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 13th Mar 2021, 09:39
  #601 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,370
Received 359 Likes on 208 Posts
Full-scale "briefing"/leak in todays Times ahead of Tuesday announcement - nothing particularly new but clearly written by the Minister Ben Wallace -

sorry I meant to say "to show how the Minister is decisive, forward looking and willing to fight the vile Sunak for much needed cash for our digital transformation"
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 13th Mar 2021, 21:16
  #602 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Deepest darkest London
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The article in yesterdays Telegraph article in full.


£80bn boost for military to arm it with new tanks, warships and ‘kamikaze drones’

Government announces modernisation drive to ensure the Armed Forces are ready to fight the wars of the future.
Britain’s military is to get an £80 billion upgrade as the Government announces a modernisation drive this month to get the Armed Forces ready for the wars of the future.
The Telegraph understands that is roughly what will be invested in improving military equipment over the next four years. The total over the next decade could amount to close to £200 billion.

More than a hundred ageing Challenger 2 tanks will get new turrets, guns, sensors and engines, becoming more deadly in the battlefield, while new frigates are being acquired. The cap on the number of nuclear warheads Britain can stockpile will increase from around 180, The Telegraph has learned, ending a decades-long drive to cut stocks. There is also a new push under way to acquire what are called loitering munitions, sometimes dubbed “kamikaze drones”, which can hover around a target before donating. There has been alarm that hostile nations such as Russia and Iran have been using such munitions, which are a cross between cruise missiles and armed drones.
One senior government source said: “Technology has proliferated, that’s what we should worry about. Everyone from terrorists to other nations have modern equipment and killer drones.” The moves form part of a major rethink of Britain’s defence, foreign policy and security outlook, with results to be revealed in two government documents over the coming fortnight.

The first, the UK Integrated Review, will be published on Tuesday. It will map out what the Prime Minister’s ‘Global Britain’ vision means in practice, including a tilt to the Indo-Pacific. The second, the Defence Command Paper, will come out March 22. It will reveal a major modernisation plan for the Armed Forces, seen as long overdue by defence chiefs. The proposals will include cuts to troop numbers and the scaling back of so-called “legacy platforms”, which are parts of the military that have been prominent since the 20th century.

Government figures have stressed that such changes should be seen as “retirements” rather than “cuts”, given the overall Ministry of Defence budget is increasing. “To modernise, some things have to be retired. Otherwise the musket would still be on the field,” a senior government source said. The changes will affect all branches of the Armed Forces, the Army, Royal Navy, RAF, and Strategic Command, which oversees cyber attacks. The focus on so-called kamikaze drones reflects how rapidly combat is changing in the battlefield, with nations (including adversaries) increasingly investing in them. A senior defence source said: “We’re seeing them used all over the place. How to counter the capability and how to use it are two things there is a lot of interest in.”

How Government is preparing for wars of the future. Boris Johnson has billed the integrated review into Britain’s foreign, defence and security policy as the most radical overhaul of the nation's posture since the end of the Cold War. ( Isn't that what they have almost all said).....

The review will be published on Tuesday, while on March 22 a Defence Command Paper will set out the Government’s plan for a generational modernisation of the Armed Forces. The Prime Minister unveiled a £16.5 billion funding uplift for the Ministry of Defence (MoD) over the next four years at the spending review last November to fund the strategy. The challenge for Ben Wallace, the Defence Secretary, and the service chiefs, has been to balance pouring cash into upgrading legacy platforms with investment in cutting-edge military technologies.

Nuclear Deterrent
Britain is set to publicly declare on Tuesday that it is increasing the number of nuclear warheads it can stockpile, The Telegraph understands. At present the UK has around 180 nuclear warheads. The higher cap will signal a new direction from Britain on nuclear non-proliferation, making a firm statement on the nation's position as a nuclear power. The Government has already confirmed it is replacing the existing warheads that are used in the Trident nuclear deterrent. Ministers have also committed to building four new Dreadnought Class nuclear attack submarines to replace the current Vanguard boats by the middle of the next decade. Defence sources said research collaboration between the UK and US was expected, but the MoD confirmed on Thursday night that both the warheads and submarines would remain independent, sovereign programmes.

