SAVE OUR SERVICES (SOS) _ SDSR 2015
Join Date: May 2004
Location: DEVON
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NutLoose, you have my vote. Also Nationalise the 'national-lottery' & use the profits for the defence of the Nation; the excess can used to pay off the National debt. That should get us out of trouble within 5-years, although profits may be affected in certain parts of the midlands and London
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Great Britain
Age: 51
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
5 Posts
I'd be radical...
Shrink the Army to ~40,000 full time and then have a 50,000 Army Reserve to protect the UK both externally and within. No more expeditions like Bosnia, Iraq or Afghanistan.
Stop trying to put 'boots on the ground' in far away places and expand the RN and the RAF (to ~40k each) to take 'expiditionary warfare' to those international niggles that need our help but rely on that nation's 'boots on the ground' - a bit like Libya. Put anything that floats and or needs assault capabilities (ie. SF and Marines) into the RN and anything that flies into the RAF (along with Flying Ops Spt like RAF Regt, ATC, FC, Eng - Admin can be done out of the 40k Army). The Army become effectively 'Home Guard'.
Gaff off tanks and armoured vehicles unless needed for defence purposes and spend the money on aircraft (Combat, ISTAR, SH, AT/AAR and FL trainers) and boats (SSBN, SSN, DD, FF, CVF and support vessels).
There you go, rebalanced to global effect, cheaper and more capable. When do I get the job of SoS for Defence?
CPL Clott
Ever so slighly
Shrink the Army to ~40,000 full time and then have a 50,000 Army Reserve to protect the UK both externally and within. No more expeditions like Bosnia, Iraq or Afghanistan.
Stop trying to put 'boots on the ground' in far away places and expand the RN and the RAF (to ~40k each) to take 'expiditionary warfare' to those international niggles that need our help but rely on that nation's 'boots on the ground' - a bit like Libya. Put anything that floats and or needs assault capabilities (ie. SF and Marines) into the RN and anything that flies into the RAF (along with Flying Ops Spt like RAF Regt, ATC, FC, Eng - Admin can be done out of the 40k Army). The Army become effectively 'Home Guard'.
Gaff off tanks and armoured vehicles unless needed for defence purposes and spend the money on aircraft (Combat, ISTAR, SH, AT/AAR and FL trainers) and boats (SSBN, SSN, DD, FF, CVF and support vessels).
There you go, rebalanced to global effect, cheaper and more capable. When do I get the job of SoS for Defence?
CPL Clott
Ever so slighly
Last edited by Corporal Clott; 8th Apr 2013 at 19:36.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
I read last week, in a novel, that the reason we had never been invaded in over 900 years was because we waged war in other people's countries.
However today someone argued that the ability to retaliate was one thing but was pointless if it meant we could suffer an attack first. The solution was to build an anti-missile system to defend the UK rather than Trident replacement.
Interesting though that WEBF hasn't joined the debate.
However today someone argued that the ability to retaliate was one thing but was pointless if it meant we could suffer an attack first. The solution was to build an anti-missile system to defend the UK rather than Trident replacement.
Interesting though that WEBF hasn't joined the debate.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So I am interested what major platform you think is in for the axe?
If I had to bet a pound I'd put it on the E-3 for the chop. Whatever one may think of all the guff about network enabled warfare and all the other whizz-wheel management speak of the day, my gut feeling is that the powers that be will be of the opinion that Lightning IIs et al will be capable of 'looking after themselves' on the front line. It also means they won't be forced into making a choice between an expensive flight deck upgrade and re-opening one or more 'single wing' flight deck schools at cranditz.
Just my ha'p'orth. I know some still serving mates are looking forward apprehensively at the next few years. That and some 'star' chat overheard at the odd funeral or two over the last year or three.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
. Think there may be an opening for you in North Korea
How about remove flying pay and reintroduce non commissioned (RAF) aircrew (pilot) - more than enough military wanabe aviators out there to fill hole left by those who jump - good luck to them.
