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

UK - More defence cuts

Wikiposts
Search
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.

UK - More defence cuts

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 6th Feb 2018, 21:56
  #121 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 607
Received 10 Likes on 7 Posts
I do wonder how BBMF survive. Could they not be civilianised, given charitable status and moved to Duxford? Something along the Canadian model?
No, I'm not sure that would work so well. I'm sure BBMF cost far less to run than the Reds. Now if the Hawk T1 is going out of service then perhaps they should be given to BBMF to operate!
H Peacock is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 00:55
  #122 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,892
Received 2,832 Likes on 1,210 Posts
I have found something they could cut without effecting operational commitments, it's this on the RAF website... the RAF's window on the world

https://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/seakingprototype.cfm

https://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/merlin.cfm

Seriously, kill the Reds off and get the BBMF farmed out as per the RNHF
NutLoose is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 07:50
  #123 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 26,806
Received 270 Likes on 109 Posts
Seriously, kill the Reds off and get the BBMF farmed out as per the RNHF
BOLLEAUX to any such stupidity!
BEagle is online now  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 08:02
  #124 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Age: 63
Posts: 1,854
Received 77 Likes on 43 Posts
I doubt if disbanding the Red Arrows and the BBMF will render anything other than further diminishing returns. Looking to chop stuff or centralise the Armed Forces further feeds into the very same spiral downwards. Nothing will change any British Government's regard for the Armed Forces as an emergency fund for everything else until we're back into a situation where we are fighting a war for survival once again. Same goes for the rest of Europe. Lord Richards was supporting further cuts inadvertently the other day on Forces News, there he was calling for a reduction in the role of the individual service chiefs, we should assign more authority the Chief of the Defence Staff. His implied point being the CDS should be the sole Defence Chief. Again, such an approach just pushes everything down the spiral toward utter insignificance.

FB
Finningley Boy is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 09:05
  #125 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,892
Received 2,832 Likes on 1,210 Posts
The RNHF is self supporting and costs the Navy nothing, hence go that route.

The Reds are a luxury we can no longer afford, the problem there is that is the one cut the Joe Public would take on board and would make them think. They are using 30 year old clapped out jets that the rest of the world has moved on from and are no longer really a relevance as a marketing tool for a British aircraft industry that has long since become a bit player.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 09:07
  #126 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,527
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Well said BEagle!
jindabyne is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 09:20
  #127 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Here
Posts: 1,707
Received 37 Likes on 23 Posts
Originally Posted by NutLoose
The RNHF is self supporting and costs the Navy nothing, hence go that route.
And they struggle for funds.

How about combining Sandhurst, Cranwell and Brittania and having a single Officer training College?
Davef68 is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 10:26
  #128 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 2,164
Received 47 Likes on 23 Posts
Probably because of the extra expense teaching soldiers about warships and teaching sailors about digging and bayonets.

If you take the RAF College Cranwell as an example you will find it has already combined with RAF officer and aircrew selection (for all services, in the latter case), flying training units, CFS, NCO Aircrew Training, Ascent (PFI), engineering training, logistics training and assorted others with a heavy dose of contractor support. As such it is pretty hard to find any savings, only additional expense if a fraction of it joined a one trick pony outfit such as Sandhurst.
Just This Once... is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 10:47
  #129 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: East Sussex
Posts: 1,075
Received 17 Likes on 7 Posts
Thinking out loud...We (the UK) need to figure out our role in the world post-Brexit, and make HM Forces fit for that role!

Do we batten down the hatches, scrap the Royal Marines and consign amphibiosity to the same dustbin as (proper) MPA, SAR, fleets of tanks and frigates; and just keep a Brigade on high-readiness as the armed-wing of Oxfam and a few Typhoons on H24 to meet the odd Bear H?

...or do we continue to be America's partner in the War on Terror (copyright 2001) once outside Europe and sail into victory on our new CVFs with a glorious fleet of 40 Lightnings (no risk of attrition then!), air-assaulting the next 'sh!t-h0le' country into the 2020s with lashings of Chinooks and Paras, kicking down doors around the world?


..or will we continue to salami-slice everything and do ALL of the above with a reduced real-terms budget while the great god 'SkoolsnOspitals' gets all the public's attention/money/noise?

I know which option I would bet on...
Training Risky is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 10:49
  #130 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 527
Received 170 Likes on 91 Posts
And all of this is chump change. Merging the colleges, binning the reds and the BBMF and all the other sacred cows like HAC will be lost in the noise.
Not_a_boffin is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 11:16
  #131 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,892
Received 2,832 Likes on 1,210 Posts
Ok, If you want to save money, I cannot understand this damned fixation with moving training facilities, since I was in it has been at St Athans, Halton, Cosford, was going back to St Athans but scrubbed no doubt after fortune squandered on planning it.. then onto Lyneham where the runway will be closed and then cancelled again and back to Cosford.. in the mean time the planned rebuild of Lynham is going ahead just for the Army at £121,000,000 cost.... call me old fashioned but I would like to know how long it would take if they all remained where they all were taking into account the extra £121 million budget before an appreciated saving would be seen.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-34243439

Every move must cost a small fortune, build up new camp, put old one into storage.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 11:34
  #132 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Not far from EGPH.
Posts: 117
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by NutLoose
The Reds are a luxury we can no longer afford, the problem there is that is the one cut the Joe Public would take on board and would make them think. They are using 30 year old clapped out jets that the rest of the world has moved on from and are no longer really a relevance as a marketing tool for a British aircraft industry that has long since become a bit player.
Actually, the oldest Hawk T1s are over 40 years old now
XR219 is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 15:44
  #133 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Here
Posts: 1,707
Received 37 Likes on 23 Posts
Originally Posted by Just This Once...
Probably because of the extra expense teaching soldiers about warships and teaching sailors about digging and bayonets.

