Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

The Defense Budget - What would you do?

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

The Defense Budget - What would you do?

Old 15th Jul 2009, 23:35
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Self jibeing blunties!! Whatever next?
Self mockery is a step towards enlightenment, and if one can't mock oneself, one should never mock others.

There are a fair few (fellow aviators) I've worked with who'd do well to remember that, their arrogance was, and is, ultimately backed by insecurity and self-doubt.
Willard Whyte is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2009, 09:02
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: E MIDLANDS
Posts: 291
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Widger

I amit that I am now "outside" and that my post was trite but the point was that re-organisations in the name of saving money or re-allocating money usually cost in the short term. Nevertheless, many people have criticised the top heavy and admin intensive nature of our MoD & individual Forces over the years. You can be as rude as you like but how about hearing your well considered (and sober) suggestions as to what to with the Defence budget.
andyy is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2009, 19:13
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nottingham
Age: 76
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Budgetry Constraints

The sound of grinding axes doth filleth the air! Every last man jack paddling his own canoe and not many of us looking at the broader picture. We fought 2 world wars with a tenth of the number of bodies in the MOD cum civil service side of the operation. Time to stop drawing teeth and start by slicing the surplus civil service tail that for too long now has wagged the military dog. I wouldn't mind if the blighters got it right but jeez the waste has been little short of spectacular. If savings aren't made I can see but one outcome. The eventual Canadianisation of all three services. What price independent thought then?
Prangster is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2009, 20:49
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: MARS
Posts: 1,102
Received 10 Likes on 4 Posts
Cut massive swathes of admin & bureacracy out of the MoD in all areas
A very sweeping statement. Give us an example.
Contractorise even more functions but streamline the bidding process
What do you think smart acquisition is trying to do. What do you think has happened over the last 10 years with the amalgamation of two organisations, DPA and DLO into what is now DE&S.
Reduce the number of Senior Officers in all 3 Services massively - the "pyramid" needs to be flatter & the reporting/ admin structure really needs to be examined to see where it is adding value & where it is adding "nausea"
Notwithstanding the fact that what you actually are alluding to is to make the pyramid sharper, not flatter, it is always a good soundbite for many to use this argument. Give us some examples then.
Combine Commands/ Functions (eg CAS & CinCStrike, 1SL & CinCFleet etc)
Already happened. 2SL and CincFleet into Navy Command, Strike and PTC into Air.
Bring the Army back from Germany so that they can spend their money in the UK
They are already coming back.
Must be some more Airbases that can close (unless they are needed to house the Army returning from Germany)
Already happening, Lyneham and Scampton, Gutersloh....But be very careful, once you lose a runway or a wharf, you will never get it back. far better for our airfields to be used for other Defence use.
Close BRNC Dartmouth & conduct initial Naval Officer training either at HMS Raleigh or in a joint service estlishment with professional training at HMS Collingwood (eventually Collingwood would have to close, too, & move its functions to Raleigh
)Now you are just showing your Senior Rate engineer bias. Move everything to Raleigh and Collingrad. Dartmouth generates income and I am not sure that the land is MODs to sell anyway. (please correct me if I am wrong) and what do you think the Defence Training Review is doing at St Athan?
Close Portsmouth Naval Base & shift all RN ships to Devonport (pity they have just announced the opposite move for FF/DDs)
Oh please..so you are an ex Guzz based WE rating with a chip about Pompey. These issues have been examined already and presented to Government. the decision was and is to move several ships to Portsmouth, Submarines to Scotland and keep FOST and the amphibious ships in Guzz, where.....surprise, surprise...they will be next to their main customer...the Royal Marines, in Devonport, Stonehouse and Chivenor. Sounds like common sense to me.

In summary, my point is, that it is very easy for uninformed, armchair politicians to spout utter drivel (yes I am being rude) on here, which has clearly not been researched and does absolutely no favours to those people who are trying to juggle the realities of a lack of money and are looking at having to take some very real and unpalatable decisions..IN ALL THREE SERVICES. Now..Get back to Rum Ration and have a nice evening

Last edited by Widger; 16th Jul 2009 at 21:17.
Widger is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2009, 20:50
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: London
Age: 44
Posts: 752
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 3 Posts
"£We fought 2 world wars with a tenth of the number of bodies in the MOD cum civil service side of the operation."