Last edited by TomJoad; 8th Apr 2013 at 22:39.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,072
Received 2,940 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roland Pulfrew
the entire BBMF as a going concern without starting to asset strip and selling off of aircraft to pay for the running of the rest.
Been done. Real gate guardians were exchanged for Airfix kits and some cash to maintain others. I think they still do a certain amount of trading.
Originally Posted by Roland Pulfrew
the entire BBMF as a going concern without starting to asset strip and selling off of aircraft to pay for the running of the rest.
Been done. Real gate guardians were exchanged for Airfix kits and some cash to maintain others. I think they still do a certain amount of trading.
Last edited by NutLoose; 8th Apr 2013 at 23:11.
SNCO pilots has some merit as an idea
Ref: SNCO Pilots
This is a great myth when it comes to savings. The approximate pay bands for a Fg Off are £30k-£33k and for a Flt Lt £38k-£45k. For a Sgt it is £33k-£37k and for a Flt Sgt it is £37k-£43k. For Master Aircrew (ie. WO1 equivalent) it is £42k-£47k. So no real saving in base salary.
Now assuming that notional RAF SNCO pilots are paid the same flying pay as the current Army SNCOs, then they are paid exactly the same rate (between £14 to £44 per day depending on their level).
So, I see no savings of any real amount. Also, the SNCOs get free uniform which costs more than the officers having to pay for theirs (excluding PCS and flying gear).
I invite the previous 2 posters to explain exactly where these massive savings would come...
LJ
This is a great myth when it comes to savings. The approximate pay bands for a Fg Off are £30k-£33k and for a Flt Lt £38k-£45k. For a Sgt it is £33k-£37k and for a Flt Sgt it is £37k-£43k. For Master Aircrew (ie. WO1 equivalent) it is £42k-£47k. So no real saving in base salary.
Now assuming that notional RAF SNCO pilots are paid the same flying pay as the current Army SNCOs, then they are paid exactly the same rate (between £14 to £44 per day depending on their level).
So, I see no savings of any real amount. Also, the SNCOs get free uniform which costs more than the officers having to pay for theirs (excluding PCS and flying gear).
I invite the previous 2 posters to explain exactly where these massive savings would come...
LJ
Last edited by Lima Juliet; 10th Apr 2013 at 09:10.
Hate myself for saying this, but how about these for 'tough love'...
Bin the Reds, replace with either a dedicated team flying Extras (eg Jordan) or forget the idea completely (I doubt there's the scope for an MFTS run team...).
Turn BBMF into a heritage trust a la RNHF; does it really need so many Spitfires? The MkII, Mk IX and one XIX should suffice - sell the rest to invest into the long term future of the others. It would perhaps permit the organisation to look into broadening the flight based on commercial appeal - a Mosquito perhaps? Would also permit far more tactical freedom with sponsorship. Move the unit back to Biggin Hill or Scampton....
Bin 100 Sqn (
) and outsource their roles to the likes of HHA/Cobham/2Excel. The requirement will continue to shrink given the likely numbers of Typhoon/F35 and the focus on synthetic training.
Scrap Sentinel, Air Seeker, Islander and Defender. Have King Air derivatives for all 'special mission' roles - accept that our Strategic Int days are over and tactical ISR (manned or unmanned) is the way ahead.
Scrap E3 and negotiate a joint UK/French E-2 fleet by purchasing a few-off new builds. Far cheaper to run than E3....
Sh*tcan the LTPA with QQ and have real competition in T&E. QQ have become a greedy monster that has, IMHO, lost sight of it's original remit - Independant Safety Advice - to spread into all manner of other areas for profit. They are overstretched and under resourced but continue to take on work they cannot deliver. The shop floor guys n gals are great, the management aren't. Bin ETPS and outsource - the UK needs few TPs these days or for the forseeable future.
