Does the UK even have a military anymore?

[Murph]

I just read the the RN is going to get rid of FIVE frigates, the British Army is down sizing, and getting rid of most of its tanks, does the UK even want to have a military any longer? WTF is going on over there, do they think that the EU Army is going to defend them? How many ships does the RN have? Maybe six left?

[67th Tigers]

I just read the the RN is going to get rid of FIVE frigates, the British Army is down sizing, and getting rid of most of its tanks, does the UK even want to have a military any longer? WTF is going on over there, do they think that the EU Army is going to defend them? How many ships does the RN have? Maybe six left?

 

It's mainly that the treasury won't budget for the costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan operations, and so the MoD is trying to juggle money to stay functioning. The RN doesn't want to cut those ships, and is hoping to put pressure on the treasury to fund them.

 

The RN currently operates:

 

2x CVL (A third has been decommissioned)

1x CVH

2x LPD

25x Major Surface Combatants (8x T-42, 4x T-22/3, 13x T-23)

9x SSN

 

Plus the SSBNs and about 3 dozen minor vessels

 

The Army is in the process of drawing down a Armoured Brigade, the number of Bn will be:

 

Armoured (CR2): 5

Formation Recce (CVR(T)): 5

Armoured Infantry (Warrior): 7

Mech Infantry (FV-432): 3 (Saxon to be cut completely)

Commando Infantry: 4 (3 from the RM)

Air Assault Infantry: 4 (2 from Para Regt)

Light Role Infantry: 12 (1 of which is rented out to the Sultan of Brunei)

Ceremonial Infantry: 3 Bns (2 in London, 1 in Edinburgh)

Close Support Arty (AS-90): 5

Close Support Arty (Light): 3

General Support Arty: 1

Air Defence Arty: 3 (to reduce to 2)

STA Arty: 2

AAC: 3 Attack Regiments and 2 General Support Regts

 

The Army has 5 maneouvre brigades (each with a CR2 regt, 2 Armr/Mech Inf Bns (2 Warrior in 2 Armr Bdes, 1 Warrior and 1 FV-432 in Mech Bdes), 1 Light Role Inf Bn, 1 AS-90 Regt), 3 Light Inf Bdes (3 Cdo, 16 AAslt and 19 Light), each with 4 Inf Bns, a light gun regt and additional assets suitable to role.

Demo Battlegroup: 1 spare Warrior Bn and a couple of spare CH2 sqns

[swerve]

A rumour, printed in the press before the latest government spending statement. The same report made other claims which have since turned out to be wrong. This one has neither been confirmed, nor definitively disproved, but no evidence for it has turned up since the original report. It may have been one of many internal budget-balancing suggestions, some of which (the extreme ones) are produced to put pressure on the Treasury before the financial statement, with no intention of them ever being implemented. SOP in inter-departmental infighting over money.

[Anixtu]

1x CVH

2x LPD

 

Not RN manned, but you ought to mention

4 x LSD

 

I'll allow the omission of 1 x LSL.

[Chris Werb]

I thought the two HVM Regiments weren't actually going to merge but that a couple of batteries were going to re-role to UAV for a couple of years whilst the HVM equipment was maintained?

[swerve]

Not RN manned, but you ought to mention

4 x LSD

 

I'll allow the omission of 1 x LSL.

 

Eh, Sir Bedivere is not yet decommissioned, so don't let it pass!

[67th Tigers]

RE air defence weapons. ive took my eye off of this as Im not normally into the subject, but what is the status of rapier in the British army?

 

Just 16RA still equipped with it (and the Crab Regt), with 4 firing btys (one of which was converted from Commando in 2004).

 

12RA and 47RA are colocating at Thorney Island, and 47 is likely being reroled by stealth to a UAV Regt for 1 Arty Bde. 12RA will thus be the only remaining HVM Regt.

[WRW]

The Crabs are losing theirs very soon

[Chris Werb]

Just 16RA still equipped with it (and the Crab Regt), with 4 firing btys (one of which was converted from Commando in 2004).

 

As you know there are also a couple of TA batteries (210 & 265) nominally so equipped to train personnel on the system.

[Lampshade111]

Poor British Army, hope you don't lose your Challengers, it is nearly impossible to destroy those things.

[Chris Werb]

I reeally dont' see what the fuss is about*. The British Army has never been better equipped vs its potential opposition (or at least not since they were hosing down spear-armed natives with Gatlings and Maxims).

 

*With one exception - the total lack of medium-high level SAM cover.

[baboon6]

Poor British Army, hope you don't lose your Challengers, it is nearly impossible to destroy those things.

 

There will still be five MBT regiments in the new lineup, though I think several of those have one squadron (out of four) as a medium armour squadron with CVRT.

[Chris Werb]

Im glad to see we are still fairly well off as far as battlefield air defence is going,

 

Arguably better than ever now the remaining HVM are getting TI (and autotrack?)

 

but I must agree with Chris that we are poorly equipped as far as that kind of threat is concerned. I dont think we have had any adequate cover of it since the withdrawal of Thunderbird, have we?

 

Correct.

 

I also wonder if we are spending adequate resources on UK air defence. Maybe we should have kept Bloodhound in production.

