Falklands defence review after military deal between Russia and Argentina
Tourist,
i was actually thinking of HMS Clyde, or the point class ships, or indeed the RFA's...
while 16 Kfir and two tankers will not, rather obviously, provide Argentina with the capability to take the FI, they could make holding the FI in the face of continued 'hassle' much more expensive, and much more resource intensive.
i was actually thinking of HMS Clyde, or the point class ships, or indeed the RFA's...
while 16 Kfir and two tankers will not, rather obviously, provide Argentina with the capability to take the FI, they could make holding the FI in the face of continued 'hassle' much more expensive, and much more resource intensive.
One of the things the Falkland war proved is that the Argentinians are one of the sadly limited number of countries who play rigidly to the rules and fight wars honourably. You think they are going to go off shooting down civvy airliners and shipping?
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
......and ignoring the use of hospital ships to illuminate enemy targets.
Oh, and imprisoning women and children in sheds, devoid of proper sanitation, for extended periods of time, in close proximity to military installations.
Did I mention booby-trapping ordnance and housing?
Threatening civilians with their lives to work for free?
Poisoning a water source.
Failing to mark mine fields.
.....and conducting illegal military invasions in general....
Oh, and imprisoning women and children in sheds, devoid of proper sanitation, for extended periods of time, in close proximity to military installations.
Did I mention booby-trapping ordnance and housing?
Threatening civilians with their lives to work for free?
Poisoning a water source.
Failing to mark mine fields.
.....and conducting illegal military invasions in general....
Fortunately, the Junta left power some years ago and attitudes have changed. Argentina stopped conscription some 20 years ago and now have a purely professional, volunteer military.
At the appropriate threat level, MPA doesn't just have 4 Typhoons, but regardless of that, the scenarios some are suggesting here are politically, economically and militarily rather fantastic.
Argentina's politicians will keep raising the Falklands issue, which is hardly surprising, but trying for a rematch of 1982 would never be supported. Even with all that lovely oil there, which at $30 a barrel may not even be worth extracting for the time being.
At the appropriate threat level, MPA doesn't just have 4 Typhoons, but regardless of that, the scenarios some are suggesting here are politically, economically and militarily rather fantastic.
Argentina's politicians will keep raising the Falklands issue, which is hardly surprising, but trying for a rematch of 1982 would never be supported. Even with all that lovely oil there, which at $30 a barrel may not even be worth extracting for the time being.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Welllll.... I did know a lady who'd spent time in the aforementioned Shed and she was no fan of Argentina - tho' TBH she reckoned they were just really badly organised rather than deliberatly malevolent............
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: birmingham
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the interests of historical accuracy I think the unfortunate officer killed was Lt James Barry of the 2nd Btn The Parachute Regiment. Rather than deliberate murder I believe it was his attempt to take a surrender from one trench whilst coming under fire from another which was the cause of death.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and lets not forget Navy Petty Officer Felix Artuso, a crewman of the Santa Fe, was mistakenly shot dead on 26 April after a British marine thought he was sabotaging the submarine. He is buried at Grytviken Cemetery.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Britain beefs up defenses in the Falkland Islands
LONDON - Britain has awarded £153 million (US $187 million) worth of contracts to equip the Falkland Islands with a new ground-based air-defense system known as Sky Sabre, the Ministry of Defence has confirmed.
A clutch of deals agreed around the turn of the year but only now becoming public includes award of a contract by the British to an Israeli company to supply a key battlefield command-and-control network to defend the South Atlantic island from potential Argentinian aggression. The main contract award, which the MoD valued at £78 million (US $95 million), was signed Jan. 9 with Israel’s Rafael Advanced Defence Systems, to develop a battle management, command, control, communications, computers and intelligence (BMC4I) network. Missile builder MBDA and surveillance radar supplier Saab have also been awarded contracts to integrate other, already ordered, ground-based air-defense system elements into the BMC4I.
Rafael, with help from UK partners Babcock, will supply its Modular, Integrated C4I Air & Missile Defense System and associated equipment in a development and manufacture phase likely to be completed around 2020. Babcock will provide a proportion of UK based activity including: synthetic based test and integration facilities, project management and hardware procurement. The percentage of UK work content on BMC4I is put at 40percent with the remainder coming from Israel.
The requirement is to deliver a ground-based air defence (GBAD) capability along with an initial support solution for up to 5 years. As part of the agreement, Rafael will serve as key systems integrator, including provision of communications links and integration with existing in-service communications infrastructure.
