Latest Navy Reports In The Papers

[hucks216]

...or Reports rather!

www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article5299272.ece

www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article5298898.ece

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3569163/Falkland-Islands-to-be-left-without-warship.html

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/3627521/Royal-Navy-cuts-betray-our-brave-sailors.html

[astraltrader]

Thanks Huck - as it happens I had seen a couple of these reports and was going to post them also as links in another thread called " shrinking navy".
As you list them with two reports that I haven`t seen - I have also posted them in that thread.


As I mentioned there - reading these reports makes me both upset and also gets my blood boiling.

I am curious what the effect these sort of articles have on you and your shipmates. I suppose in one sense it must obviously be demoralising - but can you give me your take on how you and your shipmates view these reports and if you feel able to - give your opinion on how much further downhill you think things will go?

Some of us on the forum have given our opinion in this other thread

http://www.worldnavalships.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1604&page=2


but I would value the opportunity to read your views .

[FTM127]

QUESTION?

How do these guys get in a position to make these decisions? Don't they read history books? Great Britain and the RN are the same. You can't have one without the other. The problem is that the politicians never did military service. They have no respect for the traditions of a great country. The World needs Great Britain on the high seas.

Here's an idea. Need an economic stimulation package? How about restoring the cut ships and aircraft?

Fred Morsheimer

[herakles]

From today's Times:

The Armed Forces yesterday became the first significant victims of government attempts to reduce spending in the face of the advancing recession.

Two programmes worth £20 billion will be cut and delayed after defence chiefs were told that there was not enough money to go ahead as planned.

The announcement throws into disarray the Army’s £16 billion update to armoured vehicles, while the Royal Navy’s £3.9 billion project for two new 65,000-tonne aircraft carriers is postponed for two years.

The statement from John Hutton, the Defence Secretary, sparked anger and accusations that the cuts went against the Prime Minister’s promise to help Britain to spend its way out of the downturn.

Liam Fox, the Shadow Defence Secretary, called on ministers to spend more time defending Britain. “Only a few weeks ago Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling said that they would bring forward capital projects to boost the economy. Now they are announcing cuts and delays to major programmes,” he said.

The UK National Defence Association, which is supported by three former chiefs of the defence staff, voiced its concern. Commander John Muxworthy, its chief executive officer, said: “The Government is pouring hundreds of billions of pounds into a possibly vain endeavour to solve the financial and banking crisis but at the same time cutting back on the nation’s defence and security. This is folly.”

Defence sources said that Admiral Sir Jonathon Band, the First Sea Lord, had argued robustly to stick to the existing aircraft carrier programme under which the first ship, HMS Queen Elizabeth, would have come into service in 2014, and the second, HMS Prince of Wales, in 2016.

He and the other Service chiefs had expressed “disappointment” at the proposals but they had reached a collective decision to give their approval when faced with the financial imperative of saving money and ensuring the highest priority be given to operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The two carriers — first announced in 1998 as the centrepiece of the Government’s new expeditionary strategy — were supposed to have entered service in 2012 and 2014 but were then delayed two years. Mr Hutton’s announcement means that HMS Queen Elizabeth will now not be ready for action until at least 2015.

It is a serious blow for the Royal Navy, which has had to bear the brunt of the cost-saving exercise forced on Mr Hutton to balance the books and resolve a £2 billion hole in the defence budget. New fuel tankers for the Royal Fleet Auxiliary, vital support vessels for the Navy, have also been delayed.

General Sir Richard Dannatt, Chief of the General Staff, had recently been reassured that the Army’s Future Rapid Effect System (Fres), a new generation of 3,000 armoured vehicles to replace ageing models such as the Saxon troop-carrier and Scimitar reconnaissance vehicle, was high on the list of MoD priorities. The original in-service date for these new vehicles of 2009 is now seen as pie in the sky.

With an overall price tag of £16 billion, however, Mr Hutton has had to cut a swath through the Army’s programme. A new utility vehicle to replace the Saxon was supposed to be based on the Piranha V design. In May, before the credit crunch began to bite hard, the MoD announced that it had provisionally accepted this design. Mr Hutton said yesterday that he was withdrawing approval for the vehicle and gave no date for when a new round of bids could be made. He acknowledged that it would mean a delay in the programme.

He is pressing ahead, however, with a Fres version of the Scimitar and Spartan vehicles, as well as a programme to upgrade the existing Warrior armoured infantry fighting vehicle.

[astraltrader]

At a cost of £16billion I am not surprised that the government has put a hold on the proposed 3,000 new armoured vehicles.
That to me seems a serious piece of wedge!
That would pay for a fleet of super carriers or around 17 type 45 destroyers!!

Whilst I appreciate the army badly needs some new armoured vehicles - both 3,000 and £16 billion does sound like huge figures...

[herakles]

I think you're right! I guess they mean 60 million.

