UK Military News Thread

[SampanViking]

Well there is more:

Paddy Ashdown was on the Lunchtime News fronting this report from the Institute for Public Policy Research, saying pretty much the same thing.

BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Rethink defence, 'declining' UK urged

This is all the classic methods of preparing the public for bad news and I am sure this will continue on an increasingly regular basis into the next election.

[Mr T]

Originally Posted by SampanViking

Paddy Ashdown was on the Lunchtime News fronting this report from the Institute for Public Policy Research, saying pretty much the same thing.

He effectively suggested turning the Royal Navy into a coastal patrol force and join forces with the other European members of NATO - no idea what he plans for the RAF and Army. It's not going to happen because when it comes to defence continental Europe is too complacent - and will always be that way until America leaves it to fend for itself in a crisis, by which time it will be too late.

I think we should build better bridges with the Commonwealth for future defence alliances. Australia, Canada and India don't strike me as countries that would say their helicopters couldn't fly at night during a military operation.

[lcortez]

Originally Posted by Mr T

If two carriers were going to cost £5 million, I think we'd look to expand the fleet a bit more.

I don't believe they're being built at one shipyard - the work is being split between several yards.

Really this is down to the government not putting the facts down on the table early enough. It was happy to say that money would be saved (in the short term) by delaying the build, but it probably knew that in the long run the cost would be higher. Doesn't mean the project is suddenly unaffordable.

If the project goes ahead I doubt there will be a "very lengthy" delay because it will just cost more again (and in a way that it's more expensive in the short-term too). A significant delay on top of the revised schedule would almost certainly mean cancellation.

However, at the moment I'm sceptical of this latest doom-and-gloom report - there have been a number in the last few months. Fact is that the contracts have been signed (who wants to bet that there are no penalty clauses?), £1 billion is soon to have been spent and the project has survived so many attacks on it by the other services, armchair generals (whose mantra of "the wars of yesterday are gone" always get proven wrong every decade or so) lefty hug-a-Taliban brigade and friends that it isn't facing anything new.

Keep an eye open in the next few weeks, as steel is/was due to be cut soon.

Sampan, I'm not surprised that Sir Michael Jackson would say that (sadly there's little service solidarity at the moment thanks to the Treasury). As for Portillo, I'd like to see him suggest to Liam Fox in person that the future Defence Secretary cancel a partly built aircraft carrier! But I think a defence review after the election is likely to work out what the country needs, how it would be best acquired (possibly more off-the-shelf purchases) and how much it will cost.

Whoops! Typo!

[Obi Wan Russell]

Originally Posted by SampanViking

Well there is more:

Paddy Ashdown was on the Lunchtime News fronting this report from the Institute for Public Policy Research, saying pretty much the same thing.

BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Rethink defence, 'declining' UK urged

This is all the classic methods of preparing the public for bad news and I am sure this will continue on an increasingly regular basis into the next election.

Shame on Paddy Pantsdown, and him an ex Booty as well! If we do go down the pan-European route then the best thisng we can do is build the carriers! The other Euro nations can contribute a large number of frigate sized escorts but none of them can contribute the larger vessels like carriers (excepting the French, but if we leave it to them then Europe will have only one strike carrier compared to the 11 of the USN, and don't forget all the other major powers are building carriers too ie Russia and China). No I wasn't forgetting Spain or Italy either. Their CVs aren't in the same league as CVF or CdG.

[Pointblank]

Originally Posted by SampanViking

Well there is more:

Paddy Ashdown was on the Lunchtime News fronting this report from the Institute for Public Policy Research, saying pretty much the same thing.

BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Rethink defence, 'declining' UK urged

This is all the classic methods of preparing the public for bad news and I am sure this will continue on an increasingly regular basis into the next election.

The last time someone made cuts this deep to defence, someone decided that it was a good time to make a land grab from the Brits... not smart.

[lcortez]

I think some sorte of co ordinated defence effort in Europe would make sense, as most European defence budgets are to small to finance the big ticket items that will probabaly be needed in the future as technology progresses.

