Is it time to rethink our role as a "military power"?
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Challenger 2? Not in production for a long while now. BAE closing the factories.
L85A2? Fixed by Heckler & Koch - a German company.
Where the UK does excel is in components. Radars (some of them!), crypto systems, etc. But that doesn't make you a world industrial armament power.
If the UK can build its own nuclear submarines, it's not doing too badly. Too bad it can't build the missiles though.
L85A2? Fixed by Heckler & Koch - a German company.
Where the UK does excel is in components. Radars (some of them!), crypto systems, etc. But that doesn't make you a world industrial armament power.
If the UK can build its own nuclear submarines, it's not doing too badly. Too bad it can't build the missiles though.
Last edited by Roadster280; 20th May 2009 at 00:46.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With a total UK land area of just under 25,000 Sq Mile, a population of just under 61 Million, our position of 7th richest (recently driven from 4th, probably by self interest and personal greed) isn’t too bad. Now, did we have a strong military capability because of that wealth or was that wealth maintained because of a strong Military? Against the same statistics, we are permanent members of the UN Security Council, head of the British Commonwealth (a much underestimated and underutilised body) and member of various overseas pacts. Again, are we in that position because we’re not poor or not poor because we are?
We became great because we were endowed with leaders who preferred to be big wheels rather than cogs within one. Furthermore, the flawed or not political system gave them the means to achieve it. Having achieved it, they elevated their Country to a similar status in the process and took pride in doing so. As ever, the majority of the Country was composed of people happy to be just cogs, albeit personally prosperous ones, not really caring about power, influence nor responsibility. The political system now allows the self seekers and duty avoiders to set the national objectives and ambitions. In short, the waiters have taken over a 5 star hotel and feel embarrassed that it’s not a hostel. Quite a few of the waiters occupy influential positions all the way to SO1 (and civvy equivalent). As a consequence, we are now having this discussion.
I never had a lot of time for the famous Kennedy family but the one that made it to big fellah belong septicland said something that, I for one, will always value; “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country”. The question doesn’t sit well with people with small ambitions beyond personal wealth.
I agree with a number of you (I think) but particularly Widger.
We became great because we were endowed with leaders who preferred to be big wheels rather than cogs within one. Furthermore, the flawed or not political system gave them the means to achieve it. Having achieved it, they elevated their Country to a similar status in the process and took pride in doing so. As ever, the majority of the Country was composed of people happy to be just cogs, albeit personally prosperous ones, not really caring about power, influence nor responsibility. The political system now allows the self seekers and duty avoiders to set the national objectives and ambitions. In short, the waiters have taken over a 5 star hotel and feel embarrassed that it’s not a hostel. Quite a few of the waiters occupy influential positions all the way to SO1 (and civvy equivalent). As a consequence, we are now having this discussion.
I never had a lot of time for the famous Kennedy family but the one that made it to big fellah belong septicland said something that, I for one, will always value; “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country”. The question doesn’t sit well with people with small ambitions beyond personal wealth.
I agree with a number of you (I think) but particularly Widger.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This policy of Chasing the US round the globe is a recent thing. We didn't send combat forces to Veitnam in the 60's & 70's. I note we didn't deploy British troops to Grenada. And I didn't note any British forces in Panama and Somalia. So we don't have to do it.
Unfortunatley we are being pulled in a variety of directions by various slants of international politics like EU, NATO, Commonwealth and the good old US of A. Maybe we need to sit down and rethink our military priorities and our foreign relationships. Personally I think we have more in common with our Commonwelth partners in Australia, Canada and New Zealand than the US.
Are we purchasing equipment to keep friendly with allies? or for our defence needs. The FRES program started out as a European program that we withdrew from as the design didn't meet our needs (How much money/time did we waste on that one) Type 45 destroyer came about by our withdrawal from the Horizon destroyer (European) Project. Yes Typhoon has come about from a Pan European project but could we have done better our selves? We seam to waste alot of time and effort on Joint European projects that we pull out of as our "Partners" take the project to suit them and leave us behind. Same will probably happen with A400m & JSFwe will end up with a product built for someones elses needs not our own.
