I get that. How many ASTUTE boats do we have?
The RN and the RAF man equipment, the Army equips men. The Army, believe it or not, is manpower based, the other two services are platform based. That’s why arguments about platform complexity are a bit fatuous, along with the fact that all environments are different - one of the problems of the fantastic jointery that’s been necessarily achieved over the past few years is that some people think that air is the same as maritime is the same as land.
It’s not the same. It’s the land environment that is the most complex, not the platforms, and I think that getting people to understand that is by far the biggest problem.
Well it was @Cold_Collation that brought up Astute, not me.
And saying the Army is manpower based completely misses the reality of modern war. Didn’t we just get this demonstration in crystal clear form in Ukraine and Azerbaijan?
Also, the fact that the Navy and RAF are able to actually deliver complex platforms despite cockups actually weakens your argument.
Take one example; in the decades it took the army to spend £5 billion to develop vehicles that are still not in service, the RAF drew up requirements, designed and developed the axed Nimrods, cancelled them, cut them up, took years of capability holiday, and were still able to get P8s in service BEFORE the Army will get Ajax up and running. Or Boxer. And Nimrod is seen as the biggest procurement failure in modern British history.