Times details proposed UK defence cut options
 

Apparently offered to the new Defence Secretary (and so probably leaked from his office):-

Option 1

59 cap badges removed
Combine 3Commando & 16 Air Assault
remove 7 Class 23 Frigates plus Bulwark & Albion
All 62 Wildcats
All 23 Puma
6 Apache
11 T4 Merlin
Retire Tornadoes early
Cut Ajax Armoured vehicle fro, 589 to 509

Option 2
39 cap badges removed
Remove 3 light infantry regiments and 3 cavalry regiments
Combine 3Commando & 16 Air Assault
remove 2 Class 23 Frigates plus Bulwark & Albion
All 23 Puma
8 Apache
Retire Tornadoes early
Cut Ajax Armoured vehicle fro, 589 to 509
Warrier Upgrade reduced

Option 3
42 cap badges removed
Remove 3 light infantry regiments and 3 cavalry regiments
Remove one strike Brigade
remove 2 Class 23 Frigates plus Bulwark immediately & Albion in 2023
All 23 Puma
All 62 Wildcats
All C130 Hercules
Cut Ajax Armoured vehicle fro, 589 to 509
Warrier Upgrade reduced

Puma and Herc fleet huh..... It's getting to a point where it would be easier to list what he intends to keep.

I do wonder what exactly he expects the RN to protect the carriers with when they come on stream.

No -that's NOT the current Defence Secretary's proposals - they are the ones presented to him when he got the job in December according the teh Times.

Presumably they are the ones circulating as part of the Defence Review/Security Review that have been causing all the problems - and you can see why.

Elsewhere in the paper one of the more libertarian/right wing columnists stated it really is a choice between a Eurocentric, anti-Russian, strategy with the Army based in (say) Poland) or a marine based long distance intervention armed forces. We can no longer do both and we can't paper over the cracks saying we can any longer.............

Could be a very rough 2018 I'm afraid as I can't see anything about Mrs May that suggests she has a clue about the issues

This is a link to the actual infographic in The Times...

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/imageserv...C0&resize=1200

I reckon that Puma and Wildcat will be gonners. Tornado GR4 OSD brought forward. Procurement of Poseidon and Protector slowed - same initial delivery dates but slower subsequent deliveries. Gazelle is also a gonner so you do have to wonder if the AAC will be tenable with just Apache. There will likely be RAF Regt Sqns in the cap badge loss.

Really surprised to see that Watchkeeper isn’t on the list as well.

There was me thinking that the first duty of a government was the protection of the State and its citizens. Silly, I know.

Cut , cut , cut... Got sod all to do with Beagles favourite subject, but a strong defence is only possible with a strong economy.. That Gentlemen is the truth and our economy is a lot weaker that many on here think it really is.

Party before Country.. Always has been..:E

Sixth largest economy in the world and sixth/fifth (or there abouts on both counts) largest defence budget even accounting for a somewhat anaemic economy.

Given that, why can we not afford to defend the country properly? Or would it be more accurate to ask why do politicians choose not to defend the country properly?

That doesn't read right, if you chop just the Puma and that equates to 2000 RAF, how does Puma AND Herc equate to 1500 ? scrap Puma and retire Tonkas early equates to even less at 1250 RAF.


It does make you wonder, waste all that money on Puma upgrade and then scrap it. Surely the fleet utilisation of Chinook will go up as it tries to take up the slack, as will operating costs as a wildcat or Puma must be cheaper to operate than Chinook, and surely a lot of the Navy stuff will not be compatible with operating with and hangering a larger helicopter such as Merlin? Or am I missing something?

Because they are incompentent? Anyone that says Boris Johnson is competent, I would advise to go and see a doctor. Jeremy Hunt should have walked this week. My wife had to see the horrors of an NHS hospital acceptance ward this week. Her mother was told she had stage 4 cancer by a junior doctor in a corridor, next to other patients. Nowhere else free to go and do so. The sodding Government fine Hospital trusts as they cannot fulfil ****** targets. Madness. :ugh::ugh: Corbyns lot are just as bad a thought of course. Need a RAF led Government.. Decent Man Management.

