General UK Defence Discussion

For everything else UK defence-related that doesn't fit into any of the sections above.
User avatar
mrclark303
Donator
Posts: 813
Joined: 06 May 2015, 10:47
United Kingdom

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by mrclark303 »

SW1 wrote: 01 Mar 2023, 18:43 https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-l ... boundaries

The Royal Navy will push technological boundaries and share its drug-busting and maritime security expertise in the second largest naval exercise in the world getting under way across the Middle East.

From Cyprus to Kenya, and Bahrain and the Arabian Sea, UK forces will be heavily engaged for the next three weeks on International Maritime Exercise (IMX) 23 designed to tackle threats as varied as terrorism, smuggling, sea mines and aerial drone attacks.

All the Royal Navy’s Gulf-based ships are engaged in the exercise, supported by expert dive/bomb disposal teams flown out from the UK, Royal Marines boarding and search specialists, drone operators and medics, with the RAF providing aerial support from its base at Akrotiri in Cyprus.

Support ship RFA Cardigan Bay will serve as a floating testbed for a string of technology trials which could revolutionise naval warfare – and not just in the Gulf region.

In addition to Royal Navy units, a number of the UK’s international partners will also be using the vessel as a hub for testing kit of their own.

Royal Marines and Royal Navy sailors will also be based in Kenya sharing their expertise in board and search operations. These have yielded spectacular results over the past decade, seizing millions of pounds of illegal narcotics as well as weapons caches.
You can see why youngsters want to join the RN, a good slice of good old fashioned adventure, first rate trade training and a host of new ships to deploy on ... What's not to like...

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

The Army was more on the move in 2022 it deployed troop and kit to

72 CH-2 , 120 Warrior , 30 Bulldog , 6 AS-90 plus Logistics and 2500+ troops to the Baltic

Light Mech battle group to Norway = 1400 troops

Para battle group with 500 vehicles and 2000 troops to North Macedonia

Armoured and recce vehicles plus logistics with 1200 troops to Poland

Field HQ with 800 vehicles and 3500 troops to Germany

on top of the standing deployments

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by SW1 »

https://japannews.yomiuri.co.jp/politic ... 309-96170/

Japan, the United Kingdom and Italy have finalized a plan to hold defense ministerial talks in Tokyo on March 16, according to several Japanese government sources.

The three countries expect to agree on a policy of further expansion of defense cooperation by accelerating talks on a next-generation fighter jet to be jointly developed by the three countries.

Defense Minister Yasukazu Hamada, British Defense Minister Ben Wallace and Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto will attend the meeting.


SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by SW1 »

Some will do anything to get a coffee and chocolate croissant


SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by SW1 »

https://www.wsj.com/articles/britain-bu ... a-b7c6ca05

The U.K. government said Sunday that it would spend an extra $6 billion investing in its nuclear-defense capabilities and replenishing munitions stockpiles, as part of a refreshed national-security review that aims to bolster support to Ukraine and deter an increasingly assertive China.

In a written statement, the British government said it would spend the extra funds over the next two years to reinforce its stretched military. The bulk of those funds would go into the country’s nuclear program, including enhanced support for its submarine fleet. The government is also buying fresh ammunition supplies to replace the equipment that it has given to Ukraine during its war with Russia.

But the government’s budget is stretched after the worst of the pandemic, and the nation’s economy is stagnating as inflation bites. Indeed, while the U.K. had previously committed to accelerating military spending to 2.5% of annual economic output by 2030 from roughly 2.2% currently, it said Sunday that was a long-term target.

The national-security review comes two years after the ruling Conservative government published a reassessment of Britain’s foreign-policy priorities, called the Integrated Review. That review argued that the world order that the U.K. had helped to build after World War II was crumbling and that globalization was in retreat.

The government on Sunday didn’t spell out how it would alter its strategy to counter China in its refreshed review, simply saying it would “adapt our approach” to the country. Up until now the U.K. has sought to maintain a nuanced position toward China, saying that it would still pursue trade links with the country while investing in defending against China’s growing assertiveness. The security review in 2021 concluded that China is “the biggest state-based threat to the UK’s economic security” but stopped short of concluding it was a threat to national security.

The U.K. plans to invest more in Mandarin-language training and diplomatic Chinese expertise, among other goals. It also intends to strengthen its sanctions enforcement.

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

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by dmereifield »

So extra funds merely to cover overspends of the nuclear programme and to replace stocks given to Ukraine....pathetic

wargame_insomniac
Senior Member
Posts: 1135
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by wargame_insomniac »

dmereifield wrote: 12 Mar 2023, 22:20 So extra funds merely to cover overspends of the nuclear programme and to replace stocks given to Ukraine....pathetic
From BBC news article

"Downing Street said £3bn from the extra spending would be earmarked to support the pact, along with boosting industrial infrastructure and servicing UK submarines.

The remaining £1.9bn will be used to replace weapons sent to Ukraine and improve the UK's munitions infrastructure."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64932951

So this suggests nothing to do with previous "overspends of the nuclear programme" but more future spending on AUKUS.

