Top brass purged to fill £37bn MoD black hole as Fox reopens Trident row with Osborne

#1
#2
I can't be arrsed clicking on the link. Can you tell me if it's a good or a bad thing for Our Troops.
 
#3
I can't be arrsed clicking on the link. Can you tell me if it's a good or a bad thing for Our Troops.
Do people normally run around for you and give you your opinion.............??

Lazy fcuker
 
#5
So after many years of harping on about how we don't have enough helicopter resource, one of the bright ideas is to cut it back even further!

I'm rapidly starting to lose faith with this lot. They gone from saying one thing in opposition to indicating another in government. Yet another bunch of lying bar-stewards.
 
#6
So after many years of harping on about how we don't have enough helicopter resource, one of the bright ideas is to cut it back even further!

I'm rapidly starting to lose faith with this lot. They gone from saying one thing in opposition to indicating another in government. Yet another bunch of lying bar-stewards.


So what's wrong with binning two ancient types that are as much use as tits on a bull? And as for the Wildcat? For the price Wastelands are charging per copy they'd better be made of the finest gold plated unobtainium and glued together with angels tears.
 
#7
In part I agree, there are far more capable helicopters about than FLynx/Wildcat. But at the moment we aren't looking at a replacement for Puma. Despite it's age it does fill a very impotant role of fast light lift. Merlin is twice the target of Puma and we will always have fewer of hem.
 
#9
Do people normally run around for you and give you your opinion.............??

Lazy fcuker

Lazy fcuker?
At least I managed to put my bastard opposable digits together, instead of reading the daily hate and posting just a link for neanderthals to go all wobbly headed about.
 
#10
MOD: Public sector organisation responsible for nation's security.
BBC: Public sector organisation responsible for nation's information and entertainment.

Defence Budget: £36.9bn from tax payers.
BBC Budget: £3.5bn from license fee payers.

Headcount of Armed Forces: 190,000 regular + 39,000 reserves = 229,000
Headcount of BBC: c.20,000

CDS salary: £250k (Bargain!)
BBC DG salary: £834k.

Combined pay of top five MOD civil servants: £860k (Bargain!)
Combined pay of top five BBC executives: £2.7m.

However, industry would pay millions to people with similar budgets and responsibilities.

There is a pattern to the current events:

Step 1. Replace vast numbers of uniformed personnel performing non-frontline jobs with CS or civilian contractors to save money (lower pay, smaller or no Employer's Tax & NI contributions, smaller or no pension contributions, smaller or no accommodation costs, fewer days off, less need for training, sports facilities, food subsidies, etc) and release more service personnel for core tasks and operations. Retain senior officers to oversee all areas, from nuclear reactors to supplies of boots and rations, to MOD's benefit wherever possible.

Step 2. Increase commitments for uniformed personnel and requirement for resources by engaging in two protracted conflicts on a peacetime budget with unplanned expenditure of stores, ammo, POL, etc and increased wear and tear on ships, aircraft, vehicles and other kit resulting in larger maintenance costs, faster consumption of spares and earlier need for replacements.

Step 3. Start running out of money. Reduce numbers of platforms and systems ordered and delay procurement programmes thus increasing unit costs and pushing up overall prices.

Step 4. Run out of money. Register shock and arouse public outrage at the numbers of senior officers in critical management positions and 'shiny-arsed' CS and civilian contractors compared to uniformed personnel, even though most of them are performing mundane low-paid jobs in vital support roles (security, training, logistics, ship, submarine, aircraft & vehicle maintenance, transport, budgets & contracts, clerical & administration, CIS & IT, catering, estate management, cleaning, painting, etc.).

Step 5. Sack swaths of senior officers and CS and civilian contractors to balance the books.

Step 6. Backfill gapped CS and civilian contractor positions with uniformed personnel thus reducing numbers available for front line duties and increasing strain on the system.

Step 7. See Step 1.
 
