Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

For everything else UK defence-related that doesn't fit into any of the sections above.
Luke jones
Member
Posts: 129
Joined: 07 Jan 2016, 11:13

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by Luke jones »

With a 40 Billion approx deficit this year and 20 billion PA promised for the NHS I can't see anything useful turning up for defence. Education/Justice and all the rest will have the begging bowl out now too. Just cant see any good news coming but hope im wrong of course.

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by Scimitar54 »

If you do not spend adequately on "defence", then all other expenditure is effectively wasted on "fools gold".

Luke jones
Member
Posts: 129
Joined: 07 Jan 2016, 11:13

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by Luke jones »

Scimitar54 wrote:If you do not spend adequately on "defence", then all other expenditure is effectively wasted on "fools gold".
Everybody on this forum knows that, you're preaching to the converted here.
If it was up to me we would move to 3% of GDP.
Wont happen while the NHS gets spending increases like they are getting today.
Lets just hope for afew billion PA to steady the ship as it were

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by Scimitar54 »

NHS spending increases can only continue if we have adequate defence. Unfortunately we don't! The very existence of the NHS (and the nation) is being risked. Yes we have the Nuclear Deterrant, but inadequate conventional forces will reduce the threshold at which their use may be considered. We must never
just hope for inadequate Defences.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by Lord Jim »

This is why I hate politics. Logic and common sense are not requirements to be an MP, nor is any knowledge of that your department actually does if you become a minister. I am getting a nasty feeling that the MDP will be worse than the 2010 SDSR but will be far better managed when it comes to briefing the media etc.

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2905
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by abc123 »

Lord Jim wrote:This is why I hate politics. Logic and common sense are not requirements to be an MP, nor is any knowledge of that your department actually does if you become a minister. I am getting a nasty feeling that the MDP will be worse than the 2010 SDSR but will be far better managed when it comes to briefing the media etc.

Yep, my feeling too. :thumbdown:

About politicians, yes, the only profession you don't need to have any formal education ( along with journalists )... :wtf:
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

benny14
Member
Posts: 556
Joined: 16 Oct 2017, 16:07
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by benny14 »

Given that the NHS increase is going to be funded by taxes, there are now three options for MDP.

1. Nothing
2. 0.1/0.2 Increase
3. One time payment to ease the budget gap.

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by dmereifield »

benny14 wrote:Given that the NHS increase is going to be funded by taxes, there are now three options for MDP.

1. Nothing
2. 0.1/0.2 Increase
3. One time payment to ease the budget gap.
3] and 2] I'd say, but then given how incompetent this government is (and with Hammond holding the purse strings) it could easily be 1]

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by Lord Jim »

