What would you change about the SDR ?

[mrlongbow]

Firstly as all 3 services are saying....get that Nimrod in service! Loose more GR4`s if we have too. Id rather loose that and gain the Nimrod. And as for the carriers.....well, we have lost more frigates and all the sea kings(search and rescue, junglies) will be gone plus other naval assests. All to fund this 65,000 ton floating target.

[GOOSE]

Cull the dead wood at the top of all 3 Services.

All are far too top heavy with senior officers.

I was recently told there are 3 airmen to every 1 officer within the RAF!
That is simply ridiculous if true!

Also who ever agreed to Officers of one star rank and above being able to retire and retain full pay was a very foolish person. That wages bill must be simply immense.

There's a few quid saved for a kick off!

[Thunder]

The only thing I would change would be an off the shelve purchase of P8 Poseidon's that would replace the Nimrod. We need a MARPAT a/c

I'm not too fussed on losing the Harrier or the Nimrod(as an a/c) as something had to go and I think the right choices have been made. As long as the airfields that have been earmarked for closure are turned over to the Army so to limit the damage to the communities that have grown up around them, supported them over the years and relay heavily upon them financially. These communities regardless it being Kinloss/Cottesmore/Wittering/Marham/Lossie are going to be the biggest losers.

The thing with the the F18E/F is in 20-25 years time you then have an a/c that is out of date and not capable of further upgrading, where as the F35C will still be working up to it's peak.

[Jonay]

What about the possibility of the "purplisation" of the British Armed Forces?

-A lot of joint resources
-A lot of unneeded top brass removed

are two starting points



the Canadians are managing..

[HighlandSniper]

Cull the dead wood at the top of all 3 Services.

All are far too top heavy with senior officers.

I was recently told there are 3 airmen to every 1 officer within the RAF!
That is simply ridiculous if true!

Also who ever agreed to Officers of one star rank and above being able to retire and retain full pay was a very foolish person. That wages bill must be simply immense.

There's a few quid saved for a kick off!

Speaking as one who held the Queen's Commission, it's a ridiculous ratio of 3:1, I'd be interested in how this compares with the other services.

With regard to the one-star ranks and above, it's actually half-pay in lieu of pension. It goes back to pre-Napoleonic times when all officer ranks were put onto half-pay during periods of inactivity so that they could be recalled as necessary - this has remained with Flag/General/Air-rank officers through to modern times.

I agree that it's an anachronism, who's going to recall a seventy-five year old half-pay Air Marshall - they should be on a pension the same as everyone else?

[Sheff]

Hmm, let's see:-

Okay, I'd agree with the decision to dump the Harrier fleet, withdraw the Sentinels when no longer required, and upgrade Puma.

Changes? Well obviously I would keep Nimrod MRA4. Disposing of it at this late stage is utter folly. Reductions in the overall Typhoon order? Nope, I'd prefer to have more rather than less, in fact my preference would be to abandon F35 completely and buy more Typhoons, and keep the whole Tornado fleet until completely replaced by Typhoon.

Cancel the additional Chinooks, cancel the A400 order and buy more C17s and C-130Js (operating two aircraft types is far cheaper than operating three, especially when one is entirely unnecessary).

Build both carriers and if they can't be re-sold, scrap them. Far better to cut our losses and write-off billions than spend multi-billions on operating a carrier unnecessarily for another 40 years or more. Besides, if we can write-off all that Nimrod money we can certainly write-off a project which would cost us far, far more - and be far less useful.

Above all else, the obvious move would be simple... withdraw from Afghanistan immediately.

[old_git]

The first thing i would do is implement a ruling that defence spending has to be spent on UK products, designed and built in the UK by UK owned companies or at least more than 50% Uk owned.

The point being that UK ltd is skint, the only real way to generate cash is to produce things and sell them.

This has the self generating effect of keeping people in work, and for every 100 Quid given to the defence company, 35% will go straight back to the government in Tax, then a large proportion will be returned to the government through VAt and Taxes as the employee spends his hard earned. whats left goes into savings, which are again taxed. so by the government spending the money in the UK it gets it back and Creates employment etc etc etc.

And of course you then have export sales which bring new money into the system.

Sounds simple, and it would be if successive governments hadn't destroyed the UK's manufacturing capabilities.

