This isn't good at all!!
Inter Arma Enim Silentius Lex Legis
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2000
Location: England
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This isn't good at all!!
Found this article in the Times today!!
Hope it isn't true but it seems to be in tune with the rumours coming from the MOD!!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...001597,00.html
Hope it isn't true but it seems to be in tune with the rumours coming from the MOD!!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...001597,00.html
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: greener pastures
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...Bu**er indeed.
The Nimrod fiasco must stop now! Having seen the millions wasted on the last Nimrod update, this latest episode is all to familiar and entirely predictable.
"Smart procurement"? Methinks not. 1.5 Billion may be a bitter pill to swallow, but better that than to present BwoS yet another cash cow.
Not knocking the kipper fleet, they have done an outstanding job, but the Nimrod's day has come and gone, its time to look elsewhere for a replacement.
The Nimrod fiasco must stop now! Having seen the millions wasted on the last Nimrod update, this latest episode is all to familiar and entirely predictable.
"Smart procurement"? Methinks not. 1.5 Billion may be a bitter pill to swallow, but better that than to present BwoS yet another cash cow.
Not knocking the kipper fleet, they have done an outstanding job, but the Nimrod's day has come and gone, its time to look elsewhere for a replacement.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK, sometimes!
Age: 74
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having seen the millions wasted on the last Nimrod update, this latest episode is all to familiar and entirely predictable.
the "last Nimrod update" was extremely successful, from the MR1 to the MR2. There have been several systems upgrades since then on Nimrods of MR or R role. I think bay is actually referring to the AEW 3 Nimrod, which was not a Nimrod update but a complete new project, a completely different role to the Nimrod MR2-P or R1-P. As such it was not an update.
MadMark!!!
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Down Under
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF takes direct hit in defence cuts
Peter Almond
THE RAF will bear the brunt of a new round of defence cuts that could be far in excess of those already planned as part of the modernisation of the armed forces.
Entire squadrons of Jaguar combat jets, as many as six bases and about 7,000 jobs are being considered for the axe by senior Ministry of Defence (MoD) officials.
The department’s battle with the Treasury is so serious that service chiefs are expected to ask Tony Blair to intervene.
One internal estimate has predicted that the deficit will be £1.9 billion, rising to £2.9 billion if the Treasury fails to accept some of the costs of the Iraq conflict. Defence chiefs fear that the Treasury regards expenditure on health and education as a greater priority.
Most of the shortfall has been caused by a few big procurement projects — such as the Nimrod MRA4 patrol plane, the Eurofighter Typhoon, the Astute submarine and the Brimstone air-to-ground missile — which are late and already way over budget.
Last month’s National Audit Office report on 20 defence projects found that cost overruns had doubled last year to at least £3.1 billion. It also blamed costs of the Iraq war and changes in accounting practices for the cash shortage.
One MoD source close to the budget working groups attempting to meet deadlines for the end of the financial year on March 31 said it was “the worst situation we have been in” since the post-cold war cuts of 12 years ago: “There have to be drastic cuts in (procurement) programmes and it looks like two or three major projects will have to go.”
Senior sources say six RAF stations could be under threat of closure with the loss of about 7,000 jobs. Some, if not all, the four Jaguar combat jet squadrons will be taken out of service early. Their base at RAF Coltishall, Norfolk, may also be closed.
The Nimrod project may be abandoned as well, which would mean that the £1.5 billion already spent on it will have been wasted but it could save the MoD £500m. The plane’s anti-submarine capability is no longer thought to be vital to Britain’s defences.
The army is considering axeing two infantry regiments in addition to the scores of tanks and artillery pieces that have already been earmarked to go. One unit is thought to be the Cumbria-based King’s Own Royal Border Regiment. The army may also try to save money by moving some Gurkha troops out of Britain to cheaper bases on Cyprus.
The navy may have to lose two Type 23 frigates and a submarine in addition to the four Type 42 destroyers already expected to be decommissioned.
Delays in the production of its new aircraft carriers may mean that when the Ark Royal is retired some time in the next decade, Britain will have no carriers for up to three years.
The services are already making cutbacks on military exercises and shows, fuel purchases, helicopter and jet training hours and all but the most urgent property maintenance.
These reductions are in addition to those that are widely predicted to follow from last December’s “modernising” white paper aimed at creating a more high-tech fighting force.
Last week Nicholas Soames, the Tories’ defence spokesman, accused ministers of failing to be open about the scale of the financial crisis. “It is our belief that Geoff Hoon, the secretary of state for defence, was less than frank to parliament when he came before the house in December and said there was no financial crisis at the MoD,” Soames said.
Things are not likely to get any easier for the MoD as the cost of projects is likely to increase. According to an analysis by the Liberal Democrats, 12 of the most expensive will hit their peak of spending between 2007 and 2011.
