As part of the warm up act for the forthcoming inter service wrangling it seems the RAF are first out of the traps with an offer to retire the Tornado early, close 3 bases and even cancel the MRA4.
Expect similar reactions from the other 2 services but as usual the RAF just seem to be better at this kind of thing!
Remember guys, get your suggestions in early, make them big and make sure you protect your sacred cows.
I predict no change to CVF, confirmation of JCA with a slight reduction and FRES to remain intact.
Everything else is up for grabs.
The Treasury are also reportedly telling the MoD that the capital costs of the Trident replacement are going to have to come out of the MoD’s core equipment budget unlike the current situation. By 2020 this would be consuming about a quarter of the MoD’s capital budget.
If this is the case then the services offering to cancel one or two programmes isn’t going to cut it, major surgery is going to be needed and my predictions above might even be completely wrong
We are not alone either, the French and Germans are suggesting cuts in NH90, A400, Typhoon and Tiger and the US Senate has just voted to cut the US DoD budget by $8billion.
By the way fellas, why has no one commented on my blimps and towers article, was it that bloody awful?
Ref: “By the way fellas, why has no one commented on my blimps and towers article, was it that bloody awful?”
No, it was great of course….
Just wait till week after next when I start my new job, my comments will probably disappear completely at least for a while….
What can the navy cut?
If you start of with the premise that the government require CVF, then which part of the navy that supports such ships can realistically be cut?
Ocean replacement, 1 SSN, RFA ships, a few MCMV’s? I guess the the RN may offer up a reduced F35 buy?
Hopefully though, it isn’t salami sliced like this as Fox stated it wouldn’t be.
Winners and Losers he said. I guess his definition of ‘winning’ may mean one service remaining untouched?
Blimps and Towers – not very sexy is it?
Thinking about cuts is the wrong approach in my opinion.
First, understand that the old ways need to be ditched for fiscal reasons and develop a new strategy. Then think about how modern war works and about how to master it at the operational and organisational level with given fiscal restrictions (I expect more to come – maybe 1.5% GDP, and that’s not going to grow much).
The Defence Review may do it or not (I suspect it’s going to be too politicised by partial interests).
Blimps and Towers? I know nothing about them (except what you’ve told me) so I don’t feel qualified to comment!
Sven
I think we all agree with you wholeheartedly, I responded in another thread that there appears to be nothing strategic about this exercise at all, its simply budget (Treasury) led cost cutting.
is it not true that the percentage is only 10%.
if this is so , why then is everything at risk,
why cant we afford the best defence, it is not the fault of the poor dastards at the sharp end, that their leaders are screwing every penny out of them, it is not the politicians that have to fight, and its always to late to say sorry afterwards, these guys deserve the best, and if we cannot be bothered to give them the best, then why have a military in the first place, we spend abt 2,1/2% of our national wealth on them, this should be at least 5%,
but the greedy incompetent untrustworthy leaders we have , wont pay, they give any excuse under the sun why they cant pay, but no one stands up and says why these SHOULD pay, , [we have no money] comes back the answer, [mmmmm] but its ok to spend millions on a voting system no one wants, its ok to give the likes of India and Pakistan billions, we give millions and millions on some countries in the west Indies, despite the fact that [5] of them voted last month with Argentina that Britain should give them up, but no sign or returning the money we give them, we waste billions each year on waste and corruption, we give billions and billions to our European masters, [and your telling us we cant afford our military] now they are either lying to us, or corrupt, they cant have it both ways, [that’s my opinion]
What I would like to know is this. In the middle of all this talk about how severe the cuts are going to be, is anyone optimistic enough to think that there is any possibility that we might get one or two items or NEW kit. I suppose the answer will be a resounding “NO!” and that we shall get a 3 or 4 year moratorium on new equipment.
If the Review were to be a genuine strategic one, there might be some possibility (with priorities decided)of such new eqipment. However, it certainly seems like more of the same i.e. salami slicing. A pity , for there is some good kit in the pipeline,for instance, the Fire Shadow loitering munitions for the Artillery, which could be very useful indeed in Afghanistan as well as in high-end warfare.
Must admit Mike, am not sold on Fire Shadow just yet. Seems very wasteful when you could use an armed UAV and make sure that those very expensive sensors can be reused, rather than crashing into the dirt
Admin Yeh, good point. Hadn’t thought of that!
3 non TAS2087 T23s, 2 T58 Reg’t, Astute 7, 2 Typhoon squadrons (down to 6 now; that’s only ~160 Aircraft), 1 AS90 reg’t, 1 HVM regt, withdrawal from Germany… can’t touch AAC, RE or the infantry… REME could take a little trim perhaps?
That’s a hefty reduction.
alternatively and my favourite idea: Sod Afghanistan, come home and save a few billion nicker every year, if the treasury are going to ignore the huge hole in the budget then we can only afford to maintain a self defence force… Low military expenditure or power projection; you can have one or the other, not both.
Re: “alternatively and my favourite idea: Sod Afghanistan, come home and save a few billion nicker every year”
This. Year after year pouring money down the most hellish logistics train in the world for a strategic raid gone off the boil is perhaps unwise.
Me, I almost don’t feel able to do the technical details on blimps and towers justice at the moment, and they deserve that because they get stuff done. But then I have a self-confessed anorak streak wrt airships so there you are.