As I mentioned above, the MDP should now stand for Media Disinformation Programme, as that is what it will come down to in all likelihood. I doubt any programmes will be cancelled, but numbers will be reduced and the timescales will increase. I also doubt any of the programmes like the WCSP will be completed even by 2025, and although the T-31e programme may stay in track, what will be delivered will be a very hollow shell. Imagine and Arrowhead 140 with a total armament of 1 57mm, I Phalanx CIWS and 2 second hand 25mm manually operate cannon from a T-23 and finally a hanger that can only operate a Hanger the size of an SH-60 but not a Merlin or other larger platforms. This could be the top end of what the T-31e programme delivers. The RAF's two Tranche 1 Typhoon squadrons will be kept on life support funding with no updates or improvements. Once the AIM-120C timeout the aircraft will be left with only the ASRAAM, and the size of the squadrons across the Typhoon fleet, or more accurately the total number of airframes available at any one time could be reduced further, leaving the UK only able to deploy say a dozen when needed. But the Army is going to be hit the hardest. IT re-equipment plans will slow down even more and it will have to get by with still using platform like the FV432 that will have been in service for over 60 years! Training and readiness together with stocks of consumables will also suffer, meaning the maximum formation size the Army may be able to deploy will be further reduced. The numbers of battalions and brigades may stay the same but these will be smaller less capable formations barely fit for purpose. The only programme that may still produce positive results will be anything to do with the Carriers, so F-35 deliveries and other programmes like CROWSNEST may still deliver, only because these are big PR wins and will cover the majority of negative move by hogging the columns in the media. Happy days.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Though I don't share the bleak "weather forecast" I think the inventory of pinch points is very good. I would add
- the manpower crisis in the RN (a plan for resolving it!)
- the contractor-ization of support within the RAF (ability to deploy outside the UK in meaningful numbers?)
- and some off-the-cuff comments, as per below:
Lord Jim wrote:WCSP will be completed [even] by 2025
- about then, as the standing up of the 2nd Strike Bde has been brought forward from 2023 to a year earlier; and until then the funds for MIV will be cannibalising prgrms started (or planned, like the ABSV!) earlier
Lord Jim wrote: Once the AIM-120C timeout the aircraft will be left with only the ASRAAM, and the size of the squadrons across the Typhoon fleet, or more accurately the total number of airframes available at any one time could be reduced further
- the C of course is a multiplier for combat capability
- but ASRAAM is perfectly fine for QRA
- 75% of RAF aggressor duty flight hrs are being flown by Typhoons. Burn out the Tr1 airframes and husband the rest, to last out to 2040
Lord Jim wrote: Training and readiness together with stocks of consumables will also suffer
- this has been the go-to-technique for meeting in-year financial goals/ constraints
- and it must stop (Mattis declared, when starting on the job, that reversing such tendencies and catching up would be the priority for the first 18 mths... we should do exactly the same, and advertise it in the NATO Summit)
Lord Jim wrote:smaller less capable formations barely fit for purpose
- agreed. There is a difference in allowing for nearly std modularisation (e.g. BGs) and having e.g. Bdes at such strength that from a fielded one a commander can carve out at least three manoeuvre units (plus hold back enough for force protection of the "tail).
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2905
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by abc123 »

The interesting thing is behaviour of HMG. MDR will probably result in weakest UK AF yet, and all in time of increasing strategic threats. I mean, if Russia is that hell-bent on conquering the World (or at least Baltic and Ukraine), after Georgia and Ukraine and Syria you can't behave like it's 1997 and drunk Yeltsin is the President.
Same thing with provoking the China and meddling in SCS disputes.
Reminds me a bit on Mussolini and his talk before the WW2, and then no results during the actual war. All talk and bragging, but no deeds. It's time to put your money where your mouths are.
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by Lord Jim »

But the public want spending on the NHS and Schools and don't give a damn about defence, even when body bags are being unloaded at Brize. Sure the MoD will be accused of cocking something up and causing the deaths and an officer or two will be hung out to dry but nothing will change. If we want to properly modernise the military, any extra money is going to have to come from saving in house which means shrinking all three services. Some glass ball rubbing;

Navy:
Reduce T-26 programme to 6 hulls.
T-31e design selected has be bare minimum level of capability stated in the RFI and only four purchased.
One of the two Queen Elizabeth's in reserve at all times so both can never be at sea at the same time.
Royal Marines reduced in number and combined with a reduced 16 Air Assault to for a single Rapid intervention Brigade.
ARG reduced to one Albion class and two Bay class with possible support from the active carrier.

Army:
Heavy formations reduced to one Briogade comprising two Armoured, two Armoured Infantry and one Recce Regiments supported by one Royal Artillery mixed Heavy Regiment.
Only one "Strike" Brigade formed with one Recce/Cavalry Regiment and three Mechanised Infantry Regiment supported by towed artillery.
16 Air Assault reduced and combined with 3 Commando as mentioned above.
Number of "Light" Role Battalions halved, but four equipped with MRV(P) to become Motorised Regiments. No integral artillery support, as aimed more towards peace keeping and stabalisation missions.
Options on remaining AH-64Es not taken up and Wildcat withdrawn from AAC service. Eight transferred to FAA and marinised to support new Rapid Intervention Brigade.

