3.5 Billion for defence - what would you buy?
 

Your "prudent" Chancellor has just promised an extra 3.5 billion for the defence budget, quote - the largest budget increase for 20 years - unquote. What would you buy? Can the UKmilitaryPLC afford to sponsor :
a. More senior Officers
b. One more Spec Aircrew/MACR/WO wallet(for one night)
c. Better kit, less cuts and more happy flying hours for the 20 minuters.

Health - More nurses gets my vote.

If it can keep up (defence inflation always outstrips normal inflation) it'll all go on paying for BAE's mistakes and over-inflated contracts.

Upgrading accommodation, as a matter of urgency, would get my vote. If we are to retain quality people, we need to make accommodation less spartan and more worthy of service personnel who spend long periods on deployment, living in $hit order.

In particular, some Army junior ranks' single living accommodation is an utter disgrace. Maximum security prisoners have better quality rooms!

1. Accommodation [including those in deployment locations]

1a. Ditch DHE
1b. Improve maintenance of SFA to 'commercial' standards.

2. Allowances that actually re-imburse travel & costs

3. Tax free wage on OPS

4. Flying Kit that :

a. Fits
b. Is replace easily (i.e. in stock)
c. Is functional

5.......and of course £ 20K more per year per pilot.

F 15's

Nothing matters very much, most things don't matter at all.

Ironing lessons/manuals.

Ecellent! the Branch Fanatic laughing at himself! Good stuff!

...one extra Nimrod MRA4!!!

And here's what they are spending it on. I've been banging on a bit about the US and network centric warfare on a few threads. It looks like we are going to follow them. If the UAVs are off the shelf, one hopes they are going to be Predator 2s.

The appalling thing is the idea of the monitor on a politician's desk, literally, calling the shots. It was bad enough with SACEUR doing it.......

The Times:

.............A large proportion of the new money — about £1.5 billion — is going to be spent on developing what the Ministry of Defence calls “network centric capability” — a new system under which British commanders in the field anywhere in the world or in the United Kingdom can be guaranteed an instant decision on what action to take if higher authority is required.

It is what the Americans call a “kill cycle”: Osama bin Laden is spotted by a Predator unmanned spy plane, armed with Hellfire missiles, making his way across the mountains in Afghanistan, and a decision is needed from the Pentagon, or US Central Command, or even the President of the United States, for executive authority to target the al-Qaeda terrorist leader.

Even the Americans, with their more sophisticated technology, have yet to perfect the system, because there was an occasion last year when bin Laden was spotted by a Predator, which is operated by the CIA, but the decision to fire came too late.

Now the MoD is intent on developing a similar kill cycle in which Tony Blair would have a television monitor at No 10 providing him with instant pictures, relayed by satellite, of targets or battlefield scenes, enabling him to give authority for military action.

Defence officials said the intention was to have the special network in place so that decisions could be made without any delay either from commanders at the ministry’s Permanent Joint Headquarters or by ministers at the MoD or, when necessary, from Downing Street. After Mr Brown had announced the budget deal for the MoD, the officials said the plan was to spend £1 billion on the equipment needed for this instant command process. This would include new unmanned air vehicles (UAVs) to replace the British Army’s current Phoenix system, a smaller and less capable UAV than the American Predator, as well as other sensor devices to warn of impending attacks, and intelligence-gathering equipment.

Another £500 million would also be spent on recruiting and training more intelligence analysts and other support personnel to keep the emergency network running. Details of the plans to buy new equipment will be announced in a White Paper due to be published later this week...........

How much to get live pictures to No 10?!
Can't they just get a subscription to CNN like the rest of us :)

network-centric...???
 

how Nelson managed [he managed to make up his own RoE when within visual range of his boss] is anyone's guess :D

Why commanders in the field needed explicit permission to off Bin Liner [i.e. didn't have it already] is the real question.

As with all militaries [like ours in potato-land] surely the question is what would you "un-cancel"...

I can just picture the scene:

"Alistair, come over here and look at this. Is that bin Laden? Cherie says it is, but I'm not sure."

The quality of reporting by The Times has gone very 'tabloid'.