If you take the RAF College Cranwell as an example you will find it has already combined with RAF officer and aircrew selection (for all services, in the latter case), flying training units, CFS, NCO Aircrew Training, Ascent (PFI), engineering training, logistics training and assorted others with a heavy dose of contractor support. As such it is pretty hard to find any savings, only additional expense if a fraction of it joined a one trick pony outfit such as Sandhurst.
Yes, I was just trying to stir up a little light hearted inter-service rivalry.

The sad fact is the only way to save significant amounts of money is to lose capability. We've seen that before when we lost Jaguar, Sea Harrier, Harrier GR9 and Nimrod. In that respect, the BBMF and even the RAFAT are relatively small pebbles.

However, losing amphibious capability has a strong hint of preparing to fight the last war.
Davef68 is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 15:56
  #134 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,892
Received 2,832 Likes on 1,210 Posts
The sad fact is the only way to save significant amounts of money is to lose capability. We've seen that before when we lost Jaguar, Sea Harrier, Harrier GR9 and Nimrod. In that respect, the BBMF and even the RAFAT are relatively small pebbles.
Which in itself is a short sighted cost saving exercise that has a knock on effect on the other fleets that have to take up the slack and thus burn through their fatigue lives and projected out of service dates earlier, unless you bring forward mid life updates etc to extend them.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 16:42
  #135 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,924
Received 139 Likes on 64 Posts
Nutloose,

That bit part player the British aircraft industry that you are knocking just happens to be the second largest aerospace industry on the planet.

Give the tired old cliches and stereotypical nonsense a rest eh?
pr00ne is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 17:53
  #136 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 81
Posts: 16,777
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Nutloose, you clearly missed the secret Infra plan when you were in.

Let us take a simple example. OCU 22X is located on a hangar annexed at RAF Y. The building isn't very good but they have managed for a number of years so clearly the need for change is low. RAF X is losing its resident sqns and offers other advantages so OCU22x is moved but the facilities are not perfect and it ius necessary to refurb and expand the facilities.

Meanwhile back at RAF X . . . you get the drift?
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 18:23
  #137 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 3,225
Received 172 Likes on 65 Posts
unless you bring forward mid life updates etc
Careful Nutloose, you'll be giving beancounters ideas. Some of us remember the Chief of Defence Procurement's edict of 1996 that, henceforth, no MLUs were permitted. All equipment must be bought new. Ironically, had Nimrod RMPA/N2000/MRA4 taken heed, we may have had continuous MPA. To be fair, he was deranged.
tucumseh is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 20:59
  #138 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,892
Received 2,832 Likes on 1,210 Posts
Originally Posted by pr00ne
Nutloose,

That bit part player the British aircraft industry that you are knocking just happens to be the second largest aerospace industry on the planet.

Give the tired old cliches and stereotypical nonsense a rest eh?
They might well be but unless the RAF wants a set of wings without a fuselage to hang them on, an engine without an aircraft, a missile that's launched from the ground, a set of undercarriage legs with nothing to support, then the UK Aerospace industry is totally pointless and a bit player..

Name a current modern military aircraft we produce in house, name an airliner we produce in house.. We might be the second biggest, but we have become a parts supplier, nothing more, nothing less, and it's going to get worse, when we buy in the all singing all dancing F35 from abroad, remember that, the aircraft we are a prime development financier of, but down the pecking order and below the likes of Israel when it comes to receiving them. Ohhh and before I forget, we might then have the all singing all dancing F-35 but we will be reliant on the most unstable unreliable country in NATO who are cosying up to our main threat to provide and maintain the engines for the fleet, namely Turkey.

And you think we are still the all singing all dancing 2nd aerospace country in the world.... Long since gone and reliance on the products of the likes of the USA simply drives a stake through both our capability and our independence.

If you want to look at a country that has the capability and foresight to still knock out there own military fighters I suggest you learn Swedish.


..

Last edited by NutLoose; 8th Feb 2018 at 09:14.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 21:14
  #139 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 257
Received 33 Likes on 8 Posts
So a suggestion of two options

1. We declare neutrality, we go down the Swiss model and enough to protect ourselves but be all things to all men. Instead wave the big stick through financial means and having all the cash or secrets

2. We carry on investing, doing everything we do and in fact more. We find by leaving a protection tax on the eu. If they want an independent nuclear deterrent or the Germans want to keep their hands clean for fear of returning to the old ways. Fine we will do it but it’s going to cost.
dagenham is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 22:07
  #140 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Nevada, USA
Posts: 1,604
Received 40 Likes on 27 Posts
In fact, in terms of aerospace export earnings, UK is now 4th in the world - behind both France and Germany - and further behind Germany than any other country in the Top 5 to 15 is behind the UK !

2016 figures:
  1. United States: US$134.6 billion (41% of total aerospace exports)
  2. France: $53.4 billion (16.2%)
  3. Germany: $44.6 billion (13.6%)
  4. United Kingdom: $21 billion (6.4%)
  5. Canada: $10.3 billion (3.1%)
  6. Singapore: $6.7 billion (2%)
  7. Japan: $5.1 billion (1.6%)
  8. Spain: $5.1 billion (1.5%)
  9. Italy: $4.9 billion (1.5%)
  10. Brazil: $4.8 billion (1.5%)
  11. Ireland: $4.1 billion (1.2%)
  12. China: $3.4 billion (1%)
  13. India: $3 billion (0.9%)
  14. Netherlands: $2.6 billion (0.8%)
  15. Israel: $2.4 billion (0.7%)
RAFEngO74to09 is offline  


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.