I see that the problem with an aircraft which is fit for just every purpose and eventual taks of the future will lead to a very expensive, overloaded plane which can do something of everything but does somehow not fit anywhere. The French had such problem in the pre-war years and went to construct FighterReconaissanceBomber-Planes.... te "success" against the German Luftwaffe is recorded in the history. It is not only the planes which are affected by this "Overtechnisation"... I remember my army service in the mid-eighties. We still had a light ferry on two pontons which was the unchanged model 1939 (only the motors of the pontons were newer ones). The trailer was the original 1939 model. Quite outdated you may think? It took us maximum 15 minutes to unload it from the trailers (pontons and ferry-deck) and to have it operational inthe river. Then they brought up a new, modernized version. Whilst the cost was about 10 times the old wooden one, whilst it could no be repaired any more at any carpenter workshop or by us in the field and whilst the assembly time went up from 15 to 45 minutes the payoad was still the same... ...and it was fairly sensitive to damage. (Sooooorry, as a Swiss I was only dealing with small 'ships' - but the thread is now somehow back to its origin )
Perhaps we could spend the money for new carriers on getting an integrated public transport system as good as the Swiss one instead. That would be more useful for the majority of the UK population. Aren't all able bodied Swiss males liable for military service for defending their country? Maybe we should have that here. Might teach the 'yoof' a few things about respect.
Perhaps we could spend the money for new carriers on getting an integrated public transport system as good as the Swiss one instead. That would be more useful for the majority of the UK population. The point perhaps is mate, that we maybe could have had aircraft carriers, working rifles, effective aircraft, useful vehicles, better paid squaddies, more helicopters etc. AND squillions left over for non-defence stuff if the procurement for the last several decades hadn't been such a bloated business. Spent the last few weeks following statistics on major defence projects and it's scary how much is just thrown away, and in particular how much is blown on systems that apparently could have been bought fully functioning & 'off the shelf' for a fraction.
Good point, so we can blame that on dimwitted politicians & dullard civil servants ? I still find it odd how every one today refers to modern military matters as 'defence' sounds cosier doesn't it?
Let's just say there's a few passing references to radios that don't work... but his rant targets many bigger and more bloated fish in a more specific way. I can't say I agree with him 100% on everything, but it is good provocative stuff.
Bowman costs were spiralling out of control so much when I was in they decided to only somewhere around 75% of the original comms package. Someone decided 'oh we'll hardly ever use that so leave it out and they'll only use that if ... So we can't tick that off the list'. It was being trialed by 12 Mech troops in 2003 in Canada (BATUS) but I left in 2006 and had never seen it. I believe it was outdated before it was even tested by the Army. I seem to recall when I was in Iraq all the Land Rovers needed a modification for the pending radio fit as someone discovered there was the potential for them (Bowman) to over heat and catch fire in the FFR's.
Spiralling costs do seem to be the MoDs prime activity, these two carriers are £1billion over budget already, and work started on them two weeks ago. One of the most important developments this two carriers will see is UAV usage, such as the planned USN X-47B, it's hard to imagine how the UK might match such developments in any meaningful way at all, being as that program is a six year plan budgeted at over $600 million for the first two aircraft. Eventually those are feted to become super Predators, and expected to be flying on and off carriers within two years. Under current management it's hard to imagine the UK doing anything of equal or greater significance. What we could do with is some top brass with a reputation for being both hard nosed and incorruptable at the helm of spending, rather than politicians spending more effort finding ways of shutting them up, like Dannatt, than in delivering the goods or seriously looking at the future.
