Defence Review - Headlines
 

On Tuesday, the Prime Minister will outline a timetable under which Britain’s one fully operational aircraft carrier, HMS Ark Royal, is immediately retired. The Navy’s other carrier, HMS Illustrious, will continue to function as a helicopter platform stripped of jets before retiring in 2014.

The first of the new carriers, HMS Queen Elizabeth, will enter service in 2016, configured to carry helicopters, not jets. The second new carrier, HMS Prince of Wales, will arrive in 2019. At that point, HMS Queen Elizabeth will be put into “extended readiness”, effectively mothballed indefinitely.

• The replacement for the Trident nuclear deterrent will be delayed by a year until after the general election scheduled for 2015. He will insist he remains committed to renewing Trident but will say the delay is needed to save £750 million.

• The Army will lose 7,000 soldiers, more than 100 tanks and 200 armoured vehicles. One armoured brigade will be lost and the end of Britain’s 65-year presence in Germany will be signalled.

• The RAF will keep most of its Tornado fighter-bombers but lose at least 5,000 personnel. Two RAF bases will close and be occupied by soldiers returning from Germany.

• The Navy’s fleet of warships will drop from 24 to 19 and it will lose 4,000 personnel. Harrier jump-jets will be scrapped next year but no F35 Joint Strike Fighters will be available to replace them until 2020.

• Special Forces will receive a significant increase in their budget, allowing them to buy sophisticated communications technology and weapons. Recruitment is also likely to rise.



Navy aircraft carrier will be sold after three years - and never carry jets - Telegraph

Should we end up in another war with Argentina over the Falkland Islands let's hope that the French are on our side then rather than helping get the Super Etendards ready to attack our fleet.

If only we had them and a forward operating base set up in a country next to Iran that could be used...............:ok:

Why should they? :confused: They didn't last time round, despite what some of the press would like us to believe. John Nott described the French as our most important allies in his memoirs (he later qualified this to say that he meant of the the Europeans, but not far behind the US). It may be that one French arms firm 'forgot' about the team of technicians that was there, but the French Secret Service found out, and the directors of the arms company suddenly remembered about the team when President Mitterand personally 'phoned them and politely pointed out that people doing this sort of thing would go to prison (because they were breaking sanctions).

The problem Europeans were the Italians and the Spanish.

Anyway, this story is in the Telegraph, so even if they've got it from the most impeccable sources imagineable, there's probably at least one completely avoidable and spectacular error in there (up alongside the misreporting of Timmo Anderson's lecture last week).

Slight drift thread, however, I recently attended a briefing by a very senior, very erudite, FR-A officer, who outlined in some detail the assistance France gave to the UK during teh Falklands War, including very specific information on the Exocet missiles. This was in the context of France being a key European player, both in coalitions and (now) within NATO.France and the UK have a very similar strategic position, and putting aside cracks about our 'eternal enemy' (the French make the same joke, too), France should be our strategic partner of choice as we see the growing isolationism in the US - and the mid-Terms are demonstrating this.

Rather more thread drift but I can't help get annoyed when I read about all these cuts in equipment and personnel only to then read in the same article how we are going to double our aid relief to countries like Somali, Pakistan and the Yemen. This doesn't seem right to me!!!!!

Couldn't agree more GT - shouldn't we get our own house in order before trying to sort everyone else's?
I see the plan is to close Lossie and Kinloss at the expense of Leuchars - strange decision. One squadron of Typhoons and broken infrastructure vs 4 (OK, 2 after the cuts) squadrons of GR4s and a station that has had millions spent over the last few years. Discuss?

The golf is better at Leuchars.........:ok:

so harrier to go after expensive refit and tornado needing another expensive refit not exactly economically sensible!

on the SF front if you cut the pool of talent available to recruit into our SF group won't the standard fall?

I have to agree about the Foreign Aid budget. Surely charity begins at home? Unless it is all to do with 'international standing" or maybe the fact that we can claim foreign aid ourselves if things don't get better?

