Army ‘to be cut by 20,000’ if No 10 plan is approved

Cheap easy drones have a battery life of 15-25 minutes.
It doesn't matter if they are launched as a payload from a more expensive drone - that larger drone that carries the smaller drone can be run from an alternative fuel type.
 
Computers make people dumb, the gen X and boomers had to think more for themselves.
I didn't see many 'PlayStation kids' embarrassing themselves on tour
 
I've had the misfortune to represent two of them in attendance management meetings as their union rep. Both of them spent more time off sick with stress than they did in work. I had a degree of sympathy for one of them, the other none at all.
You knew my dad?
He always went on the sick from British Leyland a day before they called an all out strike.... I wonder how he knew.
 
The thing is say you have £1 to spend but you want to buy a pie from the bakers - but you also want a pint of milk, what do you buy if they both cost a pound? You need to make a choice so you buy what one is more important.

Now scale that up - you have only have xxx million pounds to spend - do you fund a parachute regiment, or do you invest in some cyber/drones? What the biggest threat and where's it coming from? At the current time it's cyber - so it's wiser to spend the money you have on cyber defenses rather than on some regiment that will mostly be sitting in a barracks for 95% of their time.

In an ideal world we would have unlimited funds to do everything - however in the real world, we can only tax people so much - and borrow so much, so we need to spend within our means.
Vote Labour?
 
G3 don't listen to G6 in my experience.
In my experience, when it comes to cyberspace operations, the issue isn't G3 not listening, it's G6 not understanding the nature of what the difference is between cyberspace and CIS networks..
I do wonder whether the Great God of Officer Generalisation (let's not have any of those smelly specialists around, they only ever come up with problems) has resulted in a lack of engineering insight at the appropriate levels on both G3 and G6 sides? It's certainly something that @HE117 has pointed out before...

So; how many G6 "cyber" staff officers have a computing or electronics degree, Chartered Engineering status in either the BCS or IET, and even a couple of years live engineering experience at the codeface? Because (with the best will in the world) a year's M.Sc at Shrivenham and a couple of 100-hour projects and essays doesn't really cut it, in terms of "deeper understanding of the problem domain", and "that's what the SNCOs do, they're the experts" doesn't cut it unless they're the staff officers.

How many G3 staff officers have done anything similar, so that they might ask "how might we do things differently?" as opposed to "how can we do things the same way, but with more blinking lights and computer screens?".

My beloved makes a very good living in the grey area between financial controls and reporting (on the business side) and project sponsorship and management (on the IT side) - she's the G3/G6 crossover person. Because as @SkippedOnce points out, the civvy world's G1 and G6 branches often get promoted to quite senior levels, without understanding the business... from her perspective, the senior HR punter and senior IT person in small to medium enterprises, often find "congratulations, you're now on the management board" a very stressful experience.
 
Last edited:
Vote Labour?
I despise the scummy lefty twats, nobody sensible would vote Labour - that's why they suffered a massive defeat in the GE - they are unelectable commies.
 

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
It doesn't matter if they are launched as a payload from a more expensive drone - that larger drone that carries the smaller drone can be run from an alternative fuel type.
Reminiscent of an argument about making anti-ship missiles faster, more capable, with defensive ECM et al... but they'll get more expensive, to the point of being unaffordable.

"Oh, that's easy, we don't crash into the target, we detach the warhead and drop it on the target, then bring the missile back to rearm and refuel it, so we spread the cost over multiple missions."

Isn't it going to be difficult to get the autopilot to run all the defensive countermeasures, pick the right evasive manoeuvres, aim the warhead, and bring the missile back to base to land safely amidst all the other air traffic?

"Well... in the short term, we could put a human pilot in there to take care of that..."

So, a manned missile that flies out, drops a warhead on the target, and returns to base to be re-used. Is this really quite the novelty and innovation we'd hoped for?


There's nothing new about scattering submunitions over a target, whether from manned aircraft, RPAS or missiles; nor in having the submunitions detect and engage targets (see the US CBU-97 for one example). Where it gets much harder is having the submunitions communicating effectively - that's what tripped up the AGM-124 Wasp (which was more vapourware than reality, though as part of "Assault Breaker" it did seem to worry the Soviets...) and unfortunately that's the "swarming" part that's meant to be "transformational".
 

potter

Old-Salt
I do wonder whether the Great God of Officer Generalisation (let's not have any of those smelly specialists around, they only ever come up with problems) has resulted in a lack of engineering insight at the appropriate levels on both G3 and G6 sides?

