RAF 'considering extensive cuts'

HAVE YOUR SAY

it is a complete betrayal! Instead of building up the armed forces like it should, labour is just introducing cut after cut, while increasing public spending and governmental benefits. No wonder there are so many generals and admirals are resigning! Reduce the RAF by these planned cuts, and we won't have an air force worth speaking of. Sentries going into mothballs, Harriers being scrapped early, all for nothing! we need AWACS to protect us from the Russians, Harriers to bomb the Taliban and Nimrods to hunt enemy subs. For that, we also need bases. Introduce these cuts, and we won't be able to defend ourselves. What kind of idiots do we have in our government and Civil Service?

george macquisten - gibraltar, gibraltar, air training corps

"The UK winning export orders (to reliable countries) for customized versions- of its planned new aircraft carriers, astute submarines & type-45 destroyers would go a long way to fixing the public finances crisis and could enable heading off defence budget 'cuts'"

This would also contribute substantially to:

1) maintaining- and enhancing- the UK's defence/high-technology industrial base over the long-term; and,

2) maintaining and increasing the country's capabilities to produce capable, world-beating surface combatants and submarines for both indigenous and export purposes...
-----------------

Defense News Media Group

"Australia Begins Search for Submarine Designers"
August 07-2009:

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4225370&c=SEA&s=TOP

-----------------

Towards this end, concerned politicians, bureaucrats, MoD and industry officials and interest groups ought to be urgently deliberating how an end run can be carried out around safely predictable Labour govt inaction and incompetence on this issue...

Prominent, ambitious developed and developing-world countries such as South Korea, India, Greece, Saudi Arabia, Australia and Brazil are all looking to substantially upgrade their navies' capabilities... All are reported as wanting to add pocket-sized and/or 'big-deck' aircraft carriers to their respective fleets...

Several, such as Saudi Arabia, India and Greece are shopping for up-to-date Destroyers/Frigates, while Australia is beginning a multi-year programme to acquire 1 dozen modern technology attack submarines to patrol its vast coast lines and sea lanes....

INDIA:

India has been trying for over 14 years to obtain a functioning aircraft carrier from Russia but has been unable to due to Russia's inability to refurbish one of its cold-war era models for India...

So, why couldn't the UK step into the breach, and sell India aircraft carrier(s)- before a country like France or Italy does??

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/INDIA101909.xml -

"... The (Indian) navy has been waiting some time for the refurbished Russian carrier Admiral Gorshkov, now due for delivery in 2012, and is working with Fincantieri of Italy on two carriers.

Will the UK be able to get between Italy and India?? :

"Royal Navy aircraft carrier may be sold to India"-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/nov/16/royal-navy-aircraft-carrier-sale

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/17/carriers_now_for_india/

If, say, BAE/VT were successful- with UK govt export-funding loans- in obtaining export order(s) for duplicates/customized versions of the aircraft carrier model presently planned for the RN, to a country like India... this could obviate any problems caused by the RN obtaining Conventional Take-Off and Landing (CTOL) F-35C fighters for its new carriers instead of the currently planned Short Take-Off and Vertical Landing (STOVL) F-35B version.

How?

F-35-B's could still be purchased/manufactured in the UK, but these, or the bulk of them could be sold or leased on to India for its new, UK-built carrier(s)...

India already has a comparatively long history of operating STOVL Harriers, so switching over to the STOVL F-35B would not present any difficulties-and likely would be welcomed by India's politicians- as well as U.S. officials:

The United States has, over the last several years, been bending over backwards to get between India and Russia and the previously (for over 1.5 decades) rather extensive sales by Russia of its military and nuclear technology to India...

This would imply that sales by the UK of aircraft carrier(s) to India would face very little or no technology transfer hurdles raised by the US...

http://www.naval-technology.com/news/news64467.html

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/e-2d-hawkeye-the-navys-new-awacs-03443/

http://www.hindustantimes.com/US-clears-Hawkeye-E-2D-aircraft-for-India/H1-Article1-453405.aspx

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/business/us-clears-hawkeye-e-2d-aircraft-for-india_100246805.html

http://www.defenseworld.net/go/defensenews.jsp?id=3696&h=Northrop%20Grumman%20deliver%20Hawkeye%20E-2D%20AEW%20aircraft%20India

SOUTH KOREA:

A very, very close US ally in Asia that has long sought 'blue water' capabilities for its navy- if only to 'stay one ahead of highly resented Japan's navy capabilities' (due to still very raw WW II sensitivities)...