Inside infomation:
 

We have been briefed on the spending by our leaders, it is still fairly hush hush though......

Senior service:0.7 Bn to replace one times very dented type 42,

Brown Jobs: 2.1bn to Westlands-Thales (etc) to develop the "slightly smaller than predator" UAV, based on Lynx - but promising better everything this time.

Boys in Blue: 1.0bn; enough to keep an RAF Station going for another year.

That leaves 0.1bn; they are still after suggestions for the remaining.....

Harpooner
1.0bn to run an "RAF Station for a year", surely you jest!! If that were true I am not sure there would be much money left in the defence budget for anything else!! I am sure in these days of cut backs we probably don't have 30 stations left (he said taking off his shoes and socks to aid counting!). Still, there are:
Aldergrove, Benson, Brize Norton, Coltishall, Coningsby, Cottesmore, Cranwell..... Oh this is hurting my brain,I give up, I am sure some nurd out there can add them all up (WEBF maybe), but hopefully you get the point!!!

I assume it was what passes for humour!!!!!!!!!!!!! Still I always was slow on the uptake, thats why I'm not on FJs!!!

Hmmmmmmmmm Dear SantaJock

Ok, more spare parts, the same land Rovers that foreign governments get. An AFV/TCV with a big gun guaranteed to keep the other sides heads down on a debus. Radios that work, we don't need all singing and dancing, just the ones you can buy in radio shack that do the job, and don't cost squillions to develop. Combat suits that don't wear out in 2 mins flat, Pro-Boots as standard issue, The Canadian version of the M-16, the HK G36 , or can we just have our SLR's back? SA-80-2/3/4/5 's can go to the Corps. We also want Minimis as the Light Support Weapon, or a lightened Gimpy.

Next, can we stop spending squillions on new aircraft development, and instead buy Mig-29's off the shelf, for not a lot of dough, re-engine them with Derby's finest, with Western Avionics etc. I have a mate intimate with design/dev/building the C-17 Globemeister, and another one who flies on them a lot, I'll ask them to drop by with their sales glossies, I'm sure there are other aircraft available, which can be adapted for a damn sight less. Does no one ever ask the Blue mates on squadron what is in their crimbo wish list? Move RAF bases overseas, nearer to areas of likely tension, in countries where we can have a deal, to keep the running costs down.

Buy more cheaper smaller aircraft, capable of doing the job in low intensity conflicts, Hawk 200 and the like, and give the AAC the helicopter element of the RAF. Bin the Apache, because it's all political anyway and buy SuperCobras. The Isrealis love them, they're simple, and you can hang an awful lot of ordanance off them.

Tell BAe , they're having a laugh and a half with their product pricing, and you'll re-nationalise the entire defence industry, if they don't sharpen their pencils soonest. Same for Royal Ordance, Vickers and the rest of the bloated running dogs of the armaments industry.

As for the Navy? Lease some of the Yankee dry-docked carriers,or buy them , do a deal on F-18's and AV-8's.

More fast torpedo boats, cos I love 'em. Small fast heavily armed, do a lot of damage for not a lot of money, as various Arab and Asian navies have proved.

Renationalise the shipyards, and start building proper frigates and destroyers at the right money. really, when all is said and done, the Defence industry, should be under the control of the Government, not bloody shareholders.

Right, I think that's the 3.5 billion spent.

Now remember, the above is only a wibble, and just for fun, it's not meant to be serious, unless any of you wanna debate it

:D

money
 

youve got more money to spend so you give the aac the raf support helicopter force, wheres the logic in that? as the paras jump from raf c130s why not give the aac the c130s as well. and why not give the navy the nimrods as well! now what you said about the hawk 200 was a good idea.and as for having bases near the war why doesnt the british government speak to the cypriot government and see if we can use on of their airports, or maybe the raf can see sense and use akrotiri. personally i would put a lot of money in to improving the state of a lot of military airfields, how about ils on all runways and cat 3 lighting? i remember in the early 80s that it was going to be standard to have ils on all runways, whatever happened to that?

Please could at least .0001% be spent on teaching cranberry how to use the b£oody SHIFT key..........

Ah but that would be capital expenditure.

Stationary.