So; how many G6 "cyber" staff officers have a computing or electronics degree, Chartered Engineering status in either the BCS or IET, and even a couple of years live engineering experience at the codeface? Because (with the best will in the world) a year's M.Sc at Shrivenham and a couple of 100-hour projects and essays doesn't really cut it, in terms of "deeper understanding of the problem domain".

And how many G3 staff officers have done anything similar, so that they might see "how might we do things differently?" as opposed to "how can we do things the same way, but with more blinking lights and computer screens?".

My beloved makes a very good living in the grey area between financial controls and reporting (on the business side) and project sponsorship and management (on the IT side) - she's the G3/G6 crossover person. Because as @SkippedOnce points out, the civvy world's G1 and G6 branches often get promoted to quite senior levels, without understanding the business... so the senior HR punter and senior IT person in small to medium enterprises, often find "congratulations, you're now on the management board" a very stressful experience.
Few. Very few. There are some *really* good ones on both the G3 and G6 side, but too few for things to drastically improve from the inside. And it's not just in this area either, although things are improving in some other specialisms.
 
I do wonder whether the Great God of Officer Generalisation (let's not have any of those smelly specialists around, they only ever come up with problems) has resulted in a lack of engineering insight at the appropriate levels on both G3 and G6 sides? It's certainly something that @HE117 has pointed out before...

So; how many G6 "cyber" staff officers have a computing or electronics degree, Chartered Engineering status in either the BCS or IET, and even a couple of years live engineering experience at the codeface? Because (with the best will in the world) a year's M.Sc at Shrivenham and a couple of 100-hour projects and essays doesn't really cut it, in terms of "deeper understanding of the problem domain", and "that's what the SNCOs do, they're the experts" doesn't cut it unless they're the staff officers.

How many G3 staff officers have done anything similar, so that they might ask "how might we do things differently?" as opposed to "how can we do things the same way, but with more blinking lights and computer screens?".

My beloved makes a very good living in the grey area between financial controls and reporting (on the business side) and project sponsorship and management (on the IT side) - she's the G3/G6 crossover person. Because as @SkippedOnce points out, the civvy world's G1 and G6 branches often get promoted to quite senior levels, without understanding the business... from her perspective, the senior HR punter and senior IT person in small to medium enterprises, often find "congratulations, you're now on the management board" a very stressful experience.
Without being brutal, quite how many Officers are allowed to become specialist in that kind of thing, by their SNCOs? Whilst I read about R Signals Officers being entirely tosh, there is a concomitant powerplay being done by the SNCO cadre to keep Officers out of "their business" and actually not let them become good. This is a two way street.
 
I have and its quite clear that you need an enormous number of soldiers to dominate the ground(Force density) and any strategy built around the numbers we deploy, with the ROEs of an armed social worker is NOT counter insurgency. We seem to do a lot of force protection and a few wells dug for the locals and very little strategic effort.

If memory serves, the cross border operation in both Borneo and Vietnam(the paris accords insisted an end to US special forces) were demonstrations of how you really fight a counter insurgency i.e. cut off the supply and the insurgent movement will fall apart.
The vital ground in COIN being..... the local population
 
Without being brutal, quite how many Officers are allowed to become specialist in that kind of thing, by their SNCOs? Whilst I read about R Signals Officers being entirely tosh, there is a concomitant powerplay being done by the SNCO cadre to keep Officers out of "their business" and actually not let them become good. This is a two way street.
Yup. As a young STAB infantry type, I was actually allowed to get on with things (under close supervision), but I was also expected to learn the job as quickly as possible.

Meanwhile, my STAB Signals peers were being told "there's your office, sit in there and sign the paperwork, Sir"...
 
Why does cyber have to be even in theatre or in uniform?

GCHQ or a similar set up?
There is a good argument for 'strategic partnership' with a suitably-qualified (and vetted) commercial enterprise. As 'cyber' is flavour of the month (decade) as soon as anyone in uniform becomes competent in the skillset, they can walk out the door and into industry on better money and conditions. Therefore, cutting out the middleman and dealing directly with a civvy company to deliver much of the capability, despite the up-front contract costs, probably makes sense.
 
Yup. As a young STAB infantry type, I was actually allowed to get on with things (under close supervision), but I was also expected to learn the job as quickly as possible.

Meanwhile, my STAB Signals peers were being told "there's your office, sit in there and sign the paperwork, Sir"...
Must be a different 32 Signal Regiment from the one that I knew...
 

Latest Threads

Top