And so what that they are replacing the munitions sent to Ukraine. We have all been calling for them to imrpove the UK munitions holding and I can't see why you are being critical for them for doing so.

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

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by dmereifield »

If the £3 bn is new investment rather than overspends, good.

£1.9 bn for backfilling - Well, how much is the value of munitions, hardware, consumables etc that we've donated? Genuine question. Don't get me wrong, I want to provide everything we reasonably can to Ukraine, but HMG then needs to fund replacements in addition to additional investment to respond to the increased security threat.

wargame_insomniac
Senior Member
Posts: 1135
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by wargame_insomniac »

dmereifield wrote: 12 Mar 2023, 23:28 If the £3 bn is new investment rather than overspends, good.

£1.9 bn for backfilling - Well, how much is the value of munitions, hardware, consumables etc that we've donated? Genuine question. Don't get me wrong, I want to provide everything we reasonably can to Ukraine, but HMG then needs to fund replacements in addition to additional investment to respond to the increased security threat.
UK Parliament Research Briefing @ Wednesday, 15 February, 2023:

"As the second largest donor, the UK has committed £2.3 billion in military assistance to Ukraine so far and has pledged to match that assistance in 2023."

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/re ... /cbp-9477/

So that is total military assistance from UK as at that date. Now we don't know the exact breakdown. But I presume that total includes the cost of vehicles transferred, so Challenger 2 tanks AS90 SPG, M270 MLRS, older AFVs and APCs.

So hopefully the £1.9m will restock at least the value of expendable munitions sent inluding NLAW and Javelins and shells.

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

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by dmereifield »

wargame_insomniac wrote: 13 Mar 2023, 00:21
dmereifield wrote: 12 Mar 2023, 23:28 If the £3 bn is new investment rather than overspends, good.

£1.9 bn for backfilling - Well, how much is the value of munitions, hardware, consumables etc that we've donated? Genuine question. Don't get me wrong, I want to provide everything we reasonably can to Ukraine, but HMG then needs to fund replacements in addition to additional investment to respond to the increased security threat.
UK Parliament Research Briefing @ Wednesday, 15 February, 2023:

"As the second largest donor, the UK has committed £2.3 billion in military assistance to Ukraine so far and has pledged to match that assistance in 2023."

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/re ... /cbp-9477/

So that is total military assistance from UK as at that date. Now we don't know the exact breakdown. But I presume that total includes the cost of vehicles transferred, so Challenger 2 tanks AS90 SPG, M270 MLRS, older AFVs and APCs.

So hopefully the £1.9m will restock at least the value of expendable munitions sent inluding NLAW and Javelins and shells.
Thanks for the info. It doesn't sound like the funds are nearly enough to replenish and increase stocks

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by SW1 »

:roll:



:roll:

TheLoneRanger
Member
Posts: 331
Joined: 01 Jul 2020, 19:15
United Kingdom

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by TheLoneRanger »

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/ ... -behind-us

>> Not suprised that UK is falling down the rankings. We have nothing to sell !!! The goverment or UK MOD does nothing to support the development of new systems in the UK - whereas France has a buy French first policy !!!. This means France has developed products, purchased them itself and is in a position to sell something to someone.
These users liked the author TheLoneRanger for the post:
sunstersun

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2684
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by bobp »

Defence Integrated review refresh 2023

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... tile-world
These users liked the author bobp for the post:
wargame_insomniac

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7931
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by SKB »

Britain's Shrinking Military - From Cold War Colossus to Cash-Strapped Shadow

(Mark Felton Productions) 19th March 2023
War with Russia is often spoken of in 2023, but the drastic reduction in the size of Britain's armed forces is often overlooked. Here, I compare the sizes of Britain's military in 1991, when it was specifically trained and deployed to resist a Soviet assault into Western Europe, and 2023. The figures are fairly shocking, something the US government recently noted as well.

Dr. Mark Felton FRHistS, FRSA, is a well-known British historian, the author of 22 non-fiction books, including bestsellers 'Zero Night' and 'Castle of the Eagles', both currently being developed into movies in Hollywood. In addition to writing, Mark also appears regularly in television documentaries around the world, including on The History Channel, Netflix, National Geographic, Quest, American Heroes Channel and RMC Decouverte. His books have formed the background to several TV and radio documentaries.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

Yes everyone here would like to see more ships a bigger army and more aircraft in the Airforce but we also need to look at the other side of this. In 1991 our forces were 3 x the size it is today but it was facing the Soviet Union which included Poland , Ukraine the Baltic states and a hole host of what are now NATO members the simple fact is if the UK had to go to war in 1991 we would have been no better off in fact worse off

Also what we see today is Russia has all the same problems lots of kit that is unable to be used piss poor spears and ammo stocks even worse training pipe lines and no logistics to talk of
These users liked the author Tempest414 for the post:
jedibeeftrix

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by Scimitar54 »

Yes, those former Warsaw Pact countries are indeed now with the west, but you forgot to consider the “Elephant in the room” that we face today, one that we did not have to in 1991 ………………… CHINA! An immeasurably larger threat to World Peace today and a threat that is seriously increasing in both size/capability and in geographic area. :idea:

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by SW1 »

Quite amazing that we’ve come full circle here.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-a ... elled-guns

Defence Secretary Ben Wallace welcomed his counterpart Pål Jonson during a visit to the UK Ministry of Defence today, which included the signing of a letter of intent relating to a new contract to deliver 14 Swedish-built Archer self-propelled guns to the British Army, as well as highlighting potential future collaboration between the UK and Sweden.

