Defence Cuts latest
 

HUGE DEFENCE SHAKE-UP

The biggest shake-up of the military for a generation is being announced by the Defence Secretary.

Geoff Hoon told MPs the changes would ensure the armed forces could respond effectively to the new global challenges.


He announced that four infantry battalions - three from England and one from Scotland - are to be cut in the "restructuring" of the armed forces.

Three type-42 destroyers and three type-23 frigates will be taken out of service from the Royal Navy by March 2006.

Mr Hoon said that one RAF Tornado F-3 air defence squadron would be cut and the withdrawal of two Jaguar squadrons would be brought forward to 2006 - with the final Jaguar squadron to be disbanded in 2007.

Mr Hoon also announced that RAF Coltishall in Norfolk would be closed by the end of 2006 and the overall RAF manpower requirement reduced to around 41,000 by 2008.

The changes are driven in part by a shift in military strategy following the end of the Cold War towards the development of highly flexible rapid reaction forces.

But the shake-up also reflects financial pressures on the MoD.

Unveiling his White Paper 'Security in a Changing World' to the Commons in December, Mr Hoon said the emphasis would be on using technology to deliver the maximum military effect from the forces available.

There will be FOUR Battalions to be disbanded.
THREE Type 42 Destroyers to be mothballed.
THREE Type 23 Frigates to be mothballed
All Jaguars to be withdrawn by 2007.
Older Jaguars to be taken out of service by 2006.
RAF Coltishall to close by the end of 2006. ONE Tornado F3 Sqn to be disbanded.
MoD will buy the 4 C-17s in current lease and buy 1 more.
RAF reductions in manpower to be reduced by 41,000 by 2008!

All the grim details are here. The bullets are:

54(F) Jaguar to go by Apr 2005
41(F) Jaguar to go by Apr 2005
6 Jaguar by 2007

XI F3's by Oct 2005

My deepest symapthies to you all.

I'd have closed the MoD and sacked all the civil servants myself.

A sad day:(

Didn't the SDR (that security-driven, important refocusing, blah, blah) say that the minimum number of AD squadrons required was five?

If you can’t take a joke you shouldn't have signed up.

We will just have to fall back on our "legendary sense of humor!" (Again). :{

Missed some oh (baf)Hoon's rhetoric, can anyone confirm what is happening to the RAF Regiment? I heard that the Army were taking over with Rapier?

There has also been no mention about other base closures which have appeared in the press recently or the massive cuts expected to hit the SH rotary world, although this would be totally barking considering our recent hammering from NATO about lack of heli capability.

Glad to see that Typhoon seems to have escaped the chop so far, however, I am watching this space closely...............

RA's getting RAF Rapier, Rock numbers cut, Neat and Boulmer binned, NT 1st April 05, BL sometime round 2012

-Nick

The budget for new helos across the board (Merlin CSP, SABR, BLUH, SCMR, SAR) was about £4.1Bn.

It is now (according to the white paper) "over £3Bn" (actually only just over £3Bn).

This tallies REALLY well with the well publicised SH shortfall, not to mention some of the other points highlighted in the recent NAO Battlefield Helicopters report.

Quote of the day, courtesy defence white paper site....


"The Chiefs of Staff support the radical change we are pursuing and have been instrumental in its preparation. "

Read....

The Chiefs of staff support the radical change in order to not get the sack....

Like how hoon avoided the question regarding The MR4, and whether BWoS actually get it airbourne... I reckon its next for the chop.

Wasn't someone telling us that in fact, defence spending was up, and this was good news? If this is good news, I'd hate to see what bad news is....

If Colt is to go in 2006 and 6 Sqn in 2007, presumably they are moving elsewhere? Anyone confirm?

Nimrod 4 down to 12 aircraft according to revue - Current numbers at 21 (I think) therefore not far of half being retired (assuming they're not going to be operated at MK2) Therefore there could be an announcement about kinloss perhaps???

Techies, Admin and RAF Regt will be the main takers.

What beats me is the way its presented.....like it's good news for the forces!!

In light of the reduction in ship numbers - I'll say this (now on the third thread)..

