Global Military Spending - NEWS ONLY

From yesterday:

Russia is producing artillery shells around three times faster than Ukraine’s Western allies​

Russia is producing artillery shells around three times faster than Ukraine’s Western allies and for around a quarter of the cost, according to an analysis shared with Sky News.
The figures underline a major challenge for Ukraine, which relies on supplies of ammunition from the United States and Europe.
The research by Bain & Company found that Russian factories were forecast to manufacture or refurbish about 4.5 million artillery shells this year compared with a combined production of about 1.3 million rounds across European nations and the US.
On cost, it said the average production cost per 155 mm shell – produced by Nato countries – was about £3,160 per unit, compared with a reported Russian production cost of around £790 per 152 mm shell that the Russian armed forces use.
Click to expand...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/05/26/ukraine-russia-war-latest-news6/
 
Guess the Swedish will be exercising the option for an additional Globaleye....

This is arguably as important as the F-16 transfer's....

https://twitter.com/x/status/1795724163652665813
View: https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1795724163652665813?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet


Saab is also pushing a joint Nordic/Baltic Glabaleye capability...given Globaleye was offered to Finland as part of the HX Gripen bid, add in Norway, Denmark and (probably) Poland down the line once they've learnt the ropes with the ex-UAE Saab 340 Erieye and it makes a lot of sense...a unit of 9 Globaleye shared between them could cover all of Scandinavia, High North, Baltic and Poland and be a massive boost for NATO/Europe...take a bit of pressure off the UK's fleet of E-7 (even if we do do the sensible thing and increase the order to 5...).

https://www.flightglobal.com/defenc...urce=rss&utm_medium=Sendible&utm_campaign=RSS
And they're also in the hunt for a South Korean order for 4 (would have though SK would buy additional E-7 though...), a Canadian order...and replacing the French E-3F....
 
TinWing said:
https://www.defensenews.com/congres...s-ships-jets-nukes-in-defense-spending-surge/
Oddly enough, there is very little movement on extending tax cuts and the talk is of a doubling of capital gains taxes, so raising defense spending from 3% to 5% of GDP is very much a real possibility. But there again, with GDP growth well below inflation, it all just amounts to a bigger slice of a shrinking pie.
Click to expand...
The gap is narrowing, it's about 3.6% vs 2.9% now.

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-growth-annualhttps://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/core-inflation-rate
 
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
The gap is narrowing, it's about 3.6% vs 2.5% now.

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/full-year-gdp-growthhttps://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/core-inflation-rate
Click to expand...
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/gdp-...e-than-initially-thought-in-q1-131220924.html
Growth is slowing to 1.3% and there’s a possible uptick in inflation. Throw in the economic impact of higher taxes and the higher inflation from more spending and we’re headed for a lost decade of stagflation. Doubling the capital gains rate will definitely crater equities in the run up to the increase will probably hit GDP growth in a big way going forward.

And realistically, 5% of GDP on defense is just a down payment on Cold War II. In the Eisenhower era it was closer to twice that. And the top income tax rate was 92%!
 
TinWing said:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/gdp-...e-than-initially-thought-in-q1-131220924.html
Growth is slowing to 1.3% and there’s a possible uptick in inflation. Throw in the economic impact of higher taxes and the higher inflation from more spending and we’re headed for a lost decade of stagflation. Doubling the capital gains rate will definitely crater equities in the run up to the increase will probably hit GDP growth in a big way going forward.

And realistically, 5% of GDP on defense is just a down payment on Cold War II. In the Eisenhower era it was closer to twice that. And the top income tax rate was 92%!
Click to expand...
Well my source is the US Bureau of Economics and it covers inflation and growth over the period of a year rather than quarter to quarter. If you look at the stats on your link it shows two quarters at 4.3% and 3.4% prior to 1.3% in the last quarter. So there was two quarters of very strong growth one after the other, each one growing by a large amount on the previous quarter, so 1.3% on top of that again is really okay. Average them out and it's 3.2%.

1717094375425.png

My 2.9% is annual gwoth over a year. So from Q2 2023 to Q1 2024 inclusive vs Q2 2022 to Q1 2023 inclusive. See how you can present different stories using different facts about the same thing in a way that many people won't even realise?

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-growth-annual 1717094872403.png

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/core-inflation-rate 1717095025837.png
 
timmymagic said:
Guess the Swedish will be exercising the option for an additional Globaleye....

This is arguably as important as the F-16 transfer's....

https://twitter.com/x/status/1795724163652665813
View: https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1795724163652665813?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet


Saab is also pushing a joint Nordic/Baltic Glabaleye capability...given Globaleye was offered to Finland as part of the HX Gripen bid, add in Norway, Denmark and (probably) Poland down the line once they've learnt the ropes with the ex-UAE Saab 340 Erieye and it makes a lot of sense...a unit of 9 Globaleye shared between them could cover all of Scandinavia, High North, Baltic and Poland and be a massive boost for NATO/Europe...take a bit of pressure off the UK's fleet of E-7 (even if we do do the sensible thing and increase the order to 5...).

https://www.flightglobal.com/defenc...urce=rss&utm_medium=Sendible&utm_campaign=RSS
And they're also in the hunt for a South Korean order for 4 (would have though SK would buy additional E-7 though...), a Canadian order...and replacing the French E-3F....
Click to expand...
I wonder if Germany and the Netherlands might also order the Globaleye. It would add a much-needed capability to the Luftwaffe and the Koninklijke Luchtmacht.
 
Topi said:
I wonder if Germany and the Netherlands might also order the Globaleye. It would add a much-needed capability to the Luftwaffe and the Koninklijke Luchtmacht.
Click to expand...

I suspect that the Benelux countries and Germany will continue with the shared NATO fleet of AWACS, which I presume will be replaced with E-7. Denmark might as well, which may be why Saab called it the Nordic/Baltic pooled service. Sweden and Finland were never served (officially) with the NATO E-3 product, Norway got some cover from the UK fleet of E-3D back in the day. With Poland wanting its own coverage with Erieye initially and presumably GlobalEye down the line, Sweden with 2 GlobalEye (and inevitably more to come) it makes sense for Finland and Norway to get involved, perhaps less so for Denmark who get ample coverage from the UK, NATO, French and (hopefully) the Nordic/Baltic pooled fleet....

Either way NATO's colossal advantage with AWACS over Russia is only going to grow and grow...

I would have thought there would be some desire to have a pooled ELINT/SIGINT fleet as well....
 
DWG said:
Atos are absolutely hated in the UK for running corrupt disability assessments. The General Medical Council found it necessary to remind their doctors that honesty is a professional requirement.
Click to expand...
Ah, this is for off-work benefits I take it?
 
Forest Green said:
Ah, this is for off-work benefits I take it?
Click to expand...
Both disability-related unemployment benefits and non-work related disability benefits. They couldn't even be bothered to make sure their assessment centres were accessible. At one point they were trying to get out of their contracts it was doing so much damage to their corporate reputation, ISTR they also changed the name of the responsible subsidiary to something other than Atos.
 
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom