Defence Cuts latest
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Gods Country
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Defence Cuts latest
HUGE DEFENCE SHAKE-UP
The biggest shake-up of the military for a generation is being announced by the Defence Secretary.
Geoff Hoon told MPs the changes would ensure the armed forces could respond effectively to the new global challenges.
He announced that four infantry battalions - three from England and one from Scotland - are to be cut in the "restructuring" of the armed forces.
Three type-42 destroyers and three type-23 frigates will be taken out of service from the Royal Navy by March 2006.
Mr Hoon said that one RAF Tornado F-3 air defence squadron would be cut and the withdrawal of two Jaguar squadrons would be brought forward to 2006 - with the final Jaguar squadron to be disbanded in 2007.
Mr Hoon also announced that RAF Coltishall in Norfolk would be closed by the end of 2006 and the overall RAF manpower requirement reduced to around 41,000 by 2008.
The changes are driven in part by a shift in military strategy following the end of the Cold War towards the development of highly flexible rapid reaction forces.
But the shake-up also reflects financial pressures on the MoD.
Unveiling his White Paper 'Security in a Changing World' to the Commons in December, Mr Hoon said the emphasis would be on using technology to deliver the maximum military effect from the forces available.
The biggest shake-up of the military for a generation is being announced by the Defence Secretary.
Geoff Hoon told MPs the changes would ensure the armed forces could respond effectively to the new global challenges.
He announced that four infantry battalions - three from England and one from Scotland - are to be cut in the "restructuring" of the armed forces.
Three type-42 destroyers and three type-23 frigates will be taken out of service from the Royal Navy by March 2006.
Mr Hoon said that one RAF Tornado F-3 air defence squadron would be cut and the withdrawal of two Jaguar squadrons would be brought forward to 2006 - with the final Jaguar squadron to be disbanded in 2007.
Mr Hoon also announced that RAF Coltishall in Norfolk would be closed by the end of 2006 and the overall RAF manpower requirement reduced to around 41,000 by 2008.
The changes are driven in part by a shift in military strategy following the end of the Cold War towards the development of highly flexible rapid reaction forces.
But the shake-up also reflects financial pressures on the MoD.
Unveiling his White Paper 'Security in a Changing World' to the Commons in December, Mr Hoon said the emphasis would be on using technology to deliver the maximum military effect from the forces available.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There will be FOUR Battalions to be disbanded.
THREE Type 42 Destroyers to be mothballed.
THREE Type 23 Frigates to be mothballed
All Jaguars to be withdrawn by 2007.
Older Jaguars to be taken out of service by 2006.
RAF Coltishall to close by the end of 2006. ONE Tornado F3 Sqn to be disbanded.
MoD will buy the 4 C-17s in current lease and buy 1 more.
RAF reductions in manpower to be reduced by 41,000 by 2008!
THREE Type 42 Destroyers to be mothballed.
THREE Type 23 Frigates to be mothballed
All Jaguars to be withdrawn by 2007.
Older Jaguars to be taken out of service by 2006.
RAF Coltishall to close by the end of 2006. ONE Tornado F3 Sqn to be disbanded.
MoD will buy the 4 C-17s in current lease and buy 1 more.
RAF reductions in manpower to be reduced by 41,000 by 2008!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: the Tearooms of Mars
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All the grim details are here. The bullets are:
54(F) Jaguar to go by Apr 2005
41(F) Jaguar to go by Apr 2005
6 Jaguar by 2007
XI F3's by Oct 2005
My deepest symapthies to you all.
I'd have closed the MoD and sacked all the civil servants myself.
A sad day
54(F) Jaguar to go by Apr 2005
41(F) Jaguar to go by Apr 2005
6 Jaguar by 2007
XI F3's by Oct 2005
My deepest symapthies to you all.
I'd have closed the MoD and sacked all the civil servants myself.
A sad day
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Missed some oh (baf)Hoon's rhetoric, can anyone confirm what is happening to the RAF Regiment? I heard that the Army were taking over with Rapier?
There has also been no mention about other base closures which have appeared in the press recently or the massive cuts expected to hit the SH rotary world, although this would be totally barking considering our recent hammering from NATO about lack of heli capability.
Glad to see that Typhoon seems to have escaped the chop so far, however, I am watching this space closely...............
There has also been no mention about other base closures which have appeared in the press recently or the massive cuts expected to hit the SH rotary world, although this would be totally barking considering our recent hammering from NATO about lack of heli capability.
Glad to see that Typhoon seems to have escaped the chop so far, however, I am watching this space closely...............
The budget for new helos across the board (Merlin CSP, SABR, BLUH, SCMR, SAR) was about £4.1Bn.
It is now (according to the white paper) "over £3Bn" (actually only just over £3Bn).
This tallies REALLY well with the well publicised SH shortfall, not to mention some of the other points highlighted in the recent NAO Battlefield Helicopters report.
