Stop your grinnin and drop your linen
From the dictionary
present or deal with (something) in a vague or inadequate way, especially so as to conceal the truth or mislead:the authorities have fudged the issue
Or to use another inappropriate food metaphor
Perhaps not so much salami slicing, more juggling whilst salami slicing
Read it yourself here
QUICK SUMMARY
- Smaller,smarter, higher prevention on prevention
- 25,000 reduction in civil service numbers
- Simplified allowance system but ‘tough decisions’ on other allowances (New Employment Model)
- Contracts renegotiated (except CVF, obviously)
- Estate reduced
- Nimrod MRA4 cancelled
- More aid for conflict prevention (one third of DFiD budget on conflict prevention)
- £500m on cyber security programme
- Army reduced by 7,000 (it’s not like there’s a war on or anything)
- 40% reduction in Challenger
- 35% reduction in AS90 but precision ammunition to compensate
- Military Stablisation and Support Group confirmed
- Multi role brigade structure confirmed, x5
- Reduction in non deployable regional HQ’s
- Wildcat confirmed for RN and Army (quelle surprise)
- 12 new Chinooks (reduced from 22)
- Reserves reviewed
- 7 Astutes
- 6 Type 45′s are multi role (ha ha)
- 5,000 reduction in RN manpower
- Ark Royal withdrawn
- One of Albion/Bulwark to extended readiness
- One Bay withdrawn
- Ocean or Illustrious withdrawn depending on study
- Surface combatant fleet down to 19 (4 frigates withdrawn)
- Harrier withdrawn
- 5,000 reduction on RAF manpower
- CVF, 1 into extended readiness
- F35C confirmed as FJCA
- A400 confirmed
- C130J withdrawn earlier than planned
- Withdraw Sentinel
- Trident delayed and only 8 tubes with reduced warheads/missiles
- Underwater knife fighters, lots more kit
- Withdraw from Germany by 2020
- Formalise covenant
- Extra £20m PA on mental health
- New industrial strategy by the end of the year
- Kinloss and one other RAF base closed
- Greater cooperation with France
- Jam tommorrow
Vent your spleen in comments
More analysis later (some of us have jobs you know!)
So a non-state actor / terrorist orgnisation (AQ) and a previously rejected politico-paramilitary / terrorist organisation (Taliban) in a land locked country have managed to do what French, Spanish, Danish, Dutch, German, Japanese and Revolutionary American admirals have all failed to do over the last 600 years or so – reduced the RN to a meaningless and reasonably ignorable force. Well at least those 6 “multi-role” T45′s can provide some SAM cover for the UK while steaming up and down the UK coast looking good
Ooops – forgot to mention that the above did of course do so in complete collusion with our duly elected officials. Can they all be impeached / hung for treason ?
I say military coupe and put Prince Charles in charge……..
Could’ve been worse…
MRA4 is of course F-in stupid
One wonders what they think they can for “conflict prevention”. How can you be PM and an F-in Tory and still think if everyone were “reasonable” there would be no violence.
Army isnt a big deal, assuming the cuts come from the bits we dont and wont use.
Heavy Armour cuts, by my count that would still leave us with 200+ Chally2′s. Its not like we could deploy more than 50 overseas on our own anyway.
Chinooks, the extras wouldnt be ready before we’re out of ghanners anyway.
The 45′s depends how they define multirole, its shitty that we wont get 12, but that was never going to happen.
Harrier is a crying shame, thats carrier air gone for two generations of Officers.
CVF isnt a surprise, or a big deal I suppose.
Trident sounds like a mistake, it had 100 warheads for a reason.
Dom, it is a big deal if you are going to be getting a brown envelope as you get back from theatre
Cheers for that Dave
“5,000 reduction in RN manpower” – Hope these do not include the Royal Marines…
“Army reduced by 7,000″ – I read that as 2 Arm Bdes; Germany withdrawal?
“12 new Chinooks” – But Merlin is still a go, right?
“Surface combatant fleet down to 19″ – still allows a two battlegroup fleet (1 deploys with CVF) plus an amphib TF.
Not much, but better than nothing…
Special Forces are not supermen; more does not mean better. Training and support and SMART deployments trumps numbers. Attention must be given that SF doesn’t degenerate into common foot infantry. Ivan still has tanks…
It’s the out right lies that get me: from the BBC
“He said the defence budget would fall by 8% over four years but will meet the Nato target of spending 2% of GDP on defence and would still leave Britain with the fourth largest military in the world.”