........ there is to be a reduction in frigate and destroyer numbers. Inevitably this will exacerbate the problem caused by the loss of organic air defence. The loss of the Sea Harrier means that the fleet's first layer of defence against aircraft (not including third party assets) is the Type 42 Destroyer with Sea Dart.

The Type 23 Frigate is not primarily an anti air ship, but can provide extended point defence for herself and nearby vessels with vertical lauch Sea Wolf. Apart from being more suitable for anti missile use, the vertical launch version of Sea Wolf has 32 missiles ready to go as opposed to Sea Dart's two.

Because of the need to keep Type 42s due to the loss of Sea Harrier, Type 23s may be cut. This makes little sense, and is probably a consequence of the loss of organic air defence.

My guess is that losing Sea Dart would be less of a loss (considering all our frigates now have Sea Wolf, we have more sophisticated decoys and CIWS aboard high value units and some other vessels) than the SHAR/Blue Vixen/AMRAAM combination. Doesn't Sea Dart contain lots of 60s/70s technology? And even if it is upgraded the basic limitations of range and only having two missiles on the launcher.

When I was at University one of my lecturers was a ex RN Instructor Officer who had done other things in the mob. According to him the T42 design was criticised as a ship that would have trouble defending herself, let alone anyone else. The events of 1982 may have vindicated that view....

1. AAW. Sea Dart limited, old, and obsolecent.
2. Anti Surface. Same as above, additionally was Sea Dart ever serious in the anti ship role?
3. ASW. Noisy, difficult to use own sonar 2016, vulnerable to homing torpedoes or acoustic mines due to noise, no STWS, can't operate Merlin, aviation facilities limited.
4. MIOPS - due to problems with operating boats T42s are not the preferred platform for boarding duties.

I have been told the only task which has to be a T42 is the Five Powers' deployment in the Far East. Also escorting CVS/LPH/LPD(?), although I would have thought they'd be better of with a T23 providing extended point defence with vertical Sea Wolf and the Sea Harrier providing air defence.......

As I see it, we should have kept the batch two T22s we've scrapped as targets/flogged (interesting that the Romanians want 76mm guns fitted) and considered losing more of the T42s instead of the Sea Jet. However, the need to have a certain number of frigates/destroyers may make this unrealistic. Although these numbers are under threat at the moment. Perhaps the RN should acquire less sophisticated vessels for MIOPS and the like. Unfortunately the Treasury etc would no doubt use this to justify more cutbacks.

However, the need for the fleet to have an ability to deal with enemy aircraft/missiles at a range of more than a few miles means that we may end of losing more useful, better armed, Type 22 or Type 23 Frigates.

A more cynical view might be that the Type 42s are old. Many of them are due to be decommisioned in the next few years. The oldest Type 23 is newer than the newest Type 42. So if only a certain number of T42s are paid off now, the other ones will reach their paying off time in a few years anyway, so the frigate/destroyer numbers are reduced even more, which the Government then use to justify only ordering a limited number of Type 45 Destroyers.....

Lord Hill Norton said of John Nott: does not understand defence, and shows no apparent inclination to learn

Hoon appears to be made of the same stuff. The wrong stuff.

As as for losing yet another air defence squadron......

althenick MRA4 was at 18 aircraft, the announcement at kinloss was as follows , MRA4 cut to 12, MR2 fleet to be reduced by 5 aircraft by April 05, also 5 front line MR2 crews to be cut by April 05 along with 1 OCU syndicate. A review is underway to see whether we keep 3 front line Sqns or reduce to 2 front line Sqns

AD definitely not flavour of the moment. The Regt is loosing Rapier: 15, 16, 26 and 37 Sqns RAF Regt will also be sorely missed. Only slightly balanced by 3 and 63 Sqns RAF Regt (currently IS role in NI and QCS respectively) being bought up to strength as fully deployable 'general duties' field sqns. Overall reduction of 10% in RAF Regt strength.

If 6, 11, 16, 41 and 54 are for the chop, presumably somebody will decide to have a review of the Sqn numberplates remaining. We can then spend what little is left of the defence budget shifting the numberplates around and producing glossy brochures explaining why!