It seems that not only has the Empire shrunk but so has its protectors

I was with you till that last bit....

Money already spent is of no consequence as it neither saves you anything or cost you anything

Unless you’ve spent it on a capability you use now and will continue to need in the future.

As Tornado is due to retire in March 2019 (just 14 months’ time) and what little maintenance remains is already on contract, chopping it ‘early’ will save practically nothing. I call BS...

Looking from afar, it looks like UK Defence Force will in future be 2 very nice large aircraft carriers, and rest of the 3 services hollowed out.

Or as the now retired Com JFC described, Belgium with nukes. Just as well our nuclear delivery system isn’t air based from a carrier. At current rates our carriers could well end up being a military version of a taxi service for those nations who have invested properly. Unfortunately, it seems our Emperors really aren’t too bothered about their new clothes; but they still want the biggest and most expensive wardrobe to impress the neighbours.

Or maybe it's just inaccurate nonsense as everything else the Times has had to say about defence has been...

I’d like to see what they think could be cut from that. Couple of Sentrys perhaps but, see any squadrons being chopped.

GR4 will be the sacrificial lamb imho.

Hmmm, chopping great chunks out of the helicopter force just as a new training system is starting up with an expensive new contract where the company are paid by the number of students which we suddenly won't need..............

Good job we still have the Scouts! (Boy Scouts that is)

Crab,

I'm pretty certain UK PLC are going to lose 'a' helicopter fleet at least. However, what that is depends on what is politically acceptable. My personal money has been on green wildcat for some time (as you can spin it by putting them in a hangar and using them as a 'grey' spares pool). I'm surprised they're throwing both puma and wildcat into the mix but, as everyone says, you only save money by chopping a fleet, not by salami slicing.

Pba,
If MoD is considering deleting Bulwark/Albion after selling Ocean, then it makes more sense to delete the far more expensive Merlin Mk4 fleet. Moving away from LPH / LPD, MoD is effectively saying "if we need to do LitM we'll use QE/PoW". Post marinisation, Merlin will struggle to match Puma 2 performance in many areas, costs more than a Chinook to buy/run, and if Royal is downsized and the 'phibs scrapped, where is the demand? Plonk 6 Chinooks on QE and you have far more lift than 12-15 Merlins. Before everyone throws a hissy-fit, as someone who's done live LitM and the RM AOPC, I know that there's more to LitM than just landing on a boat - it's just that many don't, and will only see the $$$ saved. By signalling a willingness to scrap the ships, the other enablers should follow. Outside LitM, Puma offers far more flexibility at a greatly reduced cost than Merlin, and therefore, is a better all-round asset.

Amusing how many moans likely coming from brexiteers whose vote to leave was directly responsible for triggering this crisis.

lets stay on topic

I'm a full-on Remainer but I honestly thin k this crisis has been coming for years.

The last Labour Govt committed to some very expensive kit (F-35, Carriers, SSBN replacement etc) which was much needed. After the financial melt down the cash just hasn't been there but it's been salami slicing by the Coalition & the Tories rather than face up to the real decisions.

Those can no longer be avoided Brexit or no Brexit

What's galling is that there was a big fanfare a while back saying all this had been sorted once and for all. Difficult decisions had been taken, the black hole eliminated and basket-case MoD planning had been fixed, with finances finally on a sound footing and a sizeable contingency built in. I can't see that post-referendum exchange rates are entirely to blame for the apparent reversal.

I also don't see how cuts on the scale described in the Times article (which as has been pointed out may well be bolleaux) could ever be squared politically with HMG's stated position on defence. They may of course be part of a softening up exercise so the actual cuts seem less severe when they happen.

It may also be the case that someone has decided to selectively leak the "unthinkable" end of the options looked at, which are always included for completeness so they can be eliminated, to generate hostile reaction.

Interesting that no one here is suggesting the military should take a long look in the mirror. Single service protectionism, duplication, unnecessary regulation, inefficient use of assets and real estate. Lots of savings to be made in house if we really wanted but it’s easier to blame the politicians.