I would agree our systems of Government and infrastructure needs major reform. The much lamented NHS is still actually the best show in town find a better system across the world that is Free at the point of delivery. It needs huge reform and many of the last conservitive govts reforms need undoing. Like the Trust's system. What the NHS needs is a total and fundemental review instead of the constant tinkering and meddeling. The same goes for social care which works hand in glove with the NHS but is run on a county council level.
The UK armed forces are in the state they are in now because this Government are not comitted to the armed forces they like comitting them to foreign adventures.
Unfortunatley we are being pulled in a variety of directions by various slants of international politics like EU, NATO, Commonwealth and the good old US of A. Maybe we need to sit down and rethink our military priorities and our foreign relationships. Personally I think we have more in common with our Commonwelth partners in Australia, Canada and New Zealand than the US.
Are we purchasing equipment to keep friendly with allies? or for our defence needs. The FRES program started out as a European program that we withdrew from as the design didn't meet our needs (How much money/time did we waste on that one) Type 45 destroyer came about by our withdrawal from the Horizon destroyer (European) Project. Yes Typhoon has come about from a Pan European project but could we have done better our selves? We seam to waste alot of time and effort on Joint European projects that we pull out of as our "Partners" take the project to suit them and leave us behind. Same will probably happen with A400m & JSFwe will end up with a product built for someones elses needs not our own.
I would agree our systems of Government and infrastructure needs major reform. The much lamented NHS is still actually the best show in town find a better system across the world that is Free at the point of delivery. It needs huge reform and many of the last conservitive govts reforms need undoing. Like the Trust's system. What the NHS needs is a total and fundemental review instead of the constant tinkering and meddeling. The same goes for social care which works hand in glove with the NHS but is run on a county council level.
The UK armed forces are in the state they are in now because this Government are not comitted to the armed forces they like comitting them to foreign adventures.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 81
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ElderlyPart-timer said
This is a fallacy. We have been selling off 'surplus' assets for years only to have to search museums and scrap yards for the bits - Vulcan nose-probes - Pig APCs etc. Resource accounting and cost of ownership dorve that baby. Selling second-hand equipment is almost at fire sale prices. How much for a BV206?
Getting rid of real estate? Another poisoned challice. Some times we get lucky; more often the land is contaminated or we find we don't actually own it. or we have to remediate and offer to the original owner at a knock down price.
As for the money, in the short term there could be billions available from the sale of various no-longer-required MoD assets.
Getting rid of real estate? Another poisoned challice. Some times we get lucky; more often the land is contaminated or we find we don't actually own it. or we have to remediate and offer to the original owner at a knock down price.
Cunning Artificer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 76
Posts: 3,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The primary purposes of a State are to defend its borders against outside intervention and to maintain the peace within those borders. All else - Health & Education included - is secondary. A Minister who says that money spent on defence is wasted is, by definition, unfit to hold any position within government.
We DO need to rethink our role. The British Overseas Territories that Widger mentions are part of our State and fall within the primary purpose of defending our borders. Iraq, Afghanistan etc. do not.
If China invaded Taiwan or Russia invaded a Baltic State that would have nothing whatsoever to do with us. Our purpose as a State is to ensure that China or Russia or anyone else do not violate our own (including those overseas dependencies) borders.
Which brings us nicely on to the next point:
The purpose of Trident is not as so many seem to think, to guarantee our seat at "the Top Table". It is there as a deterrent. It replaced the Polaris that replaced the "V" Force that replaced the truly massive armed forces that existed at the end of WW2. The deterrent that some of our ministers seem to think is a waste of money. Those who say our deterrent has "never been used" don't understand the purpose of a deterrent - certainly Nikolai Valuyev has never been mugged.
