A New Approach to our FDR Posts
In the final few FDR posts left before I start a consolidation and presentation exercise (which will resurrect the Wiki) I am going to structure them in two sections where relevant.
We all know that the forthcoming review is going to be nothing more than an exercise in slashing costs with a thin veneer of strategic direction.
- Objective 1 – Short Term cost savings and Afghanistan
- Objective 2 – Long Term plans based on the idea of investing to save, coherence and a standardisation strategy that enforces the Think Defence mantra of ‘ruthless commonality’
We know that Objective 1 is the most pressing but in swinging the axe we also have to ensure that a range of capabilities can be regenerated or built up as the financial climate improves.
It’s a far cry from grand ambitions of defining our role in the world, punching above our weight and other equally redundant platitudes and rooted in reality.
I read this article in the Guardian that I thought actually quite brilliant in some regards, the comments are both interesting amusing but the fundamental point I take out of is this.
Stop messing about grandstanding about our role in the world and start thinking what is in the British interest?
Of course, I think it is in the British interest to maintain a strong military capability to be applied in support of our wider economic and political strategy, but on what basis?
6 comments
Post your own
Re: Nimrod. The Nimrod was well discussed in the comments of quite a few blog posts albeit a while ago I know I had a lot to say about it.
Anyhow I agree with Dominic I think this Government might concentrate on the Objective one short term “get the f*ck out of dodge” somewhat temporary solution. A proper long term plan to actually sort things out would really take something special and for all the talk of the new suits I really doubt it will happen.
JBT, I also hope for a little more than slash and burn! Perhaps, some real long term thinking on Armed Forces Command Organization and progress on Procurement and Planning.
Personally, I wouldn’t invest too much expectation in this SDSR alone. There is, more or less, agreement that reviews of this type will come about every 4-5yrs.
“Now this is just a thought, and I am not saying I would go this route, but, in the name of ‘ruthless commonality’ and spend now to save later……
Would it make sense to create an MPA version of the A400M instead of proceeding with re-winging the Nimrod fleet ?”
Jed, I wouldn’t go down that route either but in the spirit of discussion…why bother with the A400M in this role? Why not use C130J instead? It’s already in the fleet, it is used in both a surveillance and maritime role elsewhere and hercs have been armed. In fact, it could also be used to deploy the palletized Searchwater 2000 system offered for the ASAC Merlin upgrade.
“We all know that the forthcoming review is going to be nothing more than an exercise in slashing costs with a thin veneer of strategic direction.”
I don’t yet have the confidence to predict that outcome with so much certainty.
Ref: Objective 2 – Long Term plans based on the idea of investing to save, coherence and a standardisation strategy that enforces the Think Defence mantra of ‘ruthless commonality
Now this is just a thought, and I am not saying I would go this route, but, in the name of ‘ruthless commonality’ and spend now to save later……
Would it make sense to create an MPA version of the A400M instead of proceeding with re-winging the Nimrod fleet ?
Total commonality of wings, enginges, flight deck (and thus flight crew training), most of the airframe etc Add the Nimrods sensors, put the sonar buoy launchers in the rear ramp, have a towed MAD bird (?) etc.
Main question in my mind is how much would it cost to put a weapons bay in the fuselage big enough to carry say 4 x Stingray ? Perhaps a simpler “over the stern” launch arrangement with drogue shoots dragging them out of ‘torpedo tubes’ built into the rear ramp ? Or just external carriage of stores.
Would there be a large export market to put this ‘rugged’ MPA up against the airliner derived P8 Poseidon ?
Discuss…..
Objective 1 – Short Term cost savings and Afghanistan
It’ll be the lens the government uses, but the good doctor is starting to believe we’ll have lost ghanners before 2014.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/07/calamity-cretins.html
“And, by the way, we learn that two more soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan – both shot, and both in the same incident. As part of a combined force, they had gone to the rescue of a wounded colleague. But the really worrying thing here is the location – Lashkar Gah.
…..
That troops are now being killed and injured in the streets of Lashkar Gah is a measure of how far down the pan the Afghan adventure has gone. If the man-child at the top of our government and his fatuous sidekick think we can hold out until 2014, then they are as seriously stupid (and dangerous) as they appear to be.”
Hard to argue, apparently the US is going to stop fighting in 330 days.