So you think the MOD in the war was 5000 strong? The whole MOD CS, which includes everything from armed guards to rocket scientists is 85000 strong. By all means cut it, but what is it that you want to stop doing?
Jimlad1 is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2009, 21:58
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Somerset
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
By all means cut it, but what is it that you want to stop doing
Ok, for starters, why don't we get rid of the jobsworths who think they are helping me deliver front line support by conducting a 'Desk Risk Assessment' every flipping second and making my life difficult. I had more freedom as a child, yet now I have these oxygen thieves patrolling the floorplate for 'elf and safety purposes, which seem to come at the expense of doing real things.
Mr-AEO is offline  
Old 17th Jul 2009, 08:28
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Gotta say, when I worked at Binnsworth, there were a LOT of jobsworths! Lots of people rushing round, trying to conv0ince everyone else they were busy, most doing jobs that service personnel do as a secondary duty in about 5 minutes.

How many full time staff does it take to work a photocopier? How many Admin staff do you need to administrate the administrators? How many PAs, secretaries, tea girls?

How many "informative" leaflets need to be printed on expensive glossy paper before we realise we have a wonderment called email and the intranet to send out such guff as "u need 2 no?"

Whether we like it or not, ALL budgets across public expenditure are about to go through the Canadian model.

B.C.'s plan to cut public service by up to 57% | National Union of Public and General Employees

HALVING their civil service!

To be honest, did anyone notice the last time the entire civil service went on strike?
VinRouge is offline  
Old 17th Jul 2009, 08:49
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If It was me in the MOD as Sec State for defence.

1. Cut down the civil service support for the armed forces and strengthen areas like procurment with people qualified (professionally qualified to do day to day purchasing). Remove the political appointees ie special advisors and curtail the use of management consultants.
2. review the employment of undeployable personel and modify the pay structure to reflect this. using the same formula as is used with reservists on FTRS.
3. Use long term secondment of service officers to procurement projects. Increase the power of user opinion in the procurment process. Purchase more of the shelf.
4. Change the relationship of the Service chiefs to the government by re writing the job descriptions to try and remove the political yes men mentality.
5. Try to get a balanced, long term and integrated approach to defence. with balanced and flexible forces.
6. End PFI procurment of items like Arcraft and Ships.
NURSE is offline  
Old 17th Jul 2009, 11:50
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: england
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Blunty Jibes

Having been one of those blunties for 11 of my 23 years I totally agree with the argument that there are too many blunts in the air force. There is some top level war dodging that goes on...the usual amount of bad backs,knees etc but its not limited to the ground trades. As a truckie mate I happen to be plucked from the cast of 1 when my A Cat leader developed "headaches" just before GW2. He went on to become the standards man and so ensured another 3 years of war dodging.

I believe in Karma, so I hope the headaches were real.

5d2d
500days2do is offline  
Old 17th Jul 2009, 12:33
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
in the run up to the invasion of Iraq some of my regular counterparts were criticising the number of reservists who were going to chilwell to be mobilised and being turned down as not being medically or dentally fit to deploy. And how this was disgraceful. I pointed them in the direction of the garrison med centre to see the numbers of Regulars trying to get their medical downgradings adjusted so they couldn't go. I know that alot of the reservists were gutted at being turned down.
NURSE is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2009, 08:12
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: E MIDLANDS
Posts: 291
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Widger, You really are very rude and aggressive, aren't you? I admitted that my original post was trite but personal insults are not required and don't give a very good impression of yourself. Attack the post, by all means, but not the poster. How does being rude add anything? Its very easy to snipe in a forum but we still have not heard YOUR ideas.

And seeing as you were getting personal, for info I am not an ex WE rating & have served very happily at Dartmouth, Portsmouth, Plymouth, Culdrose, Yeovilton, the usual Sea Appointments and several Joint Appointments. I have also worked in the Defence industry for a number of years and experienced the delay, expense and inefficiency of the contracting/ procurement system. I don't consider I have a chip on my shoulder about any of the Naval Bases. However, the fleet is getting smaller and 3 Naval bases are not required for the number of vessels in service now or in the future. The Naval Base study as long ago as 1999/2000 did recognise that & actually recommended the closure of Portsmouth but other (political) factors came in to play. The fleet is now smaller than it was then, and forecast to get smaller. Whether Portsmouth or Devonport stays open is immaterial really, but one should have closed and I suggested that should be Portsmouth simply because Devonport already has the FOST areas and the refit/ support capabilities for all RN vessels that Portsmouth does not.

