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

UK Strategic Defence Review 2020 - get your bids in now ladies & gents

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 Strategic Defence Review 2020 - get your bids in now ladies & gents

Old 2nd Dec 2019, 16:10
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,191
BVRAAM,

Did the end of the Cold War, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, NATO member states now abutting Russia and almost every former Warsaw Pact member now being a member of NATO pass you by completely?

Cos that's why the 250 target figure was dropped.
pr00ne is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2019, 16:57
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 196
Originally Posted by pr00ne View Post
BVRAAM,

Did the end of the Cold War, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, NATO member states now abutting Russia and almost every former Warsaw Pact member now being a member of NATO pass you by completely?

Cos that's why the 250 target figure was dropped.
I realise that, but I will argue we had Tornado F3's, Tornado GR1/4's, Sea Harriers, regular Harriers and Jags to make up the numbers & share the roles equally. For a couple of years after the fall of the Soviet Union, we had F-4's and Buccaneers, too.

The Typhoon Force is now doing (almost) everything all the others combined, did, with a fraction of the available assets and people. That's a lot of work...
Russia and Iran now pose a threat. Maybe it's time for the country to sit down and start discussing defence again?
BVRAAM is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2019, 20:07
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: London
Posts: 26
BVRAAM is about the only person here that seems to get it.
250 were ordered, forgetting the ostrich thatís is quoting Warsaw Pact, how about the mass build up in Iran, China, and Korea. Theyíve been going on since before 90/91.
Should the Trump decide he needs to focus there, then what about a menacing resurgent neighbour near you today? Someone, somewhere, is going to go into significant harms way soon.
Heaven forbid any foe fights dirty and fails to adhere to Queensbury rules, maybe even nobbling at the pub!
Countdown begins is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2019, 20:42
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 196
I think it's only a matter of time before Iran attacks a neighbouring country again.
If Trump wins a second term, the gloves will be off - he won't need to keep the election promise of "no more wars," any more, because he'll be gone in January 2025, as per the 22nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, regardless.
If they do attack, Trump will retaliate with some form of military action. Then Russia will get involved, like they did in Syria, and it could be a mess. Like always, the UK will be dragged in and we haven't invested enough in defence to meet that demand.
Barely scraping 2% of GDP is frankly a joke, when we invest so much more in to bloated and poorly managed departments elsewhere. We should be investing at least 3!
BVRAAM is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2019, 20:55
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: London
Posts: 26
Totally agree, but lions led by donkeys! Forget Corbin or Boris as head of govt, the cancer is within already, spreading quickly. The RAF is compliant, not courageous now. Stats and D&I rule, for my boss he gets to choose if he does MOD1, yet has to screw the Nut on the Sqn for it. Surely as Ďwarfighters firstí everybody should be good to go?
Dont start me on the lame or downgrades, because circa 30k rapidly comes down to 23k that can deploy. Those are the guys leaving... before we meet with Uncle Sam to see to the Iranians.
Not a great read, but nobody wants to open the book and gab it. Stop the outflow, train quicker and stop letting SOs be little princesses, an SA80 canít shoot itself!
Countdown begins is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2019, 21:20
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 196
As a matter of fact, Trump has already hinted he will retaliate if they so much as dare strike another allied country again.
His restraint really is a sign of strength - a level of strength his predecessor didn't have. Iran should take that as a warning, and not as a cop out. Donald Trump doesn't make idle threats. Iran will call his bluff at their peril.
BVRAAM is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2019, 21:56
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,120
Donít forget we Ďpaid to be differentí on the F-35B not the A. If you want As...and itís understandable that you do...you might want to factor in all those bespoke UK weapon integrations onto the cost. Plus whichever is cheaper...probe onto A or boom onto PFI airline-tanker thingy.
My bet would be on the next order being for more Bs...but I think the through life buy will be near as damn it 50:50.
orca is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2019, 21:58
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 373
Originally Posted by alfred_the_great View Post
And then reset the culture such as ďOOADsĒ/ďdeploymentsĒ are routine and positive, not something to be whinged about - as many do on here.
A glib and frustrating comment. I really hope you are not one of those people that have deployed for 6 months in the last 10 yrs. I feel you might be slightly out of touch.

I can't speak for all, but OOA has never bothered me per se, I take the wages, I gotta earn them.

However.....There is a middle ground. When most units have a shortfall of 5-50% in the required manning due to sick, lame, lazy and empty JPANs, it gets tedious VERY quickly.

The 20% that do 80% of the work has never been more true than the last few years. I have spent 3.5 yrs of the last 6 yrs out with my own marital bed due to exercises, courses, deployments, standby, exercises etc... And just to be clear, I dont mean weekends aren't counted, I mean 1,277 days I was not home. Others that I have worked alongside, have spent around 9 months away from home in the same time period.

Personally I have been lied to and manipulated to deploy as "you are the only person qualified in the RAF". This really sticks in the throat and frustrates those who are willing to dig out blind and work hard. The role I was doing ended up with me being replaced by someone fresh out of Ph 2 training who did not have 50% of the required quals....

I had one of my Sqn mates coerced into deploying when his wife had diagnosed post-natal depression. She was 4 months post birth, had no family to help and had another child to look after whilst dealing with physical birth trauma and severe depression which led to a severe lack of sleep. My boss told him that there was no replacement and he had to go....Unsurprisingly he was Comp B'd less than a month into his deployment when his wife fell asleep at a set of traffic lights before the police were called and then had a breakdown which required a neighbour had to intervene and call the Chief Clerk! This was his 3rd deployment in 2.5 yrs.

Be mindful that general statements will by definition not include all. They will very likely deeply anger those, who are the opposite, of what your statements profess to demonstrate.

Last edited by heights good; 2nd Dec 2019 at 22:17.
heights good is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2019, 22:27
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: London
Posts: 26
Alfred made a foolish statement there, which many managed to ignore. Should you lift a chip off his formidable shoulders you will find many more; heís a sign of the times, Iím afraid. If you do people you can do more with less, if you do it Alfredís way thereís a stoker with a wrench at every bulkhead.. heís been lucky so far!
perhaps he could take his sanctimonious drive to the Navynet?
Countdown begins is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2019, 22:35
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: where-ever nav's chooses....
Posts: 636
Given I've over 2000 days LSA, I've deployed for 227 days on my last deployment, and I've led people around the world, I'd say I've earned the right to judge those who whinge about "not joining up to do OOADs".

There are a minority who sustain the burden - at every rank - and there are others who shine their arses.

Do we get it right - not always, but we should join with the expectation of repeated deployments. If you have a need not to go (and post-natal mental health support would be a good enough reason) then the system should support you as well.
alfred_the_great is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2019, 23:02
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: London
Posts: 26
Alfy, get over yourself, buttercup, Iíd give as much respect to a Fg Off who has 4 months after 18 months service. You need to get a grip, nobody is in awe of what you put... SO WHAT?! Itís what you joined to do, and without doubt you have been sustained and supported by various UPOs.
Your attitude stinks, and surely cannot be something to boast about or you see conducive to present service. Keep watching Windsor Davis, but keep quiet and let those who do the job still chat.
Countdown begins is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2019, 23:34
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Bar.
Posts: 24
In my opinion the most important thing from an Operational capability standpoint is to ensure future interoperability with the US. We need to move away from this huge European/NATO multi-national project idea.

Scrap the idea of Tempest and look to enter joint US/UK programs with licenses to build elements in the UK, even if it means buying off the shelf US designs.

You need to be able to seamlessley integrate into a Network enabled war now days to have a place at the table or be involved in night one of the war. This should be the highest priority, even if it means forfeiting some industrial kudos.

Done correctly, UK buy in to majority US programs is in my opinion the future of combat air. Smart contracting could see design or production elements shared to help UK industry, including weapons.

Mr Vice.
Mr. Vice is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2019, 01:29
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: London
Posts: 26
Mr Vice.. wholeheartedly agree. Th problem is our navy lacks clot and credibility. Remember when Cameron had to plead with the US to let a Type 23 join a US standing group in the gulf?!
Countdown begins is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2019, 01:30
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: London
Posts: 26
Mr Vice.. wholeheartedly agree. Th problem is our navy lacks clout and credibility. Remember when Cameron had to plead with the US to let a Type 23 join a US standing group in the gulf?!
Countdown begins is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2019, 08:44
  #35 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 370
Trouble is Vice is that you are then giving up any chance of taking any independent decisions. The UK is supposed to be leaving the EU because it doesn't want to be dictated to and organised by foreigners but your scheme would see the US having total control over UK military equipment etc.

Secondly can you afford it? The US spends a lot more on kit (item by item) than the UK does.......................
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2019, 08:48
  #36 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 370
Back on thread:-

In a perfect world the politicians would lay out what they want the military to do - the military would then estimate independently what forces are needed and then someone (also independent ) like the Institute for Fiscal Studies would crunch the costs and tell Govt this is the bill ....... you'd go round the hoops a few times to get to an answer

I'm sure people e.g. Sir Humphrey Appleby) will claim that this is what is done now in Whitehall - but I think it should all be done in public - then we can see who is grandstanding
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2019, 12:30
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Bar.
Posts: 24
Originally Posted by Asturias56 View Post
Trouble is Vice is that you are then giving up any chance of taking any independent decisions. The UK is supposed to be leaving the EU because it doesn't want to be dictated to and organised by foreigners but your scheme would see the US having total control over UK military equipment etc.