How on earth can we possibly have the fourth largest millitary in the world ? USA, China, Russia – but then France and Germany have bigger armies, bigger air forces and now probably bigger navies. India must have more people in uniform than the UK. Hell, isn’t the USMC bigger than all the UK forces put together ?
How do they get away with spouting such outright bollocks ?
Evidence that we are certainly not the 4th biggest military in the world:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_troops
Marcase, last I heard the Merlins were all due to be handed over to the Navy to replace the last of the Sea Kings.
Some nice graphics on this BBC page:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11567729
Interesting how Japan spends soooo much less than we do, but has more active service troops, more ships, more aircraft and even more tanks (not like they were facing the North German Plain) !
Actually, I don’t think this is as bad as it first appeared. (Phew!) Comments:
- Nimrod was always a compromise; it is an old airframe and its job can be done by newer cheaper aircraft in the future should the capability it provides ever become a priority
- We remain committed to C17 and Airbus A400 for increased strategic airlift capability
- Upgrading Typhoon so that it can conduct ground attack missions doesn’t make sense; it was designed as a fighter, to be small and agile, not to carry bombs and rockets
- The loss of Harrier is no big deal, it was long in the tooth, less capable than the Tornado fleet, and was on its way out anyway
(Question: Is Tornado more capable than Typhoon in ground attack role?)
- JSF: F-35C is a better choice than the F-35B at this stage, and will give us next generation combat aircraft sooner. (We could still buy the F-35B later if it can be perfected)
- The news on helicopters is less good: fewer Chinooks and refurbished Pumas. No thing said about Lynx Wildcat or other airframes so far.
- Not clear what is meant by 40% cut of armour. Does this mean that FRES SV will be cancelled?
- He mentioned that artillery would be cut. This is very bad news.
- If we’re bringing Cold War forces back from Germany, then it is right to cut manpower – where the heck would we put everyone?
- Good that commitment to SF means increased investment
- Commitment to Royal Marines as a separate force is great news
- Commitment to ability to deploy Brigade anywhere in the world and sustain it indefinitely is excellent
- Commitment to ability to deploy 30,000 troops for short campaign is excellent
- Like the idea of more less expensive frigates, but short-term reduction of surface fleet to 19 is pathetic
- The commitment to submarine fleet is nothing less than expected
- Carriers without planes remains daft. Don’t understand this at all.
- Trident is the major fudge.
- Manpower reductions seem sensible given the objectives to cut cost
- Like cutting the MoD by 25,000
Biggest disappointment is that with the retirement of Harrier and cancellation of F-35B, we will no longer have a STOVL capability. Question: Is the Apache AH-64 today’s new Harrier? Can a fleet of F-35Cs and Apaches compensate for the loss of Harrier?
I wonder if the F-35B will now be cancelled by the USA?
I like the idea of increased cooperation with France. last time we got into bed with our Gallic friends, we gave birth to Concorde and a whole bunch of very good helicopters that served us well.
Best news is that after 2015, defence spending will rise again as new capabilities are added.
Did I hear right, number of F-35C’s reduced to 12?
No, I heard it as 40.
In fairness I think he said 4th biggest budget. Onbviously USA, China who’s next France? Japan? Both of these countries are likley to cut military expenditure than us.
Think he said 6 astutes in the announcmnet. Don’t understand whats going to happen with MRA4. I can’t see MR2′s staying in the air for much longer. Are we not going to have any maratime air patrol. It hardly seems like a strategy. There was no mention that submarines are no longer a concern.
The announcment of a new smaller cheaper frigate program seems to say C1 is gone. Does that mean no ASW capability for the UK.
has anyone heard about the size of the Typhoon fleet i thought I heard Cameron say it would be 110, but that would mean selling off 50 airframes can anyone confirm this, and is there any news on Tranch 3b.
Did we get numbers for F35 C? 40 would be a disaster I thought 70.
I thought we are getting the full 160 on Typhoon. He seemed to announce that they would all be upgraded to tranche 3 standard. Not sure though. Doubt if he knows. He confused Typhoon and Tornado the other day.
What I don’t get is the focus on ISTAR and the apparent withdrawl of Sentinel after its job is done in Afghansitan.
I take some consolation in the following statement:
“To provide further insurance against unpredictable changes in that strategic environment, our current plan is to hold one of the two new carriers at extended readiness. That leaves open options to rotate them, to ensure a continuous UK carrier-strike capability; or to re-generate more quickly a two-carrier strike capability. Alternatively, we might sell one of the carriers, relying on cooperation with a close ally to provide continuous carrier-strike capability. The next strategic defence and security review in 2015 will provide an
opportunity to review these options as the future strategic environment develops.”
