Jump to content
DerelictStudios Forums
Goose

Uk Military Thread

Recommended Posts

There's been alot of bad press recently about budget cuts and lack of equipment for the British military. The MoD and Whitehall have been accused of systematic failures, and I figure seeing as we tend to get a few topics about individual stories cropping up here, I'll make a big one to compile them all in and update. More to come as they appear, there's plenty more in a backlog if you just search on the BBC or Times websites. Go forth and discuss.

 

 

Army:

 

TA training on hold

Ban on live bullets used in training

 

Navy:

 

Trident threatened

Carriers threatened

 

RAF:

 

More chinooks, more budget cuts, less jobs, less jets

RAF base cuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wars are costly? I think cutting MOD jobs is a good thing though. Our MOD is way larger than in other comparable nations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well at least you guys got more Chinooks. But besides that...have fun paying Mohammad and his 4 wives for endless maternity leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Cough* Mormons *Cough*

 

Anyway, get your facts straight. Paternity leave is only 2 weeks of paid leave, hardly worth the cost of bringing up a child. How is this even related to defence sepending? Do you enjoy dropping racist dookies on the forums? Geez.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think cutting MOD jobs is a good thing though.

 

Go die in a hole, the military is one of the only places you can still find a secure job these days, and the people that are lucky enough to get in, and brave enough to stick it out and go on tour deserve more than coming home in one piece only to find themselves out of a job.

 

 

Our MOD is way larger than in other comparable nations.

 

This is exactly the problem. What nation is the MoD trying to compare itself to? It's attempting to fund a cold war orientated expeditionary army on a modern self-defence military's budget. You can't buy supercarriers when you've only got enough left over for a rowboat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Go die in a hole, the military is one of the only places you can still find a secure job these days, and the people that are lucky enough to get in, and brave enough to stick it out and go on tour deserve more than coming home in one piece only to find themselves out of a job.

 

Heir heir.

As for the wounded, in the US they'd get a purple heart medal. Here, they may get MRSA or escorted out of the local swimming pools.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wars are costly? I think cutting MOD jobs is a good thing though. Our MOD is way larger than in other comparable nations.

 

What other nations are comparable? I don't think any nation has had quite the living legacy of empire as the UK, or the strong interventionism it often prided itself on.

 

In your current state... I don't know why Argentina just doesn't take the Falklands back. You've slipped that much. Not to say you should try to be a 'diet' US, as we overspend on military out the wazoo... but you're a unique case, and play a vital role in European power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Korona, racist =/= anti-certain-religion)

 

You mean the soon-to-be-but-always-were Malvinas Islands :ph34r:

 

killa, that culture of maximal appreciation is somewhat new - I personally think it was an unconscious national decision that we took after the way we treated our Vietnam Veterans like scum.

 

I think Britain really needs to figure out what its role is in the world. Its so ever confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
killa, that culture of maximal appreciation is somewhat new - I personally think it was an unconscious national decision that we took after the way we treated our Vietnam Veterans like scum.

 

That's kind of my point. There are some cases where it seems we still treat vets like scum. As pro-Britain patriotic as I once was, I do think the way this nation treats our soldiers is shameful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems the way most nations in world leading countries run from distrust to bile. There is still some sentiment of that in the US, but by and large the conservatives have that as one of their top cultural agendas that is pushed hard, and it's one of their few good points. Canada I don't really know about, but I imagine the French are probably 50/50, and the Germans are not fond of anything military. The UK is still in such a time of transition... but to what I have no idea. Korona is right on that point, as a nation it needs to come to a consensus on what it is to the world militarily. The US could use the same, but it doesn't have the pressing defense budget cuts looming over it, so while nice, a consensus will never be 'needed'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way things are going the only chance I see us having of sustaining a well trained well equipped military is by merging the three branches into one, and drastically slashing big defence projects such as the new carriers and replacing trident, then using the saved money to fund essential projects for a smaller military. It's not ideal, or particularly feasible as we now can't back out of the carrier deal, but the only other option is to significantly raise the defence budget in order to cover the shortfalls, but that's not going to happen in the middle of a war and a recession.