The heightened cap is due to be unveiled amid fears about China’s swelling nuclear stockpile.

Sam Armstrong, of the Henry Jackson Society foreign policy think tank, said: “The world is an increasingly dangerous place and this increased nuclear deterrent tells us all we need to know about where the long term threat from China is heading.” Experts on nuclear non-proliferation stressed how striking a move the policy would be. Matthew Harries, a senior research fellow in nuclear policy at the Royal United Service Institute, said: “An increase in the UK’s declared nuclear stockpile cap, if confirmed, would be a significant reverse of steady disarmament progress since the end of the Cold War."

Tanks and armoured vehicles
The Army’s ageing Challenger 2 tanks require an urgent upgrade to their turrets, guns, sensors and engines. Around 150 to 170 of the UK’s 227 tanks will be upgraded, according to defence sources. The remainder will be mothballed for spares, it is understood. All 758 Warrior infantry fighting vehicles are meanwhile expected to be “abandoned” from next year. They are set to be sold off to save money, insiders have said. This decision will be balanced by a move to accelerate the introduction of more than 500 Boxer mechanised infantry vehicles. These vehicles are set to arrive next year to avoid a gap between the two programmes. A Whitehall source signalled the programme would also be expanded, saying: “We are increasing the order of Boxer and that’s the right thing to do.” Question marks hover over the future of the Army’s high-intensity armoured warfighting capability, if the modernisation does not also boost field artillery and air defence systems.

Troop numbers cut
The Army is set to fall to around 73,000 soldiers, finally abandoning its minimum threshold of 82,000 personnel – a target it has not met for years.
A formal reduction to the service has been on the cards since December 2019, when Boris Johnson dropped the pledge from the Tory election manifesto.
Its current full-time trained strength is 76,348. Service chiefs are set to rely on the organic departure of troops, due to resignation or retirement, to reduce the headcount rather than make personnel redundant, it is understood.

Fighter jets
Britain is expected to pull back from its previously stated ambition to buy 138 F-35 Lightning II fighter jets, which are the most expensive weapons system in military history. The UK is so far only contractually obliged to buy 48 of the stealth multi-role fighter jets by the end of 2025, at a cost of £9.1 billion. The US-designed fifth-generation jets will be bought in tranches over many years, however, meaning decisions about future orders can be thrown into the long grass, avoiding confrontation with Washington now about the final order numbers. Investment is also being poured into Tempest, a UK-led programme to develop a sixth-generation fighter jet. One design option is for this to be an unmanned aircraft. It is also set to be accompanied in flight by a swarm of unmanned combat drones known as “loyal wingmen”.

Innovative weapons
The use of loitering munitions, which are a cross between cruise missiles and armed drones, by Russia, Iran, Azerbaijan and other nations has been watched closely by the MoD. Defence chiefs have pushed for the UK to invest in developing a domestic capability. “We need to develop these capabilities, test them, experiment with them and work out how best to employ them. That might require some changes to how we organise the way we fight,” said a defence source. More investment is planned for autonomous, AI-enabled systems, including both aerial and underwater drones, as well as land-based robots. Unmanned capabilities are particularly attractive because they avoid the need to put personnel at risk of harm.

Fresh focus on the Indo-Pacific
The review is expected to set out the Government's post-Brexit “Global Britain” vision, which includes a new emphasis on the Indo-Pacific. HMS Queen Elizabeth, the first of Britain’s two new aircraft carriers which have collectively cost more than £6.2 billion, is due to set sail on its first operational deployment around late April. It will sail to the Mediterranean, the Indian Ocean and east Asia, into China’s backyard, testing freedom of navigation rights. Defence chiefs are also examining plans to “forward base” more personnel and assets (including warships) overseas in the Middle East and Pacific regions. Bases and ports in Japan, Australia and Singapore have been scoped out as potential options by officials. Britain has already confirmed plans to triple the size of its military base on the coast of Oman to enhance the Royal Navy's presence "east of Suez" after Brexit.