Air Force.
the Two T1 Typhoon Squadrons are stood down and fleet rediced to four front line squadrons and one Conversion/Trials unit.
Procurement of F-35B suspended at 50 until 2035 at the earliest, giving the UK a fleet of two front line Squadrons and a Conversion unit. Trials are carried out either stateside or in a joint Typhoon/F-35 unit at conningsby
Pumas withdrawn from service.
P-8 fleet forzen at current sze.
All remaining C-130Js withdrawn from service
RAF Regiment reduced in size to one Regiment of which half are reserves.

I am in a real doom and gloom mood at the moment, sorry everyone.

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2822
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by Caribbean »

@LJ - you need to practice taking a glass and filling it half-way with whisky.
Concentrate on it, telling yourself "Glass half full, glass half full"
Drink contents
Repeat until you no longer care ;)
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by dmereifield »

Lord Jim wrote:But the public want spending on the NHS and Schools and don't give a damn about defence, even when body bags are being unloaded at Brize. Sure the MoD will be accused of cocking something up and causing the deaths and an officer or two will be hung out to dry but nothing will change. If we want to properly modernise the military, any extra money is going to have to come from saving in house which means shrinking all three services. Some glass ball rubbing;

Navy:
Reduce T-26 programme to 6 hulls.
T-31e design selected has be bare minimum level of capability stated in the RFI and only four purchased.
One of the two Queen Elizabeth's in reserve at all times so both can never be at sea at the same time.
Royal Marines reduced in number and combined with a reduced 16 Air Assault to for a single Rapid intervention Brigade.
ARG reduced to one Albion class and two Bay class with possible support from the active carrier.

Army:
Heavy formations reduced to one Briogade comprising two Armoured, two Armoured Infantry and one Recce Regiments supported by one Royal Artillery mixed Heavy Regiment.
Only one "Strike" Brigade formed with one Recce/Cavalry Regiment and three Mechanised Infantry Regiment supported by towed artillery.
16 Air Assault reduced and combined with 3 Commando as mentioned above.
Number of "Light" Role Battalions halved, but four equipped with MRV(P) to become Motorised Regiments. No integral artillery support, as aimed more towards peace keeping and stabalisation missions.
Options on remaining AH-64Es not taken up and Wildcat withdrawn from AAC service. Eight transferred to FAA and marinised to support new Rapid Intervention Brigade.

Air Force.
the Two T1 Typhoon Squadrons are stood down and fleet rediced to four front line squadrons and one Conversion/Trials unit.
Procurement of F-35B suspended at 50 until 2035 at the earliest, giving the UK a fleet of two front line Squadrons and a Conversion unit. Trials are carried out either stateside or in a joint Typhoon/F-35 unit at conningsby
Pumas withdrawn from service.
P-8 fleet forzen at current sze.
All remaining C-130Js withdrawn from service
RAF Regiment reduced in size to one Regiment of which half are reserves.

I am in a real doom and gloom mood at the moment, sorry everyone.
Pretty much all of your predictions are way too politically toxic (i.e. Visible) to occur. I expect a moderate increase in funding, probably sufficient to avoid any headline cuts, but expect salami slicing and delays to programmes that will be less visible

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2905
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by abc123 »

Lord Jim wrote:
I am in a real doom and gloom mood at the moment, sorry everyone.
No need to appologise, pretty realistic outlook... :thumbdown:
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by Lord Jim »

Problem is I don't drink. Maybe that's the problem :think:

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2822
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by Caribbean »

Lord Jim wrote:Problem is I don't drink. Maybe that's the problem :think:
Now I understand - I feel your pain :cry:
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2905
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by abc123 »

Lord Jim wrote:Problem is I don't drink. Maybe that's the problem :think:
Well I do drink, but feel the same anyway... :D
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by Lord Jim »

What Gavin Williamson should do is publish/leak the raw recommendations and costing before the Treasury has its input, and challenge the Treasury to defend any actions that prevent these recommendations form being acted upon. If he can get this conversation into the public domain it would create a very interesting situation.

inch
Senior Member
Posts: 1314
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by inch »

Do anybody think gov will anounce any big ticket item on or before the nato / trump. Visit to uk just to try and keep him sweet ?