That depends how you measure the standard. Pass rate on UKSF selection has become much higher over the past decade or so. Some argue that it has become "easier", but others argue that recruits are better prepared, and equipment is much better. Certainly, the training is now more relevant & better funded than ever before.

I think yet again the key point has been overlooked.. The real underlying issue for me is the appalling way in which MoD procurement is implemented. This will make uncomfortable reading for many, but until Military procurement is carried out by professionals with vast commercial business to business experience, then the Forces will never be properly staffed and equipped. Put simply, the MoD have people in senior decision making positions be they serving officers or Civil servants, who simply have no clue in how to conduct an efficient and effective procurement lifecycle.. Jobs for the boys are costing us dearly. The Military think they are unique and that "Civvies would never understand our needs".. Wrong Popeye!

The Military are quick to criticize contracts like Future Lynx, or FSTA by saying they are over-priced and do not represent good value, and that the contractors are making millions in profits.. Well hello guys, if you allegedly knew all this, why the hell did you sign up to it? The truth is, you did not have the ability to spot the pitfalls, nor did you have the ability to negotiate a good position for yourselves. Defence contractors are not charities, if the Military are dumb enough to sign up to their terms, they will certainly take the money and laugh all the way to the bank.. but who are the fools??

Then again, I doubt anyone would be interested in buying retired GR4s, but the GR7/9s could be an attractive proposition for anyone building an LPH class carrier for the first time and/or already operating Shars or Matadors....

Alot of the procurment cock ups though do originate from services in poor project definition and specific made by officers making assumptions and not writing them into the specifications.
The procurment professional journal my partner gets is littered with MoD cockups mainly traced back to poor definition/specification.
But I do wonder how many professionally qualified procurement officers there are in the defence procurement system. Compared to imperial civil servants with ox/bridge degrees in classics etc!

Perhaps we'll be able to reap the benefits of India's indigenous, $Bn+/annum, space program?

ROFLMAO at representitive of Air League on BBC news channel!

"we should compare ourselves to Germany and Japan not the united states they don't have a nuclear weapon or aircraft carrier between them."

Chooses to forget reason why! they also don't have a seat on the UN security council their armed forces till recently couldn't operate outside the homeland.
if he wants us to compare ourselves to medium sized powers not USA , Russia or China then why not France?

Because if one could get an NVQ in Defence Procurement and Spotting Evil Industry Lies from the University of East Sh1tforbrains, people so qualified would no doubt be perfect in every way.

At least the Oxbridge Classics graduates could probably spell simple words & phrases...

My thoughts go out to all you men and women in the services who once again are being sold down the river and expected to do highly skilled and brave work with inferior or substandard equipment. Thats the thanks you get for serving your country.

Here's a thought....
 

As a member of the EU, does the UK get tax relief on 'Foreign Aid' :cool:

totally agree footster the uniformed guys and girls deserve better from the suits allegedelly there to support them.

The leaping heap should have leapt the last time around. The fact some nation has a carrier and may want to buy them is a bonus.

Well back to drawing board with St Athan

Just a small point, if the Harrier is to be scrapped what happens to the 540 million paid to BAe for the life support of the aircraft, do they get to pay it back :}

As others have said, those still serving are going to suffer and this will be a whole lot worse than before. When you now add up the effects of the last 15 - 20 years things do not look good and I am thankful that there are still those willing to put up with numpty seniors, inept MP's, old and tired equipment, poor housing, crappy pay (compared to what you can earn), blah, blah blah.....

Good luck to us all, were gonna need it!

How long before the likes of the stalled ECA-Program actually become a reality and then end up taking on a more 'active' role and the Air Force can no longer carry out its own role.

To sum it up in the words of the Messenger addressing King Leonidas:

This is madness:}:}:}:}:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

Are we really spending all that money on an aircraft carrier only to have it serve for three years and for it only to be used as a glorified platform for heli ops?? Sounds to me like the navy brass wanted these ships come what may, and regardless of the actual capability they deliver and the impact of their procurement on the surface fleet as a whole.

