More cuts coming?
Shadow and Sentinel should probably go after Afghanistan and I suspect there will be some cuts to the Tornado force.
What, if anything are we planning to use the Reapers for after we withdraw/retreat from Afg?
What, if anything are we planning to use the Reapers for after we withdraw/retreat from Afg?
What, if anything are we planning to use the Reapers for after we withdraw/retreat from Afg?
Of course, given the plethora of threats and the future concepts for military operations being developed by the likes of DCDC, the answer to such a question can be found in the NSC strategy and future concepts work.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
once we're out of Kabul I'd expect the Army will start to feel the pinch
but I wouldn't trust any politician - a 1% cut will mean some cuts somewhere - probably in the "non-core" section
lay up/sell a couple of C-17's for example
but I wouldn't trust any politician - a 1% cut will mean some cuts somewhere - probably in the "non-core" section
lay up/sell a couple of C-17's for example
Worried
After Afghanistan there’s a lot of army kit going to be left behind (MRAP’s etc), apparently it’s too expensive to bring it back and it’s theatre specific anyway. Then there’s the RAF UOR stuff that’s not funded after 2015 (Sentinel, Shadow & Reaper), but that’s not cuts that’s just not funded so something else has to give.
Can they scrap the Voyager at this stage? Do we need as many Chinooks as we have/ordered? How safe is the Puma upgrade now?
What do we really need to meet the defence tasks of the immediate future?
I bet nobody has all the answers, least of all those in charge of the dosh.
Can they scrap the Voyager at this stage? Do we need as many Chinooks as we have/ordered? How safe is the Puma upgrade now?
What do we really need to meet the defence tasks of the immediate future?
I bet nobody has all the answers, least of all those in charge of the dosh.
Given the importance of the Middle East, I really don't see why we don't have some sort of permanent presence there, above and beyond Al Udeid.
I'm not necessarily advocating the standing up of a new Middle East Command, but it wouldn't exactly be a bad idea. It could be a bit like 6 Div was - more of an administrative base which can be ramped up as required for operations. Lease a big enough bit of desert in some reasonanbly friendly country with a coastline nearby, develop an airstrip and park all the kit you might need in the future there rather than lugging in back and forth.
Or would that be a bit too close to common sense?
I'm not necessarily advocating the standing up of a new Middle East Command, but it wouldn't exactly be a bad idea. It could be a bit like 6 Div was - more of an administrative base which can be ramped up as required for operations. Lease a big enough bit of desert in some reasonanbly friendly country with a coastline nearby, develop an airstrip and park all the kit you might need in the future there rather than lugging in back and forth.
Or would that be a bit too close to common sense?
Last edited by Melchett01; 6th Dec 2012 at 13:13.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just out of interest, what protects UAVs from a half-sophisticated enemy. With the current actions of Iran against Scan Eagle the Reaper post Afgh could become a white elephant.
How safe is the Puma upgrade now?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Given the importance of the Middle East, I really don't see why we don't have some sort of permanent presence there, above and beyond Al Udeid"
because the locals loathe the idea - and we'd just be a target
because the locals loathe the idea - and we'd just be a target
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"There is a non-core?
TGIAO"
I guess...... quite a lot of kit is committed to Afghanistan
Will we need all those Chinooks?
Do we need all the C-17's if we are back in Europe???
Others have already fingered the UOR stuff (tho I think the Govt have fallen in love with drones - no pensions, no bodies, no dependants)
Apache upgrade is likely - they can operate off non- carriers and maybe all we'll have left offshore if the F-35 and/or the carriers are cancelled
TGIAO"
I guess...... quite a lot of kit is committed to Afghanistan
Will we need all those Chinooks?
Do we need all the C-17's if we are back in Europe???
Others have already fingered the UOR stuff (tho I think the Govt have fallen in love with drones - no pensions, no bodies, no dependants)
Apache upgrade is likely - they can operate off non- carriers and maybe all we'll have left offshore if the F-35 and/or the carriers are cancelled
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: U.K.
