The PPrune Comprehensive Spending Review
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gentlemen
Shall I bring the biscuits whilst you all debate your pensions? Wondering whether the Airships are worth their pensions is another thread entirely.
So far we have:
- A defined plan out to 2015.
- Restriction on the roles of Civil Servants.
- Suitably qualified leaders (I don't think we can dictate that unless we're a Junta).
- Defined support, not the emaciated substitute we have now.
- Better usage of the E3 - this could be a whole ISTAR debate.
What's next? Or is this going to degenerate into a whinge-fest on pensions, there are probably only about 1300 threads on that already...
Shall I bring the biscuits whilst you all debate your pensions? Wondering whether the Airships are worth their pensions is another thread entirely.
So far we have:
- A defined plan out to 2015.
- Restriction on the roles of Civil Servants.
- Suitably qualified leaders (I don't think we can dictate that unless we're a Junta).
- Defined support, not the emaciated substitute we have now.
- Better usage of the E3 - this could be a whole ISTAR debate.
What's next? Or is this going to degenerate into a whinge-fest on pensions, there are probably only about 1300 threads on that already...
Ignoring the pensions debate I would add:
Upgrade all GR9s to GR9A. Ensure that Typhoon Tranche 3 goes ahead, quickly, with a full AG capability.
The full MRA4 buy, that is the original 21 not the 9/12/15? Replace the R1s with some R5s.
A decent fleet of tankers, ie in the order of 20-25 KC30 type frames, with an AT and VIP capability (we must be one of the few nations in NATO (and for that matter many 3rd world nations) that allows the head of state to fly around on a chartered aircraft rather than be flown by the Air Force). To that end I would add a fleet of VIP helicopters as well as a significant increase in SH (I note that the USAF are about to retire their MH53s from Lakenheath, or is it Mildenhall, so there's 6 worth putting an offer in on).
A decently equipped training system with some element of spare capacity.
Oh and NO MORE SQUADRON OR AIRFIELD CLOSURES!!!
Upgrade all GR9s to GR9A. Ensure that Typhoon Tranche 3 goes ahead, quickly, with a full AG capability.
The full MRA4 buy, that is the original 21 not the 9/12/15? Replace the R1s with some R5s.
A decent fleet of tankers, ie in the order of 20-25 KC30 type frames, with an AT and VIP capability (we must be one of the few nations in NATO (and for that matter many 3rd world nations) that allows the head of state to fly around on a chartered aircraft rather than be flown by the Air Force). To that end I would add a fleet of VIP helicopters as well as a significant increase in SH (I note that the USAF are about to retire their MH53s from Lakenheath, or is it Mildenhall, so there's 6 worth putting an offer in on).
A decently equipped training system with some element of spare capacity.
Oh and NO MORE SQUADRON OR AIRFIELD CLOSURES!!!
"No. We will not be setting any savings targets this year, or next year, or again. There is nothing left". "Oh, we are going to be £56M overspent this FY? Tough. It may have something to do with fighting 2 wars and it is only what the NHS overspend each month so it can't be an issue."
Yes indeed.
Oh to see them actually have the balls to say non.........
Not going to happen of course.
It's a real pity that someone hasn't been able to persaude a newspaper or pro-mil business front up the cost of some US style 'support our troops not the politicians' style stickers.......
There's an awful lot of b@lls being put on this thread about 'protect this' and 'ensure a full buy of that' without any regard to cost. Now, sorry to shock you about the real world gentlemen, but in real terms the defence vote has increased. The trouble is that too much cash is being absorbed by big ticket items such as Typhoon and the 2 carriers.
Perhaps a more mature debate should centre about what we should NOT procure, rather than petty and ill-informed debate about pensions and too many air rank officers.