 

This got me thinking though, how would an amalgamated British military change? What would the uniforms, ranks, iconography and symbols of one of the worlds oldest modern armies look like? There's so much history and tradition amongst every individual squaron or regiment, how could they preserve the identities of each, and of the branch as a whole?

 

There's been talk about it in the news on and off, I'm not convinced it would ever happen, but somethings gotta give.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally like the United Forces concept, helps cut down on stupid shitty fiefdoms.

 

But I suppose best way would be to ask our Canadian peoples. Firestorm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go die in a hole? There is an enormous difference between the MoD and the Navy/Army/Air Force.

Surely you can see a difference between a glorified civil service and the front line troops? The MoD is the civil service that grossly mis-spent its budget and fudged its acquisitions, spends millions on senior accommodation and yet leaves thousands of properties empty. They left soldiers in barracks that were literally rotting and IMO are as bad as the bwankers. Saying that they should be downsized to pay for more front line equipment is lenient to say the least, the guys in charge over there are jackasses. Maybe if they hadn't blown 500m on 8 non-flyable chinooks then they wouldn't have to be suffering job cuts to pay for more?

As for "is it too large?" well I read somewhere about a comparison between staffing and budgets for the civilian side of defence and it implied that the UK had a disproportionate emphasis on the civil servants involved in defence. That's as a % of total budget rather than in proportion to the number of troops. I can't find the link though, so that sucks.]

 

Anyway I did find this:

http://news.scotsman.com/politics/Fox-Tori...w-UK.5845888.jp

 

This sounds like the best idea I have heard in a long time. Germany can take care of itself. Why do we still fund bases over there anyway?

 

Fundamentally the idea that there is no foreseeable conventional defence threat seems sound to me. I would say that a conventional invasion of the UK is frankly impossible for the forseeable future so ultimately this mess probably doesn't matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
• 2,500 job cuts in armed forces personnel the MoD says "are not critical to current operations". To be done by slowing recruitment and preventing extensions to service, rather than redundancies

The problem is that they aren't talking about cutting jobs for the civil servants much.

 

Cuts in the Harrier, Tornado and Nimrod fleets, along with the closure of an entire air base (which houses the entire joint force harrier contingent, i.e. all the harriers we have) means that all the jobs neccessary to maintain those aircraft and keep them in the air (pilots, engineers, armourers) and therefore all the jobs necessary to maintain those personnel (medics, dentists, RAF Police, caterers, intelligence analysts....) are no longer needed.

 

You'd be amazed how many people are needed just to have a single jet flying each day, so losing an entire squadron means ALOT of jobs are no longer needed, let alone an entire airbase.

 

 

 

Fundamentally the idea that there is no foreseeable conventional defence threat seems sound to me. I would say that a conventional invasion of the UK is frankly impossible for the forseeable future so ultimately this mess probably doesn't matter.

 

As for this, well it's all well and good for you to say that, I'm sure now the cold war is over and the world powers are more or less civil with each other it's easy to feel safe and secure. But that's not a complacency the government or military can afford to take. It takes years for the MoD to buy a tank, or plane or gun, but when they arrive 20 years later they're inevitably of a very high quality. But when the MoD rushes it, mistakes get made (L85A1 for example); so if you're happy for us to scrap all our old bases, and jets, and boats before we've got a replacement lined up, then I think you're being a tad naiive.

 

 

Anyway, a tad more news. Here's some of the proposed cuts from the bbc website, and below that is what is going to be bought with the spare cash.

• Closure of RAF Cottesmore in Rutland - the biggest employer in the county - and immediate loss of one squadron of Harrier jets, with the rest moving to RAF Wittering before being phased out earlier than the previously planned withdrawal date of 2018.