Boost to fleet and shipyards
The Prime Minister has announced that the UK will acquire eight Type-26 frigates, which are sophisticated anti-submarine warships, as well as five Type-31 frigates, cheaper general purpose warships. His plan is to restore Britain’s position as “the foremost naval power in Europe”, he said last autumn, as he also confirmed plans for new support ships to supply food and ammunition to the aircraft carriers, and new multi-role research vessels. Combined, the programmes are set to support up to 10,000 jobs and are seen in Whitehall as a boost to the Union as shipyards in Scotland and Northern Ireland are set to benefit.

New organisations
A long-delayed National Cyber Force, a joint unit between the MoD and GCHQ, is being created to boost protection to Britons at home as well as to develop new offensive cyber weapons to deploy against adversaries overseas. RAF Space Command is expected to be capable of launching its first rocket by 2022 and will aim to better shield the UK’s satellites. A new Artificial Intelligence agency is meanwhile set to develop autonomous weapons systems. Stressing the importance of data in future conflicts, a senior Whitehall source said: “What’s certain is that the future will be about cyber, space, AI.”

An MoD spokesman said: “As threats change our Armed Forces must change and they are being redesigned to confront future threats, not re-fight old wars. The Armed Forces will be fully staffed and equipped to confront those threats. “We will not comment on speculation about the Integrated Review, which will be published on Tuesday.”
Valiantone is offline  
Old 13th Mar 2021, 21:18
  #603 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Deepest darkest London
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have posted it on the Aviation Muppet forums although one was far more concerned about things left at Fairford (Item rather well placed in the Mess section)
Valiantone is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2021, 08:01
  #604 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,356
Received 1,565 Likes on 712 Posts
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/u...nger-n59m8skjq

UK’s new foreign policy — Russia is No 1 danger

Britain will treat Russia as a “hostile state” but China primarily as a commercial “competitor”, according to a landmark review of British foreign policy that Boris Johnson will publish on Tuesday.....

In a clear sign that the two powers will be treated differently, the document brands Russia the “biggest state-based threat” that Britain faces as a result of its frequent aggressive incursions into UK waters and airspace and its willingness to use state-sanctioned murder against dissidents on British soil.....

The document will seek to persuade Britain’s former EU partners that the UK plans to remain a cornerstone of European security as a leading partner in Nato.


It will also say that Britain must seek out partners in key strategic regions including the Indo-Pacific. Johnson has targeted India for his first foreign visit next month once lockdown lifts to try to build closer trading links and close relations in pharmaceuticals and the high-tech sectors.

The paper will also confirm that the UK is applying for membership of the CPTPP, the trans-Pacific trade partnership, and has also become a “dialogue partner” of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean). In Africa, the UK will target closer security and diplomatic links with Nigeria.....

One senior Whitehall source said: “The principal threat to the UK is from Russia. That’s in there. It doesn’t talk about China in those terms. China is a competitor that tries to steal intellectual property and is a threat to economic security but that’s not the same as what happened in Salisbury.”.....

Another source said: “Russia is a hostile state, China is a global challenge. With China the approach is: compete where necessary, co-operate where possible, counteract when necessary.”......
ORAC is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2021, 08:17
  #605 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,370
Received 359 Likes on 208 Posts
Interesting spin in the "Torygraph" - not cuts but retirements - reminds me of Mr Blairs "aspirations"
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2021, 13:16
  #606 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by ORAC
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/u...nger-n59m8skjq

UK’s new foreign policy — Russia is No 1 danger

Britain will treat Russia as a “hostile state” but China primarily as a commercial “competitor”, according to a landmark review of British foreign policy that Boris Johnson will publish on Tuesday.....

In a clear sign that the two powers will be treated differently, the document brands Russia the “biggest state-based threat” that Britain faces as a result of its frequent aggressive incursions into UK waters and airspace and its willingness to use state-sanctioned murder against dissidents on British soil.....

The document will seek to persuade Britain’s former EU partners that the UK plans to remain a cornerstone of European security as a leading partner in Nato.


It will also say that Britain must seek out partners in key strategic regions including the Indo-Pacific. Johnson has targeted India for his first foreign visit next month once lockdown lifts to try to build closer trading links and close relations in pharmaceuticals and the high-tech sectors.

The paper will also confirm that the UK is applying for membership of the CPTPP, the trans-Pacific trade partnership, and has also become a “dialogue partner” of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean). In Africa, the UK will target closer security and diplomatic links with Nigeria.....