For my (limited) money:
Bin SAR
Bin Harrier, close Cottesmore
Bin Regt (despite them doing a fantastic job)
Bin F3 (soon as practicable)
Delay Typhoon A-G capability - rely on GR4
Bin the 2 carriers
Bin JSF
Close Lossie - move all to Marham
Close Scampton
Close Brampton
Close Wyton - move all to MOBs or SW England
Perhaps a more mature debate should centre about what we should NOT procure, rather than petty and ill-informed debate about pensions and too many air rank officers.
For my (limited) money:
Bin SAR
Bin Harrier, close Cottesmore
Bin Regt (despite them doing a fantastic job)
Bin F3 (soon as practicable)
Delay Typhoon A-G capability - rely on GR4
Bin the 2 carriers
Bin JSF
Close Lossie - move all to Marham
Close Scampton
Close Brampton
Close Wyton - move all to MOBs or SW England
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Red Line, the words about reaching twang point are from CAS himself.
As a matter of interest, why would you bin the Regt despite them doing a 'fantastic job'? Are you suggesting that the army assumes the role?
As a matter of interest, why would you bin the Regt despite them doing a 'fantastic job'? Are you suggesting that the army assumes the role?
RLE
If you did this:
You wouldn't need to do any of the others!!
Don't forget this thread is supposed to be a PPRuNe (fantasy) CSR ie what we want not what we want to get rid of.
And I agree with Al R
If you did this:
Bin the 2 carriers
Don't forget this thread is supposed to be a PPRuNe (fantasy) CSR ie what we want not what we want to get rid of.
And I agree with Al R
why would you bin the Regt despite them doing a 'fantastic job'?
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Road to Nowhere
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's all very well talking about closing stns, but in most cases mentioned here, this means relocating the functions elsewhere ... and THIS COSTS MONEY!
There is no money even for spend to save. You can come up with the best idea in the world for making savings over the next 5 years, but if it costs money now, forget it.
As for moving the CRC at Scampton to Boulmer, it's not like moving house. The number of comms links for a CRC is phenomenal and the cost of moving it any time before it is replaced under Project EMPEROR doesn't bare thinking about. The safety case (and govt policy in the current climate) requires that the existing system (UCCS) has 2 sites for redundancy.
As for the Reds moving to Leeming, as mentioned earlier, the Police are going to have a 'mare (as are we all) if they even think about displaying over the A1. In addition, popping down to R313 for displaying will still require the medical, ATC and fire cover to be in place at Scampton, which will need supporting and suddenly the savings are gone. It's not that long since the RAFAT moved back to Scampton from the dreadful mess they found themselves in at Cranwell (they always said it wouldn't work) - it would be nice to think that lesson had already been learned.
STH
There is no money even for spend to save. You can come up with the best idea in the world for making savings over the next 5 years, but if it costs money now, forget it.
As for moving the CRC at Scampton to Boulmer, it's not like moving house. The number of comms links for a CRC is phenomenal and the cost of moving it any time before it is replaced under Project EMPEROR
doesn't bare thinking about. The safety case (and govt policy in the current climate) requires that the existing system (UCCS) has 2 sites for redundancy.As for the Reds moving to Leeming, as mentioned earlier, the Police are going to have a 'mare (as are we all) if they even think about displaying over the A1. In addition, popping down to R313 for displaying will still require the medical, ATC and fire cover to be in place at Scampton, which will need supporting and suddenly the savings are gone. It's not that long since the RAFAT moved back to Scampton from the dreadful mess they found themselves in at Cranwell (they always said it wouldn't work) - it would be nice to think that lesson had already been learned.
STH
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The £3Billion revamp of MoD complete with fancy chairs should ensure that MoD CS and their Mil counterparts are nicely cushioned from the real world for many years to come. Why debate about closng this station or that station when the ever bloated MoD CS is being paid £millions in tax free handouts to endure a tour in Kabul or just hide away in MoD main building? When are they ever reduced in number? CAS is talking about closing down frontline units in a time of war. Now then, why is that exactly?
I believe we are starting to see the end state in our military. A military on its knees. These cuts are being proposed without a defence review, without sound reasoning or logic. It may already be too late, but is there no line in the sand beyond which Torpy will not go, or is he going to carry on selling out to a mendacious govt intent on ripping the heart out of a once great institution.?
I believe we are starting to see the end state in our military. A military on its knees. These cuts are being proposed without a defence review, without sound reasoning or logic. It may already be too late, but is there no line in the sand beyond which Torpy will not go, or is he going to carry on selling out to a mendacious govt intent on ripping the heart out of a once great institution.?
I'd be wary of swallowing the mantra that the defence budget has seen a real increase. You must compare like with like. The ever escalating PFI payments will, in years to come, consume a greater percentage of the budget, leaving less and less real money to spend in real time.
Nor have the budget "increases" kept pace with defence industry costs, which must include a hefty R&D element to keep pace with the technological aspirations of the military. Or else, we get sold a 20 year old pup every time. Come to think of it.....BOWMAN.
Nige, you mention Main Building. I understand a large consultancy is currently assessing how many posts can be cut from that ivory tower. Let's face it, if the Government won't let us buy capability, what have DEC got to do all day? Perhaps the chairs will appear at a local boot sale. They do say they're comfy though. On the other hand, they may keep them for the consultants (i.e. the staff they're about to get rid of).
Nor have the budget "increases" kept pace with defence industry costs, which must include a hefty R&D element to keep pace with the technological aspirations of the military. Or else, we get sold a 20 year old pup every time. Come to think of it.....BOWMAN.
Nige, you mention Main Building. I understand a large consultancy is currently assessing how many posts can be cut from that ivory tower. Let's face it, if the Government won't let us buy capability, what have DEC got to do all day? Perhaps the chairs will appear at a local boot sale. They do say they're comfy though. On the other hand, they may keep them for the consultants (i.e. the staff they're about to get rid of).
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Mornington Crescent
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How crucial is it to have two new carriers? Could we achieve the task with just one, and would the saving have significant impact? Is the contract too far gone to halve the purchase?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: At piece.
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I notice that with every conflict that we involve ourselves in we endure an initial period of internal strife, dead wood clearing and restructuring. They are usually necessary since we are organised around the last set of lessons learned.
Those enjoying promotion during wartime are often the ones who demonstrate, against the enemy, leadership, ingenuity and a powerful ability to influence people and events around them. They continue to be promoted following the conflict ensuring a golden period for the forces during which their skills are brought to bear on the service itself.
Then, between major conflicts, the military becomes a domesticated beast. It's leaders can no longer be selected for their valour on the fields of battle and performance against the enemy, but must be assessed on how well they come off in debriefs, their personal polish and secondary duties performance (Oh look old boy - this chap was PMC for a year, that'll see off the hordes). They find that they can play the system to gain position and become maybe, then yes, men, indoctrinated by their own desire for personal success. The same desire that in times of conflict may have led them to demonstrate great leadership (not necessarily altruistic in origin) but by the gradual drawing of teeth we become less able to resist the stealing of our beans and thus our own worst enemy. All this while the original leaders are gradually spat out at the far end and replaced. It does not happen over night and is certainly not true of all who are promoted but the insidious nature of the change makes it almost imperceptible.
As a new conflict hots up we must wait for those with the experience and fire to filter upwards and begin to challenge the hand that feeds ever less, if necessary giving a gentle nip to remind it of the covenant it entered and the grand promises it made last time it called and the forces delivered.
And those of us that type here (all with the blessing of the Denver Gay Mens Choir aka DGMC) should remember how frustrating we found it at the bottom of the pile and what we wished for while we were down there. Any thing less is selling ourselves out.
Bugger. Pompous switch to off.
So what I'm saying is that what I want costs nowt - that we take these lessons and never get distracted from what matters. We need to be realistic with our expectations but not subjugate our principles to our desire for personal or service gain. If you can't make something happen that should, then explain why to those it will affect. I hate feeling in the dark and would make (almost) every effort if someone took the time to explain why so many things we deserve ain't possible.