 

With hindsight I think we should have gone Patriot then MEADS, possibly with CLAWS or NASMS for intervention forces. I think London, and Faslane at least should have area SAM cover and various sites deserve point defences of some sort (Parliament, Northwood, Faslane, GCHQ). As it is, some of the bases upgraded to take QRA (including Yeovilton) are 'fitted for but not with' - presumably terrorists will give advanced notice of airliner hijacks and missile/UAV strikes? I found it quite amusing that a BBC feature recently said that the one positive thing to be said for Putin's rapid rearmament is that it might give our Typhoons something to do!

[Xavier]

Good points Chris. There are numerous targets in the west country (which Im not going to name) which would be ideal targets for a 911 style attack. And considering that much of the area they are under is under one of the primary air routes to the US, its does make me wonder if they would get a handle on the threat early enough to intercept it. And we have had no fighter airfields in this neck of the woods since at least the 50s.

 

Yes I suspect Patriot would have been a good buy, though I suppose at the time the MOD were more interested (understandably) in getting Sentry into service than getting a new SAM. Would that AA system as fitted to Type 45 be viable as a truck based system?

 

Good old Putin, I hope the MOD are going to send him a Christmas card this year.

is sure is SAMP/T

[swerve]

is sure is SAMP/T

 

Something interesting on that page -

 

"MBDA is investing in a new and complementary interceptor, ASTER Block 2, for the SAMP/T launcher. This longer range missile, with different flight trajectories, is aimed particularly at the future ballistic threat."

 

Does this mean the dormant "Aster 45" has been revived?

[harryRIEDL]

sounds posative seems like MBDA will be focuseing on static Ballistic missile defence then fitting on ships

[DB]

sounds posative seems like MBDA will be focuseing on static Ballistic missile defence then fitting on ships

Makes sense when there isn't much sea between you and "Them", don't you think?

 

David

[Doug97]

Don't know if this is a good sign or not:

 

The battle over forces spending

 

A group of former military chiefs and politicians, calling themselves the UK National Defence Association (UKNDA), has launched a campaign for a major increase in funding for the armed forces.

 

It is rare for former top brass to start such a public campaign, let alone in such a sensitive political area - but they believe it is time to speak out.

 

The establishment of the UKNDA can be seen as a sign of the growing gulf between ministers and some in the military over the course of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

There are claims that the government is no longer honouring the military covenant, Britain's duty of care to its servicemen and women.

 

Winston Churchill, former MP and grandson of the UK's prime minister during World War II, is president of the group and insists that the government must prioritise spending on the armed forces.

 

"Successive governments have let people down," he says.

 

"Whereas health and education have seen surges in spending, defence has seen a decline, and that needs to be reversed if we are to ensure our men and women on the front line have what they need.

 

"That decline in spending also means that when they come home injured there are few defence medical facilities for rehabilitation and some have to rely partially on charity for funding.

 

"While in terms of compensation, they get a fraction of what a civilian would receive for injuries."

 

 

'Let down'

 

The recent case of Rifleman Jamie Cooper, who at the age of 18 became the youngest soldier to be badly injured in Iraq, is one example.

 

He lost the use of his right hand and one leg, and suffered severe stomach injuries when he was struck by shrapnel from two mortars in Basra last year. He is still in hospital recovering from a super-bug infection he caught after his latest operation.

 

He is to receive £57,000 in a one-off compensation payment from the Ministry of Defence (MoD), on top of a small annual income when he leaves the Army.

 

His parents are planning to appeal against the compensation amount.

 

"Jamie feels very let down," says his father Phil.

 

"Yes, he chose to join the forces, but the MoD should look after their own - he's a young man who needs to be able to rebuild his life."

 

Jamie's mother, Caroline, says their appeal is not just on behalf of their son.

 

"I feel disgusted, angry and upset," she said. "These are the forgotten soldiers, the ones coming back injured, and we want more for the next soldiers to be injured too."

 

Another former chief of defence staff and UKNDA member, Adm Lord Boyce, agrees that servicemen and women fell let down by those in charge.

 

And he says that feeling could hit troop recruitment and retention hard.

 

 

'Public debate'

 

The UKNDA's launch comes after the establishment last year of the British Armed Forces Federation, a staff association set up amid growing discontent among the rank and file.

 

It also follows a report by the think tank Demos on Monday, which warned that the future for Britain's armed forces looked bleak unless steps were taken to improve pay, housing, training and recruitment.

 

The report's authors, Dr Timothy Edmunds, senior lecturer in the politics department at the University of Bristol, and Professor Anthony Forster of Durham University, said Britain needed a "pragmatic and public debate" on defence.

 

That debate should focus, they said, on what role the armed forces should be playing in the 21st Century and whether their work in Iraq and Afghanistan was making Britain a safer place.

 

In July, the MoD was awarded an annual 1.5% real-terms increase in its budget. That compares with 4% for health and 11% for international development.

 

The MoD also announced extra spending on accommodation for servicemen and women, bringing the total defence budget for 2008 to £34bn.

 

In a statement, the department said overall spending would increase by £7.7bn by 2011.

 

This, it said, was "evidence of the government's commitment to defence and to the men and women who serve with the utmost bravery in our armed forces".

 

The MoD also said it welcomed the contribution of the UKNDA to the spending debate.

 

"The UKNDA's supporters include prominent former senior military personnel, including chiefs of staff, and their experience will undoubtedly be invaluable in any such debate," it said.