Daily Telegraph letter from Admiral Lambert

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by Seaweed, Sep 28, 2009.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

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

  1. Seaweed

    Seaweed War Hero Book Reviewer

    I don't see a thread on this so thought I would put this on:

    "SIR – I must respond to the suggestion in your report ("Armour so poor troops couldn't wear it", September 25) that our troops are being "sent to the slaughter" because they are not getting the protection they require.

    "The top priority of the Ministry of Defence has always been to provide the best equipment for our people in Afghanistan. Service personnel do not have to "moonlight" to buy their own kit.

    "Every single soldier, sailor and airmen who deploys to theatre is issued with a helmet and body armour, as well as a black bag, valued at £3,500, that contains all the other personal equipment they require – boots, clothing, goggles, sunglasses and ear protectors.

    "To say that vital equipment is not reaching the front line ignores the fact that over the last three years, we have delivered equipment worth £10 billion.

    "Our commanders have a variety of helicopters, protected patrol vehicles, unmanned aerial vehicles and other key equipment at their disposal.

    Vice Admiral Paul Lambert
    Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff (Capability)
    London SW1 "

    So that's all right then.
  2. Purple_twiglet

    Purple_twiglet War Hero Moderator

    V Adm Lambert is an exceptionally good operator - that he feels moved to send this letter shows how hacked off he is with current reporting. I know he is very clued up on the current situation with equipment, and he has a damn good understanding of what we do well / badly. This is not some pompous semi-retired admiral here, this is a first rate officer at the top of his game doing a very difficult job to the best of his abilities.

  3. Not quite the same story here though

  4. Off topic slightly:


    On topic:

    The MOD might have been overcharged, as usual, for unsatisfactory/unsuitable kit: that does not make it better! :roll:
  5. A little more background on Admiral Lambert:

    Message from Rear Admiral Paul Lambert CB to the Merseyside Branch of the Submariners' Association
  6. Seaweed

    Seaweed War Hero Book Reviewer

    Follow-up letters in DT today.

  7. There was no support for Admirable Lambert's comments in the Daily Torygraph and this follow-up comment seemed to sum things up:-

    SIR – Vice-Adml Paul Lambert could not have done a better job of encapsulating the denial, complacency, wishful thinking and muddled perspectives that obviously exist at the MoD.

    John Wright


  8. I'm still awaiting comment from Rosie, to tell us what sort of black bag actually costs £3.5K!

    On the claims made on behalf of the MOD, call me a cynical old barsteward, but......
  9. Only £3.5k? Tsk, mere bagatelle!

  10. :eek:mfg:

    PS: How is Mr POS? I hope he's well. Is the rumour tuue that you bought him a pair of solid platinum cufflinks shaped like wheelspanners?
  11. No such luck sweetie! Am a student, if he is lucky this year for his birthday he will get some smellies and a pair of socks!!
  12. Why not wear the socks for a month and just give him them; they should be smelly enough. :D
  13. wave_dodger

    wave_dodger War Hero Book Reviewer

    The issues are quite different.

    The standard personal kit you're issued with is good and increasingly get better as its refined. I've been out multiple times as have bootneck colleagues and they're happy. Could it be better, yes, but its refined all the time - note the new Mk7 lid and the enhanced Osprey. So to all those muppets in the Sun that bang on about having to send their kids £xk of additional kit I wonder why.......?

    Mackays beef is at the strategic level; Are we equipped to fight an asymmetric operation in a land locked country away from our supply chain? No, are we trying, yes but under UORs which don't deliver on time or to requirement (in some cases).

    I feel sorry for the MoD guys - no matter how hard they try they will either be slammed by the Front Line Commands or the treasury;
  14. think I'll believe the remarks made by the four or five top Army Officers who left after saying that their personal kit was the best they had seen but there was no helos,no good radios,no tracked protection vehicles to save against bomb blasts, over an Admiral who I'm willing to bet,has never seen combat CQ unless he was at the Falklands.
    The top brass at the Army know and have taken the honourable route,can't see any at the Admiralty doing that because they are not really in theatre.IMO
  15. chieftiff

    chieftiff War Hero Moderator

    I think the Admiral knows exactly what he is saying, note he talks about personal kit seperately from equipment of which he merely states they have a "range" Not knowing the guy I hate to be judgemental but he seems to be playing politics rather than defending the MoD's honour (quite a trick that would be)

    My wife has been out to Afghanistan a couple of times now and I must say the kit is absolutely superb, from wicking tops through softy jackets, boots and body armour I have no doubt it has never been better and far better than it was when I joined up (arctic cold weather kit consisted of a seamans jersey, wristlets and a balaclava and off you go Jack it's only minus 30 :lol: ) As you rightly say all of the recent resignations in the Army have been about equipment rather than personal kit. I'm not sure the press actually understand the difference.
  16. Wave dodger has it right. The kit is increasingly good, the problem is the overall scale of effort allocated to the mission - specifically, there ain't enough boots on ground or wokkas in the air - nothing to do with the kit, everything to do with the unwillingness of Cyclops and his ilk to either foght to win or get out.

    I remember Cdr Lambert as he was on the DS at Dryad and a very scary submariner he was too.

  17. Ouch!
  18. Lambert refers quite specifically to body armour which is why I posted this link > http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...d-help-british-troops-to-survive-1790721.html
    which clearly refutes his point of view.


Share This Page