Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Slow News Day?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    You are in the right ball park.It is clear that the UK should NOT be a sole deterrent actor and any Budgets associated with that must have an Alliance sharing of Costs. Perhaps the UK should drop into the top strata of Conventional Forces keeping in mind Commonwealth and Overseas Territories obligations and the need for tonnage to meet exigencies weather related or otherwise. An Atlantic Island country without MPA's was a shocker.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
      You are in the right ball park.It is clear that the UK should NOT be a sole deterrent actor and any Budgets associated with that must have an Alliance sharing of Costs. Perhaps the UK should drop into the top strata of Conventional Forces keeping in mind Commonwealth and Overseas Territories obligations and the need for tonnage to meet exigencies weather related or otherwise. An Atlantic Island country without MPA's was a shocker.
      Meh the MPA issue is simply due to an epic failure of common sense within the MOD and BAE, if they'd just gone in with the P8 from the start, or the proposed Airbus option they could have avoided the entire debacle and still come out ahead on money. A lot of the issues the UK has imo is either backing bespoke UK designs and incurring unique costs (for example the "Britishised" the Apache's so much that they couldn't leverage off the US upgrade path), or political choices that make no sense, (for example the shortening of the Type 45 production, which didn't really save them much due to the sunken costs of development). It's hard to point to exactly when the "Rot" set in, I mean even since WW2 the RN has been playing games and making Penny Wise Pound foolish choices that always in hindsight make you wonder.

      In terms of the nuclear question, honestly I don't see that being the sole cost issue even with the burden it's going to place on the budget next decade, the issue is that the UK is playing games with the budgets both with the War funding, and Pension funding in with the 2%. What we are seeing is the Post Cold War choices/funding/expectations coming together.

      Comment


      • #48
        Naval Work for All

        Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
        You are in the right ball park.It is clear that the UK should NOT be a sole deterrent actor and any Budgets associated with that must have an Alliance sharing of Costs. Perhaps the UK should drop into the top strata of Conventional Forces keeping in mind Commonwealth and Overseas Territories obligations and the need for tonnage to meet exigencies weather related or otherwise. An Atlantic Island country without MPA's was a shocker.
        A Special corridor is being established to beat recent Pirate attacks in the Gulf of Aden Area. After recent activity by pirates in the Gulf of Aden and Bab Al Mandeb, choke point off Djibouti, the Naval Authorities have decided to establish a Maritime Security Transit Corridor ( MSTC ). The MSTC will consist of the Internationally Recommended Transit Corridor ( IRTC ), the BAM Traffic Separation Scheme ( TSS ) and the TSS west of the Hanish Islands , and a two way route connecting the IRTC and the BAM TSS. The Combined Maritime Naval Forces said the corridor will provide a route around which naval forces can focus their efforts. Note a TSS is like a tunnel with traffic routed in a one way scheme, the exception allows traffic to cross or join at near 90 degree angles to get in or out of your lane as quickly as possible.

        Comment


        • #49
          Amphibious Forces

          Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
          Oh I'm sure we'll have which Minster explain why the RN platforms that they have are so much better that they don't need anything anymore than what they have.
          .

          Despite a cohort emptying the barrel of capability, The British Amphibious Forces and all their current Kit is outlined in some detail on an illustrated document available online at ThinkDefence.co.uk. They include HMS Albion, HMS Ocean, and 4 Bay Class Auxillaries ( one sold to Australia). It's a good article. In another new area of endeavour, driven by NATO, the British Forces are running a major course on dealing with Defensive and Offensive action in Cyberspace " IT Defensive and Offensive Procedures". Particularily important to those at sea as we are plugged in to Cyberspace for everything.

          Comment


          • #50
            Eu defence

            Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
            You are in the right ball park.It is clear that the UK should NOT be a sole deterrent actor and any Budgets associated with that must have an Alliance sharing of Costs. Perhaps the UK should drop into the top strata of Conventional Forces keeping in mind Commonwealth and Overseas Territories obligations and the need for tonnage to meet exigencies weather related or otherwise. An Atlantic Island country without MPA's was a shocker.
            In today's Irish Examiner; European Union countries (minus GB and Denmark) have signed up to a programme of Joint Military Defence to address security challenges. A total of 23 countries are signatories out of 28 members currently. The agreement PESCO ( Permanent Structured Co-operation ) is backed by the EU Defence Fund and has identified 50 joint projects in Defence capabilities and military operations. The German statements are quite Gung-Ho and
            the EU Foreign Policy Chief talks about countries that do not live up to commitments could be kicked out of the Group. The Group can use their combined financial spending to purchase military capability.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
              ... The German statements are quite Gung-Ho....
              A word of wisdom to the new at this - initial German enthusiasm for a multi-national project is about securing workshare, then, once workshare has been doled out on the basis of initial orders,the German government cuts it order by between a half and two thirds.

              Eurocopter Tiger, Tornado, Typhoon, A400M....

              The astute will note that a recent German proposal for a multi-national, European 5/6th Gen aircraft to replace the Tornado and eventually Typhoon, Gripen - and one assumes Rafale - fell on deaf ears. Everyone knows their game now...

              Every time you hear a German statement about defence spending and responsibilities, look at the state of the German Military - they've been honking off about increasing defence spending for years, but they've not done so. Disarmament by obscolesence.

              There are countries within the EU you can trust on defence topics - Poland, France, Denmark, Sweden - but the Germans are not on that list.
              Last edited by ropebag; 14 November 2017, 15:51.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by ropebag View Post
                A word of wisdom to the new at this - initial German enthusiasm for amount project is about securing workshare, then, once workshare has been doled out on the basis of initial orders,the German government cuts it order by between a half and two thirds.

                Eurocopter Tiger, Tornado, Typhoon, A400M....

                The astute will note that a recent German proposal for a multi-enginedshe, European 5/6th Gen aircraft to replace the Tornado and eventually Typhoon - and one assumes Rafale - fell on deaf ears. Everyone knows their game now...

                Every time you hear a German statement about defence spending and responsibilities, look at the state of the German Military - they've been honking off about increasing defence spending for years, but they've not done so.

                There are countries within the EU you can trust on defence topics - Poland, France, Denmark, Sweden - but the Germans are not on that list.
                That's a bit off, for most of the projects you mentioned, EVERY nation cut orders on procurement (how many Typhoons were the RAF meant to order back when it kicked off?), and you can't ignore the fact that a) Germany had to deal with the massive economic costs of Unification and b) the fallout of the Cold War cuts. Where you complaining when in the height of the Cold War they made up a massive chunk of the Ground Forces? Did they cut too far, yes, but again arguable Every European NATO nation and Canada did so and all are struggling with the results. It's not a unique German issue (shall we mention the planned 45 order that ended up with half for example?)

                And yes they have been promising to increase spending (and again every nation, including one who plays silly buggers with sticking the pension funds into the equation to meet the 2% "cough UK" is doing so), Germany has increased spending/orders, with I think a couple of hundred Leo 2's being brought out of storage and upgraded, 5 new Corvettes ordered, signing on with the Eurotanker program etc

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by ropebag View Post

                  There are countries within the EU you can trust on defence topics - Poland, France, Denmark, Sweden - but the Germans are not on that list.
                  Well , would you believe it , the opt outs are Portugal, Malta, Denmark, GB, AND IRELAND. The others will take care of our communal responsibilities yet again.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X