£3.8Bn or £2.5m

The_Duke

LE
Moderator
#2
MrT,

No, it is not fair for the Navy to be given the equipment they need to do their job.

Make sure that you raise the point at RTMC Chilwell when you mobilise to provide VFM for all of the MTDs you have claimed over the years.

Chopper
 
#3
The_Duke said:
MrT,

No, it is not fair for the Navy to be given the equipment they need to do their job.

Make sure that you raise the point at RTMC Chilwell when you mobilise to provide VFM for all of the MTDs you have claimed over the years.

Chopper
C1 me mate.
 
#4
RN Aircraft carrier last used in anger...?

TA soldier last used in anger...?

msr
 
#5
No aircraft carrier, no task force. No task force, no indiginous ability of power projection, no NGS.

And who would you rather trust? Fleet Air Arm or Crabfat?!
 
#7
No aircraft carrier - no significant attrition of insurgency.

Sorry, I would rather have boots on the ground.

msr
 
#9
CarpeDiem said:
No aircraft carrier, no task force. No task force, no indiginous ability of power projection, no NGS.
And who would you rather trust? Fleet Air Arm or Crabfat?!
Anyone with serviceable ac in the right place at the right time in sufficient quantity with the right capability ... on occasions FAA [my alma mater] on others RAF ["Mummy"].

We do not need inter-departmental wittering ... both parts of the air power projection equation are necessary. I'm delighted the RN will get its ships, and I hope they get the ac and aircrew to equip them. Oh, yes, and the ASW and AD assets to protect them. Some sub-contracting may become necessary, but then we all work[ed] for the same Queen. :wink:
 
#10
TA soldiers will be in service long before CVF - if it ever manages to be brought to birth...By the way, what air component are you envisaging launching from these basilisk like carriers? Hmm, maybe HMS Chimera and HMS Basilisk could be good names for these proposed nay contracted for devices!
 
#11
its called " offsetting" its all the rage these days, offsetting your mortgage with your savings, offsetting your carbon footprint by planting a few trees and offsetting the cost of a couple of new carriers by cancelling a few ta weekends, im gonna offset the cost of my shopping by not getting the case of 24 cans of stella out of the trolley when i hit the checkout.
 
#12
msr said:
RN Aircraft carrier last used in anger...?
Constantly.

Having (ideally 3, the government have ordered the minimum we can get by with, and for literally pence more we could have gotten 100,000 ton ships instead) fleet carriers is an absolute requirement for power projection.

This has been an urgent operational requirement since Wilson cancelled CVA-01 in 1966, and it's finally being resolved, by simply buying what we should have bought 40 years ago.

As Andrew Lambert said; "when the individual armed forces fight, only the Treasury wins" (when each of the three services sucessfully lobbied for the reduction of the other two in the 1966 White Paper).
 
#13
Used in anger, not posing off some third world country...?
 

The_Duke

LE
Moderator
#16
£2.5m cut is not pleasant but can be absorbed by the loss of a few nice to have but non essential training events.

Losing the sea born capability to launch CAS or SH to support ground troops in whatever theatre the clowns in Downing street send us to next? Not a very attractive option.

Of course no cuts should be made, but we do not live in Utopia, and budgets always include give and take.

Ask the guys likely to benefit from the CAS launched from these ships what they would prefer - CAS or gym membership, Exec Stretch and Div SAAM for the TA. Posts which seem to begrudge the Navy the ships it needs because of these cuts seem to me to be petty, to put it mildly.
 
#17
Not begrudged, jealous.

left hand, right hand?

priorities?

Morale?
 

The_Duke

LE
Moderator
#18
MrTracey said:
Not begrudged, jealous.

left hand, right hand?

priorities?

Morale?
Jealous? Understandable, but never a pleasant or rational emotion.

left/right? Different services, different priorities, entirely different in terms of cost and timescale.

Priorities? Strategic assets over incidental TA expenditure every time.

Morale? Ask the shop floor soldier how his morale is affected by the Navy getting some new ships. I doubt he really gives a flyer. Granted he may be upset by losing his AT or Div SAAM, but make up for that by implementing better field training, which is actually quite low cost.
 
#19
The_Duke said:
£2.5m cut is not pleasant but can be absorbed by the loss of a few nice to have but non essential training events.

Losing the sea born capability to launch CAS or SH to support ground troops in whatever theatre the clowns in Downing street send us to next? Not a very attractive option.

Of course no cuts should be made, but we do not live in Utopia, and budgets always include give and take.

Ask the guys likely to benefit from the CAS launched from these ships what they would prefer - CAS or gym membership, Exec Stretch and Div SAAM for the TA. Posts which seem to begrudge the Navy the ships it needs because of these cuts seem to me to be petty, to put it mildly.
Agreed. But we're presented with a false set of alternatives. There's no way they would consider binning the aircraft carriers entirely just to save £2.5m, having invested so much already in the procurement process (oh, and also because we need the things, as Sapukay has observed).

Interior. Day. A bleak office with a window looking out on a blank wall. A man in a badly-fitting pair of suit trousers and a short-sleeved shirt is gnawing a pencil.

MoD civil servant: Hmmmm. Need to find that £2.5m somewhere. Tut, tut. Hmmmm. [doodles] Got it! Pare back the TA by £2.5m. No, can't do that to my brothers in green. ACF - best time of my life. Hang on - those ropey things off the aircraft carriers for catching planes - they cost £1.25m each. [gets out ruler and red pen, and carefully draws a line through two small entries in a very big computer print-out] No one will ever notice! [stands up, whistling] Now, EAT or Pret's?
Having said that, I'm sure that if the procurement gnomes were spanked harder they could shave £2.5m off a BAE contract or two, or buy from someone else.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top