Off to a Mess Comittee meeting now......
Those enjoying promotion during wartime are often the ones who demonstrate, against the enemy, leadership, ingenuity and a powerful ability to influence people and events around them. They continue to be promoted following the conflict ensuring a golden period for the forces during which their skills are brought to bear on the service itself.
Then, between major conflicts, the military becomes a domesticated beast. It's leaders can no longer be selected for their valour on the fields of battle and performance against the enemy, but must be assessed on how well they come off in debriefs, their personal polish and secondary duties performance (Oh look old boy - this chap was PMC for a year, that'll see off the hordes). They find that they can play the system to gain position and become maybe, then yes, men, indoctrinated by their own desire for personal success. The same desire that in times of conflict may have led them to demonstrate great leadership (not necessarily altruistic in origin) but by the gradual drawing of teeth we become less able to resist the stealing of our beans and thus our own worst enemy. All this while the original leaders are gradually spat out at the far end and replaced. It does not happen over night and is certainly not true of all who are promoted but the insidious nature of the change makes it almost imperceptible.
As a new conflict hots up we must wait for those with the experience and fire to filter upwards and begin to challenge the hand that feeds ever less, if necessary giving a gentle nip to remind it of the covenant it entered and the grand promises it made last time it called and the forces delivered.
And those of us that type here (all with the blessing of the Denver Gay Mens Choir aka DGMC) should remember how frustrating we found it at the bottom of the pile and what we wished for while we were down there. Any thing less is selling ourselves out.
Bugger. Pompous switch to off.
So what I'm saying is that what I want costs nowt - that we take these lessons and never get distracted from what matters. We need to be realistic with our expectations but not subjugate our principles to our desire for personal or service gain. If you can't make something happen that should, then explain why to those it will affect. I hate feeling in the dark and would make (almost) every effort if someone took the time to explain why so many things we deserve ain't possible.
Off to a Mess Comittee meeting now......
BluntM8
Essential, no, no (around £1Bn over five years) and yes (even though not yet signed).
You're falling into the trap that the Treasury (and by extension Fat Gordon) continually sets. Pretend there's an increase (even though as Tucumseh rightly points out it's fairly trivial), promise some big-ticket programmes / vast increase in capability (but don't fully fund it) and then in the margins tell the service chiefs to administer their own cuts.
Tucumseh also points out where the vast majority of the extra dosh goes (and it ain't on programmes), in addition to which I would add significantly increased demand for repair / maintenance of kit and recruitment and retention of people. The current Optempo is storing up even more problems for the future.
The tax take for HMG is predicted to be about £650Bn this year of which the £35Bn or so for Scotland, sorry Defence, is about 5.3%. When we are fighting two wars and in a major recapitalisation programme should an extra £2Bn per year (0.3%) be so hard to find?
Essential, no, no (around £1Bn over five years) and yes (even though not yet signed).
You're falling into the trap that the Treasury (and by extension Fat Gordon) continually sets. Pretend there's an increase (even though as Tucumseh rightly points out it's fairly trivial), promise some big-ticket programmes / vast increase in capability (but don't fully fund it) and then in the margins tell the service chiefs to administer their own cuts.
Tucumseh also points out where the vast majority of the extra dosh goes (and it ain't on programmes), in addition to which I would add significantly increased demand for repair / maintenance of kit and recruitment and retention of people. The current Optempo is storing up even more problems for the future.
The tax take for HMG is predicted to be about £650Bn this year of which the £35Bn or so for Scotland, sorry Defence, is about 5.3%. When we are fighting two wars and in a major recapitalisation programme should an extra £2Bn per year (0.3%) be so hard to find?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Lincs
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Instead of asking for more toys why we we make what we've got work better?