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...if you believe the latest spin there's nothing to worry about...stacks of cash available so we wont even notice it...
U.K. Defense To Face Cuts Over Next 2 Years | Defense News | defensenews.com
U.K. Defense To Face Cuts Over Next 2 Years | Defense News | defensenews.com
Last edited by Spanish Waltzer; 6th Dec 2012 at 15:24.
Bob, as a rule, I generally have about one moment of clarity per week. I think that was this week's. I do hope the Boss isn't expecting too much in the way of clarity or inspriation tomorrow.
Heathrow Harry, I was thinking of somewhere along the lines of UAE or Bahrain, somewhere we already have a defence relationship with and who might already be interested in or be in the process of buying kit. Oh I don't know, say Typhoon.
Plus, there are many Middle East countries who are, how shall we say, very pragmatic and the concept of like / loathe doesn't often come into it as long as a suitable mutually beneficial arrangement were negotiated.
Heathrow Harry, I was thinking of somewhere along the lines of UAE or Bahrain, somewhere we already have a defence relationship with and who might already be interested in or be in the process of buying kit. Oh I don't know, say Typhoon.
Plus, there are many Middle East countries who are, how shall we say, very pragmatic and the concept of like / loathe doesn't often come into it as long as a suitable mutually beneficial arrangement were negotiated.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: at home
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spanish Waltzer,
Frightening article given what we have endured already. Figures of 245 million cut next year and 490 million the next look a bit skewed. Surely 1% is 340 million and 2% is 680 million by the words of the article, or has this taken into account this years underspend. Either way, it doesn't look good for the whiteboard projects.....
Frightening article given what we have endured already. Figures of 245 million cut next year and 490 million the next look a bit skewed. Surely 1% is 340 million and 2% is 680 million by the words of the article, or has this taken into account this years underspend. Either way, it doesn't look good for the whiteboard projects.....
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Worcestershire
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HS,
The budget cuts, though, are back loaded with total spending reducing from 34.1 billion pounds this year down to 34.1 billion pounds next year and 33.5 billion pounds in 2014. Equipment spending, though, actually is planned to go up over the same period.
The whiteboard stuff should be ok if I read the article correctly. In fact probably more likely.
I will check with the bloke in the pub.
The budget cuts, though, are back loaded with total spending reducing from 34.1 billion pounds this year down to 34.1 billion pounds next year and 33.5 billion pounds in 2014. Equipment spending, though, actually is planned to go up over the same period.
The whiteboard stuff should be ok if I read the article correctly. In fact probably more likely.
I will check with the bloke in the pub.
Last edited by Phoney Tony; 6th Dec 2012 at 19:31.
Enough!!!
Maybe it’s just time to call a halt to the whole RAF now. I served it for forty years and watched it being cut away to almost nothing around me.
I think I’m right in thinking that Trenchard’s big idea was to form a proper Air Force out of the Independent Striking force (long range bombers) taking with it the army co-operation, scouting, fleet defence and patrol elements of the RFC and RNAS.
Well we have no long range bombers left except the Lancaster.
(The Nimrod MRA 4 might have been one but…).
Our last twin engine medium bombers (Tired out Tornado’s) are in their last years (months) of service. We have bought generations of shiny new fighters and shot down … nothing (except a Jaguar by accident).
We have Transport aircraft to move a large army we don’t have to places we don’t want to go to.
Helicopters: we’ve got Merlin’s we are going to give to the navy, Chinooks to move nonexistent troops around unknown future battlefields and poor old Pumas. Nice new ‘Tankers’ that don’t tank, AWAC’s to find exactly what for our fighters to shoot at?
Oh and lots of drones as their cheap and ‘trending’ at the minute.
Maybe we should give all the choppers to the army, fighter bombers to the navy and scrap the rest then we can reset the clock to 31st March 1918….
