Navy Matters review of the SDSR

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by Allnightin, Sep 16, 2010.

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. The editorial review of the current situation at Navy Matters in the run up to the conclusion of the SDSR makes sobering reading.

    http://navy-matters.beedall.com/
     
  2. janner

    janner War Hero Book Reviewer

    An interesting article, plenty of food for thought. It will be interesting to see how his predictions pan out
     
  3. Seaweed

    Seaweed War Hero Book Reviewer

    If he's right, a hideous future lies in wait. To cherry-pick a few items:

    1. It is now absolutely clear that this is NOT a 'strategic' review as it is wholly devoid of any concept of strategy - it is merely a budget-cutting exercise, as if defence were an optional extra for the UK.

    2. To use the word 'strategic' slightly differently, there seem to be an alarming number of commentators who don't understand at all the need for our one truly STRAGIC weapon, the Trident SSBN.

    3. We have long since given up any idea of an OPPOSED amphibious landing capabilty - that vanished when the SHARs were scrapped. The Amphibs of various sorts are now and will be for years (until they wear out, sadly probably before air cover comes back on stream, if it does)) merely expensive load carriers.

    4. 'Scrapping the RFA' would be lunacy and the idea that we can depend on everyone else for the same thing is moonshine and shows a want iof understanding of the need for underway replenishment. The idea that we can pop into any old port for ammunition, for instance, seems to have holes in it. And after the USS Cole debacle the risks inherent in assuming the casual use of foreign ports for anything else should be plain to see.
     
  4. It's an interesting articicle, - however it is very negative.

    There has been considerable discussion over the past few years about how best to maintain the industrial base. Lord Drayson quite rightly put together a plan that saw regular work over a number of years to keep the shipyards and skill base in work.

    If that is to be continued it will require x number of ships being built every year rather than the feast or famine we have seen in the past.

    The C3 varient of the Type 26 programme (the opv vessel) in my view should be the highest priority to help increase hulls for more routine tasking.

    October 20th is not far away and I suspect many of these decisions have already been taken.
     
  5. More to the point, if you have no amphibious capability, the why have a carrier or DD/FF? You're either in power projection (and that's not opposed landings) or you're not. If you're not doing that, then unfortunately, at this time, you're into home defence, which doesn't need SLOC defence as there is no recognised (by MoD & FCO) threat. Bunch of MCMV, OPV and some SSK - instant Norwegian / German navy....
     
  6. The Defence Industrial Strategy was outlined in this White Paper in Dec 2005. Unfortunately, the maritime sector was the slowest to get off the starting blocks and this does not bode well for the future:

    The Defence Industrial Strategy: update
    A Green Paper on our defence industrial and technology policy (DIS2), is due to be published in December this year (only two months after SDSR reports). This will be followed by another White Paper in due course (Hansard 13 Sep 2010). Progress has been delayed owing to uncertainties about the Defence budget and I can't see how these are going to be resolved before December.

    UK Industry restates need for Defence Industrial Strategy 2
    It's a shame that Lord Drayson is not still around to see it through but he resigned in Nov 2007 to pursue his dream of participating in the Le Mans 24 Hours Race.
     
  7. wave_dodger

    wave_dodger War Hero Book Reviewer

    NSC will meet 17 and 28 Sep, then CSR Announcement to be made on 20 Oct, followed by PM to make SDSR announcement 27 Oct, followed thereafter by HoC debate 01 Nov.

    The SDSR has just literally moved from study into the options/propositions phase which is why I think we're seeing the current rash of ill informed news items, no doubt fuelled by hoovering up talk in pubs near the Mall.

    Two of the key questions remaining to be answered are how to fund a deterrant capability and how many carriers the UK needs [reading into that its not disputed we need a capability], balanced by the need to have core capabilites that offer broad utlity and adaptability.

    From all I've seen, which is limited to but one strand of SDSR, whilst there are favoured options its clear no one has made any decisions yet and there is much room for manouvre, within some pretty difficult financial constraints.
     

Share This Page