Over the last decade, S. Korean officials have been reported repeatedly as saying the country wants at least one proper aircraft carrier to go with its under construction/recently commissioned new surface combatant Destroyers (which are based on the U.S.'s Burke class Destroyer), LHD's, and submarines:

http://www.deagel.com/news/Republic-of-Korea-Navy-to-Receive-Six-More-U214-Class-Submarines_n000005540.aspx

If the UK was successful in generating a South korean export order for copies (or customized versions) of the aircraft carriers planned for the RN, then the currently planned F-35-B's could still be- purchased/manufactured in the UK, but these, or the bulk of them could be sold on to S Korea for deploying on its new, UK-built carrier(s).

For nearly 6 decades, the U.S. has made a routine practice of licensing much of its most secret and high technology weapons, hardware and aircraft to S Korea ... so technology transfer issues that could be factors in a UK sale of aircraft carrier(s) & F-35B’s to S Korea ought to be negligible or at least not insurmountable...

AUSTRALIA:

Possibly America's closest ally in Asia, Australia also has extensive and deep positive ties to the U.K.. Australia is about 1/3 of the way through a 15-year plan to redevelop and significantly upgrade its navy's capabilities...

Throughout the preceding 5 years, there has been an acrimonious debate within the country's defence community and its political parties regarding Australia possibly purchasing the F-35 versus other fighter aircraft...

If the UK was successful at marketing highly capable UK-made aircraft carriers to Australia, and if the sale included CTOL F-35 C's and/or STOVL F-35 B's, this could constructively end Australia's F-35 controversy...

If Australia was convinced of the enormous tactical and functional advantages for by it acquiring nuclear powered submarines as opposed to conventionally powered ones- the UK's Astute attack submarine model has unique positive advantages over other countries' potential offerings:

Astutes are the world's only recently designed & under production model of this category of submarine, and are acknowledged internationally as the best submarine of their type...

Defense News Media Group

"Australia Begins Search for Submarine Designers"
August 07-2009:

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4225370&c=SEA&s=TOP

France is just commencing a 10-year process to design a replacement for its presently in-service, several decade-old technology attack submarines, and the UK’s only other possible competitor, the U.S., does not export its nuclear powered submarines...

Technology transfer issues (and US objections) would be minimal or non-existent due to Australia's decades-long reliance on and liberal use of the U.S.'s most advanced military technology and hardware...

BRAZIL:

Not as likely to be an export market for UK-built aircraft carriers or Destroyers- without US technology transfer objections- as South Korea or India, but, as France is presently angling for contracts for the 'complete rebuild of Brazil's navy and its infrastructure'- what would be a more capable and 'world responsible' nation to do this- the UK or France??

Continued...

Roderick V. Louis - Vancouver, BC, Canada

And which country, the UK or France, would make a better custodian of sensitive US/NATO technology that might be compromised if not handled properly- when being incorporated into Brazilian military/naval uses??

http://www.janes.com/news/defence/jdw/jdw090911_4_n.shtml :

"Brazil concludes major procurement deal with France"

".... Brazil and France have signed a military cooperation agreement for the construction of four new conventional submarines for the Brazilian Navy..."

"... Under a National Defence Strategy, finalized at the end of 2008, Brazil aims to establish a second fleet to protect the country's north and north east regions...."

"... To equip the new fleet, the navy plans to build (with foreign companies' assistance/involvement) three nuclear submarines, fifteen conventional submarines, two aircraft carriers, four amphibious assault ships, six general-purpose Frigates, four air-defence Frigates, 20 corvettes, 12 ocean patrol cutters and 48 patrol boats..."

If the UK was successful in generating a Brazilian buy of customized-for-export versions of the Type-45 Destroyer and/or aircraft carriers, then the UK’s currently planned F-35-B's could still be purchased/manufactured in the UK, but these, or the bulk of them might be able to be sold on to Brazil- if U.S. technology transfer issues could be overcome- for use on its new, UK-built carrier(s)...

Alternatively, the UK could assist and work with Brazil in choosing different fighter aircraft compatible with its new, UK-built aircraft carrier(s) and equipping these aircraft with electronics, radars, ordinance, etc....

GREECE:

A staunch NATO ally and trusted U.S. defence technology export market country, Greece is looking to acquire 6 up-to-date, technologically proficient Destroyers or Frigates over the next 7-10 years...

Why let France fill this void with its FREMM Frigates- which were designed in large part with substantial UK technology, know how and finances (as a result of the failed UK, France and Italy 'Horizon Destroyer programme' of the late 1990's)???

The UK's new, under construction and undergoing sea-trials Type-45 Destroyers- if built and fitted as per their designers' specifications- are a far superior-in-capabilities' multi-role surface combatant to France's FREMM's...