Nevertheless, industry executives in Europe reacted angrily to the award of the BMC4I system to the Israeli contractor. “Everybody was extremely surprised the MoD opted for Rafael. Politically, industry thought that was a route the UK government wouldn’t go down. It’s something other MoD’s, like the Israeli or French, would never have done. It makes you wonder just what parts of the local defense industry the government is willing to defend,” said the executive, who asked not to be named.
Doug Barrie, the senior air analyst at the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank in London said he was puzzled by the decision. “At least on paper this looks like a sensitive area to award to a non-NATO or non-European partner. I’d have thought the government might have wanted to stay closer to home with this technology, as it arguably comes into the territory of sovereign operational capability,” said Barrie.
Concerns have also been raised by executives here about sharing sensitive Land Ceptor missile data with the Israeli company, which is itself a significant missile developer. An MoD spokeswoman said the department had addressed the issue in the contract. “Appropriate non-disclosure agreements are in place between the participating companies, along with safeguards around sensitive information and what needs to be shared,” said the spokeswoman.
Land Ceptor is currently in development led by the British arm of MBDA. The weapon is part of the Common Anti-Air Modular Missile family, the naval version of which has also been ordered by the Royal Navy.
MBDA was one of the bidders for the BMC4I requirement. Lockheed Martin , Northrop Grumman, Thales and Saab were also thought to have lodged bids......
The BMC4I order is the final major element of a more than two-year program aimed at beefing up the Falkland ground-based air defenses currently reliant on the aging Rapier ground-to-air missile. MBDA secured a deal to supply the British Army with a new ground-to-air weapon, known as the Land Ceptor, at the end of 2014, and that was followed several months later by the MoD acquiring additional Giraffe surveillance radars and updating existing sensors in a deal with Saab.
LONDON - Britain has awarded £153 million (US $187 million) worth of contracts to equip the Falkland Islands with a new ground-based air-defense system known as Sky Sabre, the Ministry of Defence has confirmed.
A clutch of deals agreed around the turn of the year but only now becoming public includes award of a contract by the British to an Israeli company to supply a key battlefield command-and-control network to defend the South Atlantic island from potential Argentinian aggression. The main contract award, which the MoD valued at £78 million (US $95 million), was signed Jan. 9 with Israel’s Rafael Advanced Defence Systems, to develop a battle management, command, control, communications, computers and intelligence (BMC4I) network. Missile builder MBDA and surveillance radar supplier Saab have also been awarded contracts to integrate other, already ordered, ground-based air-defense system elements into the BMC4I.
Rafael, with help from UK partners Babcock, will supply its Modular, Integrated C4I Air & Missile Defense System and associated equipment in a development and manufacture phase likely to be completed around 2020. Babcock will provide a proportion of UK based activity including: synthetic based test and integration facilities, project management and hardware procurement. The percentage of UK work content on BMC4I is put at 40percent with the remainder coming from Israel.
The requirement is to deliver a ground-based air defence (GBAD) capability along with an initial support solution for up to 5 years. As part of the agreement, Rafael will serve as key systems integrator, including provision of communications links and integration with existing in-service communications infrastructure.
Nevertheless, industry executives in Europe reacted angrily to the award of the BMC4I system to the Israeli contractor. “Everybody was extremely surprised the MoD opted for Rafael. Politically, industry thought that was a route the UK government wouldn’t go down. It’s something other MoD’s, like the Israeli or French, would never have done. It makes you wonder just what parts of the local defense industry the government is willing to defend,” said the executive, who asked not to be named.
Doug Barrie, the senior air analyst at the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank in London said he was puzzled by the decision. “At least on paper this looks like a sensitive area to award to a non-NATO or non-European partner. I’d have thought the government might have wanted to stay closer to home with this technology, as it arguably comes into the territory of sovereign operational capability,” said Barrie.
Concerns have also been raised by executives here about sharing sensitive Land Ceptor missile data with the Israeli company, which is itself a significant missile developer. An MoD spokeswoman said the department had addressed the issue in the contract. “Appropriate non-disclosure agreements are in place between the participating companies, along with safeguards around sensitive information and what needs to be shared,” said the spokeswoman.
Land Ceptor is currently in development led by the British arm of MBDA. The weapon is part of the Common Anti-Air Modular Missile family, the naval version of which has also been ordered by the Royal Navy.
MBDA was one of the bidders for the BMC4I requirement. Lockheed Martin , Northrop Grumman, Thales and Saab were also thought to have lodged bids......
The BMC4I order is the final major element of a more than two-year program aimed at beefing up the Falkland ground-based air defenses currently reliant on the aging Rapier ground-to-air missile. MBDA secured a deal to supply the British Army with a new ground-to-air weapon, known as the Land Ceptor, at the end of 2014, and that was followed several months later by the MoD acquiring additional Giraffe surveillance radars and updating existing sensors in a deal with Saab.