 

• 2,500 job cuts in armed forces personnel the MoD says "are not critical to current operations". To be done by slowing recruitment and preventing extensions to service, rather than redundancies

 

• Independent review to look into cutting more civilian defence jobs

 

• Withdrawal of the Nimrod MR2 in March 2010, one year earlier than expected, and the slowing of the introduction of the Nimrod MRA4 to 2012 - which will hit RAF Kinloss in Moray

 

• Plan to reduce the RAF Tornado and Harrier force by a further one or two squadrons, with final decisions to be taken in the defence review due next year. RAF Lossiemouth, in Moray, is the RAF's largest Tornado GR4s base

 

• Temporary reduction in some aspects of army training

 

• Earlier than planned removal from service of one Royal Navy survey ship and one mine-hunter. Navy's Lynx and Merlin Mk1 helicopters also to be "retired" sooner than planned.

 

 

• Twenty two new Chinook helicopters - the first 10 due to be ready by 2012/13. Takes the total fleet from 48 to 70

 

• An improved "close combat equipment package" with "state of the art" body armour and night vision goggles being made available to 50% more troops

 

• More Bowman tactical radios for troops and £80m for special forces communications

 

• One additional C17 transport aircraft

 

• The number of Reaper drones - unmanned surveillance aircraft - to be doubled as part of a increased funding to improve intelligence and surveillance

 

• Improvements to the defensive and support arrangements for the RAF Hercules heavy-lift fleet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not happy to scrap them all indefinably, I am talking about the gaps in capability that open up for a few years thanks to this fudging. We won't have long range surveillence for about 4 years thanks to them scrapping the Nimrods early (probably a good thing since they are falling out of the sky). It's not really going to matter, we won't be having a conventional war in the next 4 years where that will be important.

 

TBH if it's a choice between having the troops in Afghanistan properly equipped and keeping old gear we probably won't need till the end of its life then I think they made the right choice.

 

Of course it is pretty bad that they have to make such choices, rest assured I am laying the blame here on the MoD, they had the money they needed and squandered it. Another retarded acquisition is that next-gen communication system that was out of date pretty much as soon as it entered theatre.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8247143.stm

 

Or how about selling off their appartments and then having to lease them back from the private landlords?

 

aiaiaiai. The guys in charge need a good hosing down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hadn't heard about that one.

 

You're right about small capability gaps with things like Nimrod, the replacement for those is just an upgrade. But what about Harriers? They're being replaced by the F-35 which has hit delays, technical problems, and is going to cost more than expected. As a result we've cut down the size of our order, so we're now going scrap the harriers early, and get less replacements later; and there's still talk of scrapping the entire program, which means they may have to be replaced by something else, which is going to take even longer to come into service and cost even more money. That's a massive capability gap, which the also ageing Tornado fleet will have to fill, but they're taking the Tornados out of service early, and reducing their numbers before then too. They've only just started their stint in afghanistan, and when it's over the Harriers will go back, if we've got any left by then. All this money saving for a few Chinooks is pointless, by the time they come into service we'll have scaled down our operations in Afghanistan and won't need 70 Chinooks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The helicopters are more likely to be used than coastal defences. They need a comprehensive defence review to decide what is needed, clearly we are left with a lot of legacy stuff from the cold war that isn't really appropriate for the current state of world diplomacy. The issue is that while many bases are not needed they seem to be going about it piecemeal cutting a bit here and a bit there rather than looking at things in a joined up way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah. I say they should just pay up until the election is over and the Tories are in power, then they need to have a strategic defense review and sort this shit out. Otherwise I'm taking a rifle and marching on Parliament, sadly it will only be loaded with blanks as we can't afford bullets anymore, but I could scare them a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chinooks were all but obsolete two decades ago. The fact people are still buying them at all seems a little bizarre to me. Especially buying new ones when after we leave Iraq, there will certainly be US surplus. I've been in the plant their manufactured in, and hear horror stories of sabotage because some fat fucker on the assembly line doesn't want his position to get moved. I wouldn't spend a dime on one, frankly. They're about the most unversatile helicopter anyone can have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the RAF uses different specs. What is replacing the Chinook for heavy lift to make it obsolete? The Osprey? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For heavy lift, pretty much nothing save for a skycrane. For troop transport, pretty much anything from giants like the sea stallion to huey descendants to well anything for Christ's sake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Chinooks are awesome, but thats me. They have immense power and troop carrying capacity.

 

Still, I suppose one can go for Blackhawks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×