It is the Force Projection plans that need to be done away with. Our defense should be limited to just that. Defending ourselves against external aggression. Being aggressive towards others or joining in their squabbles is not our business. In fact, what I suggest is isolationism. There's nothing wrong with minding your own business when there's bigger boys in the schoolyard.
We do not need to re-think our role. This is why:
...maybe we will fundamentally disagree about the value of trying to stop a rather nasty internal conflict. In those situations we will need proper UK armed forces.
Which brings us nicely on to the next point:
So, is Trident - and its upgrade - really needed?
It is the Force Projection plans that need to be done away with. Our defense should be limited to just that. Defending ourselves against external aggression. Being aggressive towards others or joining in their squabbles is not our business. In fact, what I suggest is isolationism. There's nothing wrong with minding your own business when there's bigger boys in the schoolyard.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: See that little island just above France? Yeah, there...
Age: 37
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this shall be my last post on this subject, but i'm a spotter, and so a few equipment points 
Leo II - Chally has a better armour and off road capability, as well as sighting systems. The only reason other countries buy it is Chally is expensive and isn't as cheap to run over an extended period of time as Leo.
Colt Commando isn't - barrel is too short = low velocity = poor killing power from a 5.56 cartridge, as well as using the 'wrong' action, meaning its unreliable. Steyr, yes, getting a little old now, and isn't as reliable as the new A2 - although yes, Roadster good point but H&K was owned by us when they fixed it, it got changed to German ownership afterwards.
Nurse, you're thinking of BOXER MRAV there - which was a waste of time. FRES is something completely different, it is a program rather than a particular vehicle (the vehicle chosen being the Piranha) and a critical aspect of British Defense as it is the program to replace our really old FV430/2 fleet, among others.
Not that its anything to do with aviation, of course.
Nurse makes a good point about the Commonwealth - how about it chaps, the United States of the Commonweath, a single entity state! WOuld be pretty darn rich, plenty of space, global reach so they'd be forced to fund defense, and it would be a good excuse to reform our systems. I think i'm onto something here, now I just need to become Prime Minister...
Leo II - Chally has a better armour and off road capability, as well as sighting systems. The only reason other countries buy it is Chally is expensive and isn't as cheap to run over an extended period of time as Leo.
Colt Commando isn't - barrel is too short = low velocity = poor killing power from a 5.56 cartridge, as well as using the 'wrong' action, meaning its unreliable. Steyr, yes, getting a little old now, and isn't as reliable as the new A2 - although yes, Roadster good point but H&K was owned by us when they fixed it, it got changed to German ownership afterwards.
Nurse, you're thinking of BOXER MRAV there - which was a waste of time. FRES is something completely different, it is a program rather than a particular vehicle (the vehicle chosen being the Piranha) and a critical aspect of British Defense as it is the program to replace our really old FV430/2 fleet, among others.
Not that its anything to do with aviation, of course.
Nurse makes a good point about the Commonwealth - how about it chaps, the United States of the Commonweath, a single entity state!
WOuld be pretty darn rich, plenty of space, global reach so they'd be forced to fund defense, and it would be a good excuse to reform our systems. I think i'm onto something here, now I just need to become Prime Minister...
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: London UK
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
selling MoD assets
Wader2
I agree that often MoD assets don't realise much cash but there is a large chunk of Govt owned radio spectrum - 75% of which is allocated to MoD - that Ofcom are due to sell at some point. Back in Jan 08 Ofcom thought they could get between £3bn and £20bn for this sale but presumably they wont get that much now. Still they might get as much as £10bn and 75% of that is a sizeable sum - assuming the Treasury can be 'persuaded' to do the decent thing.
