"Modernising Defence" - a mini-review

How Green is my valley is being re-made into how Black is my tongue. The Royal should have got the position.

Oh, yes, the review. Words are cheap.
I’m surprised they didn’t ask you. A bit of stab JNCO monkeying followed by thousands of posts of utter buffonery would surely set you up perfectly to be able to advise on the higher echelons of Defence.
 
This piece of research https://www.pwc.co.uk/government-public-sector/assets/forces-for-change-2017.pdf might be of cheer to you then...

Though perhaps what the UK public really want from Defence (Homeland Resilience and Security) may be at variance with what the Chiefs' want.
But do the public understand the value of things like deference or defence engagement and diplomacy? Do they understand the importance of contributing forces to NATO, or the ongoing fight against Daesh?

Astute-class HMS Ausdacious (S122) at the shipyard.
View attachment 343272

It's a really pretty fish, isn't it?
It? IT? She!

Anyway, pretty is as pretty does.....
 
So what did Williamson actually say to the House about MDP? From RUSI

we will consider our global defence network, to make sure we have the right military and civilian staff deployed around the world’. That should get the fat boys in the DA community twitching

‘we will consider how we can rebalance our training and equipment to mainland Europe, the Far East and the Middle East and review our overseas basing to improve our interoperability …’. Interesting

‘we will consider a much more agile approach to the development of new equipment …’. Good luck

‘we may need to accelerate elements of the programme to meet the most acute threats sooner’. This in the one most commentators believe will result in cuts

‘we will consider how to improve our resilience, so that our networks … are protected against cyber-attack and infiltration …’. Lots of money into IT

‘we will consider how to enhance our ability to collect, analyse, disseminate and act very quickly on the vast quantities of data …’.Lots more money on IT

‘we are considering what a more active and dynamic approach to operations in all five domains – land, sea, air, space and cyberspace – should look like’. Empty words or an admission that since 2015 no one has even considered this?

‘we will consider how to modernise our approach to technology and innovation’. Money on procurement, R&D and even more IT

‘we will consider how to deliver greater efficiency by adopting ambitious, digitally-enabled business modernisation’. How much more can go on IT?

‘we will consider removing existing areas of overlap and duplication within our force structure and burden-sharing more effectively with allies and partners’. This is my favorite getting rid of jobs for the boys across all three services.
 
The problem with our IT is that so much of it is so poor and unfit for purpose. If we want to be information agile, we really do need to sort our IT/ICS out. That WILL cost some serious money!
 
The problem with our IT is that so much of it is so poor and unfit for purpose. If we want to be information agile, we really do need to sort our IT/ICS out. That WILL cost some serious money!
Not quite true, you can cut out a load of tasks like "testing" to keep the timeframe and salary costs of expensive developers down. However, the end result is a inevitably a buggy mess that performs worse than the system it replaced. See RAPS...
 
I can’t help thinking that IT is new way of trying to divert ourselves from the fact that proper defence costs lots of money.

I’m not saying that there isn’t a cyber threat, and I’m aware that we’re off the pace, but talking up cyber diverts from the lack of progress with heavy armour, artillery and myriad other systems which have been holidayed, gapped or seen as ‘unnecessary’.
 
Last edited:
Not quite true, you can cut out a load of tasks like "testing" to keep the timeframe and salary costs of expensive developers down. However, the end result is a inevitably a buggy mess that performs worse than the system it replaced. See RAPS...
Testing is for wimps. Are you a wimp?
 
How can Russia afford more military spending than the UK given that our GDP is bigger than Russias?
Could it be that we have politicians from all parties who think that giving billions away in overseas aid is more important than defense of the realm?. Could it be that we are being robbed blind by certain defense companies? Not to mention the billions the government is giving away in tax breaks to big business and the rich. Surely we would be better off if we had those billions for other things like defense or maybe the NHS?
Perhaps the question you should be asking is how others (Russia) seem to be doing 'more' with their defence budget pound for rouble than we seem to get.

It's a genuine question ... all I keep hearing is that they are getting a march on us ... how come given that we have a free-er hand at accessing the defence market for kit then they do. I recall in the 90s the idea of the peace dividend. When Russia opened to the world, it was revealed what a poor state their defence/armed forces were really in. In under 3 decades they have apparently reversed that, and not only reversed it, but surpassed us. And all with the need to finance their nuclear stockpile in addition to modernising their armed forces, in addition to engaging in military ops (UKR, SYRIA), in addition to living with sanctions, in addition to scrutiny over where their money actually resides overseas etc etc .

How have they caught up and as claimed by some, overtaken us?

Is it simply that they have the declared defence budget and a much larger undeclared budget?
 
Perhaps the question you should be asking is how others (Russia) seem to be doing 'more' with their defence budget pound for rouble than we seem to get.

It's a genuine question ... all I keep hearing is that they are getting a march on us ... how come given that we have a free-er hand at accessing the defence market for kit then they do. I recall in the 90s the idea of the peace dividend. When Russia opened to the world, it was revealed what a poor state their defence/armed forces were really in. In under 3 decades they have apparently reversed that, and not only reversed it, but surpassed us. And all with the need to finance their nuclear stockpile in addition to modernising their armed forces, in addition to engaging in military ops (UKR, SYRIA), in addition to living with sanctions, in addition to scrutiny over where their money actually resides overseas etc etc .

How have they caught up and as claimed by some, overtaken us?

Is it simply that they have the declared defence budget and a much larger undeclared budget?
They're skint..the SU-57 is on the back burner.
 
But do the public understand the value of things like deference or defence engagement and diplomacy? Do they understand the importance of contributing forces to NATO, or the ongoing fight against Daesh?
Have a 'funny' for that!
 
The problem with our IT is that so much of it is so poor and unfit for purpose. If we want to be information agile, we really do need to sort our IT/ICS out. That WILL cost some serious money!
There's no money for anything.

The job is fúcked I'm very glad that I have weeks to go.
 

Top