And if you have 2 companies making aeroplanes, lets say AVRO and HAWKER then the competition keeps em honest and allows competition for a good deal for the government.

Very simplistic but the principal is very simple.

And if Jonny Foreigner does like our closed shop approach they can set up a factory in the UK and employ thousands and not be allowed to take the profits offshore and not be allowed to equip the factory from any suppliers other than UK suppliers without very heavy taxation.

Just my 2 penneth. BRING BACK THE AVIATION INDUSTRY.

geoff

[Rainbow 6]

I agree pretty much with the harrier going as they were going any way.

The Nimrod cancellation is daft, we are an island nation and need to defend our sea lanes.

F-35 is also a good call, but I would cancel the whole project, and order F-18's wired for both attack and EW, and have twice the number, as Lenin said quantity breads a quality all of its own.

I would also put penalty clauses in the contracts to stop costs growing out of control, for late delivery, and failure to meet the agreed spec's.

I would also look at dis-banding all the services and forming a new UK defence force, which would cut duplication in the 3 branches, and look at staffing levels in the MOD as there seem to be 1 member of the MOD for everyone in the armed forces.

Rainbow

[22A]

In the RAF's own journal "Air Clues" there was an article written late 70's / early 80's at the time of cuts by a Sqn Ldr suggesting;
Scrap the Red Arrows, Vintage Pair and even the BBMF. If the public want to see something spectacular at an air show, let's have a Jaguar taking off from a road or grass strip or a few Harriers taking to the skies from dispersed hides etc.

Subsequent issues of the mag carried many letters condemning the officer's suggestion, but I'm surprised the current group of Whitehall penny counters haven't latched onto that idea.

[Dave Smith]

I would agree with Rainbow 6 - keep Nimrod.

I'm amazed that the University AIr Sqns survived, from what I gather the only people flying with them are those that are selcted to go General Duties Branch (Pilot), and then when they to EFTS, they start from square one again. The down side of the coin would be that keeping the AEFs would no longer be practical and would have an adverse effect on Air Cadet flying.

[RichC]

1. Keep Harrier until there is a replacement for Carrier borne aircraft to come online. All at Cottesmore, close Wittering.
I get fed up with our Governments getting rid of hardware years before a replacement is due!
2. Keep Nimrod MRA4 obviously but base it at RAF Waddington to keep them centralised within the UK
3. Shelve the F-35 and go with FA-18E/F for the moment until we really can afford it.
4. Keep the carriers, i think without carriers is absurd in the current climate and looking back at history, we WILL need them again no matter how much Sheff disagrees
5. Keep Ark Royal and Illustrious until the two new carriers come online.
6. Build more Type 45s and Astutes.
7. Keep our tanks and AS90s
8. Get rid of Scampton, Barkston Heath, Topcliffe, Dishforth, Kinloss and Leuchars but keep Lossiemouth and put Typhoons up there.
9. Put all of the Tornados at Marham if possible.
10. Put the Dishforth Lynx at Leeming, keep the Hawks at Leeming as well as Red Arrows.
11. Order more Chinooks
12. Keep the Puma upgrade but properly upgrade them with everything possible.
13. Up the numbers of Wildcat back where they were or higher.
14. Keep Sentinel but reduce by 2 aircraft
15. Do not scrap the C-130Js. Keep the C-130J fleet as well as the A-400M.

So in all, mothball atleast 6 airfields and keep most of our hardware, upgrade where needed.

[romeo bravo]

The down side of the coin would be that keeping the AEFs would no longer be practical and would have an adverse effect on Air Cadet flying.

Interesting comment, please explain?!?!

So in all, mothball atleast 6 airfields and keep most of our hardware, upgrade where needed.

Mothballing airfields saves how much? There is still a hidden cost to mothballing; keeping the infrastructure going for how long?

Keeping hardware and upgrading where needed would cost megabucks, which this country does have.