We have the 5/6th largest defence budget in the world. Maybe we should manage it better?

Quite correct. I was also about to point out that the various plans to upgrade Typhoon to take on the current Tornado attack and reconaissance roles have not been completed and therefore we will have a significant capability gap, but then I remembered that this no longer seems to matter to anyone. What a sad and depressing state of affairs...

Well said. Worth remembering that on 19 November 2001, and again on 13 December 2001, the Chief of Defence Procurement ruled it was a 'routine expectation' of any project or programme manager to save 30% from his budget, without affecting time, performance or operational capability. When Steve Webb MP wrote asking Minister how often that had been achieved, MoD refused to reply. OK, my tongue is slightly in cheek, as CDP was a fool, but he must have got the notion from somewhere and would be insane to issue such a written declaration if he could not back it up with evidence. Even if 10% of projects could realise such a benign saving, that's a lot of money.

Blah
 

The very obvious and sensible solution is to sell both the new aircraft carriers....to Brazil or the USMC or KSA or Zimbabwe.
We don’t need the carriers nor can we afford them or man them.

The last time we actually needed carriers was in 1982. That’s as far away now to us as WW2 was to the 82 generation. There is no military justification for aircraft carriers now, unless you happen to represent the US (or Zimbabwe).

There is simply no credible argument for them.

Unfortunately, as we all know, selling the carriers would be a national embarrassment but it would be the correct decision.

It would release funds to maintain a balanced force and prevent the desperate search for manpower.

No Sir, no there wasn't a reasonably balanced budget pre 2015 based on a rate of exchange at a certain level.

No there wasn't a significant and sustained collapse in the pounds exchange rate which has had an enormous impact on the ability to buy stuff, due to a sudden and large variance between planned exchange rates and actual exchange rates.

I must have imagined this financial car crash, such was my elation at the prospect that a bunch of my countrymen have decided to take this country back decades, after being sold a bunch of lies by the tabloid press and extremist political parties and then creating the conditions which is seeing this country hurtle headfirst into a strategic crisis the likes of which will take decades to recover from.

Thank god I imagined all of that, otherwise we'd be in a bit of trouble now wouldnt we...

A substantial part of "the trouble that we are in" is that the Remoaners cannot accept the verdict of the democracy that they espouse.

Which is the default position of the EU that they love; never mind referendum results, have another one. Or another. Bound to get it right sooner or later.

You mean like brexiteers who spent 40years moaning after the first referendum, and now expect everyone to STFU and not do as they did?

That's in the imagination. I believe the majority of Brexiteers scarcely noticed when they were hoodwinked into bondage, it took many years for them to wake, and Nigel Farage to stir them and the Tories to action.

Lets see: pesticides that worked were banned, vacuum cleaners that sucked were banned, light bulbs that gave adequate light instantly were banned, kettles that boiled quickly were banned ............ after a while the complacent worms turned.

Then there are the EU accounts which have never ever been signed off by auditors. Some of us do not like being swindled and shafted overtly, we prefer subtelty.

You missed washing machines that washed off the list.

For Gods sake can we stop turning every thread into a re-rum of Jet Blast on Europe?

as I've said the link between Defence Cuts & Brexit is tenuous - the only possible connection is the fall in the value of the pound - but that went up and down over the period we're talking about anyway

The big hole is caused by the fact that the Trident replacement was added to the defence budget when it used to be a stand-alone cost. Take it out again and the problem disappears.

The terrible serviceability rates of the E-3D Sentry, coupled to the low availability and flying rates they attain, mean that 2-3 can go. Get rid of Sentinel, which came in as a UOR only, - has that requirement ended? Lose 2 Shadow and put RJ at Mildenhall. Close Waddington (with the exception of the Creech/Drone interlink).

Sadly I suspect the money would disappear into the Govt coffers and never be seen again. Also I can't see how it would improve recruiting. A career (or job)in the Armed Forces is not seen as an attractive option for most of society due to a multitude of reasons, most of which are outside our control