'An Indefensible Defence Strategy...'

Discussion in 'Weapons, Equipment & Rations' started by Barely_Black, Dec 6, 2010.

?

SDSR and future procurement options.....

Poll closed Jan 5, 2011.
  1. HMG - Dodging critical decisions since 1888 ?

    18 vote(s)
    50.0%
  2. A lost opportunity to re frame some basic Qs.

    13 vote(s)
    36.1%
  3. Sensible,given the dire financial circs dammit

    3 vote(s)
    8.3%
  4. We is broke bro - waddya gonna do ?

    2 vote(s)
    5.6%
  5. Huzza! We heart Doc Fox !

    2 vote(s)
    5.6%
Multiple votes are allowed.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I am posting this here rather than in the SDSR folder because it relates specifically to equipment and future procurement decisions.....so bite me.

    From last week's red top rag...er...the Financial Times Editorial :

    and Doctor* Fox's response in the letters Column:
    Bare :batman:



    *no relation to Dr Fox, Chair of Cunning at Oxford University, I am assured
     
  2. Bouillabaisse

    Bouillabaisse LE Book Reviewer

    The point about defence industry investment and planning is well made. The Defence Industrial Strategy from 2005 was aimed to give an idea of where money would be spent and what capability MOD wanted to retain in the UK. It was clear then that they expected some companies to withdraw from the market one way or another as funding drew down. Unfortunately in some critical UK sovereign areas the results have been difficult. In at least one core area which is UK Eyes only there are now no companies actively working (they all effectively withdrew operations at around the same time for the same reasons) and MOD is having to spend money on make-work to keep the vital staff going.
     
  3. to be honest don't think we have had anything but a treasury lead review since ww2 and thry have mostly been wrong.
    no need for areoplanes missles will solve all are problems
    tsr2 cancelled
    cold wars over no need for smelly infantry anymore next year bosnia kicked off.
    fres and networked capability techno bollocks of the worst kind you canna put he firepower and protection of a chally2 and fly it on a c130 and even if you could how are we going to supply it and its crew with ammo fuel food pimms etc?
     
  4. Biped

    Biped LE Book Reviewer

    Mr Fox says we must get our defence 'back in the black'.

    By that I presume he doesn't mean in the sense of 'profit and loss', because profit in these terms is 'winning' and loss is of course 'losing'. 'Losing' or 'being in the red' means the loss of lives, the losses of campaigns, and perhaps as was so nearly the case after Dunkirk . . . losing our freedoms.

    But I'm sure he knows that defence of the realm is not about runnnig a grocery store, where cost cutting will hopefully balance a profit and loss account - in fact, Dr Fox, it's quite the reverse.
     
  5. Goatman

    Goatman LE Book Reviewer

    Given that the Govt appear to be pinning their hopes on Lord Sliveen to pull their procurement process chestnuts out of the fire I'm guessing a further bout of re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic is set to commence.

    Any SofS (and any Chancellor) would do well to heed the words of former Communist party member
    and Anzio veteran Denis Healey, when he had the job :

    'Without strong Defence you don't have hospitals, roads or schools...what you have is a pile of ash...'
     
  6. a cheap defence policy trident and tactical nukes. **** with us we are going nuke early
    ocean going patrol boats for police work **** with them your getting buckets of instant sunshine.
    light infantry forces for defense peackeeping work if we suspect your funding people trying to hurt us bucket of instant sunshine time.
    if in doubt go nuke early
     
  7. Does that mean more RTR!!!

    But all I have ever seen on procurement, reviews and the application of business practice such as JIT it that it has led us into a sorry mess. But blame has to be shared; we do not know what we want and when we want it and how we will use it.

    The time lag on procurement of major platforms is so long that I really do wonder how we ever got Spitfire, Lancaster etc. in the old days.

    Our obsession with developing our own instead of looking to buy offshelf.

    Our requirment list that demands global capability even if we have no means to deliver it and certainly no logistic back up even if we could get it there.

    The use of outmoded equipment in new platforms be it guns, ammo or, heaven forbid, the BV, all means we still continue to require backdated systems retrofitted (?) to new equipment.

    The 120mm tank gun is a classic example of this but there are many many more.

    Our latest obsession has been UOR, we now have more platforms made by different companies with spares, maintenenace and training requirements that would, to be fair, terrify any Bde about to deploy (G4 must be made of shopping list supermen).

    Each new tour with a different Bde structure throws up different demands and ideas, but no one is putting it all together and saying hang on I thought you wanted Mastiff for convoy escort, I thought you wanted jackal for SF support, now what do you want and please show me a mission analysis and how you intend to integrate it with what you have and how it will make a difference.

    I have said it elsewhere but I do actually feel sorry for the MOD as they are bombarded with the next wish list after every 6 month tour.
     
  8. There's a strategy?