I think I’m right in thinking that Trenchard’s big idea was to form a proper Air Force out of the Independent Striking force (long range bombers) taking with it the army co-operation, scouting, fleet defence and patrol elements of the RFC and RNAS.
Well we have no long range bombers left except the Lancaster.
(The Nimrod MRA 4 might have been one but…).
Our last twin engine medium bombers (Tired out Tornado’s) are in their last years (months) of service. We have bought generations of shiny new fighters and shot down … nothing (except a Jaguar by accident).
We have Transport aircraft to move a large army we don’t have to places we don’t want to go to.
Helicopters: we’ve got Merlin’s we are going to give to the navy, Chinooks to move nonexistent troops around unknown future battlefields and poor old Pumas. Nice new ‘Tankers’ that don’t tank, AWAC’s to find exactly what for our fighters to shoot at?
Oh and lots of drones as their cheap and ‘trending’ at the minute.
Maybe we should give all the choppers to the army, fighter bombers to the navy and scrap the rest then we can reset the clock to 31st March 1918….
The real problem is far simpler:
We have 'leaders' that don't lead, 'managers' that now only manage budgets, the people to succeed, but not the political will to win. We have less and less weapons, and more and more health and safety workshops, more intelligence, yet less assets to exploit it.
You can point to the public's fascination with talent shows, celebrities and lack of knowledge of the wider world. You can equally point to government mismanagement, civil servants or a national media with a 10 second attention span.
However, the blame lies in no small part with the RAF itself. In the 1990's the decision was made to stop promoting leaders and start promoting politically aware 'yes men' managers instead. Despite the few that slipped through the net, that is the largest contributory factor in our current woes.
We have 'leaders' that don't lead, 'managers' that now only manage budgets, the people to succeed, but not the political will to win. We have less and less weapons, and more and more health and safety workshops, more intelligence, yet less assets to exploit it.
You can point to the public's fascination with talent shows, celebrities and lack of knowledge of the wider world. You can equally point to government mismanagement, civil servants or a national media with a 10 second attention span.
However, the blame lies in no small part with the RAF itself. In the 1990's the decision was made to stop promoting leaders and start promoting politically aware 'yes men' managers instead. Despite the few that slipped through the net, that is the largest contributory factor in our current woes.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Home alone
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HAS59,
I don't think your point is anything unique to the RAF, or even Britain.
There was a study published recently, which detailed how, despite huge increases in funding, the US military has cut its force numbers massively and the readiness of its existing equipment to deploy is much diminished from the level it was at in 2001. I think the biggest problem lies in what we think technology can achieve for us; modern fighters are obvious examples of unrealistic specifications and budgets being developed because we think technology will make the design and manufacture easier, when it appears to be doing the exact opposite...even worse, they have eaten into everyone else's budgets! I can't imagine we would be in the same situation if we had chosen to develop a super F15, for example...or if the F35 programme was only developing 1 aircraft with a lesser EW capability and less data-linking capability. You could apply that to almost every one of our weapons programmes of the 21st century. IMHO, we've tried to make our gear capable of doing too much!
I don't think your point is anything unique to the RAF, or even Britain.
There was a study published recently, which detailed how, despite huge increases in funding, the US military has cut its force numbers massively and the readiness of its existing equipment to deploy is much diminished from the level it was at in 2001. I think the biggest problem lies in what we think technology can achieve for us; modern fighters are obvious examples of unrealistic specifications and budgets being developed because we think technology will make the design and manufacture easier, when it appears to be doing the exact opposite...even worse, they have eaten into everyone else's budgets! I can't imagine we would be in the same situation if we had chosen to develop a super F15, for example...or if the F35 programme was only developing 1 aircraft with a lesser EW capability and less data-linking capability. You could apply that to almost every one of our weapons programmes of the 21st century. IMHO, we've tried to make our gear capable of doing too much!