As for Dartmouth, the income gained does not cover its costs. That income is likely to continue if the training carried out was also transferred.

Smart Acquisition has been criticised on several occasions by some very experienced people in the NAO and on the Commons Defence Select Committee. I don't think its a great example of how to run things. In particular bidding for contracts is hugely expensive and bureaucratic & those bid costs just go back on the MoD's bill. A typical PFI will cost over £1M to the contractor to bid & the costs to the MoD are equally massive. In many cases the transfer of risk to the Contractor has also not actually been achieved.

I do realize that several Air bases are about to close, what I am suggesting is that more needs to be done. No, its not ideal & I appreciate that real estate is important but the Defence budget is under pressure to achieve more with less (or the same), so how do we do that? Unpalatable decisions have been made in the past (axing of the RNs Diesel Boats and SHAR, amalgamation of several Regiments, loss of the Jaguar etc etc) but it may be time for some more unpalatable decisions to be made and for some capabilities to be axed.

No one expects a full blown defence review here but what are your ideas for juggling the lack of money with the commitments. What unpalatable decisions do you recommend as being least bad? Headlines will do but no rude answers please. As for Rum Ration, I don’t post on there; in some respects I would suggest that it’s a forum that is more suitable to the rude and aggressive…..like yourself.
andyy is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2009, 18:27
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Belfast
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Close RAF Cranwell and move RAF officer training to Dartmouth. (The Navy still need access to the sea, this is not a bias either way).

Some genuine Joint services identy and co-operation might even emerge - not the p****ing session we have today.

Grenade duly chucked under table.... standing well back!!
blandy1 is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2009, 19:21
  #53 (permalink)  
Registered User **
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Erchester
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Grenade duly chucked under table.... standing well back!!
Why? Nothing appears to have happened.
Maxtor epson is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2009, 19:26
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: MARS
Posts: 1,102
Received 10 Likes on 4 Posts
Widger is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2009, 19:59
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
1.Go back to having Sqdn Ldrs/Lt cdrs as CO's of Squadrons.....Why do we need Wing Cdrs/Cdrs as Sqdn Commanding Officers.
2. Chop CEA....if you have not been moved out of area in the last 4 years
3. Chop specialist pay by 50% or move onto task payment basis.
4. Close either Plymouth or Portsmouth Naval Base.
5. Chop SWO/EWO/BWO jobs
6.Do we need more AEO's than Helos?
7. Get shot of JPA Ministers bury £32bn tax crisis as recess starts - Times Online
8. Revert to pay rates as was Pre pay 2000...re introduce Tiff / ET pay.
9.
jim2673 is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2009, 10:47
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Monkeys ride bikes, ever seen one fix a puncture??
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have to say, I find all the "Scrap A400M" (buy American?) and "More UAV's" (American?) and other such remarks amusing..

You see chaps, Westland may well be useless, Airbus / EADS could be seen as the biggest cash drain in history, and BAe systems may just make your blood boil, however..

One day, as I did, you will leave Her Majesty's Service and seek gainful employment in civvy industry, then you may realise the importance of our primes, and the value they create for the millions of businesses in the supply chain. Your military pensions and green tinted view of the world will change, I assure you.

Now lets have no more of this "Scrap everything and buy yank kit off the shelf" claptrap. Instead of whining like big cissies, I think we ought to be thankful that finally the brass have backed old Gordon the Gopher into a corner from which there is no escape, and hopefully the momentum we have will see decent levels of resource, not just helicopters, where it ought to be.. with the boys!

Call me racist or whatever else, but the first politician who stops immigration , slashes welfare for the great unwashed and unwilling, and channels funds towards equipping the boys in a decent fashion will have my vote in an instant.

MP Expenses, Car industry bailouts, Bank bailouts, welfare state, immigration and an excessive civil service are all a shameful reflection of President Tony and Gordon the Goofer.
Flyt3est is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2009, 12:44
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Back in civilisation
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Devil My 2 pence worth

Personnally I would go on a 60year tour of the globe but that is just me being selfish!

