...and there goes the MRA4..:ugh:

Cutting defence budgets when we are most likely for a terrorist attack?
Nice work Cameron.

If this coalition has scrapped our defences and left funding for almost useless renewables in place then I might have to stamp my feet quite vigorously and wave a placard or two!

"The termination of the Defence Training Rationalisation (DTR) project and the Metrix Consortium's appointment as preferred bidder has been announced by Defence Secretary Dr Liam Fox today, 19 October 2010."
So it's not all bad news then?!:ok:
Spent my last tour in the Service as a poc between an outstation of the DCAE and this monster; it became clearer to me as time progressed that it was going to be too expensive in the emerging climate of public spending runaway and would not be able to deliver the military contextualisation needed. Now that I'm a Civil Servant (insert filthy/hard working/loyal/muddled as appropriate) I'm rather relieved just to know what the future holds until "the Spring." DTR would have given us a shiny new home, but how many such projects actually end up looking like the architect's drawing?

One think that has not been mentioned is why are the things we need to buy so bloody expensive? If we could get them for a reasonable price, the cuts would be a lot less painful.

Why do we need to pay £20 for a washer to go on an aircraft? Does it have to come hermetically sealed in it's own box?

Do we really need everything to have a Mil Spec when an equivalent item works just as well as one designed for civil use but costs half the price?

Do we need to put things through an extensive Boscombe Down trial because 'thats what we've always done'?

Can we not specify what we want from the onset rather than changing our minds every few months and avoid scope creep?

We all have examples where we've said 'How Much?!' Lets address the things like the above and perhaps we'll find a new aircraft no longer costs £80M each and we might be able to afford the Armed Forces that we really need.

I don't. I was simply taking issue with Nurse's rant about qualifications. My point - somewhat tangential to the thread, I admit - was that pinning all our hopes on halfwits with made-up qualifications which at first sight appear relevant, and automatically discounting anyone with an old-fashioned non-vocational degree, is unlikely to deliver the improvement in defence procurement which we all so desperately want and need.

According to this:
BBC News - The UK's defence dilemma

we still have one of the bigger defence budgets in the world, are still spending in the region of 2.5% of our GDP, yet appear to have significantly less in terms of manpower AND equipment than comparable or even smaller nations?

and we're just cutting rather than sorting the actual problems out?!

No but people properley qualified to supervise procurement who know and understand the legalities and who can coach services into writing specifications that are air tight, comprehensive and logical could save both time and money.

and its not made up Qualifications my partner is a member having passed the exams and has worked in procurement in both Industry and Local Government on top of a degree in buissness studies

Home Page - The Chartered Institute of Purchasing and Supply

Is this the same body of Professionals who entered into a contract for Aircraft Carriers where it would now cost more to pull out and get nothing than it would to actually buy the boats?

Would say like most government departments most procurement officers are not CIPS qualified as there is no requirement to have the CIPS qualifications in Civil service just to pass the Civil service entry exam.

I used to do that. It was pre-requsite to being promoted into MoD(PE) as a civilian project manager. Bloody annoying having to coach someone who is 3 or 4 grades/ranks above you and who doesn't have to sign on every week for Family Income Supplement because he's paid 4 times as much! Nevertheless, the problem these days is that what was once a pre-requisite to getting into procurement, is now little more than an aspiration, if that, to the vast majority in DE&S.

Ask any of the old TTO grades what gave them most pride in their position. The fact they had to pass trade tests every year to maintain their grade and pay. Introduce that requirement into DE&S and watch most squirm.

Has Hendon got space for a MRA4? Prob not and it will be getting a Harirer.
Perhaps Duxford will take one?

STV: Strategic Defence Review statement: Live streaming

Watch live coverage from the House of Commons of the cuts to be made by Britain's armed forces.

but often so late that the costs had gone up and it was money we hadn't got.

Dannatt said a couple of years ago that we had tanks and MLRS that we didn't need. Swiss Des was said to be furious when he found out about the Lynx in Germany that were stuff all use anywhere else.

Yes the MOD has been profligate with spending plans.

Creating Defence Training Estate as a centralised organisation that would save money didn't it just created a larger HQ and reduced the previous organisations not an inch.

How many Chinooks were going to be procured again?

Nimrod & GR9 gone.

Could have been MUCH worse guys....

New Chinooks
 

PM has just announced 12 new helicopters to be procured (presumably Chinook).

An additional 12, rather than 22.

S41

In his statement the PM said that the carriers and the F-35C would be introduced at the same time, a late change of mind at the ridicule being experienced?

When talking about AT he mentioned the C-17 and A-400M, but the C-130J was conspicuous by it's absence.