[derek s.langsdon]

When defence cuts were announced. Shadow Defence Secretary Jim Murphy MP said "Uncosted,Unwise,Unfair"--"The Government plans are unwise (understatement!)...The UK now has an aircraft carrier strike capability GAP for the next decade,and the Navy has surrendered flexibility by CUTTING FRIGATES and our amphibious capability....
How our armed forces can do more for less requires a thorough examination of defence needs and how to make defence more efficient in the long term and in the National interest,NOT a drive for immediate savings"

derek-L/Norfolk

[jainso31]

Governments of the day, on a five year term; are seldom interested in the long term-unless of course if they are pressed by a lobby which they feel may do them some harm. So they exist from day to day just trying to keep their noses clean.
Of course should a major crisis occur-all bets are off and money spent like water to damp down the fire.Defence is not seen today as a major issue and hence cuts in expenditure-a sop to the great unwashed and a boost to their "succession hopes".
However if this happens after mid term -do nothing- and hand the mess to the new incoming government-just the Name of the Game chaps!!:cool::mad::confused:
I do have a genuine sympathy with men like yourself who are concerned with Defence; but what chance have you got with a "shower"- who still think we are a World Power; and continue to give money to the POOR really matters.-"yes I know they are not poor; but it is the gesture that counts".BS!!:mad:

jainso31

[culverin]

# 5 to me is a repetition of all that the armed forces are most adept at.
believing each is justified in appropriating 100% of our diminishing, by % of GDP, defence expenditure.
Let's face it.
The navy despises the Army, as it has its own.
The navy detests the air force, as it has its own.
Neither the army or air force have their own navy.

Crucially, neither army or the sky boys are permitted to, crucially, grow a full set.
Tossers tashes only.
Simple.

[oldsalt]

The latest report is about the closing of Dartmouth & transferring its functions to Raleigh. Next on the list for the chop has to be HMS Drake!

[CYLLA]

hi Old Salt ,

yep i think you could be correct at H.M.S DRAKE ,who,s ever is left may be placed in a portacabin in the dockyard.

cylla

[oldsalt]

:(The disadvantage of knowing Drake when if you didn't get your hammock slung immediately at "secure" then you slept on the deck is very sad.

[Old Salt]

Perhaps RNC Dartmouth could be moved to Rosyth in one of the sections of the new carriers ? Quite a few others could be fitted in as well ?? :p

Last one out turns out the light please.

Brian

[SheppeyMiss]

While this post is slightly off thread in that it isn't about 'Navy Reports in the Papers', I thought you might like to see what the MoD' plans are ongoing, at least by what I've found on the MoD's own website.

So straight from the horse's own mouth...

Defence Plan 2010-2014 (http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/AboutDefence/CorporatePublications/BusinessPlans/DefencePlans/DefencePlan20102014.htm)
The Defence Plan is the MOD's top level management plan for the financial years 10/11 to 13/14, setting out the Defence objectives and driving business activity within the Department.

The narrative element of the Plan outlines the Public Service Agreements and Departmental Strategic objectives that provide the framework within which MOD works. The Plan also provides an overview of the Strategy for Defence and sub-strategy framework and the new performance management system for the Defence Board - the Defence Performance Framework. The Defence Board Strategic Objectives are then detailed - these form the quarterly reporting element of the Defence Performance Framework. Defence Plan 2010-2014 PDF [1.2 MB] (http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/AB3A3278-2820-40EF-AA15-9BDA7D0A5318/0/Defence_Plan_2010_2014.pdf)

This link goes to the MoD Defence Business Plan 2011 - 2015.

www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/AboutDefence/CorporatePublications/BusinessPlans/ModBusinessPlans/ (http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/AboutDefence/CorporatePublications/BusinessPlans/ModBusinessPlans/)

At the bottom of the page and there is this list of downloadable PDFs
Monthly updates on the implementation of the Structural Reform Plan element of the MOD Business Plan are also available below.

Business Plan Measurement Template PDF [166.7 KB] (http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/455FA472-13BF-43AC-9C88-2704DA941332/0/20110506_business_plan_measurement_template.pdf)
Structural Reform Plan Monthly Implementation Update - November 2010 PDF [67.3 KB] (http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/57819E91-FA18-4B5D-A432-8762432FB70B/0/structuralreform_nov2010.pdf)
December 2010 PDF [86.1 KB] (http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/6866E781-A712-4F68-A520-81E281ADD354/0/structuralreform_dec2010.pdf?)
January 2011 PDF [90.4 KB] (http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/34875492-6264-4D73-A9E1-DD7340B0D166/0/structuralreform_jan2011.pdf)
February 2011 PDF [95.8 KB] (http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/D7AE31E3-F3C6-4D1C-A975-DB67BBACEB42/0/structuralreform_feb2011.pdf)
March 2011 PDF [101.7 KB] (http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/84BAC8B8-5A9B-4E9A-94E3-426ECAB1E153/0/structuralreform_mar2011.pdf)
April 2011 PDF [101.5 KB] (http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/8D80341E-6B37-424F-ACD0-48A8582F3067/0/structuralreform_april2011.pdf)
May 2011 PDF [63.9 KB] (http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/897BD186-EC8D-454B-A432-30871A0902F6/0/structuralreform_may2011.pdf)
June 2011 PDF [80.8 KB] (http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/8F0865AB-8712-4D60-88A6-387406308637/0/structuralreform_june2011.pdf)

Missy

[Teuchter]

Thank you very much Missy - this makes scary reading!!

[jainso31]

Pretty complex piece of research you have produced Missy, but having read it- Teuchter's right it is scary.

jainso31

[alan.gamblin]

Hello all,

It must be a sign of the times; an American Admiral advising American troops in Afghanistan that their pay is not now guaranteed! We wouldn't do that to our chaps, would we ??:(

Kind regards
Alan