Secondly can you afford it? The US spends a lot more on kit (item by item) than the UK does.......................
In answer to a couple of your points:

1) The UK is leaving the EU yet is getting involved in Tempest with Italy and Sweden. Both nations who have no interest in the sort of expeditionary warfare we have been carrying out for decades. How will you develop and expand the platform to suit your needs when the partner nations share no interest in spending money to increase the capability? This is often seen in the Eurofighter Program.

2) I would be interested to see your figures on how the US spend a lot more 'item by item' than the UK does. I am pretty sure that given scales of economy the Australian procurement of US Hornets works out cheaper than the Typhoon purchase for the UK.

The US would not have total control over your kit and equipment and where you use it, that is nonsense. What it would give you is access to spares and combined development. As I mentioned before, UK industry could benefit from integrating great UK weapons on to US platforms and offering the US the benefit of our weapons if they did decide to purchase.

Finally, on what planet do you think we would ever get involved in an independent war. Look at the state of our current government and national appetite for overseas Operations. Get real, we are no longer a global super power. Lets move forward and integrate with the US, they have been involved in every single conflict we have been in for the past 30 years and we could not have done without them, the sooner we get over the notion of the UK as an independent Global Military Power the better.

Lets accept where we are, channel our funding to buy the best capability we can in order to seamlessly integrate with our preferred partner for the greatest combined effect.

Mr Vice.
Mr. Vice is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2019, 15:35
  #38 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 370
"the sort of expeditionary warfare we have been carrying out for decades"

i'm not sure that has a great deal of public support in the UK any longer............ nor is there a great deal of enthusiasm for being US mercenaries - it hasn't worked out very well since 2000
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2019, 17:25
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: London
Posts: 26
The PoW and QE are future artificial reefs, nothing more.
Letís put them near... China for example. A years ago some clever Navy spokesman said about the acoustic range of QE... Ď doesnít matter as itís not an ASW assetí. Thatís maybe because itís the target, so... maybe itís acoustic range does matter?
Lions led by donkeys! We donít have enough P8s, helicopter canít do wide area surveillance and the RAF answer is to replace experience willingly for cheaper people. It will end in tears. When 20t of water floods in, itís a minor problem?!
I recall the article just 2 weeks ago when a helpful MOD spokesman told the papers the F35 had a 20:1 advantage. So 20 Chinese stealth, or Russian for that matter, and we offer SEAD or DEAD?
At the end of the day, thereís no getting real, thereís flag waving and euphoria, for whatever reason.
Time for the SDSR? YES. Time to outsource to Deloitte? YES, the MOD cannot be trusted, itís too much jobs for the boys, and little comprehension of the stakes the pilots face.
Our next war may not be against a country of tribes, but one against overwhelmingly stiff odds and a less belligerent canopy.
Countdown begins is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2019, 18:52
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere Sunny
Posts: 1,537
Originally Posted by Countdown begins View Post
The PoW and QE are future artificial reefs, nothing more.
Letís put them near... China for example. A years ago some clever Navy spokesman said about the acoustic range of QE... Ď doesnít matter as itís not an ASW assetí. Thatís maybe because itís the target, so... maybe itís acoustic range does matter?
Lions led by donkeys! We donít have enough P8s, helicopter canít do wide area surveillance and the RAF answer is to replace experience willingly for cheaper people. It will end in tears. When 20t of water floods in, itís a minor problem?!
I recall the article just 2 weeks ago when a helpful MOD spokesman told the papers the F35 had a 20:1 advantage. So 20 Chinese stealth, or Russian for that matter, and we offer SEAD or DEAD?
At the end of the day, thereís no getting real, thereís flag waving and euphoria, for whatever reason.
Time for the SDSR? YES. Time to outsource to Deloitte? YES, the MOD cannot be trusted, itís too much jobs for the boys, and little comprehension of the stakes the pilots face.
Our next war may not be against a country of tribes, but one against overwhelmingly stiff odds and a less belligerent canopy.
Too late - the big consultancies are over SDSR like a tramp on chips. All are offering their 'visioneering' and 'imagineering' across the services and the other SDDR players. At £1200 per consultant per day...

...Oh, and just to point out, SDSR is not conducted by the MOD. MOD and the three Services are active bystanders.
Whenurhappy is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.