If I was the Queen I would say that the political system is working as it should. No doubt it could be improved, but basically it is sound in that it is democratically elected. I would, if I were her, point out that we elected this bunch of plonkers, not me.

We need a defence/foreign policy that commands the support of a majority of the electorate. Personally, I think we should retreat to the most successful alliance of recent history – NATO. We should concentrate on defending the NATO area and stop poncing about in distant lands.

Euan – my RAF service was as an Air Signaller/AEOp & AEO. I flew on MPA, MRR & 51 Sqn and then rounded things off with 13 years in RAF & DIS intelligence posts.

I’m afraid the monarch has abdicated her duties, her authority and if their were any justice her position.
As a Constitutional Monarch, she should have disolved Parliament when it refused to provide the promised referendum on Lisbon.
That is her sole function, and she failed it.
Such was the opinion of an ex monarchist Tory at a local fund raiser held in some bomb shelters he’d used personaly during the second world war, and yes, that was as surreal for me as it sounds.

We dont need a coup, although personaly I cant imagine I’d put up much resistance, but it would be nice if some serving officers would mount some political resistance, but the only people who will speak out are Captains who want out of the army and see blasting higher ups as a way out, retired officers once their pensions are untouchable, and Dannatt who’s bloody fault half the problems are anyway, at least in part, who then ruins his credentials as an army voice speaking for the army by joining the bloody Tories.
Why arent the Seniors Officers resigning en masse, or refusing to deploy until the right equipment is made available?

WTF do the men in charge of the Guards division think will happen if they refuse to deploy their men to Afghanistan until the list of equipment they need is supplied, and send said list to The Sun?
PCSO’s are going to come and tell them they’re being naughty and must stop?

Ahh! Jed if only, I even believe that the Military and Monarchy could do a better job of running this once proud and influential nation.

In regards to military management, I’m one of the few that think that separating the armed forces with their own budgets would be a better route than having the one pot of money. The reason is that all that happens now is infighting between the services. Separate services and separate budgets should mean they can get on doing the job that they are supposed to do, although there would need to be some checks and balances to ensure things don’t go crazy. Crazy as in the RAF neglecting the boring old transport and intelligence fleets for fast pointy shiny things or the Army reverting to a Cold War tank armada. Politicians would have less oversight to screw things up although they would have to ensure the military don’t bugger things up either.

It is indeed a smokescreen for cuts definitely and at the end of the day the decision will be down to the next government on whether or not the order is made or if it has already been made if they cancel it. Although cancellation could be difficult either due to contractual terms or the public perception of cancelling a helicopter order but as they should just have been elected they could take the popularity hit and recover. The sad thing is I doubt the next government will be here in time to delay the retirement of the Nimrod fleet which is to cease flying by March 31st which is perhaps the dumbest decision made in defence since the £1.4 billion cut to the helicopter budget years ago. The next bunch could bring the MRA.4 fleet into service faster with an interim capability before all the aircrews are trained, it would also be wise to decide to take the 3 development airframes into service.

Michael the UK can afford decent armed forces as we don’t spend very much now and we haven’t for a while even with current funds and better management we could do better. The public I would argue although entitled to an opinion are largely uneducated in regards to the wider scheme of things so if the Military done what the public said we would be doomed. For instance many people don’t see the connections linking why we do something like deploy the RN to the Gulf or Indian Ocean and the UK. In regards to politicians many of them have an extremely short memory span so they are more than capable of doing another Afghanistan so to speak. What did you do in the RAF btw?

What we need is a bunch of ex Generals, Air Vice Marshals and Admirals to stick their head above the parapet and tell it like it is – Prince Charles too, how many regiments is he honorary colonel for ?

If fact screw it, all the mediocre politicians are as bad as each irrespective of party – so full military coup and full reinstatement of the monarchy !!

Ewan, I had trawled the net but could not really make out what the total was. I know the MoD state that the first 10 will arrive in 2012, but it also states that the order will not be placed until next year, so I don’t know why you think its 10 with options for another 12. Whatever the detail, to totals still vary between 22 and 24. The replacement for the 2 lost in Afghanistan this year could be included in or extra to the 22 they the MoD and others refer to.

Like you I think this is a smoke screen to cover the cuts that were anounced at the same time. As you say we will have a new government next year and these extra aircraft are very unlikley to see the light of day. Another case of too little too bloody late.

The MoD site also refers to a unarmoured vehicle programme being put on hold. I guess this is OUVS (strange as OUVS should have been armoured!!!

My comment about border guards was light-hearted but, in my opinion, only too likely. If you combine the likely threat with what we can afford and what the electorate will support – you get what I suggested – defence of the UK.

I find it hard to believe that ANY British government is going to repeat the Iraq-Afghanistan mess. Mind you – they are daft enough to. I joined the RAF in 1954 – in the middle of an expansion to fight the Korean war – which finished in 1953……….

Jed I did get the vibe of sarcasm from your comment although I didn’t get the same vibe from Michael’s last comment in hindsight my reply was OTT so sorry about that got a wee bit carried away. The paramilitary coastguard I would have doing quite a bit after all our border is a maritime one so it’s only logical that a border guard and a coastguard are one in the same. The idea that I have is a proper coastguard that has a wide range of roles from Safety and Security at sea to Immigration control. Hopefully there will be a mention of it when it comes to the FDR articles on the Navy which I’m sure will be excellent and I’m positive the comments will be… well…interesting?