Gutter politics of the worst kind.
Would not have happened if Mrs Clinton had won.
Just another indicator of how desperate and out of depth the Government is regarding Brexit and Trump. Trump loves Tel Aviv so now we do. Kiss Israel's a*rse but make sure it's thousands of miles away. Get deals at ANY cost to prop up the already trashed British economy and create the illusion that we are still a main player in the world.
Time for coffee and a nap...
Would not have happened if Mrs Clinton had won.
Just another indicator of how desperate and out of depth the Government is regarding Brexit and Trump. Trump loves Tel Aviv so now we do. Kiss Israel's a*rse but make sure it's thousands of miles away. Get deals at ANY cost to prop up the already trashed British economy and create the illusion that we are still a main player in the world.
Time for coffee and a nap...
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Next to Ross and Demelza
Age: 53
Posts: 1,235
Received 52 Likes
on
21 Posts
Maybe, just maybe, the Israeli system was the best one available...
In any case, I really cannot see the UK government 'sucking up' to Israel. Not with all those contracts with other Middle Eastern countries we want to win.
In any case, I really cannot see the UK government 'sucking up' to Israel. Not with all those contracts with other Middle Eastern countries we want to win.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 65
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An interesting article that ORAC copied here (#131).
Strange to read that instead of feeding its own industry, the money mostly goes to Israel, Sweden, etc., and only a part of it (UK part of MBDA) remains in the country.
Building a BMC4I and radar network for this particular "use case", which implies a quite limited scenario as compared with e.g. a theatre-level one, appears to be not a cutting-edge task. And especially against an adversary obviously not from the "premier league" (in contrast to football). Even if the situation in the industry is that bad, it could be a chance to improve it a little bit.
Perhaps there is too much politics under the carpet....
Strange to read that instead of feeding its own industry, the money mostly goes to Israel, Sweden, etc., and only a part of it (UK part of MBDA) remains in the country.
Building a BMC4I and radar network for this particular "use case", which implies a quite limited scenario as compared with e.g. a theatre-level one, appears to be not a cutting-edge task. And especially against an adversary obviously not from the "premier league" (in contrast to football). Even if the situation in the industry is that bad, it could be a chance to improve it a little bit.
Perhaps there is too much politics under the carpet....
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Used in the Iron Dome system the Israeli's use for picking off Hamas rockets, so a highly effective proven system. Looks like a good risk free choice.
http://www.rafael.co.il/5620-691-en/Marketing.aspx
http://www.rafael.co.il/5620-691-en/Marketing.aspx
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 65
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ORAC,
Well, they indeed can hit most of the flying pieces of metal tubes (that Hamas rockets are made from), but not all, BTW. During one of my visits to Israel I even watched a couple of successful interceptions (explosions in the air) with a local friend of mine (wives preferred to stay deep inside the house). But is it a scenario envisioned for that remote archipelago?
IMHO, a good alternative (from the battle management stand-point) would be a kind of SSDS (ship self-defense system) installed on (US) air carriers, but a bit more distributed across the shoreline.
Well, they indeed can hit most of the flying pieces of metal tubes (that Hamas rockets are made from), but not all, BTW. During one of my visits to Israel I even watched a couple of successful interceptions (explosions in the air) with a local friend of mine (wives preferred to stay deep inside the house). But is it a scenario envisioned for that remote archipelago?
IMHO, a good alternative (from the battle management stand-point) would be a kind of SSDS (ship self-defense system) installed on (US) air carriers, but a bit more distributed across the shoreline.
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Durham
Age: 49
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ORAC,
Well, they indeed can hit most of the flying pieces of metal tubes (that Hamas rockets are made from), but not all, BTW. During one of my visits to Israel I even watched a couple of successful interceptions (explosions in the air) with a local friend of mine (wives preferred to stay deep inside the house). But is it a scenario envisioned for that remote archipelago?
IMHO, a good alternative (from the battle management stand-point) would be a kind of SSDS (ship self-defense system) installed on (US) air carriers, but a bit more distributed across the shoreline.
Well, they indeed can hit most of the flying pieces of metal tubes (that Hamas rockets are made from), but not all, BTW. During one of my visits to Israel I even watched a couple of successful interceptions (explosions in the air) with a local friend of mine (wives preferred to stay deep inside the house). But is it a scenario envisioned for that remote archipelago?
IMHO, a good alternative (from the battle management stand-point) would be a kind of SSDS (ship self-defense system) installed on (US) air carriers, but a bit more distributed across the shoreline.