It is now (according to the white paper) "over £3Bn" (actually only just over £3Bn).
This tallies REALLY well with the well publicised SH shortfall, not to mention some of the other points highlighted in the recent NAO Battlefield Helicopters report.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote of the day, courtesy defence white paper site....
"The Chiefs of Staff support the radical change we are pursuing and have been instrumental in its preparation. "
Read....
The Chiefs of staff support the radical change in order to not get the sack....
Like how hoon avoided the question regarding The MR4, and whether BWoS actually get it airbourne... I reckon its next for the chop.
"The Chiefs of Staff support the radical change we are pursuing and have been instrumental in its preparation. "
Read....
The Chiefs of staff support the radical change in order to not get the sack....
Like how hoon avoided the question regarding The MR4, and whether BWoS actually get it airbourne... I reckon its next for the chop.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: troon
Age: 61
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nimrod 4 down to 12 aircraft according to revue - Current numbers at 21 (I think) therefore not far of half being retired (assuming they're not going to be operated at MK2) Therefore there could be an announcement about kinloss perhaps???
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 59
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
we will need a targeted redundancy scheme. The details, once agreed with Ministers and the Treasury, will be announced towards the end of the year.
What beats me is the way its presented.....like it's good news for the forces!!
In light of the reduction in ship numbers - I'll say this (now on the third thread)..
........ there is to be a reduction in frigate and destroyer numbers. Inevitably this will exacerbate the problem caused by the loss of organic air defence. The loss of the Sea Harrier means that the fleet's first layer of defence against aircraft (not including third party assets) is the Type 42 Destroyer with Sea Dart.
The Type 23 Frigate is not primarily an anti air ship, but can provide extended point defence for herself and nearby vessels with vertical lauch Sea Wolf. Apart from being more suitable for anti missile use, the vertical launch version of Sea Wolf has 32 missiles ready to go as opposed to Sea Dart's two.
Because of the need to keep Type 42s due to the loss of Sea Harrier, Type 23s may be cut. This makes little sense, and is probably a consequence of the loss of organic air defence.
My guess is that losing Sea Dart would be less of a loss (considering all our frigates now have Sea Wolf, we have more sophisticated decoys and CIWS aboard high value units and some other vessels) than the SHAR/Blue Vixen/AMRAAM combination. Doesn't Sea Dart contain lots of 60s/70s technology? And even if it is upgraded the basic limitations of range and only having two missiles on the launcher.
When I was at University one of my lecturers was a ex RN Instructor Officer who had done other things in the mob. According to him the T42 design was criticised as a ship that would have trouble defending herself, let alone anyone else. The events of 1982 may have vindicated that view....
1. AAW. Sea Dart limited, old, and obsolecent.
2. Anti Surface. Same as above, additionally was Sea Dart ever serious in the anti ship role?
3. ASW. Noisy, difficult to use own sonar 2016, vulnerable to homing torpedoes or acoustic mines due to noise, no STWS, can't operate Merlin, aviation facilities limited.
4. MIOPS - due to problems with operating boats T42s are not the preferred platform for boarding duties.
I have been told the only task which has to be a T42 is the Five Powers' deployment in the Far East. Also escorting CVS/LPH/LPD(?), although I would have thought they'd be better of with a T23 providing extended point defence with vertical Sea Wolf and the Sea Harrier providing air defence.......
As I see it, we should have kept the batch two T22s we've scrapped as targets/flogged (interesting that the Romanians want 76mm guns fitted) and considered losing more of the T42s instead of the Sea Jet. However, the need to have a certain number of frigates/destroyers may make this unrealistic. Although these numbers are under threat at the moment. Perhaps the RN should acquire less sophisticated vessels for MIOPS and the like. Unfortunately the Treasury etc would no doubt use this to justify more cutbacks.
However, the need for the fleet to have an ability to deal with enemy aircraft/missiles at a range of more than a few miles means that we may end of losing more useful, better armed, Type 22 or Type 23 Frigates.
A more cynical view might be that the Type 42s are old. Many of them are due to be decommisioned in the next few years. The oldest Type 23 is newer than the newest Type 42. So if only a certain number of T42s are paid off now, the other ones will reach their paying off time in a few years anyway, so the frigate/destroyer numbers are reduced even more, which the Government then use to justify only ordering a limited number of Type 45 Destroyers.....
Lord Hill Norton said of John Nott: does not understand defence, and shows no apparent inclination to learn
Hoon appears to be made of the same stuff. The wrong stuff.
As as for losing yet another air defence squadron......
In light of the reduction in ship numbers - I'll say this (now on the third thread)..
........ there is to be a reduction in frigate and destroyer numbers. Inevitably this will exacerbate the problem caused by the loss of organic air defence. The loss of the Sea Harrier means that the fleet's first layer of defence against aircraft (not including third party assets) is the Type 42 Destroyer with Sea Dart.