Luke jones
Member
Posts: 129
Joined: 07 Jan 2016, 11:13

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by Luke jones »

Lord Jim wrote:But the public want spending on the NHS and Schools and don't give a damn about defence, even when body bags are being unloaded at Brize. Sure the MoD will be accused of cocking something up and causing the deaths and an officer or two will be hung out to dry but nothing will change. If we want to properly modernise the military, any extra money is going to have to come from saving in house which means shrinking all three services. Some glass ball rubbing;

Navy:
Reduce T-26 programme to 6 hulls.
T-31e design selected has be bare minimum level of capability stated in the RFI and only four purchased.
One of the two Queen Elizabeth's in reserve at all times so both can never be at sea at the same time.
Royal Marines reduced in number and combined with a reduced 16 Air Assault to for a single Rapid intervention Brigade.
ARG reduced to one Albion class and two Bay class with possible support from the active carrier.

Army:
Heavy formations reduced to one Briogade comprising two Armoured, two Armoured Infantry and one Recce Regiments supported by one Royal Artillery mixed Heavy Regiment.
Only one "Strike" Brigade formed with one Recce/Cavalry Regiment and three Mechanised Infantry Regiment supported by towed artillery.
16 Air Assault reduced and combined with 3 Commando as mentioned above.
Number of "Light" Role Battalions halved, but four equipped with MRV(P) to become Motorised Regiments. No integral artillery support, as aimed more towards peace keeping and stabalisation missions.
Options on remaining AH-64Es not taken up and Wildcat withdrawn from AAC service. Eight transferred to FAA and marinised to support new Rapid Intervention Brigade.

Air Force.
the Two T1 Typhoon Squadrons are stood down and fleet rediced to four front line squadrons and one Conversion/Trials unit.
Procurement of F-35B suspended at 50 until 2035 at the earliest, giving the UK a fleet of two front line Squadrons and a Conversion unit. Trials are carried out either stateside or in a joint Typhoon/F-35 unit at conningsby
Pumas withdrawn from service.
P-8 fleet forzen at current sze.
All remaining C-130Js withdrawn from service
RAF Regiment reduced in size to one Regiment of which half are reserves.

I am in a real doom and gloom mood at the moment, sorry everyone.
That really would be depressing. It's a tough gig caring about defence in the UK.
Iv seen friends of mine killed fighting for this country and its so shite constantly seeing the armed forces seemingly on the brink.
Praying for good news from the MDP.

clinch
Member
Posts: 95
Joined: 28 Jul 2016, 16:47
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by clinch »

It's not looking good. This is from the Financial Times.
Theresa May has asked Gavin Williamson, the defence secretary, to justify Britain's role as a “tier one” military power, throwing the Ministry of Defence's armed forces modernisation plan into disarray just weeks before a crucial Nato summit.

At a tense meeting this week, the prime minister said Mr Williamson needed to rethink the capabilities needed to be a modern military force and focus more on Britain’s cyber warfare capability to meet new threats, including Russia.

Senior officials said Mrs May’s intervention created “shockwaves” at the MoD, with some claiming she appeared to be questioning Britain’s role as a global military player. “People have their head in their hands,” said one official.

Downing Street acknowledged that Mr Williamson’s plans had been challenged by Mrs May in Tuesday’s meeting but dismissed suggestions that she was arguing for a reduction in Britain’s military status.
https://www.ft.com/content/caf066c6-749 ... 23e4384287

It's behind a paywall but if you copy and paste the url into google you should then be able to read it.

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by dmereifield »

If this is the case then May and Hammond are even more useless and less ambitious (on behalf of the UK) then I had realised, and I had already set the bar pretty low

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

clinch wrote:questioning Britain’s role as a global military player. “People have their head in their hands,” said one official.
I have heard claims about psychological inertia, but Suez was in 1956
- Russia did not take mildly, either, being classified a regional :) power
- and is now busting the sinues (from meagre and volatile economic resources) to try and prove otherwise
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2905
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

Post by abc123 »

Well, the PM is right, the UK isn't first tier power since at least 1945, so it was high time for someone to cut the MoD crap about being one... At least, less money will be thrown into bottomless pit of BAE & Co.
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

Post Reply