#11
5.6 Billion on Pay and Pensions.
Now who told me that Forces Pensions did not come out of the Defence Budget.
So if they cancel the Lynx/Wildcat we will have the AAC with Apache' and Islander.
Mind you I have for many years been of the opinion that most UK Helis are too small for their Army/Airforce jobs.
Case of Navy wants small capable heli to fit on it's boats so Army gets Lynx which was just too small and Crabs get Merlin sized for the Navvy.

john
 
#13
5.6 Billion on Pay and Pensions.
Now who told me that Forces Pensions did not come out of the Defence Budget.
So if they cancel the Lynx/Wildcat we will have the AAC with Apache' and Islander.
Mind you I have for many years been of the opinion that most UK Helis are too small for their Army/Airforce jobs.
Case of Navy wants small capable heli to fit on it's boats so Army gets Lynx which was just too small and Crabs get Merlin sized for the Navvy.

john


There are half a dozen or so helos available off the shelf that are far more suited to the AAC's needs for far less money.
 
#14
Would it help the helicopter situation if the RAF gew up and started letting the Army fly bigger helicopters?

ie, would it allow the Army to procure something like Black Hawk (or similar, purely for the sake of argument) without the possibility of the RAF throwing their teddies out of the pram?
 
#15
Would it help the helicopter situation if the RAF gew up and started letting the Army fly bigger helicopters?

ie, would it allow the Army to procure something like Black Hawk (or similar, purely for the sake of argument) without the possibility of the RAF throwing their teddies out of the pram?
The RAF have about as much influence on AAC equipment procurement as I have on Christina Aguliera's knicker elastic mate; ie F**k All.

It's a very simplistic (in fact, bone) line of thought to take that each of the Services has much of a say in the actual equipment bought for themselves - that's why DE&S / Mod PE / whatever they are called this week exist. With that in mind, if we can only minimally influence what kit we buy for our own Service, then how likely is it that we can do the same for procurement decisions elsewhere?

I'd advise reading up on the procurement process (on which I am NO expert, by the way)
 
#16
The RAF have about as much influence on AAC equipment procurement as I have on Christina Aguliera's knicker elastic mate; ie F**k All.
I was under the impression, from what I'd read on here in the past, that the RAF had to fly everything over a certain size because (basically) nasty Army NCOs couldn't be trusted with anything bigger than a Lambretta with an egg whisk welded to it. Have I been mislead?
 
#17
There are half a dozen or so helos available off the shelf that are far more suited to the AAC's needs for far less money.
Yeah, there probably are.

And I'm sure if DAAvn operated in the ideal world that you allude to (with no interference from political Lords & Masters seeking to keep 9000 wasters in Somerset gainfully employed and off the benefit queues etc etc etc) he MIGHT WELL have thought of that.........
 
#18
I was under the impression, from what I'd read on here in the past, that the RAF had to fly everything over a certain size because (basically) nasty Army NCOs couldn't be trusted with anything bigger than a Lambretta with an egg whisk welded to it. Have I been mislead?

If the AAC could buy what it wanted with the size issue, the Lynx would never have gotten a look in. It's a shipboard ASW helo masquearding as a battlefield helicopter, a task it's totally unsuited for.
 
#19
I was under the impression, from what I'd read on here in the past, that the RAF had to fly everything over a certain size because (basically) nasty Army NCOs couldn't be trusted with anything bigger than a Lambretta with an egg whisk welded to it. Have I been mislead?
The very same AAC SNCO pilots who operate the most lethal CAS / CIFS platform in Brtitsh Military Service today you mean.....????

WAH64 -MTOW 9525kg (21000lbs) I have seen sources claiming up to 10,107kg but can't verify
Sea King HAR3/3A - MTOW 9525kg (21000lbs) extendable to 9707kg (21400lbs) for op necessity
Puma HC1 - MTOW 7000kg (15430lbs)

I am unsure as to where this commonly touted "weight limit imposed by the RAF onto the AAC's helicopters" comes from; urban myth I'd suggest. Anyways, you have AAC Officer & SNCO pilots currently operating an airframe that weighs the same as one and more than another airframe type in RAF service.
 

mattyw

Old-Salt
Kit Reviewer
#20
I was under the impression, from what I'd read on here in the past, that the RAF had to fly everything over a certain size because (basically) nasty Army NCOs couldn't be trusted with anything bigger than a Lambretta with an egg whisk welded to it. Have I been mislead?
Yh you have been reading the anti RAF thread which is very misleading.

I would say cut the small helow's out and use merlin and other helicopters.

Blackhawk is a great helow but it would cost so much to replace are current set up.
liam fox has timed this well if he is clever he can cut out the old birds ie puma, lynx and save money and working helows.


P.s did you know we brought 2nd hand merlins?
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads