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

US General says British Army less than Par?!?!?!?

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.

US General says British Army less than Par?!?!?!?

Old 14th Feb 2023, 10:10
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 527
Received 170 Likes on 91 Posts
Originally Posted by Just This Once...
This is delusional Royal Navy thinking at its best. Your new ship eating itself and needing extensive repairs is precisely the reverse of an actual military capability. Only a fool would claim a positive for the speed at which an unplanned, lengthy and expensive repair is taking place.
It's no different to the T2 engine issue, the Tutor issues, the Atlas engine issues, the Typhoon seat issues. It's a bit more difficult to fix, what with the 'oggin and everything and a bit more visible, what with the ship being one of two rather large assets.
Not_a_boffin is online now  
Old 14th Feb 2023, 12:31
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 7,197
Received 393 Likes on 244 Posts
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin
At no point do any of them explain why the UK (or the US for that matter) should front up large land formations of troops in Eastern Europe, when European nations much closer to the threat - particularly Germany - appear unwilling to do so. It's not as if Ivan is showing particular competence in his ground operations is it? that's against an opposition with a fraction of the counter-air and air-to-ground capabilities that NATO would deploy in the first 5 minutes of any Russian push westwards.
There's a very real danger of learning precisely the wrong lessons from this conflict - and Lucas and his ilk are just the people to teach them....
Thank you for articulating some of the thoughts that have crossed my mind vis a vis roles and missions in NATO. I wonder if the Poles feel, sincerely, that the rest of NATO actually has their back.
Lonewolf_50 is online now  
Old 14th Feb 2023, 17:27
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: North Yorkshire....God's Country
Age: 59
Posts: 470
Received 42 Likes on 19 Posts
I don't suppose it helps that we have an ACM who's not exactly banging the table either.......there seemed to be so many missed opportunities when he was in front of the Defence Select Committee.
mopardave is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2023, 17:34
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,864
Received 2,816 Likes on 1,200 Posts
Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50
Thank you for articulating some of the thoughts that have crossed my mind vis a vis roles and missions in NATO. I wonder if the Poles feel, sincerely, that the rest of NATO actually has their back.
The amount of rearming they are doing I doubt it, the rest of NATO could learn from them as opposed sitting on their hands and twiddling their thumbs. They know the score re Russia’s ambitions if Ukraine falls, have lived under a Soviet regime and damned well will fight to stop that ever happening again.
NutLoose is online now  
Old 15th Feb 2023, 07:48
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,407
Received 361 Likes on 210 Posts
IIRC in both 1914 and 1939 the French weren't very impressed that the British could only field a couple of divisions in support of their forces. It's all very well saying you have a significant Navy and Air Force (which we did then) but fighting in Europe means infantry on the ground in large numbers.

Asturias56 is offline  
Old 15th Feb 2023, 08:01
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 527
Received 170 Likes on 91 Posts
Originally Posted by Asturias56
the French weren't very impressed
"Bof!"
Not_a_boffin is online now  
Old 15th Feb 2023, 08:17
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: GMT
Age: 53
Posts: 2,067
Received 182 Likes on 68 Posts
Originally Posted by Asturias56
IIRC in both 1914 and 1939 the French weren't very impressed that the British could only field a couple of divisions in support of their forces. It's all very well saying you have a significant Navy and Air Force (which we did then) but fighting in Europe means infantry on the ground in large numbers.
We have a commitment to NATO, which could be air or sea. However, when it comes to feeding human lives into a grinder on the ground in Europe, I'd like to see the EU members who have spent sweet FA on defence for decades, feed their youth into the grinder instead. NATO is the best solution, but the EU is no friend, and UK Defence should be postured to the UK, its interests and it's minimum obligation to NATO.
minigundiplomat is offline  
The following 3 users liked this post by minigundiplomat:
Old 15th Feb 2023, 08:32
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Threshold 06
Posts: 576
Received 25 Likes on 16 Posts
Rishi has said “He will do everything needed to defend Britain”

Very reassuring.
….and so it begins.

Apparently, according to Defence Secretary Wallace, we are conduction an urgent review of our posture in the light of recent U.S experiences.

As a first step, an export embargo on Map pins, sewing kits and knitting needles (in fact, anything sharp and pointy) has been applied and will be rigidly enforced, once the enforcers come back to work after their ongoing strike action.

However, the effect of this draconian governmental ban on the U.Ks industrial power base has been assessed as minimal, as everything is imported from China anyway.

Keep calm and carry on, I guess….
oldmansquipper is offline  
Old 15th Feb 2023, 08:36
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 527
Received 170 Likes on 91 Posts
Originally Posted by Asturias56
As Table Media, a German specialist news outlet, has revealed, Nato is so worried about Britain’s military overstretch that it has asked Germany to keep the rotating leadership of the alliance’s new spearhead force, the Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF), for a further year.

We must provide a 5,000-strong force, ready within two to five days. Crucially, these soldiers may not be committed to any other task. Britain habitually double-counts its military obligations, so that the same troops fulfil multiple, clashing duties. But Nato sees through this. It is shaming that our allies would prefer even the notoriously underpowered Germans to our own armed forces for this vital role.

The Ministry of Defence insists that Britain is ready to fulfil its commitment, though Nato has not denied making the request to Berlin. But all over our military machine, rivets are popping, while “the magical thinking is getting worse”, as Francis Tusa, a defence analyst, tells me.

That's a proper SoS!