I like the idea on the other thread of the miltary having a Gov't review (orignially mis-typed as revue, not sure I wasn't right in the first place - bl00dy bunch of clowns). The Monster Raving Looney Party would have more of a clue!:mad:

Reggie Mental
6 Sqn (or whoever) to go to Coningsby for their last year-ish.

25% increase in C-17 strength......at least it's not all bad news....

This is just the skeleton guys!
They will put the flesh on after (if they win?) the next General Election - then we will see some reductions!!
But what if War-Doh! wins or perhaps the DimLebs?

Military jet noise - the sound of Freedom

Hardly surprising when the last time Brits came under attack from the air (not counting from their friends) was 22 years ago and the last time the UK was bombed from the air was 60 years ago.

The Treasury guys have a duty to look after our cash after all.

Plus when nobody has had smallpox for x decades you don't spend money on inoculations any more...do you?

I think I will go for a paddle, my feet are getting hot again. (Sorry only my mates will understand that)

Please will somebody come and lead me back to my ward. I have tried Blackbushe and its not there.

And not wishing to depress those who were hoping to become FJ pilots (and Nav... sorry, WSOs) - re: the threads of a few weeks back about Linton:

So I think we can guess that, unless Two Jags kicks up a very large fuss indeed, the Hawk 128 order will be chopped substantially as well. Makes all the remarks about how 'good' things were for defence and that to claim that there were 'defence cuts' was all rather silly.

Leeming..(no, not her!)
 

.....wither Leeming? Chinny's/Apaches, or yet another 'xxx barracks?'

Will enough Typhoons be ready for the Jag pilots when their Sqns close? Will the Rocks get transfered to the RA?

I see Keetch mentioned the dreaded word Manning Control and redundancies again funny how Hoon would not mention it when asked specifically

more examples of servicemen & women being stabbed in the back

Side show Bob - thanks for the correction - next time i'll do my homework as I have done for RN!


A bit off topic but defence related...

5 of 6 minesweepers to go are from faslane - invalidates the existance of MCM 3 therefore - no surface fleet north of the border???

We're Famous!
 

Nice to see the Telegraph mentioning this website when asking CDS if the Chiefs are standing up to the politicians enough, at the Press Conference this afternoon. Would writing to your MP get that much publicity for a complaint? I doubt it.

BCH

Well at least is was nice to see PPRUNE get a mention in the Buffoon / Chiefs press conference.....

I wouldn't bet on it. There aren't that many Rocks on a GBAD Sqn and the idea is to get the rest of the VHR Field Sqns up to full strength, which will absorb most of the 'sprung' manpower below SNCO. And as Jacks Down mentioned - 10% is what we are looking at.

Archimedes said 5 AD sqns the minimum.

43 111 56 17 29 ?

With the reduction from 18 MR2 to 12ish MR4 they could all go to Waddo in 2010 onwards.

With the SK OCU going to Valley why not put the Hawk 128 there too?

The rocks will be at 63% of their 1990 level compared with the RAF at only 45%. Good news for the rocks unless they are well above their 1990 level right now <g>

well, spending money to relocate them just before chopping them fits wirth the overall standard of common sense applied by Defence Ministers over the years.

So....

We need reductions in manpower but we don't know how many redundancies there will need to be and even what trades they will be in!

We are buying C-17s....after we have leased them...why didn't we buy them in the first place?!?

"Network Enabled Capablilty is a relatively new concept" No s:mad:t Sherlock! I've worked with what can be termed NEC in my time and have attended some high-level meetings and no-one at a senior level has a clue what this is! What I can point out is a network is only as good as the data that goes into it. And the MR2, MRA4, T42 and T23 either are, or have the potential to be, excellent sensor platforms. NEC should be a force multiplier, not a force replacement! Targeting etc is all very well, but the temporary nature of air power is no substiture for boots (or a ship) on the ground (or water)!!

