Register here

Author Topic: Rearming the UK: What equipment? and how much?  (Read 20881 times)

Offline Hood

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 929
Re: Rearming the UK: What equipment? and how much?
« Reply #105 on: April 18, 2018, 05:10:27 am »
The armed forces are still short of manpower. The National Audit Office has identified 102 trades that do not have enough trained regulars to carry out operational tasks. Most of these were in; engineering, intelligence, logistics, pilots, communications and medical. For example, 2,400 engineers (the largest shortfall being Royal Navy weapons technicians), 700 intelligence analysts and 800 pilots.
The NAO are critical that all three armed forces have separate intelligence organisations, especially when they are also competing for analysts against other government agencies and private companies.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/18/armed-forces-facing-biggest-shortfall-in-staff-for-a-decade-report

Offline Hood

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 929
Re: Rearming the UK: What equipment? and how much?
« Reply #106 on: May 14, 2018, 02:33:48 am »
Some mixed news for UK defence spending.

Defence secretary Gavin Williamson has approved £2.5bn for the UK’s submarine programme, including a £1.6bn contract for the last Astute Class (HMS Agincourt) and other contracts worth £906m for the next phase of the Dreadnought programme covering the next 12 months.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/may/14/defence-secretary-gives-go-ahead-for-25bn-spend-on-submarines

On the other hand just last week the Public Accounts Committee warned that the MOD “simply does not have enough money to buy all the equipment it says it needs” and accused it of not being clear with politicians or the public about the financial risks.
The PAC inquiry's most conservative estimate of the funding gap is £4.9bn, rising to a worst-case scenario of £20.8bn more than the 10-year £179.7bn equipment budget. The PAC’s 2017 review had found a budget shortfall of £7bn.
Some of the increase is due to Dreadnought costs being brought forward but the PAC also noted that the MOD had not included the Type 31 frigate in the original spending plan, plus another £9.6bn of "additional costs", although the MOD were unable to say where they were.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/11/mod-faces-21bn-budget-shortfall-warns-spending-watchdog

The Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn during a visit to BAE Systems' Govan site last Friday called for navy shipbuilding contracts to remain in the UK and that the contract for three new RFA ships should remain in the UK. He has come under fire from the SNP (Scottish Nationalist Party) for making the speech in Glasgow when BAE's yards at Govan and Scotstoun are already at capacity and so isn't tendering for the ships, instead of at Rosyth where  Babcock Marine is making a bid. (In any case the First Minister Nicola Sturgeon had also made the same mistake and Govan is her constituency!)
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2629915/jeremy-corbyn-glasgow-shipyards-mocked-snp/

Offline Hood

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 929
Re: Rearming the UK: What equipment? and how much?
« Reply #107 on: May 17, 2018, 01:02:09 am »
The Defence Committee inquiry into amphibious forces published their report in February 2018 and concluded that reductions to the amphibious fleet would be “militarily illiterate” and “totally at odds with strategic reality”.  It emphasised that the specialist nature of amphibious capability and that cutting it would end its status as one of the UK’s leading strategic assets. The Committee also concluded from the evidence obtained that that amphibious operations require specially configured warships manned by amphibious specialists and that not doing so would expose the vessels and the personnel to an unreasonable level of operational risk.
At the moment however, the government is sticking firmly to the line that the carriers can take on the role.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/queen-elizabeth-class-aircraft-carriers-cannot-take-the-place-of-specialised-amphibious-vessels-say-defence-committe/

Offline Foo Fighter

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 435
  • I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Re: Rearming the UK: What equipment? and how much?
« Reply #108 on: May 28, 2018, 01:19:28 pm »
Posit thus, the Japanese go for the F-22 with F-35 systems and sensors and the UK buys in to that, I know far fetched but, how many VTOL F-35's would we need if the RAF get the F-22/F-35 half breed for conventional roles?

Offline Hood

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 929
Re: Rearming the UK: What equipment? and how much?
« Reply #109 on: July 24, 2018, 04:51:09 am »
The MoD have announced the closure of RAF Scampton and RAF Linton-on-Ouse as part of its plan to sell a one-third of its estate to make nearly £3bn of savings by 2040.
No news yet on where the Red Arrows will relocate to.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-44936234


Offline Hood

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 929
Re: Rearming the UK: What equipment? and how much?
« Reply #111 on: July 30, 2018, 05:13:42 am »
Even more woe:
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/hms-tyne-reactivated-due-to-issues-with-replacement-ship/

HMS Tyne has been recommissioned as her replacement, HMS Forth, the first of the River Class Batch 2s, is not ready for service due to several defects.
The source seems somewhat vague and the claims are unsubstantiated, but the claim is that there are over 100 defects to be rectified by BAE Systems before the RN can accept the ship.