Last edited by Not_a_boffin; 15th Feb 2023 at 09:03. Reason: Put working link in
Not_a_boffin is online now  
The following users liked this post:
Old 15th Feb 2023, 09:13
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,864
Received 2,816 Likes on 1,200 Posts
Interesting the Challenger 3 design has been signed off, one would have thought they would review parts of it in light of what they are learning from Ukraine re top armour etc
NutLoose is online now  
Old 15th Feb 2023, 09:23
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 527
Received 170 Likes on 91 Posts
Originally Posted by NutLoose
Interesting the Challenger 3 design has been signed off, one would have thought they would review parts of it in light of what they are learning from Ukraine re top armour etc
There's no amount of armour you can put on a tank to defeat a top-attack weapon without turning the tank into an immobile pillbox. You use active defences to counter that sort of weapon.
Not_a_boffin is online now  
Old 15th Feb 2023, 10:14
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,864
Received 2,816 Likes on 1,200 Posts
Originally Posted by oldmansquipper
Apparently, according to Defence Secretary Wallace, we are conduction an urgent review of our posture in the light of recent U.S experiences.

As a first step, an export embargo on Map pins, sewing kits and knitting needles (in fact, anything sharp and pointy) has been applied and will be rigidly enforced, once the enforcers come back to work after their ongoing strike action.

However, the effect of this draconian governmental ban on the U.Ks industrial power base has been assessed as minimal, as everything is imported from China anyway.

Keep calm and carry on, I guess….
Iv'e also learnt they have added bodge tape, plastic sheeting and broom handles to the list.
NutLoose is online now  
The following users liked this post:
Old 15th Feb 2023, 10:18
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,864
Received 2,816 Likes on 1,200 Posts
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin
There's no amount of armour you can put on a tank to defeat a top-attack weapon without turning the tank into an immobile pillbox. You use active defences to counter that sort of weapon.
True, but then were these part of the Chally 3 update or already fitted to the Chally 2 and if, not would it not be prudent to look at what is shown to work and modify if needed before they cut steel to allow for it, they may well have jamming for missiles, but for a grenade dropped from above?
The Germans incidentally late war added steel plates on legs over vunerable areas on the engine decks such as intakes or cooling grills to protect them from aerial attacks, so its nothing new..


NutLoose is online now  
Old 15th Feb 2023, 10:35
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 2,687
Received 850 Likes on 494 Posts
Originally Posted by minigundiplomat
We have a commitment to NATO, which could be air or sea. However, when it comes to feeding human lives into a grinder on the ground in Europe, I'd like to see the EU members who have spent sweet FA on defence for decades, feed their youth into the grinder instead. NATO is the best solution, but the EU is no friend, and UK Defence should be postured to the UK, its interests and it's minimum obligation to NATO.
NATO is a military alliance. The EU isn't.
Ninthace is online now  
Old 15th Feb 2023, 12:57
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 527
Received 170 Likes on 91 Posts
Originally Posted by Ninthace
NATO is a military alliance. The EU isn't.
Not from choice. Give them time.....
Not_a_boffin is online now  
Old 15th Feb 2023, 13:00
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 527
Received 170 Likes on 91 Posts
Originally Posted by NutLoose
True, but then were these part of the Chally 3 update or already fitted to the Chally 2 and if, not would it not be prudent to look at what is shown to work and modify if needed before they cut steel to allow for it, they may well have jamming for missiles, but for a grenade dropped from above?
The Germans incidentally late war added steel plates on legs over vunerable areas on the engine decks such as intakes or cooling grills to protect them from aerial attacks, so its nothing new..


There's a significant difference between resisting splinters / small arms and shaped charge or self-forging projectiles. That difference tends to result in multiple inches of additional material and consequent additional weight.
Not_a_boffin is online now  
Old 15th Feb 2023, 13:08
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 2,687
Received 850 Likes on 494 Posts
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin
Not from choice. Give them time.....
Unless there is a major withdrawal of commitment to NATO the US and Canada, I don't see it as likely. There would be too much duplication of effort and dual commitment of forces to both. While the EU has NATO to defend it, where is the benefit?
Ninthace is online now  
Old 15th Feb 2023, 15:43
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 527
Received 170 Likes on 91 Posts
Originally Posted by Ninthace
Unless there is a major withdrawal of commitment to NATO the US and Canada, I don't see it as likely. There would be too much duplication of effort and dual commitment of forces to both. While the EU has NATO to defend it, where is the benefit?
A common sense argument made many times over the last four decades, not least by Maggie. However, that hasn't stopped the EU from trying to advance a parallel organisation to succeed the old WEU.

You may wish to acquaint yourself with this....

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/eu-s...is-response_en

or this - which doesn't even mention NATO...
https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/eu-r...nt-capacity_en
Not_a_boffin is online now  
Old 15th Feb 2023, 15:54
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 2,687
Received 850 Likes on 494 Posts
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin
A common sense argument made many times over the last four decades, not least by Maggie. However, that hasn't stopped the EU from trying to advance a parallel organisation to succeed the old WEU.

You may wish to acquaint yourself with this....

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/eu-s...is-response_en

or this - which doesn't even mention NATO...
https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/eu-r...nt-capacity_en
Oh they may have aspirations, but I just don't see then going anywhere without involving NATO within a European context. The UK and I suspect most other countries do not have the forces to commit to two organisations and control of the military still rests with the sovereign states, not Brussels, does it not?
Ninthace is online now  
Old 15th Feb 2023, 16:51
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,864
Received 2,816 Likes on 1,200 Posts
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin
There's a significant difference between resisting splinters / small arms and shaped charge or self-forging projectiles. That difference tends to result in multiple inches of additional material and consequent additional weight.

Nooo, never.

I was just showing nothing is new, and that they were worrying about overhead weapons for a long time..
NutLoose is online now  

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.