The MoD last week declined to put a figure on the size of its deficit but said that it intended “to live within the resources” allocated by parliament.“We are now undertaking a significant examination of defence costs and capabilities. In part, the aim of this is to reduce costs, especially overheads, but it is also to allow us choice and planning flexibility,” a spokesman said.
“This is being taken forward in the policy context set out in the December 2003 defence white paper. This work is not due to be completed until late spring/summer. It is far too soon to speculate about the outcome of this work.”
Peter Almond
THE RAF will bear the brunt of a new round of defence cuts that could be far in excess of those already planned as part of the modernisation of the armed forces.
Entire squadrons of Jaguar combat jets, as many as six bases and about 7,000 jobs are being considered for the axe by senior Ministry of Defence (MoD) officials.
The department’s battle with the Treasury is so serious that service chiefs are expected to ask Tony Blair to intervene.
One internal estimate has predicted that the deficit will be £1.9 billion, rising to £2.9 billion if the Treasury fails to accept some of the costs of the Iraq conflict. Defence chiefs fear that the Treasury regards expenditure on health and education as a greater priority.
Most of the shortfall has been caused by a few big procurement projects — such as the Nimrod MRA4 patrol plane, the Eurofighter Typhoon, the Astute submarine and the Brimstone air-to-ground missile — which are late and already way over budget.
Last month’s National Audit Office report on 20 defence projects found that cost overruns had doubled last year to at least £3.1 billion. It also blamed costs of the Iraq war and changes in accounting practices for the cash shortage.
One MoD source close to the budget working groups attempting to meet deadlines for the end of the financial year on March 31 said it was “the worst situation we have been in” since the post-cold war cuts of 12 years ago: “There have to be drastic cuts in (procurement) programmes and it looks like two or three major projects will have to go.”
Senior sources say six RAF stations could be under threat of closure with the loss of about 7,000 jobs. Some, if not all, the four Jaguar combat jet squadrons will be taken out of service early. Their base at RAF Coltishall, Norfolk, may also be closed.
The Nimrod project may be abandoned as well, which would mean that the £1.5 billion already spent on it will have been wasted but it could save the MoD £500m. The plane’s anti-submarine capability is no longer thought to be vital to Britain’s defences.
The army is considering axeing two infantry regiments in addition to the scores of tanks and artillery pieces that have already been earmarked to go. One unit is thought to be the Cumbria-based King’s Own Royal Border Regiment. The army may also try to save money by moving some Gurkha troops out of Britain to cheaper bases on Cyprus.
The navy may have to lose two Type 23 frigates and a submarine in addition to the four Type 42 destroyers already expected to be decommissioned.
Delays in the production of its new aircraft carriers may mean that when the Ark Royal is retired some time in the next decade, Britain will have no carriers for up to three years.
The services are already making cutbacks on military exercises and shows, fuel purchases, helicopter and jet training hours and all but the most urgent property maintenance.
These reductions are in addition to those that are widely predicted to follow from last December’s “modernising” white paper aimed at creating a more high-tech fighting force.
Last week Nicholas Soames, the Tories’ defence spokesman, accused ministers of failing to be open about the scale of the financial crisis. “It is our belief that Geoff Hoon, the secretary of state for defence, was less than frank to parliament when he came before the house in December and said there was no financial crisis at the MoD,” Soames said.
Things are not likely to get any easier for the MoD as the cost of projects is likely to increase. According to an analysis by the Liberal Democrats, 12 of the most expensive will hit their peak of spending between 2007 and 2011.
The MoD last week declined to put a figure on the size of its deficit but said that it intended “to live within the resources” allocated by parliament.“We are now undertaking a significant examination of defence costs and capabilities. In part, the aim of this is to reduce costs, especially overheads, but it is also to allow us choice and planning flexibility,” a spokesman said.
“This is being taken forward in the policy context set out in the December 2003 defence white paper. This work is not due to be completed until late spring/summer. It is far too soon to speculate about the outcome of this work.”
Inter Arma Enim Silentius Lex Legis
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2000
Location: England
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am hoping it is all just a bit of Government spin. Along the lines of tell everybody that their Council Taxes will go up by 11% and then when it goes up by 5.9% (3 times more than inflation!) every ones a winner!!
Mmm
Mmm
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems to be the way things go. Do a good job in the political war we sent you on, and we'll slash your budget, make swinging cuts, and make sure we can't fight our way out of a paper bag in the future. Oh, and any procurement cockups, or those by the businesses we bankroll, will mean even more cuts, because clearly its the Militarys fault.
Message? Do a BAD job in the next war, and loose. Hmmm, actually, if they make the cuts, we probably will....
Any words I wish to use now would be censored.
Surely with the world in the state its in now, we should be INCREASING the defence budget?
Message? Do a BAD job in the next war, and loose. Hmmm, actually, if they make the cuts, we probably will....
Any words I wish to use now would be censored.
Surely with the world in the state its in now, we should be INCREASING the defence budget?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Never mind guys, when our present political leaders propose us as the next member of the USA just think of all the advantages.Wider choice of postings, lots of different types to fly in wonderful places,better pay and pension and no MoD.On the other hand we could throw our hand in with the EU Defence force and rely on them to defend us.
I'm really sorry that I retired so long ago and am now so old I'll never see the benefits of either "option".
Keep smiling,it's almost all thats left.
I'm really sorry that I retired so long ago and am now so old I'll never see the benefits of either "option".
Keep smiling,it's almost all thats left.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Over there, behind that tree.
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds bad. Even if it's spin, the ground is being prepared to gut the RAF. Mind you, all that money spent on stupid PC court cases - tripping over high heels, etc - will be considered well spent . And there will not be any cuts in the caring/sharing programmes.
What future the BoBMF? The Arrows?
. And there will not be any cuts in the caring/sharing programmes. What future the BoBMF? The Arrows?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: cambridge uk
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is awful and one of the reasons i hesitated to join the RAF and in the end never did. Why does the government continually chip away at the defence budget to bolster other areas of his spending policy. This has been going on for years, i have no first hand knowledge of the armed forces but you all do an amazing job with few resources.
On a flying note. I was talking to a guy who was a nav on Tornados, he said he was lucky if they got 150 hours flying a year - just enough to stay current and in practice. He also commented that a new pilot on squadron could expect up to 180 per year initially.
It makes me so unbelievably angry to see the state of the armed forces i need a cup of green tea and a sound of the whales CD. The armed forces has been systematically dismantled by politicians and bureaucrats looking to stamp their own personal seal whilst in office before they get transfered to another department or the MoD not controlling and supporting contractors properly, making sure they deliver on time and on budget. How long will it be before the RAF has a fully operational typhoon squadron?
The whole thing is run badly from the top.
(I know someone who works in whitehall, she does three days max and is in the upper tax boundary.)
Apologies for this badly written post - i can hear shamu singing now.
Rant over 4 now
On a flying note. I was talking to a guy who was a nav on Tornados, he said he was lucky if they got 150 hours flying a year - just enough to stay current and in practice. He also commented that a new pilot on squadron could expect up to 180 per year initially.
It makes me so unbelievably angry to see the state of the armed forces i need a cup of green tea and a sound of the whales CD. The armed forces has been systematically dismantled by politicians and bureaucrats looking to stamp their own personal seal whilst in office before they get transfered to another department or the MoD not controlling and supporting contractors properly, making sure they deliver on time and on budget. How long will it be before the RAF has a fully operational typhoon squadron?
The whole thing is run badly from the top.
(I know someone who works in whitehall, she does three days max and is in the upper tax boundary.)
Apologies for this badly written post - i can hear shamu singing now.
Rant over 4 now
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for your support Eagerbeaver. The problem we have is that the very senior officers spend too much time looking upwards rather than downwards due to knighthoods, promotion and future employment issues. As troops on the ground, however, we are just too good at making do from a bad situation. Poor kit, manning etc and we still do a damn sight better job then our friends across the pond. This is the British way and all the time we get the job done well someone in the treasury will see us as an easy target!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tracy Island
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bloody amazing, some fantastic economics revealed, like the wasting of £1.9 billion will save £500 million, what about the De Lorian affair where it's cost HMG more than £20 mill to recover £20 mill. Fan bloody tastic. 40% of my income flushed down the pan by these ba$tards.
So what's the answer;
We need defence right ?
Privitise the forces
1) Maritime Security PL Sea (good tax breaks with this lot)
2) Land Force PLC
3) Air Force PLC
I would suggest a management buyout as I'm not sure we can trust the current incumbents to run it. As well as domestic there is fantastic overseas business potential here. Should be a winner with the stock market. Oh and if we don't like the government elect, we can send in the boys right
FEBA
So what's the answer;
We need defence right ?
Privitise the forces
1) Maritime Security PL Sea (good tax breaks with this lot)
2) Land Force PLC
3) Air Force PLC
I would suggest a management buyout as I'm not sure we can trust the current incumbents to run it. As well as domestic there is fantastic overseas business potential here. Should be a winner with the stock market. Oh and if we don't like the government elect, we can send in the boys right
FEBA
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Floatin' on th' Black Pig, Yarr!
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The real cracker is the loss of two infantry battalions, of course, with Tony's non intervention policy the infantry are just sitting in barracks drinking tea with no realistic chance of a deployment anywhere other than salisbury Plain. 