The Type 23 Frigate is not primarily an anti air ship, but can provide extended point defence for herself and nearby vessels with vertical lauch Sea Wolf. Apart from being more suitable for anti missile use, the vertical launch version of Sea Wolf has 32 missiles ready to go as opposed to Sea Dart's two.
Because of the need to keep Type 42s due to the loss of Sea Harrier, Type 23s may be cut. This makes little sense, and is probably a consequence of the loss of organic air defence.
My guess is that losing Sea Dart would be less of a loss (considering all our frigates now have Sea Wolf, we have more sophisticated decoys and CIWS aboard high value units and some other vessels) than the SHAR/Blue Vixen/AMRAAM combination. Doesn't Sea Dart contain lots of 60s/70s technology? And even if it is upgraded the basic limitations of range and only having two missiles on the launcher.
When I was at University one of my lecturers was a ex RN Instructor Officer who had done other things in the mob. According to him the T42 design was criticised as a ship that would have trouble defending herself, let alone anyone else. The events of 1982 may have vindicated that view....
1. AAW. Sea Dart limited, old, and obsolecent.
2. Anti Surface. Same as above, additionally was Sea Dart ever serious in the anti ship role?
3. ASW. Noisy, difficult to use own sonar 2016, vulnerable to homing torpedoes or acoustic mines due to noise, no STWS, can't operate Merlin, aviation facilities limited.
4. MIOPS - due to problems with operating boats T42s are not the preferred platform for boarding duties.
I have been told the only task which has to be a T42 is the Five Powers' deployment in the Far East. Also escorting CVS/LPH/LPD(?), although I would have thought they'd be better of with a T23 providing extended point defence with vertical Sea Wolf and the Sea Harrier providing air defence.......
As I see it, we should have kept the batch two T22s we've scrapped as targets/flogged (interesting that the Romanians want 76mm guns fitted) and considered losing more of the T42s instead of the Sea Jet. However, the need to have a certain number of frigates/destroyers may make this unrealistic. Although these numbers are under threat at the moment. Perhaps the RN should acquire less sophisticated vessels for MIOPS and the like. Unfortunately the Treasury etc would no doubt use this to justify more cutbacks.
However, the need for the fleet to have an ability to deal with enemy aircraft/missiles at a range of more than a few miles means that we may end of losing more useful, better armed, Type 22 or Type 23 Frigates.
A more cynical view might be that the Type 42s are old. Many of them are due to be decommisioned in the next few years. The oldest Type 23 is newer than the newest Type 42. So if only a certain number of T42s are paid off now, the other ones will reach their paying off time in a few years anyway, so the frigate/destroyer numbers are reduced even more, which the Government then use to justify only ordering a limited number of Type 45 Destroyers.....
Lord Hill Norton said of John Nott: does not understand defence, and shows no apparent inclination to learn
Hoon appears to be made of the same stuff. The wrong stuff.
As as for losing yet another air defence squadron......
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Where the heart belongs
Age: 55
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
althenick MRA4 was at 18 aircraft, the announcement at kinloss was as follows , MRA4 cut to 12, MR2 fleet to be reduced by 5 aircraft by April 05, also 5 front line MR2 crews to be cut by April 05 along with 1 OCU syndicate. A review is underway to see whether we keep 3 front line Sqns or reduce to 2 front line Sqns
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AD definitely not flavour of the moment. The Regt is loosing Rapier: 15, 16, 26 and 37 Sqns RAF Regt will also be sorely missed. Only slightly balanced by 3 and 63 Sqns RAF Regt (currently IS role in NI and QCS respectively) being bought up to strength as fully deployable 'general duties' field sqns. Overall reduction of 10% in RAF Regt strength.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Muscat, Oman
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If 6, 11, 16, 41 and 54 are for the chop, presumably somebody will decide to have a review of the Sqn numberplates remaining. We can then spend what little is left of the defence budget shifting the numberplates around and producing glossy brochures explaining why!
I like the idea on the other thread of the miltary having a Gov't review (orignially mis-typed as revue, not sure I wasn't right in the first place - bl00dy bunch of clowns). The Monster Raving Looney Party would have more of a clue!
I like the idea on the other thread of the miltary having a Gov't review (orignially mis-typed as revue, not sure I wasn't right in the first place - bl00dy bunch of clowns). The Monster Raving Looney Party would have more of a clue!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: ecosse
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is just the skeleton guys!
They will put the flesh on after (if they win?) the next General Election - then we will see some reductions!!
But what if War-Doh! wins or perhaps the DimLebs?
Military jet noise - the sound of Freedom
They will put the flesh on after (if they win?) the next General Election - then we will see some reductions!!
But what if War-Doh! wins or perhaps the DimLebs?
Military jet noise - the sound of Freedom