How about a comms network that actually is one (DII is coming, I agree) but equipped with sufficient bandwidth to meaningfully move data around intra- and inter-Theatre. At the same time make sure we have properly trained personnel to manage the network, authorised to do so rather than having to call back to HW every time RAFCCIS has a snag.... This is not a slight on TCW and the comms peeps BTW
How about equipping ALL of the ISTAR assets with datalinks, networking up the groundstations and making the products available to everyone, across the network as a 'on demand' service? Saves having to fly the target again tomorrow, fellas.
How about gently pushing the DSSO and accreditors to one side and telling them they've hampered operations for long enough and that we're going to do things more efficiently from here on in? (Anyone who has to 'impex' anything will understand that one).
Increase numbers of personnel in key high-demand-on-ops ground trades i.e chefs, MT, int, and so on.
Reduce numbers of unnecessary posts at each EAW - FS Discip? DAG? PTIs on ops?
Just my 2p for starters.
SBG
How about a comms network that actually is one (DII is coming, I agree) but equipped with sufficient bandwidth to meaningfully move data around intra- and inter-Theatre. At the same time make sure we have properly trained personnel to manage the network, authorised to do so rather than having to call back to HW every time RAFCCIS has a snag.... This is not a slight on TCW and the comms peeps BTW
How about equipping ALL of the ISTAR assets with datalinks, networking up the groundstations and making the products available to everyone, across the network as a 'on demand' service? Saves having to fly the target again tomorrow, fellas.
How about gently pushing the DSSO and accreditors to one side and telling them they've hampered operations for long enough and that we're going to do things more efficiently from here on in? (Anyone who has to 'impex' anything will understand that one).
Increase numbers of personnel in key high-demand-on-ops ground trades i.e chefs, MT, int, and so on.
Reduce numbers of unnecessary posts at each EAW - FS Discip? DAG? PTIs on ops?
Just my 2p for starters.
SBG
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scotland
Age: 49
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't Panic Mr Mannering
Captain Darling has pulled a rabbit out of the hat and found some new money. Everything is going to be okay !!!
The 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review (2007 CSR) continues the longest period of sustained real increases in Ministry of Defence (MoD) expenditure in almost three decades by providing for 1.5 per cent average annual real growth over the three years to 2010-11. This increase in funding, together with value for money reforms generating annual net cash-releasing savings of £2.7 billion by 2010-11, enables the MoD to:
• enhance conventional capability across the Armed Forces including two
new aircraft carriers for the Royal Navy, protected vehicles for the Army, and further Air Transport capability for the RAF;
• fund the renewal of Britain’s nuclear deterrent while ensuring that this
• fund the renewal of Britain’s nuclear deterrent while ensuring that this
does not come at the expense of the conventional capability our Armed Forces need; and
• invest £550 million in new and refurbished accommodation for
• invest £550 million in new and refurbished accommodation for
servicemen and women and their families, drawing on anticipated receipts from the sale of Chelsea barracks.
In addition to the planned expenditure accounted for in this three-year settlement, the Government will continue to meet the additional costs of military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere from the Reserves.
In addition to the planned expenditure accounted for in this three-year settlement, the Government will continue to meet the additional costs of military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere from the Reserves.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Didn't he announce new aircraft carriers just the other month? And hard vehicles.. and refurbed digs.. and better AT? And he's going to do it all again? Oh, the joy!!
Quick, everyone out of my way! The ballot, the ballot, where can I make my mark for Labour?
Quick, everyone out of my way! The ballot, the ballot, where can I make my mark for Labour?
And I note that one of the head honchos from RUSI rubbished the announcement as "still not enough" on the BBC News at 6PM! I won't hold my breath that this will improve the situation - I doubt whether it will even relieve the pressure on PR08
I won't hold my breath that this will improve the situation - I doubt whether it will even relieve the pressure on PR08
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even if the money isn't enough, perhaps we might speak some sense! Eg - if we can't bring all flying training under the military again - which bits have to be under the military? What do we need most - new aircraft/weapons or more spares?
Keep 'em coming!
Keep 'em coming!