Ok gents, I study War and Society at uni, asides from my dissertation being very 'retro' its a pretty modernist course. And the 'Society' part is integral to war, something I've only realised in my ear off of actually 'learning' things about life, war et al. We have several key problems: 1. We are a democracy. 2. Our politicians know nothing about real conflict. 3. Blood scares us. 4. Our military is outdated, stagnated and contaminated by ridiculous ultra-backwards thinking. Pretty bold statement but let me elaborate... As part of my degree I've read countless US publications, journals, security assessments and interviews, newspaper articles, blogs, debates the works. The British well... theres stuff but its not really as focused as the Americans. We havent had a 'real' defence review with academic support/assistance in a long time. The US came up with Joint Vision 2010 a few years ago, it tried to look ahead to the future and predict what the US military must achieve and be able to do... I'm not saying it was perfect but it set into solid word the RMA beliefs of the US military and gave them time to pass them on/and work out how to achieve their goals. We havent... well really even tried to do this. The Army is still a discriminative body against anyone with dyslexia, dyspraxia et al for Officer candicacy despite.... well these prejustices are increasingly hemoraging vital potential manpower reserves. The RN, RAF, and Army fight each other tooth and nail for any resources backstabbing and promoting ridiculous projects. For example. Why... do we REALLY need the Eurofighter? Or the Join Strike Fighter? Why! After watching Transformers I am now convinced that this tech is only useful in the event we are invaded by giant transforming aliens. This is a sad day. Equally despite the academia and notable global trends warning of a shift in warfare is approaching 'Fifth Generation' theory, well we've ignored it. I know one chap who prior to joining the military was a bright light of potential, very insightful - brilliant advocate of new military techniques and tactics. Within 2 years he is more oldschool than a... well wanting to avoid any cliches a really old general. He advocates shockingly 'backward' tactics for example: Lets go to Afghan with sub-standard kit for dessie operations and not consider the enemy or potential shifting of the war. Then after 2-4 years we'll have AWESOME kit. It may be measured in body bags but it'll rock the kasbar and we shall win!!!! To hear that from supposidly, an intelligent young Lieutenant who is meant to represent the future leadership of the army. Its frankly appauling. Disgraceful. Too many officers are ridiculously out of touch with the real world regardless of what they say, comfy TA base running commissions make this worse. What hope do we have if this is what the next generation of leaders think? I dread to think. The Navy has lovely destroyers, which are pretty much pointless - we want real force projection capabilities, from amphibious assualt ships, and Carriers. But the Carriers are long overdue and due to our *forgive the expression* blatant cocksucking of BAE's every demand and whim, well its bloody ridiculous. When we ALSO look at the fuckwittery that is the Security Services in this country we get an even direr picture of an entire wing led by stagnant, slightly retarded people who get into power by being "Jolly nice chaps" and not much else bar maybe a bright spark when they were younger. We get regular attempts to recruit us at university for anyone of the above services, all are met with raised eyebrows, blatant and subtle mockery and humour. As we seem to be happy to accept the status quo. To be honest we live in a country with mass apathy with a 'so-called gent' in charge who is effectively a dictator, an overstretched military, an underfunded military, a state so far up the financial shitter due to mismanagement that its ridiculous... Not to mention cutting the military by well over 10,000 men in official and covert cuts. Well that we havent had all our troops rounded up and castrated like the Italians in Abysinnia in the 1800s is a testament to how bloody good they are with shockingly shit kit and incompetent retarded leaders. What would I do? Call immediate defence reviews - conservative and ultra-radical and all inbetween to get a good balanced view of what could be done. Ask squaddies what they really want kit/weapons system wise. Look at real sustainable new businesses offering innovative defence solutions - not BAE and subsidary crap. Probably find a way to take down BAE - take a dividend, and force them to be accountable on why all projects always overrun so much.
Actually no, I rather like the A2. What I'm saying is get things properly assessed by thosee who know and by those who think/theorise and your onto a winner. Not everything is bad, just most is late, insanely overpriced for what it does, and passable at best.
All procurement in the public sector is over priced not just the MoD....It's because they know they can take the piss and the people doing the buying don't treat it like its their money unlike the private sector. From what I can gather you are making your assumptions from a TA rupert still wet behind the ears.
The statement was taken from one chap, but most of those I've met (and due to my degree I've met a fair number) seem to have bought into similar tripe when they are younger. I will be joining the TA later this year/early next year to get a better rounded perspective on things - hopefully as infantry...
Heh I was refering to first hand experience... But yeah, I see where you are coming from. Organisational changes ho :p
Get yourself down to your local recruiter.....enlist...and fix the Army for me please...im dreading my fast approaching deployment to Afghan, with all the kit shortages the QM could only find me an SMLE with 10 rounds and a pair of High-Tech Silver Shadows to do what the officers call "The Great Push"...seems they have this new idea about creeping barrages?... Seriously mate...get off your arse and get a pair of Dessies on and then you can make comments on Officers and Kit shortages...just because you study War and Society does not mean you can preach so wind yer neck in. Also, dont join the TA...join the Regs...or does showering with other men frighten you? Donnie
If you want first hand experience I would suggest you join one of the Reg forces, you would need to be in the TA a rather long time to get an idea how the Army works.
Some of us have degrees to finish which slightly complicates things... not least that I want to do a Masters and the TA will fund that quite nicely. However that attitude of 'you have to do it the regs way or no way' is pretty... well pointless and demonstrates the stagnant problems aforementioned. Looking at numbers, quotes and loads of publicly published documents does actually give you an idea of what goes on. Perhaps if more former squaddies went into politics it wouldn't be such a tits up.