One senior Whitehall source said: “The principal threat to the UK is from Russia. That’s in there. It doesn’t talk about China in those terms. China is a competitor that tries to steal intellectual property and is a threat to economic security but that’s not the same as what happened in Salisbury.”.....

Another source said: “Russia is a hostile state, China is a global challenge. With China the approach is: compete where necessary, co-operate where possible, counteract when necessary.”......
Breathtakingly silly. Chjna has just torn up its Hong Kong agreements, while Russia has acquiesced in an aggressive NATO expansion into eastern Europe.
Russia. a declining state, with a sub replacement birth rate and a population a third that of Europe is somehow the most dangerous threat, while the reality of salami slice industrial, real estate and influence expansion by a massively larger China is ignored.
etudiant is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2021, 15:44
  #607 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,370
Received 359 Likes on 208 Posts
China doesn't go round poisoning people left right and centre

China has things we want


Asturias56 is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2021, 16:23
  #608 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Age: 42
Posts: 1,559
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ORAC
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/u...nger-n59m8skjq
UK’s new foreign policy — Russia is No 1 danger
Britain will treat Russia as a “hostile state” but China primarily as a commercial “competitor”, according to a landmark review of British foreign policy that Boris Johnson will publish on Tuesday.....
I am geuninely interested in this one. Either China is commiting genocide among thier own Uyghur non conforming population or they're not. What's the formal HNG view on all those camps? There are obvious parallels but it seems we're being wilfully blind. It feels we are appeasing China because there's no way to win against them militarily in a non MAD way. But there's barely even a squeak of protest. Iraq was invaded on the basis of much less I suspect.
Skipness One Foxtrot is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2021, 16:43
  #609 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Asturias56
China doesn't go round poisoning people left right and centre

China has things we want
No argument that China gets a pass because they supply us with lots of stuff, unlike Russia. That said, it is doubtful that Russia is poisoning people left, right and center.
The reported poisonings of late, of the Skripals and of Navalny, have been so slapdash that one may doubt whether these events are getting honestly reported.
The Litvinenko case by contrast was brutally effective, with an unambiguous trail, a markedly different and imho more Russian approach.
etudiant is offline  
Old 15th Mar 2021, 08:41
  #610 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,370
Received 359 Likes on 208 Posts
" one may doubt whether these events are getting honestly reported."

Etudiant - they were able to track the Russian killers on CCTV on both visits to Salisbury and they were identified by RUSSIAN activists. And is Russia so dysfunctional that state of the art chemical weapons are available to anyone?

You just look silly when you try and excuse such things
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 15th Mar 2021, 16:00
  #611 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Just behind the back of beyond....
Posts: 4,183
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
https://www.kcl.ac.uk/warstudies/ass...experience.pdf

This paper examines several features which have been a constant within the UK’s defence review process, particularly those pertaining to air and space power. These common features can be summarised as:

1. A tendency to highlight new technologies and capabilities which will permit the UK to fulfil its ambition to act as a major power on the world stage with smaller armed forces;

2. Subsequent realisation that the equipment programme required to achieve these ambitions is, in fact, unaffordable unless significant additional investment is made in defence or the ambitions trimmed yet further;

3. A tendency to release money for the new capabilities by declaring that certain items of equipment are most unlikely to be required in future, or can be disposed early as they no longer fit into the UK’s defence posture – only for events to intrude upon these assumptions.

Jackonicko is offline  
Old 15th Mar 2021, 17:28
  #612 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Asturias56
" one may doubt whether these events are getting honestly reported."

Etudiant - they were able to track the Russian killers on CCTV on both visits to Salisbury and they were identified by RUSSIAN activists. And is Russia so dysfunctional that state of the art chemical weapons are available to anyone?

You just look silly when you try and excuse such things
Please note that I'm not making excuses, just that Russia has demonstrated that it will strike ruthlessly and effectively, whereas in these two cases the presumed targets survived.
Two botched killing in a row when the boss is a former KGB man just seems implausible to me.
Plus the peculiar fact that the Skripals appear to be held in custody by the British intelligence community and still have not been allowed to meet the press in person afaik.
So very murky imho, as is usually the case where the intelligence agencies are involved.
etudiant is offline  
Old 15th Mar 2021, 18:09
  #613 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Deepest darkest London
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Would you want to appear on TV after that? Really.....!
Valiantone is offline  
Old 15th Mar 2021, 21:07
  #614 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 661
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It is rumoured in the press (Guardian) that trident warheads to go from 180 to 260.