Re: Fire Shadow
My understanding is that is designed to be extremely cost effective. Priced to be comparable to GMLRS.
Would sending an armed UAV be cheaper?
Yes Jason, thats the theory but do you have an confidence the will be cheap. GMLRS costs between £80 and 120k each, depending on source.
The cost cutting is being quite deliberately overstated by the government in order to assuage the bond market and credit ratings agencies. It is also fits with their view of shrinking the public sector. I am still expecting 10 to 15% reduction over 4 years for the MOD. This is manageable with proper reform of procurement and some sensible reorganization.
Personally, I am not expecting the SDSR to be radical. The Conservatives Foreign policy outlook is not fundamentally different from Labour.
I would expect negotiated withdrawal of British Forces Germany, some reduction in Challenger 2 and AS90, early withdrawal of Type 22, renegotiation of Tanker contract, reduction of Tornado but more important is to follow through on the Bernard Gray report.
I think we should only buy it it if the price is right Admin. This is really the crux for the MOD. Defence inflation only runs ‘hot’ because the MOD stokes it so!! IMHO ;o)
Alex, you can trim REME at your peril, the army would literally grind to a halt.
The alternative would be a future where every soldier was also a technical tradesman. Feasible?
Sub’s can’t be trimmed, the DIS was crystal clear on the fact that the submarine industry requires a 22 month drumbeat of orders and a 25 year lifespan, which results in a minimum requirement for 11 boats (currently: four ballistic and seven conventional).
JBT,
And the submarine industry is worth preserving: in Europe only the UK and France build nuke boats which (with respect to the Swedes’ excellent AIP designs) have the legs for worldwide operations which is itself a deterrent for potential state-on-state conflicts. Now that the mess with Astute design (got into firstly by a building “holiday”) has been cleared up the capacity to turn them out is distinctly British, and if someone like Babcock (ahem) were to buy out the operation you’d lose some of the corporate-raiding overcharges of being a BAe division. (I have no vested interest in either, but defence industry is best served by mid-sized companies that have pressure on them to produce quality and less overhead from paying for gobbling up competitors.) Plus Barrow might be a crucible for the UK reinventing on a small scale what industrial centers look like and get over all this “post-industrial” guff. (Post-industrial for values of “let the developing world do it all cheap, we’ll get jobs in arbitrage and live off Thai takeout, except for the louts on the council estate.”)
Jasons,
That stoking is the matched pair to the Big And Expensive syndrome (and for BAe one could easily substitute Lockheed Martin ref: F35 for example.) One of the world’s worst codependent relationships it seems.
I hope, truly hope, that you’re right about the overall trend. It sounds plausible enough for me to delude myself anyway. Hate to lose the T22 Batch 3s, except for the vey vey SHORAD of GWS.25 they are classy if aging ships. In a perfect world punt Type 26 back slightly and replace one-for-one with Type 45 and start the process of giving those more general-purpose characteristics (SeaRAM, Harpoon in strength, plan for swapping Aster 15 with quad-packed CAMM, a run-of-the-mill towed sonar, letting the 23s/26s be ASW specialists.) But then I tend to get ambitious on naval issues
Germany’s done. Trouble is they will look at the armour in the same light. Could be the CVA-01 moment of the British Army and I hope to heaven not.
Do not forget there is already a £35Bn hole in the procurement budget that needs to be dealt with before we even look at the SDR.
The RAF is already offering a third reduction in the Typhoon fleet bringing it down to 4 operational and one training squadron, offering to withdraw the tornado early, possibly in two phases with the last going in 2016.
The Army will probably leave Germany and both the 1st and 3rd Division will be reorganised so thay are both organisationally similar losing 2 Armoured and 2 Armoured Infantry battalions which will be re-rolled as medium together with 4 Mechanised battalions. The AAC will probably lose its Lynx AH-7s retaining only the AH-9As until the Wildcat enters service.
The navy nmay lose the T-22B3 but they have superior C3 than the T-23 so we may see additional T-23 go first. I think the FSC/C2 will be first off the blocks to increase numbers faster ands cheaper that C1, taking over patrol roles from high end units.
MoD Main Building and Abbey Wood need a major trimming back and a proper single joint headquarters needs to be established with lower headquarters being disbanded leaving the Army with brigade, navey with squadron and RAF with Wing command level units.
Just catching up on old posts; good article on towers.
I seem to recall it was a subject debated a couple of years ago when someone in theatre displayed some original thinking and started touting the idea. Obviously, it was quickly decayed on the basis of cost.
Given the paucity of imaginative thinking throughout the campaign, and the growing numbers of dead and injured coming back it is, in my view, time to examine all the alternatives. If we can’t dominate the ground numerically then we should fill the gaps with technology. It’s insane that men are dying when there is a chance that towers could uprate our surveillance and int gathering and help to deny ground to the bad people.
Moreover, the towers don’t even need to be manned; the Israeli’s do an interesting line in unmanned towers which have some sexy firepower which is remotely operated.
It sounds like possibly the Army (or maybe just Armd forces) will be taking a 20% cut in manpower.
If its just the Army then that will likely be a Brigade and allegedly its most likely that it will be 7 Bde. If thats the case that will only leave 1 Bde in germany and a Div HQ, will they really need that Div?
Generally its going to be a painful and miserable few years for the MoD.