Swedish industry has also provided important support amid the UK’s programme of providing military aid to Ukraine, with hundreds of NLAW anti-tank weapons – designed by Swedish company Saab – donated by the UK to bolster Ukraine’s capability. The UK today also announced a contract of nearly £5 million to replenish munitions granted to Ukraine with Saab-produced Carl-Gustaf M4 recoilless rifles.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

Scimitar54 wrote: 29 Mar 2023, 19:48 Yes, those former Warsaw Pact countries are indeed now with the west, but you forgot to consider the “Elephant in the room” that we face today, one that we did not have to in 1991 ………………… CHINA! An immeasurably larger threat to World Peace today and a threat that is seriously increasing in both size/capability and in geographic area. :idea:
When it comes to China as said a number of time it is really only the Navy, RM & Gurkha's that will get put in to any allied force also as said the European Naval fleet ( not including the US and Canada Atlantic fleets) is the same size as the Chinese fleet and the Pacific allied fleet is bigger

With this being said that is why I would push for 4 x Type 31+ , 3 x Vard-7-313 and a tanker to be forward deployed East of Suez I would also push for another 1 or 2 Gurkha battalions to be formed and held in the region

Also as said in the past I would be looking to push Australia and Canada to buy 14 F-35b's each which along with a British squadron could form a carrier airwing of 30+ jets to allow a ACNZUK battle group of

1 x Carrier (UK)
4 x Destroyers ( A & UK)
11 x Frigates ( 3 A , 3 x C , 4 x UK , 1 x NZ)
1 x SNN ( UK )
4 x SSK ( 2 A & 2 C )
1 x LHD ( A)
4 x Tankers ( 1 from each )
2 x SSS ( UK )
3000 Troops

topman
Member
Posts: 771
Joined: 07 May 2015, 20:56
Tokelau

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by topman »



I think the numbers speak for themselves.

Numbers in service and retention should be a high priority. If not number 1.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

This is why I say we should look to add 1400 to 1600 extra Gurkha's and keep them in the Indo-Pacific these plus the Gurkha Battalion in Brunei could form a Brigade

Remember Gurkha's are always added to the Army figures so the British army is 79,400 plus 4000 Gurkha's

As for retention we need to do better across the board better housing , better equipment , better Pay we need to get more for the money spent as said when it comes to infrastructure we are getting about 1000 pounds of work of every 4 to 5000 spent

topman
Member
Posts: 771
Joined: 07 May 2015, 20:56
Tokelau

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by topman »

I disagree about the whole Pacific thing. We're better off doing one thing well, than half a dozen things badly.

We need to concentrate on keeping people in, repairing buildings, invest in training, recruiting, deploy on realistic exercises. Europe and the ME is more than enough for us to worry about.
These users liked the author topman for the post:
SW1

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

topman wrote: 30 Mar 2023, 16:59 I disagree about the whole Pacific thing. We're better off doing one thing well, than half a dozen things badly.

We need to concentrate on keeping people in, repairing buildings, invest in training, recruiting, deploy on realistic exercises. Europe and the ME is more than enough for us to worry about.
We can agree to disagree on the Indo-Pacific

I do not disagree that we need to do better when it comes to infrastructure as said. As for training the Army was on the move last year all over Europe from the Nordic states to the Med where elements of the 1st , 3rd divisions & 16 AA took part in large exercises

Now when it come to recruiting we know part of the problem has been the private company running it and the poor start it got off to

topman
Member
Posts: 771
Joined: 07 May 2015, 20:56
Tokelau

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by topman »

I see quite a few posts about the Pacific thing, when i read them then compare them to the day to day in the military these ideas look completely pie in the sky fantasy. Mind you there's a few in the MoD that indulge in these fantasies as well. Hopefully they stick to writing reports on SP that no one reads.

There's more to the MoD than a few army exercises, how realistic are they, do they have enough equipment to train, can they use as much equipment and stores as they are expected to. That goes tri-service for exercises.

Some of it is capita but it's much much more than that.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

Ex Swift Response with 16AA is a good place to start you can pick it up on Youtube nice peace on there

then there was the deployment in to Germany of the Field HQ and all its sub HQ's to test deployment and robustness

So some good stuff going on

topman
Member
Posts: 771
Joined: 07 May 2015, 20:56
Tokelau

Re: General UK Defence Discussion

Post by topman »

A HQ deployment, wonderful.

Post Reply