But it is deeply disappointing that 3 Commando will only be expected to deploy on a battle-group level, rather than a brigade level.
Lots more information here, various factsheets
http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/intelligence-security-resilience/national-security/strategic-defence-security-review.aspx
I do not see how Dr Fox’s test for the review has been met:
“Defence as a whole must come out in a stronger position.”
QE will be sold to the French, putting it into extended readiness and then rotating it is pure fantasy
The only rotation will be with France, hence CTOL, despite all the nonsense about running costs
I don’t understand. The RAF is to have full ISTAR capability but they are pulling Sentinel and MRA4. Whats going to provide the ISTAR picture then. There are only 3 Sentinels and it’s hardly a big aircraft. I can’t imagine pulling it will save much but it will put a hudge gap in our ISTAR as well as C4 capability. I did not realise MR2 was already gone. I thought maratime patrol was a major contribution by the UK to NATO. The US can’t do it nor can any of the European’s. Still no numbers on JCA
This is not a strategic defence review.
This is a fudge salami sandwich, which works abut as well as such a sandwich would.
We keep Tornados, when strategically scrapping them and continuing development of Typhoon would make more sense.
We do nothing to address inter theatre air transport or Helicopters (except to carry on as before).
The Rn becomes a hopelessly unbalanced cling to one carrier (will RAF get F35C?)
The Army gets to keep the ability to deploy small packets of heavy Armour. Why?
No chance of ;looking at thehuge admin tail of all the armed forces, no consideration of whether we ned the airforce any more. IN Fact it is not Strategic, It has crippled our defence, and it has reviewed nothing (except to cut RN seemingly with senior RN support)!
I am depressed. (As I think the Slim Pickens character in blazing saddles opined).
Does France have a budget to buy QE, Could India afford it? Or want it now they are building there own.
its possible.
————————————————-
my response:
5x Mutlirole Brigades
1x Air Assault Brigade
1x Marine Brigade
1x CVF (second only in extended readiness)
1x LPH (if only we had two)
1x LPD (second only in extended readiness)
3x LSD (real shame they are decommissioning a Bay)
19x Destroyer/Frigates (could have been a lot worse)
XXx C3 (no, i don’t believe the program has disappeared)
all in all, its not a million miles away from what i would have wanted anyway, and a lot of the deficit is only moth-balled (and brand new) rather than turned into razor-blades.
not totally unhappy, and impressed with Fox for keeping the cuts to ~8%, this could have been a LOT worse!
My bad, the reporter must have been talking out of his ar*e and mis-read the report, only 12 to be deployed at a time. Although scanning through it I can’t find any actual figures. Wildcats here to stay, but nothing on numbers.
Sir Jock Stirip’s great quote on BBC. “We don’t need carriers for the near term because we KNOW what our tasks are going to be”. They must have signed an agreement with Argentina then.
c,
Yes, there seems to be a real contradiction there (not unusual in this masterpiece of a “Defence Review”! Sentinel is fairly new aircraft, isn’t it? Do we or do we not need all the ISTAR we can get?
And what about the decion to withdraw all Hercules transports?
Will what remains, the C-17 and the A400M, be able to do all the smaller, tactical insertions of troops and equipment that will be needed where there are no airstrips, etc.? It wasn’t so long ago that the Hercules was being suggested by Government spokesmen as a posible temporary replacement for the Nimrod MR Mk2 when that was withdrawn.
maybe David Cameron has got mistic meg and paul the octopus on the National Security Council see he KNOWS what is going to happen for the next 10 years.
How the fcuk can they justify the withdrawal of sentinel. They have just got it working for Christ sake. The fixed costs are sunk Nd with only 5 the running costs cannot be that high. This seems madness!
Monty the typhoon was designed from the outset as s multirole/swingrole fighter. It is not a one-trick pony. Once the weapons have been fully integrated (raptor, stormshadow and brimstone) have yet to be added to it’s capability. When done it will out perform the tornado in just about every way. If ex are getting 160 that is all of tranche 3. As the 72 sold to Saudi count as ours
I have only seen a bit of coverage I find it all depressing. But what coverage I have seen has been all RAF. They are losing 2 (two!) stations……..
Martin said: “n fairness I think he said 4th biggest budget” – nope, read the qoute again. He may of meant budget, but that’s not what he said
Still the point would be how come Japan spends less in real terms, has no expeditionary illusions (at least not publicly announced ones) but has more of everything (and generally of good quality) to defend its homeland ?
