And adding to the chorus:
Mind the gapWednesday, April 22, 2009
With further delays to the CVF programme announced, Rear Admiral Terry Loughran calls for commitment to fulfilling the original CVF programme.
On Thursday 11th December 2008, Defence Secretary John Hutton announced delays of one to two years in the in-service dates of the two new aircraft carriers (CVF), HM Ships Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales. He accompanied this statement with an assurance that there would be no loss of jobs. As MP for Birkenhead, he knows this to be disingenuous, as jobs that would have been created, at a time when employment is such an important issue, will now be delayed. The arrival of a full-time Defence Secretary who understands the connection between the creation of hi-tech jobs, the benefits to the economy and the importance of appropriately equipped armed forces in protecting our national interests worldwide is welcomed by all three services. However, like his immediate predecessors, he finds himself between a rock and a hard place - toeing the party line while trying to manage a defence budget that has fallen to its lowest level since the 1930s at just 2.3% of GDP.
The concurrent operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, while unpopular in the country, serve to emphasise the uncertainty in predicting where national interests might be threatened, and the need, therefore, to plan far ahead for the timely delivery of the appropriate flexible forces. Clearly, the planners, constrained by reduced defence allocation, have failed to provide, for example, sufficient armoured vehicles and support helicopters, and the contingent bill for current operations and the associated Urgent Operational Requirements - standing at some £13bn - causes Treasury eyes to water. But robbing the long-term procurement plans (with the inevitable cost increases) is never a sensible answer to present funding pressures. Be that as it may, in the optimism that infuses me in the early days of a new year, I would only make a plea for honesty, oh and some joined-up thinking!
Scarcely three weeks after the announced delay, the Prime Minister trumpeted an injection of cash into the economy to create new jobs, high technology and apprenticeships. Look no further than the CVF project, which, in keeping with the country's history of innovation in aircraft carrier design, is already attracting great interest from abroad. The groundbreaking joint venture to build these ships is harnessing the finest skills from around the British Isles, and the project has given a further boost to BAE Systems Surface Fleet Solutions' (now the BVT Surface Fleet Joint Venture with VT and FSL) already admirable record in creating new apprenticeships.
Already I hear the cry of 'realism', the final acknowledgement of failed planning and poor decision-making. The demise of the Sea Harrier - arguably the finest air-to-air system in the Western world - providing an air superiority capability to the carriers, was justified in part by the arrival of the air defence expected from the Type 45 and PAAMS. 'Mind that Gap'!
We are now told that a delay in the CVF (already slipped from 2012) will allow the build programme to align more closely with the planned introduction into service of the Joint Combat Aircraft. But provision has already been made for the GR9 to fill that gap - and it is important that it does so to maintain our expertise in embarked STOVL (Short Take-Off and Vertical Landing) operations. Further delays are likely to demand further investment in both these aircraft and in the two remaining 'stop gap' carriers - Illustrious and Ark Royal. And we need all the time we can get to recover the skills of operating large aircraft carriers, skills that, through necessity, have faded somewhat since the demise of the 'old' CV Ark Royal. It is the intricacies of the ship/air interface that allow the most effective employment of embarked aircraft, core skills embedded in Royal Navy Fixed and Rotary Wing Squadrons, and no job for a part-time airgroup, embarked today but ashore tomorrow. It would do no harm to get to grips with this interface in the new ships before the arrival of fresh challenges in the shape of the JCA.
There should be no suggestion that the postulated delays will somehow undermine the case for the ships themselves. The events of the last decade have, if anything, strengthened the arguments set out in the Strategic Defence Review and the subsequent New Chapter that we need to engage our enemies in their backyard and not our own, and that aircraft carriers offer the full range of options, from peace support though coercion into combat. And in these days of 'nation states' and the uncertainties of over-flights and foreign basing, power projection ashore from the sea affords a variety of beneficial options. It is highly misleading to assume as normal the present situation in Afghanistan where we are operating with all our forces on the ground. The stand-off capability of the CVF and their future aircraft will afford assured power projection and air support with all the advantages of poise for diplomacy, flexibility in deployment and sustainability to own forces. The present CVS, admirable though they have proved over the last three decades, leave an ever-widening capability gap that cannot be ignored. It is nevertheless remarkable that their current generation of STOVL aircraft, the Harriers now up to GR9 modification, have proved quite so utilitarian and amenable to capability updates, and it is inconceivable that the combined ship/airgroup capability package should be undermined in the interim by the early retirement of these aircraft. It is being mooted that this would be a cost saving measure in favour of a single aircraft type - Typhoon, which would certainly soak up any savings in an effort to make that aircraft's 'multi-role capability' a reality, and not one that would ever encompass embarked operations from any ship.
Given my own experience, having flown as a pilot in the old CV Ark Royal and commanding the present STOVL ship of the same name, and being involved in the CVF programme from the initial competitive phase through to chairing the Independent Review Panel, I might be accused of special pleading. Guilty as charged! With the Royal Navy regularly providing over 50% of the forces in Afghanistan - from the Naval Strike Wing Harriers in close air support to the Royal Marines on the ground and helicopters in support - I would welcome any injection of additional resources to all personnel involved in a high-combat situation. But let's not fool ourselves, or the public at large, by pretending anything other than capabilities such as CVF defined in the Strategic Defence Review, which have withstood many a scrutiny, need appropriate funding. Military adventures do not come cheap in terms of lives and serious injuries, and they deserve separate funding. Defence procurement to capability, time and cost is always a challenge. Both benefit from a little honesty.
Rear Admiral Terry Loughran is a seasoned Conference Chairman, Facilitator and After Dinner Speaker, maintaining a close interest in defence matters. He is currently Chairman of FLY NAVY Heritage, celebrating this year the Centenary of Naval Aviation.