I agree that often MoD assets don't realise much cash but there is a large chunk of Govt owned radio spectrum - 75% of which is allocated to MoD - that Ofcom are due to sell at some point. Back in Jan 08 Ofcom thought they could get between £3bn and £20bn for this sale but presumably they wont get that much now. Still they might get as much as £10bn and 75% of that is a sizeable sum - assuming the Treasury can be 'persuaded' to do the decent thing.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
true Yeoman its been through that many variations. I thought the piranah wasn't suitable which is strange as the Aussies, Canadians and New Zealanders seam to like it.
As to Challey 2 slight problem it will need a new gun soon as Bae don't make ammo for it an its different from the rest of the worlds 120mm. Why have bae stopped making it well the govt stopped ordering it.
As to Challey 2 slight problem it will need a new gun soon as Bae don't make ammo for it an its different from the rest of the worlds 120mm. Why have bae stopped making it well the govt stopped ordering it.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: See that little island just above France? Yeah, there...
Age: 37
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NURSE _ Piranaha 5 was chosen a while back
Ministry of Defence | Defence News | Equipment and Logistics | Design selected for future armoured vehicle for British Army (FRES)
Ministry of Defence | Defence News | Equipment and Logistics | Design selected for future armoured vehicle for British Army (FRES)
OLD RED DAMASK
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Lancashire born. In Cebu now
Age: 70
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Colt Commando isn't - barrel is too short = low velocity = poor killing power from a 5.56 cartridge,
As to Challey 2 slight problem it will need a new gun soon as Bae don't make ammo for it an its different from the rest of the worlds 120mm. Why have bae stopped making it well the govt stopped ordering it.
The CO of gunnery school at Lulworth at a BAEE in '82 if my memory serves me correctly, issued a challenge to one of the instructors to get 10 down in a minute. He did it in 1min 5 secs and still got his case of champagne!
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: A Gaelic Country
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. "Punchy" Home Defence Force ie minimum Air Land & Sea Forces with
2. Strong SF/INT incl. MI6/MI5/Special Branch etc ie Counter Terrorist units +
3. Token but VERY able UN/NATO/EU Deployable Forces eg similar to 16 Air Assault/3 Cdo Bde
And a realisation - and willingness - by the UK - specifically Air Officers, General Staff & Admirals, the public and politicians that the sun long ago set on the Empire.
2. Strong SF/INT incl. MI6/MI5/Special Branch etc ie Counter Terrorist units +
3. Token but VERY able UN/NATO/EU Deployable Forces eg similar to 16 Air Assault/3 Cdo Bde
And a realisation - and willingness - by the UK - specifically Air Officers, General Staff & Admirals, the public and politicians that the sun long ago set on the Empire.
Covec,
Home Defence also includes all of those overseas territories that contribute to our current and future wealth. You must also remember that we are a trading nation and 90% of our wealth comes by sea, 80-90% of transatlantic air traffic flies through our skies. Hunkering down and shutting our borders, ignoring everything else is not and has never been an option. We can afford current Defence requirements, all it will take is a fraction on the money that was spent bailing out ONE bank, Northern Rock to afford it. That is the issue. We are a force for good in the world, we are a trading nation and rather than looking at Defence cuts, in this very unsure world and concentrating on "the war", we should be cutting back on the Social Security burden and preparing for "A War".
Home Defence also includes all of those overseas territories that contribute to our current and future wealth. You must also remember that we are a trading nation and 90% of our wealth comes by sea, 80-90% of transatlantic air traffic flies through our skies. Hunkering down and shutting our borders, ignoring everything else is not and has never been an option. We can afford current Defence requirements, all it will take is a fraction on the money that was spent bailing out ONE bank, Northern Rock to afford it. That is the issue. We are a force for good in the world, we are a trading nation and rather than looking at Defence cuts, in this very unsure world and concentrating on "the war", we should be cutting back on the Social Security burden and preparing for "A War".