The 'thinking' behind this review appears to be terribly muddled.

PS Any mention re the Puma fleet?

SM, money spent is money gone.

As Cottesmore was already going to close, another 'advantage' in disbanding the Harrier force is the saving in rebasing them at Wittering and building a new mess there.

Surely it will be put to bed...can you imagine getting rid of the only FJ which can operate off carriers, keeping the only helo which can't go to sea, while having a carrier which can only operate helicopters...not that maritime ops is the be-all-and-end-all, but that's just one argument against the Puma.

Torque,

I'll rise above your infantile twaddle and refer you to an earlier post from NURSE in which she hits the nail on the head.. In many cases, the problems stem from assumptions made by those defining the specifications which are not promulgated to the procurement authority.. If you seriously think (As your post suggests in spirit, if not actual word) that Defence contractors should be part of team Military and bend over backwards to make up for the MoD's skillset shortfalls, say, by not maximising an opportunity, then my old chum, you are misguided.

Now I am not suggesting perfection (If I may address your "response" specifically) however the process of procurement is a serious failing in the Military and until that situation is recognised and addressed, then the arguments over value, cutbacks and in appropriate solutions will rage on.

PS.. I am ex-Mil myself. I sympathize and identify with the issues.:ok:

BBC News "ticker"
 

"DEFENCE CUTS:

Plans for a £14bn defence training programme centred on a training college in South Wales are scrapped by the MoD"

No details yet - just on the ticker @ 12.05 - BBC News - Home

For once, the BBC has it right: "Defence Cuts".

and these are just the cuts that are to affect Defence. What of all the other cuts to come this week??

Why is it the population are the ones being shafted, rather than the bankers who are still raking in billions for their companies, and making massive bonuses? We've bailed them out, so where is the return on our investment?? Oh thats right, going into the bankers pockets in the form of profits and bonuses.

Details ref St Athan: Termination of the Defence Training Review

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.

The DTR project intended to combine the technical and engineering training for the Royal Navy, Army and Royal Air Force on a single site at St Athan in South Wales. In a written ministerial statement to Parliament today, Dr Fox said:
Training will continue to be delivered at current training locations as it would have done under the original PFI (Private Finance Initiative) proposal. These sites are: Arborfield, Blandford, Bordon, Cosford, Cranwell, Digby, Fareham (Collingwood), Gosport (Sultan) and St Athan.

PN - money spent is money gone; not quite true, contracts with BAEs and Rolls Royce for airframe and engines were out to 2018, the OSD for Harrier.

What would be interesting reading is how much we, as taxpayers, have got to now pay out to these companies in the form of compensation for breaking the contracts, because it will be down to the taxpayer to pick up the bill.

As for the move from Cottesmore to Wittering, Cottesmore was/is going to close as a flying station, yes;in fact a satelitte of Wittering from 01 Apr 11. Wittering's building plans for Cottesmore personnel moving in have already started; SLAM buildings, new JRM, new WO/Sgt Mess all progressing well. Contracts for all these would have already been signed; yet more compensation claims against the MOD.

Surely by increasing the money in the RAF and Navy's pockets instead of this foreign aid money, the forces would be able to drop food supplies and whatnot directly to the people who need it. Rather than the whole 'piss it down the drain' currently employed.

"AID..."
 

Jolly, this the sort of thing you are referring to?

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...ew SAM Systems

Nice to know that the "ring-fenced" billion or so "we" give to india each year is being put to good use!