I don't see the benefit in doing this. One story suggests there is a US angle in terms of justifying joint development, but not sure how that really plays out. There might be a technicality in the warhead lifecycle perhaps.

But it just looks like an unnecessary provocation / escalation - which will draw criticism - but I can't see an upside in terms of posture or deterrence and it will just cost more money and could probably have been masked in any case in terms of support considerations.

What's the view? Nothing classified of course. Perhaps there will be some explanation to come.

JFZ90 is offline  
Old 15th Mar 2021, 21:31
  #615 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by JFZ90
It is rumoured in the press (Guardian) that trident warheads to go from 180 to 260.

I don't see the benefit in doing this. One story suggests there is a US angle in terms of justifying joint development, but not sure how that really plays out. There might be a technicality in the warhead lifecycle perhaps.

But it just looks like an unnecessary provocation / escalation - which will draw criticism - but I can't see an upside in terms of posture or deterrence and it will just cost more money and could probably have been masked in any case in terms of support considerations.

What's the view? Nothing classified of course. Perhaps there will be some explanation to come.
Maybe adding Chinese targets to the strike plans?
etudiant is offline  
Old 15th Mar 2021, 22:27
  #616 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Devon
Posts: 2,809
Received 19 Likes on 15 Posts
Originally Posted by JFZ90
It is rumoured in the press (Guardian) that trident warheads to go from 180 to 260.

I don't see the benefit in doing this. One story suggests there is a US angle in terms of justifying joint development, but not sure how that really plays out. There might be a technicality in the warhead lifecycle perhaps.

But it just looks like an unnecessary provocation / escalation - which will draw criticism - but I can't see an upside in terms of posture or deterrence and it will just cost more money and could probably have been masked in any case in terms of support considerations.

What's the view? Nothing classified of course. Perhaps there will be some explanation to come.
If that indeed is the policy then I expect some sort of explanation but I share your reservations. I guess it is all in the details, but will it be at the expense of a third of RAF transport aircraft or ships deployed in the Gulf to protect international shipping?

Will the need to escort tankers and other merchant vessels in the Middle East be remembered? We have need to deploy fully armed and worked up frigates and destroyers to protect shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and off the Yemeni coast - within the last couple of years.

Does the issue of advanced weapons in the hand of proxies (eg both Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis) being given things like anti ship missiles or SAMs count as a 'grey zone threats? What about deniable things like mining from innocent looking vessels, or attack aircraft flown by mercenaries?

Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 15th Mar 2021 at 22:47.
WE Branch Fanatic is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2021, 12:40
  #617 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,356
Received 1,565 Likes on 712 Posts
Integrated Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy Review

https://www.scribd.com/document/4989...egrated-Review

https://bfpg.co.uk/2021/03/integrated-review-10-things/


The Integrated Review of UK Foreign Policy: 10 Key Insights
ORAC is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2021, 13:09
  #618 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Beyond the M25
Posts: 519
Received 48 Likes on 24 Posts
The US-designed fifth-generation jets will be bought in tranches over many years, however, meaning decisions about future orders can be thrown into the long grass, avoiding confrontation with Washington now about the final order numbers.
So, as of now the UK has no official programme of record when it comes to F-35 numbers?
Mil-26Man is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2021, 13:31
  #619 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,753
Received 2,732 Likes on 1,164 Posts
Well considering the US is looking at yet another F16 replacement on F35 cost grounds.
They are considering building a new jet that will learn from the F 35 mistakes, and that was supposed to originally have been the “low cost” replacement. Lol.

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinio...ch-ncna1259781
NutLoose is online now  
Old 16th Mar 2021, 14:21
  #620 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,370
Received 359 Likes on 208 Posts
well its out - and there's no real list of what the changes are going to be in the actual document

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...foreign-policy

More mentions of climate change than the military as far as I can see
Asturias56 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.