National Shipbuilding Strategy

[ArmChairCivvy]

The main heading is "Replenishing the Fleet" and those two are "case studies".
- whetherthe report is just on them, or will include a forawrd looking element, too... as said, we will see (thee latter would be close, or tangential, to the National Shipbuilding Strategy)

[Repulse]

Looks like they are different. Small piece in the Times today:

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/parke ... -fct2dllm9

Suggests that it will be released over the next 2 weeks. The key bit, which I like is that Sir John Parker is pushing for T31 work outside of BAE Systems on the Clyde.

From this, I'd like to think that the modular approach of the Venator 110 would be the winning design.

[dmereifield]

Looks like they are different. Small piece in the Times today:

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/parke ... -fct2dllm9

Suggests that it will be released over the next 2 weeks. The key bit, which I like is that Sir John Parker is pushing for T31 work outside of BAE Systems on the Clyde.

From this, I'd like to think that the modular approach of the Venator 110 would be the winning design.

Interesting, maybe it won't be the shit show we have all come to expect...

[Ron5]

I'm sure given his connections with Babcocks, he'll be pushing for them to get more work. If he was friendly to Bae, he wouldn't have got the job.

[ArmChairCivvy]

We should take a poll here? Friends of BAE and vv

Mark and Ron... you go first; just to get a nice balance (just joking!).

[Ron5]

Maybe ask the fans of the Treasury & MoD???

[dmereifield]

That announcement was indeed referring to a defence committee report rather than the NSS. The report is here:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... /22102.htm

[shark bait]

not much new, and the new bits do seem to highlight a growing concern over a budget and build rate that can keep up with the decommissioning schedule of the T23. That will indeed be a big challenge.

One particularly poignant bit where the committee calls out to the governments bull shit;

The use of artificial delays to the programme as a way of managing an over-stretched budget would serve only to increase costs and to undermine further the UK’s already severely depleted surface fleet...

Slowing the pace of the programme just to squeeze out a marginally better deal will not deliver a much-needed capability, and will serve only to increase costs further down the line, especially if the promised infrastructure investment is not forthcoming....

The MoD does not seem to learn from past mistakes and mismanagement of budgets through built-in delays.

[dmereifield]

http://news.sky.com/story/royal-navy-fl ... w-10665762

Picked up by Sky News...particularly too few escorts

[shark bait]

BBC too, mainstream picking it up, but will it make the slightest difference?

[marktigger]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38044967?SThisFB

[Spinflight]

One does wonder whether Trump's election might focus some minds on actually meeting the 2% of GDP NATO minimum.

Even with creative accountancy and the £9.2 billion in foreign aid included we are now well below and looking at 1.85% next year.

[dmereifield]

BBC too, mainstream picking it up, but will it make the slightest difference?

With all of the recent media coverage on 1] the RN’s underfunding/loss of capability (this report, loss of SSM, T45 engine issues etc), and 2] the increasing pressures the RN is under (protecting the carriers, resurgent Russian activity in the North Sea/English Channel, Spanish incursions in Gibraltar waters etc), as well as the need to increase EEZ patrols post Brexit, and Trump's seeming lack of commitment to Nato, if it doesn’t make a difference now, when will it ever

[Spinflight]

I wouldn't personally take Trump's comments as a lack of commitment to NATO. Quite the opposite, he's criticized NATO members for not meeting the minimum criteria which shows a commitment to a strong NATO.

I'd also argue that it is the EU nations which have clearly signalled a move away from NATO, how else could you explain galileo, though where almost bankrupt states will find extra cash to meet their obligations is rather problematic.

[Caribbean]

An interesting snippet from the T31 section

74.In addition, it is vital to know which European examples, whether it be the French Aquitaine-class, or the Danish Absalon-class frigates, the MoD has considered as being suitable templates for the GPFF.

[RetroSicotte]

That snippet seems to be build out of inaccuracy of understanding from those writing, if you ask me.

[Caribbean]

That snippet seems to be build out of inaccuracy of understanding from those writing, if you ask me.

Or perhaps fishing for a general sense of intended direction, since they represent two rather different philosophies of "adaptable" design

[Ron5]

More likely (not very) subtly asking the MoD not to reinvent the wheel.

[Ron5]

So where is it? Thought it was to be published today.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Probably with the two ladies, meeting on neutral ground somewhere near Stirling Castle to hammer out what the conclusions should be?

[shark bait]

John Parker has submitted his report to the MOD, but they're not releasing yet.

[Ron5]

Groan... but thanks for the update

[GibMariner]

Granted, it's the Daily Mirror and should be taken with a pinch of salt, but nonetheless troubling if there's even a hint of truth in it. At least they're reporting something on the issue, haven't seen anything at all from more 'credible' papers.

MPs accuse Defence Ministers over "delayed" National Shipbuilding Strategy

Plans to boost the Royal Navy are mired in chaos amid claims ministers failed to publish a National Shipbuilding Strategy before the Autumn Statement, MPs said tonight.

The key blueprint was expected to inject confidence into the industry, outlining key dates for when new vessels will be ordered and join the Fleet.

Military experts, defence workers and MPs had been told it would be published before Wednesday’s crunch Statement.

But three minutes before the Chancellor was due to get to his feet in the Commons, the Mirror was told it would not be published in advance - as the Ministry of Defence denied planning to unveil it before the financial showpiece.

The "let-down" came just two days after MPs issued a scathing verdict on the size of the Royal Navy and raised fears over future ships.

The Commons Defence Committee blasted the "woefully low" number of vessels available.

And it highlighted uncertainty over plans to replace ageing Type 23 frigates which are due to be decommissioned by 2035.

A statement on the official Parliament website said weeks ago: “The plan to publish a National Shipbuilding Strategy was announced in the 2015 Strategic Defence and Security Review.

“It will be published by the Autumn Statement, which is on 23 November 2016.”

But Whitehall sources insisted the Parliament website was "wrong" - and said the MoD never promised to publish the strategy by the Autumn Statement.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mp ... er-9327601

[ArmChairCivvy]

A statement on the official Parliament website said weeks ago: “The plan to publish a National Shipbuilding Strategy was announced in the 2015 Strategic Defence and Security Review.

“It will be published by the Autumn Statement, which is on 23 November 2016.”

But Whitehall sources insisted the Parliament website was "wrong" - and said the MoD never promised to publish the strategy by the Autumn Statement.

Joined-up Gvmnt in action...
or,
the healthy separation of the Executive and Legislative?

[Ron5]

"Sir John Parker's independent review"

"Independent" .. mmmmm

In other news, Sir John Parker has been announced in the honors list as Lord Parker of S-Showshire.