Centralise the UAS's into regional centres, though I sense with the Wittering announcement that this is already on the cards.
Come clean about the Successor deterrent. The programme is all about maintaining a nuclear sub capability, not about Trident (we're keeping the same missiles...). Create a national shipbuilding strategy, like the US does, and have a pulsed programme that knocks out an SSN every 4-5 years, a redesign every 20. Do the same with DD/FFs and (perish the thought) carriers. Steel is cheap, technology continually moves on. It's often cheaper to incorporate at build than through refit. Enables the RN to sell-off/scrap older vessels earlier and keep a smaller number of more modern/cheaper to operate vessels in the fleet. Industry can order long lead items in confidence and the budget is easier to programme as the spikes are fewer and less pronounced. If the strategic threat changes you simply extend some of the older ships....With this policy we could become serious about exporting new warships again.
As for the army...where do you start? Like trying to reform the catholic church.....
I'm playing Devils Advocate - I'd rather defence went back to 3-4% of GDP and the UK Govt (of whatever hue) stopped using it as a benefits system for certain elements of UK Industry for political gain......
Bin the Reds, replace with either a dedicated team flying Extras (eg Jordan) or forget the idea completely (I doubt there's the scope for an MFTS run team...).
Turn BBMF into a heritage trust a la RNHF; does it really need so many Spitfires? The MkII, Mk IX and one XIX should suffice - sell the rest to invest into the long term future of the others. It would perhaps permit the organisation to look into broadening the flight based on commercial appeal - a Mosquito perhaps? Would also permit far more tactical freedom with sponsorship. Move the unit back to Biggin Hill or Scampton....
Bin 100 Sqn (
) and outsource their roles to the likes of HHA/Cobham/2Excel. The requirement will continue to shrink given the likely numbers of Typhoon/F35 and the focus on synthetic training.Scrap Sentinel, Air Seeker, Islander and Defender. Have King Air derivatives for all 'special mission' roles - accept that our Strategic Int days are over and tactical ISR (manned or unmanned) is the way ahead.
Scrap E3 and negotiate a joint UK/French E-2 fleet by purchasing a few-off new builds. Far cheaper to run than E3....
Sh*tcan the LTPA with QQ and have real competition in T&E. QQ have become a greedy monster that has, IMHO, lost sight of it's original remit - Independant Safety Advice - to spread into all manner of other areas for profit. They are overstretched and under resourced but continue to take on work they cannot deliver. The shop floor guys n gals are great, the management aren't. Bin ETPS and outsource - the UK needs few TPs these days or for the forseeable future.
Centralise the UAS's into regional centres, though I sense with the Wittering announcement that this is already on the cards.
Come clean about the Successor deterrent. The programme is all about maintaining a nuclear sub capability, not about Trident (we're keeping the same missiles...). Create a national shipbuilding strategy, like the US does, and have a pulsed programme that knocks out an SSN every 4-5 years, a redesign every 20. Do the same with DD/FFs and (perish the thought) carriers. Steel is cheap, technology continually moves on. It's often cheaper to incorporate at build than through refit. Enables the RN to sell-off/scrap older vessels earlier and keep a smaller number of more modern/cheaper to operate vessels in the fleet. Industry can order long lead items in confidence and the budget is easier to programme as the spikes are fewer and less pronounced. If the strategic threat changes you simply extend some of the older ships....With this policy we could become serious about exporting new warships again.
As for the army...where do you start? Like trying to reform the catholic church.....
I'm playing Devils Advocate - I'd rather defence went back to 3-4% of GDP and the UK Govt (of whatever hue) stopped using it as a benefits system for certain elements of UK Industry for political gain......
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,567
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
Lightning IIs et al will be capable of 'looking after themselves' on the
front line
Wensleydale, they won't need to as the loadie on board the Voyager will just punch buttons on the Mission Planning System and out will pop the answers and the jets will be on their way home.
