UK Defence Forum

Why does the US Army need to buy smart rounds from others?
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/us-army ... e-systems/

Errr, their own were developed to level mud huts from a safe distance (not to take out tanks that have been dispersed, in order to safeguard against pre-emptive artillery strkes)

BAE staying in good trim, to work on the next trident (from 2040?), from DID of today
"Trident II AWS[:] The US Navy is modifying a contract signed with BAE Systems. An additional $9.5 million are being awarded for engineering and integration services on the Trident II, SSGN attack weapon system and strategic weapon surety. The Trident II (D5) strategic weapons system is installed on US Navy Ohio-class submarines and UK Royal Navy Vanguard-class submarines"

Ian King has contributed a good opinion piece to Sky News, on how the soon-to-be new EU Commission will need to be a countervailing power to French-German domination, rather than an errand boy. He does not mention defence industries (so I will, at the end):
"There is a growing concern among some politicians, notably Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel, that Europe lacks as many companies that are global leaders in their field as China or the United States. That partly reflects the fact that Europe is a more fragmented and less homogenous market than either the US or China.
But it also reflects the fact that the commission, particularly under Ms Vestager, has enforced competition rules vigorously. Mrs Merkel complained in a speech in June last year that EU competition law "does not help us sufficiently" to create global champions. Ms Vestager has refuted this, noting that EU competition law had helped facilitate the creation of European global leaders "
- BAE's plan was scuppered by a "Nein" from Merkel
- in the land domain the same kind of thing of now driven by German interests (in smaller, less visible steps)

Well, we'll have no say in making these policies... pretty soon. Nor in the selection of the Commission president... which process (with the Spitzenkandidat system) has, so far, been even more rigged than markets.
- even the previous round did not quite go as some in the UK may have wished

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Well, we'll have no say in making these policies... pretty soon. Nor in the selection of the Commission president... which process (with the Spitzenkandidat system) has, so far, been even more rigged than markets.
- even the previous round did not quite go as some in the UK may have wished

We have virtually no say now, and even less as the EU continues to move towards majority based voting. Remember that time the influential, 2nd largest EU economy, with the world's largest financial hub and EU's most/second largest armed forces, exerted it's influence during the appointment of the last Commision president....that's how influential we were in the EU

I remember that painfully well
"Remember that time the influential, 2nd largest EU economy, with the world's largest financial hub and EU's most/second largest armed forces, exerted it's influence during the appointment of the last Commision president....that's how influential we were in the EU"
but may be it had something to do with our fractious politics ( a majority is not a majority, it's all Oxford Union, unlike in coalition politics that are common across the Continent), our Boys' Own leaders (talking about Wunderwaffe, when the major European languages, other than English, escape them... save for what's on wine labels) - sure, now we have a different flavour, but fundamentally with the same failure of not being steeped in other cultures; more at home in the parish than on the world scene - well: what sort of campaign was "Anyone but Juncker"? - A bit like the one in the 2017 snap GE

BAE tried the first best (for their management's stock options: to demerge the company along the Atlantic divide, but forgot who holds the Golden Share);
then they tried the second best (this time following industrial logic, but they again forgot who had the "Golden Share" on the other side, i.e. the minority holding that gives the power to say "Nein").

Nicht Gut... is it?

It has been reported that the Competitions and Markets Authority (CMA) has launched an investigation into Rheinmetall's acquisition of a 55% stake in BAe's UK based Combat Vehicles Business line in Telford as part of the Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land (RBSL) joint venture (JV). The aim is to investigate as to whether such an acquisition would still allow the requires level of competition in the UK Market for land systems.

WTF! there isn't any real competition form UK based Companies anymore, BAe's AFV business has been in a coma since completing the orders for the Armoured Engineering Platforms years ago and we currently only fit out chassis provided by overseas plants in facilities built to expedite contract already awarded. Any competition to Rheinmetall's Boxer would involved another company establishing its own production/fitting out facility to meet to contract requirements, so again there is no UK based competitor.

IS this a back door attempt to get there to be an open competition for the MIV programme? Have certain interested parties been talking to other interested parties to persuade the CMA that an investigation is warranted?

Here is the Article;
https://www.janes.com/article/87932/uk- ... nmetall-jv

Say no more
"WTF! there isn't any real competition form UK based Companies anymore, BAe's AFV business has been in a coma since completing the orders for the Armoured Engineering Platforms years ago and we currently only fit out chassis provided by overseas plants"

Lord Jim wrote: IS this a back door attempt to get there to be an open competition for the MIV programme? Have certain interested parties been talking to other interested parties to persuade the CMA that an investigation is warranted?

Here is the Article;
https://www.janes.com/article/87932/uk- ... nmetall-jv

I would say it has more of an impact on CR2 LEP, given that both competitors have now merged into a single business. Somewhat undermines what was supposed to be a competitive bid process.

One is better than none?
"undermines what was supposed to be a competitive bid process."
- does this flow from the UK or from Brussels, would be nice to know

Their was no competitions in the UK anyway. The only competitor's came from abroad so I fail to see what they can investigate.