Why aren’t we commissioning and independent panel made up of experts from the Japanese MoD ???
Its been said already but little strategy and a whole lot of cutting. A very sad day for our armed forces and our nation as a whole. Lets hope the USA and Nato agree with all our international issues…..
Monty said:
- Commitment to ability to deploy Brigade anywhere in the world and sustain it indefinitely is excellent
- Commitment to ability to deploy 30,000 troops for short campaign is excellent
Bullshit – how do they get that brigade anywhere in the world exactly ? With 1 x Albion, 3 x Bay and 1 x Worlds Largest Helo carrier ? How many C17′s and A400 will be there to run the logistics train, depending on host nation support of course ??
Again how are they going to get 30,000 troops for a short term op actually deployed ? Oh, well if the threat zone is connected to the western european high speed train network, they can always ride there on the German trains…….
Strategic no – fudge, entirely
I Jed I was only going of memory from watching Cameron on the TV. Presuming he did mean budget who is the third if it’s not Japan. It’s not Russia or India and I think they are commited to retaining the EU’s biggest budget so can it be France.
chaps, calm down, calm down eh, eh, eh
Working on some write ups now so keep the spleen venting at the Government and MoD, not each other. I think we are all of a similar view
WE ARE ALL DOOMED
“Again how are they going to get 30,000 troops for a short term op actually deployed ?”
They won’t, even with the six point-class a mission of that size requires US assistance for theatre entry.
Has anybody seen anything about the Alsations?
I can’t believe the Crabs have f*cked us over again.
And to top it all its Trafalgar Day on Thursday………
(I want to say something but I am actually lost for words……)
Did I read the MCMV are being left alone?
Yes my “BS” was not directed at Monty, but at the politicians – sorry Monty !
I loved Cameron’s quotes about the T45 beging the best general purpose destroyer in the world. He could not even bring himslef to say general, No ASW, No TLAM, No CIWS and a pissy little main gun. Hardly general purpose.
In his speech he mentioned a new cheaper frigate program however in the released documents it still mentions the T26 but no mention of the C2 T27 medium Vessel.
Also loved his opening statement that every time the military brass told him they need something in Afghanistan he decided to keep it. Sorry Navy no luck, If Afghanistan had a port you might have been able to keep the T22′s. Hardly strategic thinking. Afghanistan could end next year one way or another. The Iraq insurgency ended pretty quickly following the surge. The cracks may already be appearing in the taliban. Alternativley if it gets worse the US could pull out next year. Then we will have butchered our amred forces for a war we are no longer fighting and a type of war we will avoid getting into for a generation or more.
From the BBC: “The UK has traditionally punched above its weight and must continue to do so. This will require a more co-ordinated approach, he argues.” He being Cameron.
If I ever meet the guy in public, he will find out that I can punch above my weight too !
Projection: we are now primed for the eventual sale/cutting of both carriers by reason of the additional cost of standing up both air wing, airborne early warning, and support after the Harrier hiatus, the need for larger fleet tankers and fleet solid support to make even one carrier work, the expense of catapults and arrestor gear, and the RAF having the chance to get the long range attack plane it wanted all along ala’ acquiring the Buccaneer.
The first thing to go in future cuts will be the remaining carrier and what is left of the amphibious capability. Be ready for a CV or F-35 choice being presented. F-35 brings value without the CV, CV and its necessary fleet train and escort is nothing without the F-35. Without any air cover, the argument for amphib capability is gone, same as when Fearless and Intrepid were to be cut after Ark Royal and Eagle went.
The Royal Navy just became an expensive corpse for the Air Force to feed upon while providing cover for politicians who do not want to pay the price for substansial blue water capability.
This is a set up for worse to come, and I beieve the other services, Osborne, and Cameron see that path forward, also. To deal successive cuts through atrophy of starved capabilities and the smokescreen of never-to be-realized promised restoration in future better times is just a continuation of the pattern of long term decline. Consider the completion of the carriers to be the economically insane political sacrificial lamb, ala’ the newly refurbised Victorious in the sixties and seventies.
Watch if BAE disinvests or fails to upgrade Portsmouth or Scotstoun. That will tell you whether they see things generally as I do.
Cheers.
Wayne
Cheers.
Some possible implications :-
5 x Multi- Role Brigades
The reduction from 6 previously planned
1) removes the need to stand up an extra armoured regiment
2)Will require operational deployments to be increased from the current 6 months to 7 or 8 months.
Sentinel
Sentinel will be retained until withdrawal of forces from Afghanistan. This might allow time for the development of a UAV to carry the Synthetic Aperture Radar and Moving Target Indicator sensors.