Oh, silly me - I forgot that the MPS is not fit for purpose and Voyager isn't cleared to tank, but that doesn't matter because the Voyager can't go anywhere near an operational theatre as it has no defensive aids.
Never mind, Voyager will be a splendid transport aircraft - when it is eventually cleared for ETOPS!
Oh, silly me - I forgot that the MPS is not fit for purpose and Voyager isn't cleared to tank, but that doesn't matter because the Voyager can't go anywhere near an operational theatre as it has no defensive aids.
Never mind, Voyager will be a splendid transport aircraft - when it is eventually cleared for ETOPS!
Come on! Can anyone explain to me why it would be significantly cheaper to have SNCO or WO Pilots rather than Officer Pilots in the RAF?
Before replying, check out the numbers/figures in the post above...
LJ
Before replying, check out the numbers/figures in the post above...
LJ
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last edited by TomJoad; 10th Apr 2013 at 17:39.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,072
Received 2,940 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
So you would remove democratically elected bodies and the electorate's representation just to bolster military funding. Nice . Think there may be an opening for you in North Korea
You'll be first up against the wall..... Ever played catch the mortar shell?
What i was trying to say was... If they do not want independence then they should, like England, recognise parliament as the central seat of Government for the Countries that make up the UK.. I could understand individual little countries each having their own Governments or assemblies as independent states, but if they do not wish to be independent then this little Country cannot afford to have four independent layers of political baggage.
Stitchbitch
Trading with Rolls Royce (a BBMF PR.19 Spitfire) helped to fund the re-build of a Hurricane.
Trading with Rolls Royce (a BBMF PR.19 Spitfire) helped to fund the re-build of a Hurricane.
Last edited by NutLoose; 10th Apr 2013 at 18:10.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You'll be first up against the wall..... Ever played catch the mortar shell?
What i was trying to say was... If they do not want independence then they should, like England, recognise parliament as the central seat of Government for the Countries that make up the UK.. I could understand individual little countries each having their own Governments or assemblies as independent states, but if they do not wish to be independent then this little Country cannot afford to have four independent layers of political baggage.
What i was trying to say was... If they do not want independence then they should, like England, recognise parliament as the central seat of Government for the Countries that make up the UK.. I could understand individual little countries each having their own Governments or assemblies as independent states, but if they do not wish to be independent then this little Country cannot afford to have four independent layers of political baggage.
Yeah right - let me talk to your dad!
Easy Street,
... if only there was some system in place to leave JO aircrew in flying or flying-related posts through their careers, maximising their time on the front line... treating them like Professional Aircrew...? 
Realistically though, most people of my vintage have managed 3-4 consecutive flying tours, often on the same types. Plenty of JO chums of mine have gone GR4 front line - GR4 OCU - GR4 front line for their first 3 tours. Some stepped sideways to RPAS or training jobs.
Where are we sending people to in order to demonstrate their potential for broader employment? Even the last couple of guys I knew off to BALO-style jobs were volunteers.
You're right, it does. For one thing, it would stop the idiocy of treating every new junior pilot as a possible future CAS, and moving him/her off the front line after 3 years so they can 'demonstrate their potential for broader employment'. At least with a SNCO you could leave them there forever to become the wizened old ninja...
Realistically though, most people of my vintage have managed 3-4 consecutive flying tours, often on the same types. Plenty of JO chums of mine have gone GR4 front line - GR4 OCU - GR4 front line for their first 3 tours. Some stepped sideways to RPAS or training jobs.
Where are we sending people to in order to demonstrate their potential for broader employment? Even the last couple of guys I knew off to BALO-style jobs were volunteers.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cloud9
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Courtney Mil: "Those of us drawing a service pension should have it severely cut. It's far too big as it is and this would really save money."
Courtney, have you been missing out on your meds again?
HB
Courtney, have you been missing out on your meds again?
HB