Why not look at something else more drastic, take the cuts but also look at our commitments and what we do around the world in our NATO role, reduce costs in Afghanistan by reducing manpower and equipment out there

[Michael Leek]

Some of the questions that should be asked, the answers to which would, I believe, lead to real cost savings;

1. Why are there 86,000 civil servants in the MoD?
2. Why has no government addressed year-on-year over-spend on the part of the MoD?
3. Why has no government dealt with poor project management in the MoD that has led to massive over-spends in contracted-out projects?
4. Why are some of the privatised companies that were formally part of the MoD not made accountable for their over-spends and poor quality control procedures?
5. Why are we pouring money into the JSF Lightning II programme with no clear indication of final cost or availability?
6. If JSF Lightning II is as good as the government say it is then why have they scrapped the VTOL version? What is this decision really hiding?
7. Why are there so many MoD properties and land that are subtantially under-used?
8. There are more Group Captains in the RAF today than pro rata during the Second World War. Why? (Think of salaries, expenses, pensions, etc, etc.)
9. There are more RN flag rank officiers today than pro rata during the Second World War. Why? (Think of salaries, expenses, pensions, etc, etc.)
10. Why are senior managers in the MoD not made accountable for year-on-year overspends?

...and many more!

We need a defence review process that is independent of party politics. And if the UK really does want a voice on the global stage it needs to make the commitment - and therefore find the money - to pay for its armed services to meet the commitment a global voice demands.

The title of the SDSR is Securing Britain in an Age of Uncertainty is the best piece of irony of 2010! By implication the coaltion government are concerned about Britain's security, yet lack the fore-sight to address the long-term strategic and operational defence needs of Britain in an environment they describe as 'uncertain', suggesting they are aware of international situations that could deteriorate at any time, yet they come up with a review that puts Britain's security at risk! Whoever thought of this black-humuoured title for the SDSR must work part-time for Private Eye! Someone's taking the proverbial out of the British voters and public...!

[Blue Diamond]

I would also look at dis-banding all the services and forming a new UK defence force, which would cut duplication in the 3 branches, and look at staffing levels in the MOD as there seem to be 1 member of the MOD for everyone in the armed forces.

Rainbow

Didn't the Canuk's try this and eventually get round to reverting to independent arms?

[Unknown74]

Sack Fox

[gixrgill]

Ill always remember how uncomfortable he looked when that harrier pilot asked about his prospects..........couldnt agree more

[Unknown74]

These are the changes to this ludicruous Review I would have made

1) Scrap Trident all together

2) Make up a mixed force (reduce each type in numbers I mean) of Tornado GR.4s and Harrier GR.9s (at least until F-35 arrives)

3) Replace Nimrod MR.2 with the Sentinals

4) Scrap the RC-135 idea and have Sentinals and Shadow's in that role

5) Transport fleet, C-17, Airbus A.330, C-130J, A-400

6) Disolve the ConDem Coalition and have another Election get rid of them and Labour come back and sort everything out

[urkles]

These are the changes to this ludicruous Review I would have made

1) Scrap Trident all together

2) Make up a mixed force (reduce each type in numbers I mean) of Tornado GR.4s and Harrier GR.9s (at least until F-35 arrives)

3) Replace Nimrod MR.2 with the Sentinals

4) Scrap the RC-135 idea and have Sentinals and Shadow's in that role

5) Transport fleet, C-17, Airbus A.330, C-130J, A-400

6) Disolve the ConDem Coalition and have another Election get rid of them and Labour come back and sort everything out

So you want to make us defenceless and bankrupt?

[Blue Diamond]

These are the changes to this ludicruous Review I would have made

1) Scrap Trident all together

2) Make up a mixed force (reduce each type in numbers I mean) of Tornado GR.4s and Harrier GR.9s (at least until F-35 arrives)

3) Replace Nimrod MR.2 with the Sentinals

4) Scrap the RC-135 idea and have Sentinals and Shadow's in that role

5) Transport fleet, C-17, Airbus A.330, C-130J, A-400

6) Disolve the ConDem Coalition and have another Election get rid of them and Labour come back and sort everything out

6) Labour were the muppets who got us in the mire in the first place. Don't forget it was Labour who scrapped the SHAR and were going to withdraw the Harrier force before it's replacement was ready so all the current lot have done is bring forward the Harrier's retirement date.

[Bilvo]

What is the point in this thread!?! The SDR is what it is, there is nothing you can do about it, so giving your opinion on "What would you change about the SDR?" is completely pointless

Deal with it and move on