As I have already said ....sorry,postulated (!) on this subject (Carriers,defence cuts ) elsewhere on this site today ; don't believe everything that you read in the newspapers !!
I would suggest that there exists a strong possibility that a senior Royal Naval officer, maybe even from the Royal Marines,has but recently left these shores for The Americas with the object of negotiating for the purchase of a number of FA-18 Super Hornets,to be operated (eventually) from the two new CVAs ,the names of which I DO hope will be changed ( Sorry,Your Majesty / Your Highness , but your names / titles are too long !...something snappy like "Eagle" or "Ark" would be better !)
I would imagine,therefore,that BOTH vessels would be configured with arrestor wires and catapults ; EMALS would be logical, as the ships' propulsion systems will result in the availability of VAST amounts of electricity from gas-turbo and Diesel ICE generators. Auxiliary steam plants have their weaknesses, as per the "Graf Von Spee" !!
As to the operation of 1 CVA as purely a LPH is ludicrous,when one considers that HMS Ocean is a "commercial" design ,sister ships of which could be "knocked up in no time " by any half-decent shipbuilder in the event of a sudden need for such vessels ; the amount of money wasted on the seemingly ENDLESS modifications to HMS Hermes whilst MOD vacillated between designating her either a CVA or a LPH was nothing short of OBSCENE !! We must not let this happen again !
So I guess some lucky, near-future FAA pilots will be spending a year or two across the Pond, MADDL-ing and DLP-ing with the USN, before returning home and buying a house in rural Somerset !! But that's only a supposition,of course !!

As i see it if you cant sort out your own country ie giving the men and women of the armed forces the correct and most up to date equipment to protect you and not cut backs and asking more from them how can you sort the worlds problems out. We spend far too much on foreign aid and because of this our own country and defences and those who serve suffer. They have been shafted yet again it is Totally unjust and a disgrace in my eyes.

Postman Plod

:D:D

Now THERE is an uncomfortable question Mr Cameron.. :ok:

When David Cameron makes his speech at 1530 this afternoon I bet he will start with words along the lines of…”…due to the gross incompetence of the last Labour Government and the 3.3 billion black hole that they left in the Defence Budget, it’s all their fault that we have to make these deep and painful cuts to the Armed Forces…..”
And then he will go on to praise the role of the Armed Forces and the value of them, their commitment and dedication and bla, bla, bla.

And that it: that statement will allow him to get away with it!!!!!!!!

In my opinion at least the last Government was spending money on Defence to make up for the shortfalls created by themselves and cuts that took place well before the Labour Government was elected to power in 1997. The country has become broke, not because of a Labour Government Policy, but because of a meltdown in the free market Banking Sector. That is why every country in the western world is going through this pain. But at the end of the day, money was still being spent on the Armed Forces by the previous Government. I don’t think that can be said now.

Blaming the last Government is in the same principle as blaming Winston Churchill for the fact that the country was broke at the end of the Second World War!!!! (Slight exaggeration I know, but it is the same principle on a much smaller scale).

And let’s face it, if wasn’t for the support reported in the press and even comments made by Hilary Clinton (just how low have we become) the cuts would have been harder and deeper. In the words of Ricky Tomlinson “Personal Intervention by David Cameron, My Ar$$e” This Government finally backed down on deeper cuts because of immense pressure and the bad PR that would have come following ruthless cuts and not because of any other reason.

To cut the Armed Forces to this extent, while we are fighting a war and with the world in such an un-stable situation because of so many political failures is not just bloody stupid it is criminally insane.

Forgets your aircraft, boats and tanks, your carriers, trident and all the other spectacular projects. The real people about to hurt with this Defence Review will be the boots on the ground – pilots, gunners, infantry, paras, engineers, cooks, plods, blunties and everybody else that do the real work, including a lot of civilians.

And the only way for the Armed Forces to ever recover from this will be to have a bloody big, and I mean big, war! Tell you what they would find the money then!

Sorry, I will get down now.

SRENNAPS,

No need to get down, I think. Well said...

As to the GBP 3.3 billion black hole; what happened to the GBP 36 billion version? Cameron, Osborne, et al, just like the ZaNu Labia lot before, are making these numbers up as they go along...

ah well, bring in the receivers...:ouch:

the pollies [in fishnet stockings] and their pubic service minders need to be keel hauled...