I need to read further, and to peruse the debate, but first glance indicates firmly that this is a short-sighted, cost-driven, back-of-a-fag-packet piece of nonsense that will degrade the operational efficiency of our Armed Forces and is no way to repay the months and years of hard work we have put in. The only way our creaking services have managed is by personnel putting in extra effort and "playing the game". For the sake of us all that has to stop and we must put our hands up and say "we can't do that" when we are short of personnel or equipment - although it may now be too late!

why not pull out of iraq and afgan and let the yanks sort thier own problems. with the money saved we could build up some pretty good home security and defence. this can only be done when tony blair emerges from hid hide out some where up the bush pass.

If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and quacks chances are it's a duck !! This is not a 'realignment' or an adjustment - it is a defence cut to save money.

If defence spending is rising in ‘real terms’ why are we being told to institute 2.5% year-on-year 'efficiency savings'? BTW, when next year comes around and we are at 97.5% won't the 2.5% of that figure be proportionately more and increase proportionally for the duration of the ‘efficiency’ drive.

I note that the treasury has ‘provided funding for the Iraq operation’. Really? - then why have we been told that flying hours in the Gulf are to be counted in the annual total as, quote, ‘the treasury has refused to accept this as a cost of the operation’ end quote.

Another point on basic maths: The total strength of the RAF is currently 48000 because we can't (or won't) recruit to our actual limit total of 52200. Based on that figure, the RAF will be cut by 11200 personnel not the oft quoted 8000.

Rant over, sadness descending



:confused:

It would appear that under this government, in addition to not being able to get a GP appointment for over a week, not being able to find NHS dental treatment at all and not being able to get a policeman to attend a traffic accident, I will now be able to enjoy my retirement knowing that our armed forces are too depleted to do much more than a Queen's Birthday flypast and the odd airshow.

Thankyou Bliar.

Jess

Have a look at the House of Commons Defence Committee report into the Defence White Paper 2003, the rag that precipitated this particular round of rationalisation. You may find it illuminating reading........ It can be found on the MOD web via Chots if you have access.

To paraphrase for all though, the committee, which is predominantly Labour, cautioned against the very cuts that have been announced today until Effects based operations and NEC are understood. The MPs themselves noted that there was an undue haste to sell the family silver in the name of a concept that is not yet understood on either side of the pond.

Ho hum, the government even ignore their own sort, so what chance do we have........

Rgds

Oh Yes, and I forgot. You will have noticed that some of the FRIs have been dispensed with today as well. No surprises there then.

Q. What do we have too many of in the RAF ?

A. Senior Officer aircrew according to DASA stats.

Does rather suggest that senior officer ME Navigators are on the hit list.....

In Tor Wot,

The efficiency savings are to be ploughed back into Defence, the money doesn’t go to the treasury, or anywhere else, it stays within the defence budget.

I think you’ll find that the difference in your RAF manpower figures is because 48500 is the trained and operational figure, it is 400 lower than it should be at 48900. The 52500 figure you quote is the total including those in training.

Soddim,

I think you’ll find the blame for the current Dentistry issue lies with the Tories and what they did to the profession when they were in power.

I can get a GP appointment within 24 hours where I live, and there are asylum seekers nearby!

Proone

But is the 41000 figure trained strength or total strength ? I'll lay good odds on it being total strength......

prOOne - are you sure you're not 'Comical Ali', the late Iraqi defence spokesman?

Your assertions convince an audience of but one. Yourself.




Now do :mad: back to your day job.

I don't know whether or not it's my (Mis ?) interpretation of reading the review or what.BUT if you read the final totals in "Determining the force structure" IMHO I have made the following conclusions.
Helicopters:- 115 Support,these consist of 37 Chinook,18 Merlin,31 Puma and 29 Sea King.
48 Attack presumably the new Apache fleet.
Anyone want to tell me where all the Gazelles and Lynx from the AAC have gone to??
Someone in another thread presumed all 232 Typhoons were safe. Hoon stated he will only sign up for the 2nd tranche if the price is right after negotiations with BAe.
Totals given say Air Defence 20 and Offensive Support aircraft 64.
Finally he says that the current fleet of C130's will be replaced by the A400M in 2011(I thought that option had been scrapped) but again he won't say how many.
Excuse me if my presumptions are wrong but I think the way the report has been worded means we have all had the wool pulled over our eyes and the Air element of H.M. Forces has been hung drawn and quartered.