Puma
On the face of it the Puma upgrade programme is a waste of money.However, extending the life of the aircraft may allow a replacement to be ordered once the order for the 12 new Chinooks has been completed.
Chaps don’t worry here’s what will happen:
The Argies will attack again now that they have a proper navy and we are decommissioning ours. Cameron and Co. will realise that their cushy lives mean fuck all in their real along with their ability to make “strategic” decision – they will be kicked out of office and that will be that.
I have to agree with what some commentators have said regarding the Review in that at best it should be seen as interim because of the imbalance caused by ongoing operations in Afghanistan and the deficit. Hopefully the review in 2015, post Afghanistan will being some logic back into the porcess
However there are a number of decisions that I simply do not understand. The main one is the future of the carriers. If one is going to be up for sale I sincererly hope that it is sold at FULL market price and not palmed off. The second is the withdral of the Sentinal. This has only just begun to prove its worth in Afghanistan. ISTAR was supposed to be the RAFs forte for the future and one of its main contributions to operations. I seems to be a case of least worst option to me. Why is the Tornado fleet being retained? It is too big for our current needs and should have been reduced by at least 3 squadrons. The Helicopter programme is still a mess and an opportunity has been missed, so we will have to wait until 2015 to sort this out. I have a feeling FRS SV will survive as this is going to be the core platform for the Multi-role brigades to replace legecy vehicles well past their sell by date, though major decisions will be made post 2015. Nimrod was an obvious choice as there would hace been too few airframes to meed its mission objectives effectively.
There is some good news and for me the future of the Typhoon is top. The RAF has needed a “Swing Role” platform for decades and IF the Typhoons is going to be fully funded and brought up to a common T3 standard then the RAF had gain a big plus. The mention of “Cheaper Frigates”, seems to indicate that the C2 programme will be first of the building blocks with the T-26 moving forward at a slower pace until after 2015. This is the right decision in my book and I wounder if come of the capabilities listed under C3 could be cover by using a common hull to build a modular support vessel class? With regards to special forces, I do not see and expansion of the SAS/SBS but more an increase in the “Ranger” style infantry units to suppliment them meaning units like the Paras and RM may get more specialist equipment and additional training.
I think we will have to simply say that this review was not what was advertised and has had too many restrictions placed on it that haven’t had much to actually do with strategic thinksing and wait a further 5 year and hope the Government’s gamble doesn’t come back to bite our service men and women.
After my rant, I looked at the Cabinet Office fact sheets that Admin recommended. Are there one or two small but hopeful signs here that at least Army equipment might be improved? The fact sheet mentioned the following three items:
“Loitering Munitions able to circle over a battlefield for many hours ready for fleeting or opportunity targets.”
“A new range of medium weight armoured vehicles will be purchased,including the Terrier engineer vehicle and Future Rapid Effects System reconnaissance and UTILITY (my capitals) vehicles.”
“A force protection system to protect
against indirect fire such as artillery and mortars.”
Could the first refer to the fact that Fire Shadow will enter service?
The second seems to suggest, despite all the comments in the press, that FRES UTILITY will be procured.
And the third perhaps suggests a C-RAM system. Am I wrong?
“If one is going to be up for sale I sincererly hope that it is sold at FULL market price and not palmed off.”
That is yet to be seen.
“Why is the Tornado fleet being retained?”
I thought it was some of the tornado fleet, in which case it is to continue the afghanistan mission and then to become F35c drivers later on.
Jed,
I realized you were venting at Cameron not me, so no offence taken. I had assumed (wrongly) that if Cameron says we will have the capability to deploy 30,000 troops, it would be backed up with the means to make sure it is feasible. There may be some behind the scenes deals with the USA, but we really ought to be able to do this independently.
Thanks for info on Typhoon, Phil D.
Percontator,
Your list of what we get for our £33 billion is deeply shocking. Not a lot of stuff is it? I think the Navy has come of worst out of this. 19 ships is pathetic. How do you defend British waters with 19 ships? We need a fleet of at least 20 frigates, 15 destroyers, 3 carriers, 3 commando carriers, 15 attack submarines, 4 missile submarines, 20 minesweepers / GP vessels and 20 fast patrol boats. Look at the Navy we had in the 1960s and that tells you a lot about what it takes to defend our shores. However good any individual vessel is, it can only be in one place at a time.
no grand strategy then, no making a choice between a continental or maritime model
Vested interests coupled with weakness has resulted in the worse of all worlds, equal pain, salami slicing of the worst kind