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Widger Covec,
Home Defence also includes all of those overseas territories that contribute to our current and future wealth. You must also remember that we are a trading nation and 90% of our wealth comes by sea, 80-90% of transatlantic air traffic flies through our skies. Hunkering down and shutting our borders, ignoring everything else is not and has never been an option. We can afford current Defence requirements, all it will take is a fraction on the money that was spent bailing out ONE bank, Northern Rock to afford it. That is the issue. We are a force for good in the world, we are a trading nation and rather than looking at Defence cuts, in this very unsure world and concentrating on "the war", we should be cutting back on the Social Security burden and preparing for "A War".
Today 09:21
Home Defence also includes all of those overseas territories that contribute to our current and future wealth. You must also remember that we are a trading nation and 90% of our wealth comes by sea, 80-90% of transatlantic air traffic flies through our skies. Hunkering down and shutting our borders, ignoring everything else is not and has never been an option. We can afford current Defence requirements, all it will take is a fraction on the money that was spent bailing out ONE bank, Northern Rock to afford it. That is the issue. We are a force for good in the world, we are a trading nation and rather than looking at Defence cuts, in this very unsure world and concentrating on "the war", we should be cutting back on the Social Security burden and preparing for "A War".
Today 09:21
Given the EU's sometimes lukewar support to our interests I would sugest we're better off looking after ourselves and the EU doing what its ment for being a trading group not a new Nation state.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: A Gaelic Country
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am talking about a refocussing of what units eg acft types, warship types, land arms we could "maximise" to meet the modern needs of the UK.
Are we really facing an invasion threat? Through France? Norway? Belgium? The Gaps? Really? Do you still believe that!
Unless the Defence Budget increases we will only continue to compromise "effect" across all three Services and stoke up the inter-Service infighting.
And I am not advocating "closing up the borders". Continue to "come to the party" but lets make sure that we have a bl**dy good bottle of the absolute, unadulterated best!
By the way: re my location "EU". I am voting UKIP this June.
Are we really facing an invasion threat? Through France? Norway? Belgium? The Gaps? Really? Do you still believe that!
Unless the Defence Budget increases we will only continue to compromise "effect" across all three Services and stoke up the inter-Service infighting.
And I am not advocating "closing up the borders". Continue to "come to the party" but lets make sure that we have a bl**dy good bottle of the absolute, unadulterated best!
By the way: re my location "EU". I am voting UKIP this June.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: London
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In many ways UKIP would be a sensible choice for your vote....in many ways except defence. The UKIP's defence manifesto is completely barking mad....
1. Don't scrap the carriers...in fact, order another one and have 3.
2. Double the size of the TA.
3. Withdraw from Iraq.
4. Replace Trident.
5. Restore traditional regiments.
6. To increase the Air Force’s capabilities by enlarging the tanker fleet,
Like I said.....mad as a fish.
1. Don't scrap the carriers...in fact, order another one and have 3.
2. Double the size of the TA.
3. Withdraw from Iraq.
4. Replace Trident.
5. Restore traditional regiments.
6. To increase the Air Force’s capabilities by enlarging the tanker fleet,
modernising the transport fleet, buying more helicopters and 50 extra JSF
aircraft, and increasing RAF personnel to 50,000.Like I said.....mad as a fish.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
In many ways UKIP would be a sensible choice for your vote....in many ways except defence. The UKIP's defence manifesto is completely barking mad....
1. Don't scrap the carriers...in fact, order another one and have 3.
2. Double the size of the TA.
3. Withdraw from Iraq.
4. Replace Trident.
5. Restore traditional regiments.
6. To increase the Air Force’s capabilities by enlarging the tanker fleet,
Like I said.....mad as a fish.
1. Don't scrap the carriers...in fact, order another one and have 3.
2. Double the size of the TA.
3. Withdraw from Iraq.
4. Replace Trident.
5. Restore traditional regiments.
6. To increase the Air Force’s capabilities by enlarging the tanker fleet,
modernising the transport fleet, buying more helicopters and 50 extra JSF
aircraft, and increasing RAF personnel to 50,000.Like I said.....mad as a fish.