approaching the present ratio.
To return to the subject of public perception ,most these days rarely come across a Serviceman which I feel is unfortunate. I have had the pleasure of knowing such stalwarts as Chris Ashworth and Dave Rostron amongst many others. My view over decades has been that amongst the very best and most competent and can do people I have met have been in the military whilst many others have been fully deserving of their rank......... but I have felt over the years that a small proportion have been a major disappointment and would probably not have survived in any plc I have worked in over the decades.
Contributors here denigrate the Red Arrows and perhaps to a lesser extent BBMF. Don't ever forget they are the public face of the RAF and we are proud of them just as we are truly proud of OUR Royal Air Force. It would be nice to read a trifle less about boarding school allowances and pension allowances, figures quoted make my eyes water to be perfectly honest.
Good luck and best wishes to all serving personnel, hopefully the coming months will prove to be somewhat less harsh and damaging than anticipated.
Final point - on a comparative basis with other air arms, how do we compare, I'd like to think relatively well .
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It staggers me that anyone can compare the costs of Trident with that of the Red Arrows/BBMF!!
Current annual costs for Trident = over £2billion pounds for 2007/08
Current annual costs for Red Arrows = approx £15million of which about £7million is recouped from appearance fees. There is also sponsorship which eats into the £15million.
IMHO Trident is not needed and totally unjustifiable even in a period of prosperity.
In a period of stringent cuts such as we are now then to consider replacing it is downright criminal.
We have not, do not and never will ever need a nuclear capability for the purposes of "Defence of the Realm".
Current annual costs for Trident = over £2billion pounds for 2007/08
Current annual costs for Red Arrows = approx £15million of which about £7million is recouped from appearance fees. There is also sponsorship which eats into the £15million.
IMHO Trident is not needed and totally unjustifiable even in a period of prosperity.
In a period of stringent cuts such as we are now then to consider replacing it is downright criminal.
We have not, do not and never will ever need a nuclear capability for the purposes of "Defence of the Realm".
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
indeed why we need more than say 40% of the Wing Commanders and Group Captains we have. Squadron Leaders?
All I can get my head round is that £50K in the private sector is a hell of a good salary
To return to the subject of public perception
My view over decades has been that amongst the very best and most competent and can do people I have met have been in the military whilst many others have been fully deserving of their rank......... but I have felt over the years that a small proportion have been a major disappointment and would probably not have survived in any plc I have worked in over the decades.
PS At a guess, one doctor is responsible for about the same number of patients as one senior officer is of men in the Services.
PS At a guess, one doctor is responsible for about the same number of patients as one senior officer is of men in the Services.
I suggest we have probably 50-100 worth far more than 100K, and 400 - 450 not worth their bus fare home.
Thread Starter
On this forum, and elsewhere, there has been much discussion relating to the upcoming SDSR. This thread was intended to be about the ignorance of the public and the media. To what extent will the SDSR be influenced by public opinion, and by the media? How much does the public listen to the ignorance and prejudices of such individuals as Max Hastings and Lewis Page?
A question I asked many moons ago was whether defence and security policy should based on known threats or known vulnerabilities?
I cannot resist posting two links which illustrate that it isn't all about boots on the ground.
1. The story in the Sun that an Argentine warship harassed a trawler from the Falklands. They've also been making unfriendly noises about the UK forces down South. This is discussed over on ARRSE.
2. This article from the Mail offers an insight into current submarine activities: Five days aboard one of Britain's silent warriors, the submarine HMS Talent
It’s easy to think of these boats, built in the Eighties, as expensive and outdated Cold War toys, but they are still perfectly designed for stealthy surveillance and potential attack.
‘She carries some of the most advanced weapons, and is also one of the quietest submarines in the world,’ says Simon Asquith, the commanding officer on Talent.
Just as a ‘bomber’ submarine carrying our Trident nuclear deterrent is at sea every day of the year, and has been since 1968, so too the Royal Navy now always has a hunter-killer submarine such as HMS Talent ‘east of Suez’. They are reticent about exactly where they go, but look on a map and you’ll see Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, Iran and Afghanistan.
‘It’s great PR for surface ships if they have a success while doing counter piracy, or if they board a boat and carry out a big drugs bust,’ says Cdr Asquith. ‘But lots of these operations have a submarine input and that’s never discussed, and rightly so.
‘They call us the silent service, but the danger of that is that we become the forgotten service, as very little of what we do can be reported. Even my wife has no idea what we’re doing 90 per cent of the time.’
And...
But they can’t afford to lose too many at a time when submarines are a growing threat. The number commissioned and being built worldwide is rising rapidly. Their lethal potential was shown in March when a torpedo from an unseen North Korean sub sank a South Korean navy gunboat. North Korea denies it, but 46 sailors were killed and it could have escalated into war.