Also it makes little sense to me to duplicate capabilities, when a pooled effort would spread the cost, and deliver a better result, one example being the Naval situation outlined above.

Can't really agree with the charge that Europeans are to complacent about defence, when the French are reorientating their force's towards expeditionary warfare, along with a substantial modernisation, along with Spain increasing the size of it's army from 85,000 to 135,000, plans to order a further 100 Leopard 2a6e tanks, and reorientating towards expeditionary warfare.

No doubt other nations are making changes as well. All this at a time when th UK is talking cut's (again).

Should point out that thus is not an anti UK dig, just felt that I needed to state Europes case agains the usual EU bashing.

[Mr T]

Originally Posted by lcortez

I think some sorte of co ordinated defence effort in Europe would make sense, as most European defence budgets are to small to finance the big ticket items that will probabaly be needed in the future as technology progresses.

Also it makes little sense to me to duplicate capabilities, when a pooled effort would spread the cost, and deliver a better result, one example being the Naval situation outlined above.

Can't really agree with the charge that Europeans are to complacent about defence, when the French are reorientating their force's towards expeditionary warfare, along with a substantial modernisation, along with Spain increasing the size of it's army from 85,000 to 135,000, plans to order a further 100 Leopard 2a6e tanks, and reorientating towards expeditionary warfare.

No doubt other nations are making changes as well. All this at a time when th UK is talking cut's (again).

Should point out that thus is not an anti UK dig, just felt that I needed to state Europes case agains the usual EU bashing.

We're not bashing the EU because the EU has no policy on a single, pan-European defence force. We're talking realities over how our European neighbours spend on defence.

It's not just the UK that is talking about cuts to military spending. But more importantly you're neglecting to mention the fact that many European countries limit their spending to a very small percentage of GDP. The UK, France and Spain are the exception to the rule, not the norm.

Also there's no way they'd give up their militaries. The Baltic states can't even agree on a joint air force between the three of them to allow them to afford their own planes. Plus we would need a joint foreign policy to be able to use a joint defence force, which isn't going to happen.

[Ambivalent]

France has the world's third highest defense expenditure after the US and PRC.

[Mr T]

Originally Posted by Ambivalent

France has the world's third highest defense expenditure after the US and PRC.

As I said, France is one of the exceptions to the rule when it comes to defence spending in Europe. Too few states take it seriously, whilst the rest look to rely on the United States/a few of their neighbours for defence.

[Ambivalent]

I will say I'm a little surprised to see Bambi expanding the Spanish Army, not to mention those new LHA's they are building. Italy is hard to guage, an awful lot of their military spending is hidden in the spending of the Ministry of Industry budget and the budgets of other Italian ministries.

[Mr T]

MoD and BVT in shipbuilding deal

The Ministry of Defence and BVT Surface Fleet, a joint venture between BAE Systems and VT Group, have signed a landmark agreement worth at least £3.5bn to sustain Britain's shipbuilding industry over the next 15 years.

Britain's remaining shipyards are at full stretch building aircraft carriers, frigates and submarines. But the industry has long recognised that rationalisation is necessary.

Under the legally binding agreement, BVT has committed to find at least £350m of cost savings over 15 years in return for a guaranteed minimum workload from the MoD estimated at about £235m a year.

BVT will have "exclusive" rights to design, build, integrate and support shipbuilding programmes such as the Future Surface Combatant to replace Britain's ageing Type 23 frigates. The deal offers unprecedented visibility at a time when the defence budget is under pressure.

Good news. FSC project's moving forward!

[Scratch]

It seems there's still chances the CVF's will operate F-35C variants pretty soon into their service life. Aparrently there are people in the MoD that would like to have that capability and it doesn't seem that remote. Maybe it'll be a mix. And perhaps at least the PoW will operate a arrestor system from the beginning. That might alway be an option to have one capability each.

