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 18th Feb 2021, 16:51
  #541 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Just south of the Keevil gap.
Posts: 308
Surely this is an admission of the folly of the breaking up of DERA and trashing the legacy of all its predecessor organisations.
Shakes head in disbelief.
Cpt_Pugwash is offline  
Old 19th Feb 2021, 10:08
  #542 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 851
Originally Posted by Cpt_Pugwash View Post
Surely this is an admission of the folly of the breaking up of DERA and trashing the legacy of all its predecessor organisations.
Shakes head in disbelief.
It...kind of is, isn't it?
steamchicken is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2021, 07:51
  #543 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 2,744
Times today say s that the Army are proposing to mod/upgrade 150 Challenger 2 tanks at a cost of £1.2 Bn with a new German 120mm gun, scrap 77 Challenger 2's, retire the Warriors early instead of upgrading them and replacing them with Boxers at £ 1,5 bn instead

Planned to be announced after the Defence Review is published
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2021, 08:32
  #544 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 93
Originally Posted by Cpt_Pugwash View Post
Surely this is an admission of the folly of the breaking up of DERA and trashing the legacy of all its predecessor organisations.
Shakes head in disbelief.
Arguably - Dstl were to continue that role. Question is - why have ARIA when you have Dstl?
Not_a_boffin is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2021, 10:47
  #545 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 2,962
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin View Post
Arguably - Dstl were to continue that role. Question is - why have ARIA when you have Dstl?
My first question would be is the £800M to manage the research, or do it as well?

If the former, that's a lot, but not extraordinary when you look at the funding chucked at the Integration Authority and Military Aviation Authority, neither of whom actually do anything in their titles.

If the latter, stand by for a cut in the defence budget in order to contribute, ignoring the fact that project teams will still have to pay to 'pull through' the technology and apply the science.

A scientist somewhere will be presenting this as cost neutral, and a beancounter will be saying that's one small step from a savings measure.
tucumseh is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2021, 16:42
  #546 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 11,283
Sir Humphrey's Thin Pinstriped Line....

https://tinyurl.com/3s5bnvtv

To Boldly Sail No More - Is There a Case for Scrapping Royal Navy Frigates?

ORAC is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2021, 17:21
  #547 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 2,744
Jeez!! This is what happens

The RN is thinking of cutting escorts partly because they don't have enough people to man them and the Carriers at the same time (an outcome many of us forecast years ago) - but do you think once they cut to 17 they'll get the them back in 5 years time - I doubt it ....................... And the ones that are left will be buzzing around the carriers leaving gaps al over the shop - brilliant!!
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2021, 19:26
  #548 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London
Age: 64
Posts: 379
Is it worth noting that all this is media speculation? AFAIK we are not gong to hear anything definitive for a few weeks yet. They are entitled to their opinions, but what Lord West thinks about the future of the RN and Lord Dannatt et al about the future of the Army is just opinion. Oh yes, and the DM is suggesting the RAF Regt is for the chop, so it must be true.
Fortissimo is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2021, 19:31
  #549 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Devon
Posts: 2,561
Originally Posted by Asturias56 View Post
Jeez!! This is what happens

The RN is thinking of cutting escorts partly because they don't have enough people to man them and the Carriers at the same time (an outcome many of us forecast years ago) - but do you think once they cut to 17 they'll get the them back in 5 years time - I doubt it ....................... And the ones that are left will be buzzing around the carriers leaving gaps al over the shop - brilliant!!
The naval leadership made a case in 2015 to have a manpower uplift of something like 1500 personnel. Unfortunately it never happened as Cameron was scared of cutting 'troop' ie Army numbers.

Since then there has been ministerial guidance to put more warships to sea - partly because of the need to contribute to NATO. A lot of HQ type posts, occupied by senior people, have been axed in order to recruit more personnel to go to sea. Manpower is planned to increase by 3000 over three years.

I imagine that all sorts of options are being looked into. As Sir Humphrey's Twitter says, nothing has been decided. The cynic in me wonders if some of these things are leaked so that the real decisions do not look so bad.

Cross fingers!
WE Branch Fanatic is online now  
Old 24th Feb 2021, 19:57
  #550 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cambridge, UK
Age: 42
Posts: 38
Lots of rumours flying around right now...
JonnyT1978 is offline  
Old 25th Feb 2021, 12:46
  #551 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 274
Yes an awful lot of rumours and yes probably also some softening up so that the real thing seems less bad when it happens. All I would say is that politically and presentationally, cutting frigate numbers would be very difficult for HMG given all the recent puff about "the growing navy" and I'd be surprised if Johnson didn't veto the idea. It will certainly have been an option considered, and therefore available for leaking in the traditional way, but possibly no more than that. I guess they could just about spin it as a temporary short term dip in the context of longer term growth but I really can't see that appealing to the PM. But then who knows, we'll just have to wait and see,
Frostchamber is online now  
Old 25th Feb 2021, 13:16
  #552 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Jungle
Posts: 148
100 Sqn to get chopped.
Foghorn Leghorn is offline  
Old 25th Feb 2021, 13:59
  #553 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 961
Absent a clear leader, the process is inevitably degenerating into an intra-service scrap, with the Treasury taking copious notes about the weaknesses pointed out in each service's presentations be the other services.
etudiant is online now  
Old 25th Feb 2021, 17:58
  #554 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 93
Originally Posted by Foghorn Leghorn View Post
100 Sqn to get chopped.
Which given that 736NAS is definitely going (publically announced some weeks back) and its role to be taken on by 100, might be interesting....
Not_a_boffin is offline  
Old 25th Feb 2021, 18:18
  #555 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Jungle
Posts: 148
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin View Post
Which given that 736NAS is definitely going (publically announced some weeks back) and its role to be taken on by 100, might be interesting....
Certainly will be interesting!
Foghorn Leghorn is offline  
Old 26th Feb 2021, 06:16
  #556 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 11,283
UK following Russia into era of Hybrid Warfare?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/r...fuse-832sw9tfs

Royal Marine commandos on mission to disrupt and confuse

Small groups of Royal Marine commandos will be deployed on covert missions overseas to operate in the “grey zone” between peace and war where they can disrupt enemy activity.

Lieutenant Colonel Simon Rogers, commanding officer of 40 Commando, said that they would carry out “special operations” in sensitive places where a conventional deployment would increase political risk.

Commandos will take on the role of special forces so that the “highest end troops” are free to focus on the most demanding operations, he said.

Tasks could include deception operations where commandos send fake electronic transmissions to confuse adversaries, or missions to disrupt online systems and deceive enemy forces by making them think UK troops are positioned elsewhere.

Rogers told a conference at the Royal United Services Institute think tank that special operations referred to normal activity in unusual or sensitive places where sending large numbers of troops would cause problems for the government.

He said “special operations are now no longer the preserve of special forces” and that under the Future Commando Force programme the Marines would take on some of their roles to “ease the burden”.

What is more, terrorist threats and hostile state activity are overlapping and they are on a global scale,” he added, noting that the Future Commando Force programme needed to increase the Marines’ ability and capacity to operate in a “sub-threshold” space, a type of warfare where armed clashes are avoided.

By stopping the adversary operating in that area between peace and war, this could in turn prevent such activities leading to all-out conflict. Rogers added that the UK needed to ensure there was a “cost to malign activity below the threshold of conflict”.

Vice Admiral Jerry Kyd, fleet commander of the navy, told the conference that the military needed to recognise that the UK’s adversaries sought to win battles without having to take part in a conventional war.

That meant troops needed to be more proactive but still able to fight in a full-blown conflict. “When deterrence fails, we go to a shooting war very quickly indeed”, he said.
ORAC is offline  
Old 26th Feb 2021, 09:06
  #557 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 30
Originally Posted by Foghorn Leghorn View Post
100 Sqn to get chopped.
Very unlikely given the amount of funding and new projects being put into 100 Sqn over the coming years.
Hercules, BAE 146 and Puma on the other hand, will probably get chopped.
The...Bird is offline  
Old 26th Feb 2021, 15:42
  #558 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 2,744
can't see them chopping the Herc - you can't do everything with an A400...........
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 26th Feb 2021, 21:33
  #559 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Jungle
Posts: 148
Originally Posted by The...Bird View Post
Very unlikely given the amount of funding and new projects being put into 100 Sqn over the coming years.
Hercules, BAE 146 and Puma on the other hand, will probably get chopped.
Nope, there’s zero funding going into the Ton. I’ll give you, what may potentially happen is they will retire the Hawk T1s the Ton use and then stand the Sqn back up with the Hawk T2s to support the Qatari Hawk sqn in the UK.
Foghorn Leghorn is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2021, 01:15
  #560 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cambridge, UK
Age: 42
Posts: 38
More 'softening up'?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-grounded.html
JonnyT1978 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.