‘Submarines are a surprise growth area,’ says David Ewing of Jane’s Underwater Warfare Systems. ‘India is working on a nuclear sub, which could have a destabilising effect, and currently has one on loan; Brazil is going like mad to build one and the Russians are starting to churn out the things. Iran is also trying to get as many mini-subs as it can, while North Korea has 88 subs.
‘Rogue states are likely to go for smaller subs,’ he adds, pointing to a new danger from smaller conventional submarines using AIP, or Air Independent Propulsion: ‘They have to go slowly but they’re very quiet, can stay down for a long time, about 12 or 14 days, and are perfect for use just outside a harbour when you can pop off anything coming out one by one – get one of those in the Straits of Hormuz and you’re looking at trouble.’
A question I asked many moons ago was whether defence and security policy should based on known threats or known vulnerabilities?
I cannot resist posting two links which illustrate that it isn't all about boots on the ground.
1. The story in the Sun that an Argentine warship harassed a trawler from the Falklands. They've also been making unfriendly noises about the UK forces down South. This is discussed over on ARRSE.
2. This article from the Mail offers an insight into current submarine activities: Five days aboard one of Britain's silent warriors, the submarine HMS Talent
It’s easy to think of these boats, built in the Eighties, as expensive and outdated Cold War toys, but they are still perfectly designed for stealthy surveillance and potential attack.
‘She carries some of the most advanced weapons, and is also one of the quietest submarines in the world,’ says Simon Asquith, the commanding officer on Talent.
Just as a ‘bomber’ submarine carrying our Trident nuclear deterrent is at sea every day of the year, and has been since 1968, so too the Royal Navy now always has a hunter-killer submarine such as HMS Talent ‘east of Suez’. They are reticent about exactly where they go, but look on a map and you’ll see Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, Iran and Afghanistan.
‘It’s great PR for surface ships if they have a success while doing counter piracy, or if they board a boat and carry out a big drugs bust,’ says Cdr Asquith. ‘But lots of these operations have a submarine input and that’s never discussed, and rightly so.
‘They call us the silent service, but the danger of that is that we become the forgotten service, as very little of what we do can be reported. Even my wife has no idea what we’re doing 90 per cent of the time.’
And...
But they can’t afford to lose too many at a time when submarines are a growing threat. The number commissioned and being built worldwide is rising rapidly. Their lethal potential was shown in March when a torpedo from an unseen North Korean sub sank a South Korean navy gunboat. North Korea denies it, but 46 sailors were killed and it could have escalated into war.
‘Submarines are a surprise growth area,’ says David Ewing of Jane’s Underwater Warfare Systems. ‘India is working on a nuclear sub, which could have a destabilising effect, and currently has one on loan; Brazil is going like mad to build one and the Russians are starting to churn out the things. Iran is also trying to get as many mini-subs as it can, while North Korea has 88 subs.
‘Rogue states are likely to go for smaller subs,’ he adds, pointing to a new danger from smaller conventional submarines using AIP, or Air Independent Propulsion: ‘They have to go slowly but they’re very quiet, can stay down for a long time, about 12 or 14 days, and are perfect for use just outside a harbour when you can pop off anything coming out one by one – get one of those in the Straits of Hormuz and you’re looking at trouble.’
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Or if they get in the grain of a force waiting for an HVA to wander into range.
Last edited by Pontius Navigator; 10th Oct 2010 at 17:34.
For babel fish read google...
Analysis of the Advantage of Speed and Changes of Course in Avoiding Attack by Submarine - ONI Pub. No. 30
Bet you wish you hadn't asked...
Analysis of the Advantage of Speed and Changes of Course in Avoiding Attack by Submarine - ONI Pub. No. 30
Bet you wish you hadn't asked...
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Biggus, nice one.
Just goes to show that even within one part of a Force there is jargon that is not understood by another, let alone by a different Service.
Not a lot changed in the theory of TDZ then.
Just goes to show that even within one part of a Force there is jargon that is not understood by another, let alone by a different Service.
Not a lot changed in the theory of TDZ then.
Champagne anyone...?
Was happy with HVA but the grain bit lost me. I mean we all know that one "grain-force" is equal to 635.46023075 micronewtons or perhaps 6.3546023075×10-4 kilogram meters / second squared but not following the link to submarines......
Biggus, what a ripping yarn that was!
Biggus, what a ripping yarn that was!
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Far from the madding crowd
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Royal Navy are pirates, says Argentina's president
Just read this article in the Torygraph, helps in my mind not to make the Three Services tha sacrifical lambs during the austerity cuts.
I know we all have our own thoughts on the types that are/were in the Navy but she is sooo 18th Century.
I know we all have our own thoughts on the types that are/were in the Navy but she is sooo 18th Century.
Last edited by Almost_done; 10th Oct 2010 at 19:41. Reason: spoll choking error
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
SS, it is like a grain in wood, it runs in one direction. Line up with the grain and wait for the target to arrive.