================================================== ========

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php...68&c=EUR&s=TOP

U.K. May Reconsider STOVL JSF for Conventional Ship Variant

By andrew chuter
Published: 7 Aug 2009 13:43

ONDON - Media reports late last week that Britain may ditch the short-takeoff and vertical-landing variant of the Joint Strike Fighter in favor of the conventional carrier variant were not entirely dismissed by a Ministry of Defence statement, which appeared to leave the door ajar for a possible change of platform for the Royal Navy's new aircraft carriers.

"To maximize the flexibility that the carriers will offer over their service life, they are being built to an adaptable design that can operate both STOVL and CV type aircraft. The QE Class are designed around the operation of the STOVL Joint Strike Fighter aircraft, and this remains our preferred solution to meet the UK's Carrier Strike requirement along with the Queen Elizabeth Class of carriers and the Maritime Airborne Surveillance Capability," the statement said.

Britain has already ordered three STOVL F-35s for operational evaluation, but MoD insiders say there remains a school of thought among some in the ministry to look again at the CV aircraft.

[Obi Wan Russell]

Latest news about the Naval Strike Wing from Janes Defence weekly, the main points are:

Regenerating Core Capabilities.

* Long term deployments lasting weeks or months with 10+ jets are to be come much more common.

* Too much skill fade with the current arrangement.

* Unlikely light blue will get enough sea time to get night qualified. So dark blue will do day/night, light blue day only.

* Joint deployment with USMC will continue, leading to a major ex next spring off the US East coast combining NSW and USMC airgroups. They can operate 16 or more Harriers.

* 801 will stand up late next year as part of the NSW, making 4 sqns in total.

And a rumour doing the rounds that 892NAS may return as well! (not holding my breath on that one, but still a positive move). The deployment to the 'Stan and the ongoing JUMP upgrade program have meant a reduction in available airframes for the existing three frontline sqns up until now, added to the fact that the FAA have been sending some of their pilots and ground crew through the USN training 'pipeline', to gain experience in operations from large deck carriers in preparation for the CVFs. All in all it seems a positive move for the FAA and bodes well for the future.

[Neutral Zone]

Originally Posted by Obi Wan Russell

And a rumour doing the rounds that 892NAS may return as well! (not holding my breath on that one, but still a positive move).

Certainly one for the "I'll believe it when I see it" file but certainly it's the sort of rumour you want to be hearing!

It would be fitting if 892 NAS were to be the RN's first F-35 unit, complete with an alpha tailbadge!

[Ambivalent]

Originally Posted by Scratch

It seems there's still chances the CVF's will operate F-35C variants pretty soon into their service life. Aparrently there are people in the MoD that would like to have that capability and it doesn't seem that remote. Maybe it'll be a mix. And perhaps at least the PoW will operate a arrestor system from the beginning. That might alway be an option to have one capability each.

================================================== ========

U.K. May Reconsider STOVL JSF for Conventional Ship Variant - Defense News

U.K. May Reconsider STOVL JSF for Conventional Ship Variant

By andrew chuter
Published: 7 Aug 2009 13:43

ONDON - Media reports late last week that Britain may ditch the short-takeoff and vertical-landing variant of the Joint Strike Fighter in favor of the conventional carrier variant were not entirely dismissed by a Ministry of Defence statement, which appeared to leave the door ajar for a possible change of platform for the Royal Navy's new aircraft carriers.

"To maximize the flexibility that the carriers will offer over their service life, they are being built to an adaptable design that can operate both STOVL and CV type aircraft. The QE Class are designed around the operation of the STOVL Joint Strike Fighter aircraft, and this remains our preferred solution to meet the UK's Carrier Strike requirement along with the Queen Elizabeth Class of carriers and the Maritime Airborne Surveillance Capability," the statement said.

Britain has already ordered three STOVL F-35s for operational evaluation, but MoD insiders say there remains a school of thought among some in the ministry to look again at the CV aircraft.

The Royal Navy should build the same version of the CVF the French are going to build and be done with it. Then if the F-35B or C turns out to be a turd ( or hideously over priced ) the RN can buy Rafael's. It also gives them the ability to operate the E-2D, and that is a huge advantage of CATOBAR in my view.