Seriously though, should we not look at areas where we can buy off the shelf and build under licence in the UK adding value where we can like the israeli's do?

I think (my 2 pence worth) scrap the Nimrod force and replace with a couple of P-8's and BAMS global Hawks. Use the MRA4 test aircraft to replace the one's at Waddo.

Buy a few more reapers with cost savings from the above if any?

Scrap the flt ops branch and some admin functions that could be and use aircrew to do the ops role like it used to be. Also outsource the procurement function to private consultancy with selcted MOD input instead of the huge amount of people working in DPA/DPO or whatever it is called now.

At the same time have a independant review of the rank structure and have the recommendations implemented outside the MOD (prob never going to happen, they like their gold braid too much!) This could then lead to sensible redundancies and thinning at the top,.

I would also suggest a review of the medical and dental arrangements to try and get a cheaper outsourced service in places such as London where it must cost a fortune.

A complete review of the bases and also support areas with the idea of more closures than are currently on the cards. ( I don't like the idea of putting all the eggs in one basket but the cash situation dictates this)

We might also want to scap the puma fleet and use some money from other savings to acquire and train a new force on blackhawks built under licence in the UK. This would maybe lead to long term cost savings than running with an old aircraft.

I think a review of all weapon procuremnts over the next five years would be a good idea as well as in the short term I don't think meteor and similar items are a priority?

Anyway, that is my ideas please feel free to rip apart! (Putting helmet on for incoming)

P.S I do think that is it very sad that we have come to this point
Had Enough 77 is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2009, 13:03
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Monkeys ride bikes, ever seen one fix a puncture??
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well you get my vote HE 77 old boy! Value added for the UK, thats what we like.
Flyt3est is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2009, 13:21
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: York
Posts: 620
Received 23 Likes on 14 Posts

A small saving: Why don't we combine our 3 Airman Recruit training set-ups into one. We currently have recruit training for Airman Aircrew, RAF Regt and the 'the rest' at separate locations. When I was involved 10yrs ago it always irked me that they used an identical syllabus of training.

A bit of history: Up till the demise of the SLR rifle the RAF Regt were put through recruit training with other ground trades. As the RAF Regt got the new L85 rifle up to two years before everyone else it was rightly deemed necessary to not go through recruit training with the SLR then switch to the L85 for trade training so they subsequently switched their recruit training to the Regt depot. However when everyone else got the L85 they never switched back.
dctyke is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2009, 15:06
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Back in civilisation
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Devil Reply to Deliverance

Deliverance

In response to your response, how about this?

Current amraam is good enough, i did not say scrap bvraam it but revert back to the program when more appropriate as we need the money for other operational needs.

As for the MR2, speaking from experience, the global hawk/reaper combination would be more useful and have a longer time on station due to the lack of aar (even with AAR they can stay longerthan the Rod). The MR2 is falling to bits and has a poor serviceabiltiy compared to the serviceabiltiy of UAV's. The global hawk is also a very good platform for the BAMS role backed up by a small force of P-8 bought off the shelf from the US. The MRA4 has no export abilty (profit) and has some major problems that are sucking an exceptional amount of cash into a large black hole, even at this late stage.

Don't think I mentioned the type 45 but as you ask I feel the current numbers should be kept especially if the carriers are completed or else they would be at risk every time they put to see without proper AD cover!

I dont think I mentioned navy merlins either but again as you ask they should be kept in the role they are doing (in case the russkies bring those pesky subs down again!) and as I suggested the PUMA fleet scrapped and replaced with blackhawks/chinooks or the like.

As for the E3 I think you will find that that has been used quite a bit in the past few years around the UK and I am quite happy to keep them as they are a force multiplier and tend to be good to have around when the ruskies come bounding down from the frozen wastelands of the north (again poosible future war.)

One point I forgot to add was around certain types of training where it seems to be expected/high % to fail first time e.g FC, RAF reg etc. I think these courses should be redesigned to achieve a higher first time pass rate as repeating the whole course would be more costly.

I hope this helps your confusion. I would certainly apprecaite others views on this as well.....
Had Enough 77 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.