Actually my “border guards” comment was meant to be dripping in sarcasm….. but……

it does not mean it wont happen, border guards, para-military coast guard where we once had a navy, and consolidated police air support which used to be the airforce…..

Sorry for the double post but 2012 at the start of the third line should be 2013.

Phil we are apparently ordering 10 with options on another 12 airframes the cynic in me says the options will never appear, the first 10 will be produced in 2012 and should arrive in the UK sometime in 2012. There are 2 additional airframes that have been ordered to replace losses. That’s what I have managed to piece together from the internet and elsewhere sheds some light on the promised order of 22, looks like spin to me. I will believe the conclusion I have drawn from information I have read until I see otherwise. In regards to equipment there is not much detail but I believe they will be CH-47F standards as the fleet is currently being upgraded although if they are bastardised who knows but I would not put it above the MoD. The whole order is also dependant on the next government it could be cancelled as the chances are the helicopters will arrive most likely too late to be of use. Part of me thinks this is a ploy to be used by labour as the contract could be pretty rubbish so the next government could see the mess that it is and cancel it for the greater good while labour use it as a stick to beat someone with. The reason I think that Is why order them at the last minute, why have them delivered in 2013 as I’m sure a better deal could have been done with the USAF Boeing and other customers.

Michael and others: A border guard sized and equipped armed forces or limited defence orientated armed forces may seem like a good idea but in reality it’s simply not possible for the United Kingdom. If people want it to be possible they need to massively change their lifestyles or and have to accept that they will have to pay more for things, Simply put that rice you eat comes from the other side of the world so do the clothes you wear most things we now take for granted are from far away. 90% of our trade is by sea this makes us vulnerable to blockades or disruption in trade anywhere which means we either have to pay more or could mean we do not get the goods at all. The United Kingdom is one of the most globalised countries on the planet if not the most globalised nation so for us changing would take decades and would cause severe economic pressures reducing our wealth.

Try proposing this to people, you would have to change your life and pay more for things with money that is going to depreciate which means holidays will be unaffordable. Why they ask? Oh! so we can have the moral high ground and not get into wars that get our brave soldiers killed also we would save lots of money so we could waste it elsewhere such as the NHS or Social Protection. I’m no expert but I believe most people would tell you to F**k off and maybe ask if you are from CND or Greenpeace.

Of course it might not happen that way things could be hunky dory but when something kicks off as it does eventually the UK would be in a tough position unable to do anything about it but would be affected by it and dependant on others to sort the problem. We would have little influence in the world when it comes to crisis and our voice on the world stage would diminish considerably as we would lose our position within the UN. Relationships with other nations would change as we would no longer be a world player with influence so little reason to have close relations to have us on side if you know what I mean. If we reduced the armed forces massive change would be wise so that when the inevitable crisis’s happen we not be totally buggered with society collapsing and no power etc. Energy costs would rise as we would no longer be able to strike deals for LNG from Qatar or Oil from Saudi Arabia we would be totally reliant on the whims of our suppliers which is not a good position to be in. Massive investment would be needed in alternatives overriding people opposing wind farms, new coal power stations, new nuclear power and those opposing massive new pylons stretching across the countryside. In other words democracy would suffer in ways as national utilitarian priorities would have to override those who oppose these things for the greater good i don’t think people would be happy with that on a wide scale. On a small scale in certain circumstances for big projects that affect national priorities that can have an impact on those priorities in a significant way then yes utilitarianism is certainly the best way.

I could probably write more but I feel this comment/post is pretty unstructured already so I’ll leave it here.

Hopefully they will be to the same spec as the upgraded ones

http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2009/09/a-tale-of-three-upgrades-chinook/

Just a thought, How many Chinooks are we going to order? Is it 22 or 24. According to defencenews its 24, as 2 are to replace the 3 lost this year. The other thing is will they be CH47Fs or some bastardised hybrid like we did with the HC3s. Then MoD website seems to say that they will be fitted as as per Project Julius. If this is true, then its bad news as this is a hybrid half glass / half analogue, so noy CH47F. I can see another chinook disaster about to happen.

Actually, the more I think about this border guard idea, the more I like it. How about if we re-configured our armed forces to defend the UK? Small army, air defence, control of the western sea approaches; and SLBM to make us safely prickly.

I should think the voters would go for that.

Well, I would think that an armed border guard force would command the support of the electorate. We could even equip the maritime section with a couple of aircraft carriers!

Micheal says: “In a few years time we will have armed forces fit to fight in Afghanistan”

I am not so optimistic, in a few years, you will have an armed militia, lets call them “the border guards”, who won’t need 60 Chinooks and probably won’t have the budget to fill their enormous fuel tanks…….

Just shows you should be careful in what you wish for. Everyone wants a defence review and now we’ve got one. In a few years time we will have armed forces fit to fight in Afghanistan. But we will have pulled out of there by then. It’s difficult to forecast the next crisis, but it will almost certainly be different.

Just wondering, do you have any sort of breakdown for soldiers killed on long range manoeuvres and soldier killed “mowing the lawn”

Chinooks are useful for longe range large movements, but not so much if you’re wandering around the green zone looking for a fight/policing the area.

New Chinooks

Retiring Sea Kings and Merlins. So heavy lift up. Medium lift down. Swings and roundabouts.