He was the first pilot to launch the F-35 from a ski-jump ramp, and also the first pilot to perform the SRVL landing aboard HMS Queen Elizabeth.

BAE Systems Completes P950 RIB USV Trials with MSI RWS

BAE Systems has successfully completed a series of trials with the Pacific 950 unmanned surface vehicle (USV) fitted with MSI Defence's new lightweight remote weapon station (RWS).

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... h-msi-rws/

That's small enough for RN vessels to carry their own mobile waterborne harbour defence force with a reduced personnel requirement. I wonder what situational awareness this system gives the operator. I wonder if BAe is working on some sort of VR helmet for the operator, syncing all the data form both on board and other systems.

Lord Jim wrote:That's small enough for RN vessels to carry their own mobile waterborne harbour defence force with a reduced personnel requirement. I wonder what situational awareness this system gives the operator. I wonder if BAe is working on some sort of VR helmet for the operator, syncing all the data form both on board and other systems.

I wonder how resilient to jamming is that thing.

The US at least is doing a lot of work in securing its communications against hacking and we could be doing the same under the umbrella of cyber. Of course that is going to be way above the security classification we are able to be talked about here.

A thought that sprung to mind when Hawk was mentioned... almost a thousand produced; which was the previous British designed a/c that achieved that?

Anyway, not setting up a quiz, but rather the thought about how big business the (training) simulators are these days. All those (erm, must be well under half by now) planes in service around the world and half of the hours 'flown' in simulators
- Project Vulcan putting Ajax/ Boxer/ the 'new' Ch2 training all under the same simulator environment

Project "Vulcan" may deliver something we should have had at least a decade ago.

Something you don't see very often (if ever)...

2 bits of good news on UK Torpedo's..the Spearfish upgrade had been delayed by a shortage of submarine time for the test programme, looks like it will complete soon. Then the (tenatative) very early next steps for a new Lightweight Torpedo. Stingray is already on Mod 1 so hopefully the decision will lead to a full replacement, rather than upgrade, in time which would keep torpedo design expertise in the UK (plus the world could do with a new advanced LWT). Torpedos take a loooonnnngggg time to develop, so even if they made a decision to go with new tomorrow you wouldn't be seeing it in service for 10-15 years. Hopefully, once the Spearfish upgrade is done and dusted attention will also move to its next upgrade or replacement to keep the teams busy.

RE " the world could do with a new advanced LWT" the new one from Saab was just tested both with a surface launch and from a sub
- but, yes, agree: we should not lose the expertise

Stick some wings on it for the P-8's...



Add a rocket booster and you've got a longer range ASROC...

"RE " the world could do with a new advanced LWT" the new one from Saab was just tested both with a surface launch and from a sub
- but, yes, agree: we should not lose the expertise"

Problem with the Swedish gear is that a lot of the times its, quite rightly, developed specifically for their anticipated area of operations. And thats great for them, but its not always appropriate elsewhere. I'd expect the Torped 45 and 47 to be the best littoral torpedoes on earth, but their open water performance will be lacking.

Looks like the Ukrainian Fast Attack Craft sale is a done deal....good news for BAE (I presume, as the inheritors of Vospers). Where are the 2 ships for the UK going to be built though? Thought Govan would be pretty busy with T26. Can they squeeze 2 in? Appledore?

Must say I'm surprised at the choice of boat. Vosper's made very good ships, particularly seaworthy FAC's and Patrol Ships. But for £1.25 billion for 8 you're not far off the cost of a similar, or just slightly smaller, number of Khareef Class. It's still a capable ship though... be interesting to see what the Ukrainians want it fitted with. The Qatari ones are mini battleships...76mm Oto Melara, 30mm Goalkeeper, Mistral SAM's and 8 Exocet. Plus the usual machine guns..all on 600 tonnes...

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-brita ... KKBN26S1SM

https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/britai ... r-ukraine/

This, I guess, was a formality
"CMA launched an investigation into Rheinmetall's acquisition of a 55% stake in BAe's UK based Combat Vehicles Business line in Telford as part of the Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land (RBSL) joint venture (JV)"

and totally not cognisant of what is going on in the global market place, where that level of consolidation in Europe was well overdue:
"After its first contest to replace the Bradley fighting vehicle fell apart, the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle do-over competition appears poised to have more than one bidder. Germany’s Rheinmetall is partnering with Textron Systems and BAE System is partnering with Elbit Systems of America. General Dynamics Land Systems — the only company to submit an eligible bid in last year’s contest — is also expected to bid.

What’s new: Rheinmetall, which created a joint venture with Raytheon to enter the last competition, is now teaming with Textron Systems. Raytheon remains part of the Rheinmetall team"
- from DefenceOne of yesterday

ArmChairCivvy wrote:This, I guess, was a formality
"CMA launched an investigation into Rheinmetall's acquisition of a 55% stake in BAe's UK based Combat Vehicles Business line in Telford as part of the Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land (RBSL) joint venture (JV)"

From the UK government website ..

The CMA investigated and cleared the proposed acquisition by Rheinmetall Defence UK Ltd of BAE Systems Global Combat Systems Ltd.
Published 15 April 2019

"was a formality"