New Defence Review

Discussion in 'The Fleet Air Arm' started by scouse, May 16, 2011.

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. Must be, nearly impossible for a Wafu to get a Sea Going Draft nowadays, except for the Mighty! Ocean and small ships flights :winkrazz: Quote the BBC news
    The MoD now wants to make further savings for the financial year ending in March 2012.

    Potential targets reportedly include HMS Illustrious, Britain's last surviving aircraft carrier, which is due back from a refit next year.
    Last edited: May 16, 2011
  2. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker War Hero Moderator

  3. From a strawberry perspective nowadays, one wonders what there is left to cut? Will Norman gets his wish and see a culling of gold braid?
  4. janner

    janner War Hero Book Reviewer

    No need for further cuts, pull out of Afganistan, Iraq and Libia completely, savings of millions of pound a day
  5. That's a bit like saying that National Express could cut fuel bills by not driving buses around.

    There are savings to be made, but swift ends to operations is counterproductive and expensive in the long term.

    As an aside, there arn't that many left in Iraq, and (afaik) hardly any in Libya.
  6. janner

    janner War Hero Book Reviewer

    Doesn't have to be many in Libya, look at the costings for the Crabs and the cost of Tomahawk missiles, as far as Afganistan is concerned we continue to carry a massive part of the costing, something which in my opinion we cannot afford to do, its time for the UK to step back and for other Nations to carry a fair share of the operation, both in manpower and from a financial point of view.
  7. I'd be surprised if a reduction to The Sea Lord wasn't being considered. The post of Fifth Sea Lord was abolished in 1965, Fourth Sea Lord in 1964 and Third Sea Lord in 1965.

    The last First Lord of the Admiralty was the 2nd Earl Jellicoe from 1963 to 1964, after which the Admiralty was subsumed into the Ministry of Defence as MoD(Navy).
  8. it could be posible that they are going to cut the F35's and go with the F18's which has been talked about on here before as being a possibility.

    might mean we have aircraft on the carriers quicker... could be another reason why they are putting cats on them.
  9. They need to cut the guys in suits that carry bits of paper around all day at the bases and not service men/women (too many of those underworked and overpaid bureaucrats)
  10. wave_dodger

    wave_dodger War Hero Book Reviewer

    There's nothing especially new in that, its what they call the Planning Round process. PR 11 has now ended (sort of) and so for PR12, the MoD looks at what it is to be given and then has to confirm it (a) that is enough resource to deliver its planned outputs, (b) look at what it might need to stop and then (c) what the First/Second/Third order assumptions will be of doing/not doing something. Pretty much every possible option no matter how whacky or ludicrous gets put forward to show that the Department has thought about how to make savings, in order to better deliver output and then those in the seats of power decide what measures are taken forward such that we can still deliver the effect required by Government.

    If it's the civvies you mean, then they're there because they are substantially cheaper to use than employing a matelot, and whatever they're doing is still needed. If it wasn't they'd have been gotten rid of immediately as an easy savings measure.

    If it's other matelots you have to be careful, you may be just voting to get rid of your relief....
  11. wave_dodger

    wave_dodger War Hero Book Reviewer

    I don't think this would happen, for political reasons more so than financial reasons. We're putting cats/traps on CVF because the cost overruns of the F-35(STOVL) its lesser capability made someone think twice, hence we now are potentially getting a variant with better capability which will need the EMAL system or its UK alternative that they are considering putting on the CVF, and these are apprarently less damaging to the design/build process than the 50s technoclogy steam cats.
  12. How about going down a different route to generate more cash. We could have "Walt" cruises, giving wantabes the life lived by jolly jack. The full experience cram them all into one messdeck 60 minimum. Charge at least 5k for 3day cruise. Feed them £1.50p day broadside messing. For Walts who suffer from seasickness billet them in Nelson for the week and give them the NAAFI experience, to increase their dits.
  13. Ageing_Gracefully

    Ageing_Gracefully War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    Instead of the government asking MOD to look at savings, perhaps they should tell MOD this is what we, as a government, want for our armed forces. MOD takes this away and returns to government and tells them what this would cost.

    Very naive of course, but might just get some of the uncertainty out of life in the Forces at present.

    Any changes that the government demand i.e. let's bomb Libya, are then paid for as additions to the basic contract.
  14. wave_dodger

    wave_dodger War Hero Book Reviewer

    I agree, in principle that is the way it should be, for each of the Departments inc. Health and Social Security (or whatever it is these days).

    I think the vote that we get, i.e. the amount apportioned by Parliment is essentially that, but the problem is that the Treasury demands savings, the treasury dictates how the money is spent and for operations like Libya which we couldn't forsee and hence plan/cost we should get an amount of money set aside to cover "running costs" and "wear and tear" but you watch as the Treasury change the rules to their entire satisfaction. The real culprits here in many ways are the Treasury.
  15. wave_dodger

    wave_dodger War Hero Book Reviewer

    It's quite galling to see that we fund a state that has the technology, funding and desire to create a nuclear capability yet needs £650m in development aid.

    I accept there are polictical considerations but in these austere times I do wonder if our priorities and loyalties aren't somewhat skewed.
  16. Something like this has been on the cards since the last Government failed to fund projects mandated by the Strategic Defence Review (SDR) of 1998. The situation was exacerbated in early 2008:
    To make matters even worse, in Dec 2008 the Government implemented a delay of up to two years in completing the replacement QE Class carriers which added a further £1.1 bn to the £3.9 bn bill (link).

    So, irrespective of the banking crash and ensuing fallout including SDSR, Defence was already in big trouble thanks to inadequate government funding and costly interference. You can defer projects as long as you like but the bills will only mount up in the meantime and still need paying some day.

    As for those wonderfully cheap front-end Public-Private Partnerships and PFIs, the less said the better.

Share This Page