SAUDI ARABIA:

Similar to Greece, Saudi Arabia is looking to acquire 4- 6 up-to-date Destroyers or Frigates in the immediate future:

"Saudi Crown Prince Sultan and the Navy frigate programme"

Tue, August-11 2009

http://tacticalreport.com/view_news/Saudi_Crown_Prince_Sultan_and_the_Navy_frigate_programme/756 :

"... Saudi Crown Prince Sultan is said to prefer taking more time studying the choices with regard to the Saudi Navy frigate programme... the Saudis are focusing their choices on the (U.S.'s under development) Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) and on (France's) FREMM-class frigate... "


NORTH AFRICA:

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Algeria-Switching-Frigate-Order-Buying-Helicopters-from-Italy-05794/

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2009/10/02/Algeria-seeks-European-stealth-frigates/UPI-89241254511161/ :

"... Algeria seeks (six) European stealth frigates"

The French/Italian FREMM multi-role/multi-mission Frigate is competing against a bid from Germany's Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems and a severely handicapped one from the UK's BAE Systems, which is is only able to offer its 1980's technology Type-23 Frigate.

This, it appears, as the UK govt has not provided/arranged loan assistance and support for BAE to offer export-variants of its new cutting edge Type-45 Destroyer...

Why let France win the Brazil, North Africa, Greece, Saudi Arabia and other countries' warship contracts with its FREMM Frigates- which were designed in large part with substantial UK technology, know how and finances as a result of the failed 'UK, France and Italy Horizon Destroyer programme' of the late 1990's- when the UK could relatively simply submit vastly superior bids by offering multi-role/multi-mission versions of its Type-45 Destroyer, which, when "fully equipped" is a far more capable and potent warship than the FREMM???

Successful aircraft carrier and F-35 B aircraft sales, and the related spin off administrative, training, design work and manufacturing jobs for UK citizens both in the UK and abroad- would invariably result in ameliorating any potential downsides to the UK, for possibly, switching its orders for the F-35B STOVL to the F-35C CTOL version of this aircraft...

Similarly, UK exports of customized-for-export versions of its Astute submarines and Type-45 Destroyers would generate administrative, training, design work and manufacturing jobs for UK citizens both in the UK and abroad for many decades...

Thinking outwards, expandingly in an export mind-set, rather than thinking inwards, in a 'negatively reactive' way is needed by UK govt, industry and MoD officials...

A long-term- export oriented- UK industrial & economic development strategy should be clearly laid out before any national asset sales occur or increases in UK borrowing are approved...
Roderick V. Louis - Vancouver, BC, Canada

We shall soon have only a token force, Air Force, at the expense of an overseas conflict that cannot be won by force. It is a national disgrace and a tactical error from which we will never recover.
Peter Tamblin - Padstow Cornwall

Morale in the RAF has been rock bottom for a number of years now with a number of experienced aircrew opting to PVR.Carry on with these stupid proposals and there will be no one to fly the few aircraft we will have left.Not only do these major cuts cause concern but the little cuts such as stopping in-flight rations for aircrew help destroy the little morale that is left.Instead of ACM Dalton "sucking"up to Brown he should be fighting for a strong ROYAL AIR FORCE.
Bob Griffiths - West Midlands

Why do we never hear of cuts in diversity, multi-culti, quangos, management consultants, "climate change", facilitators, deputy directors , etc.
It is a mistake to cut defence.The 1929 stock market crash created the scene for WW2 in 1939. The 1973 oil price shock may have led to all those small wars in the late seventies/early eighties. The 2007 credit crunch may lead to some sort of conflict in the middle of the next decade.
John Hartley - Woking, England, UK

Another case of an ill concieved, singularly focused plan to try and placate HMG that the RAF is attempting to save money! Why oh why is the ACM even considering carrying out this review at such a time as our forces are engaged in hostilities in a 3rd world country. Look beyond the next budget or election. The Armed Forces becomes more PLC as time goes on, think big and have a holistic view of events. Build more carriers if you plan to close down Air Bases. How about doing the Canadian thing and combine all UK forces into a single service. Same uniform, same pay scales, same rank structures, imagine the savings on beaurocracy. Of course it will probably mean we don't need as many Marshalls, Admirals or Generals living in london. As usual, it appears that politics are the driving force for our military leaders rather than the needs of the Forces. Additionally, I wonder who will carry out this review and how much it will cost? some bean counter from HMG who can only see to the end of his time in his current cosy civil service job, save money my old son and you'll soon be rewarded with a bonus or promotion. My money saving idea would be to cease immediately the FULL pay high ranking officers still recieve AFTER retiring.
Dis-appointed - UK PLC

At this rate, in a few years, the U.S. Air Force will be operating more RAF bases than the RAF!
All joking aside, I agree with Roderick V. Louis about trying to sell a/c carriers to India. If Britain delivers a good product, I'd be willing to bet that the Indians would want more than one carrier. After the problems they've been having with Russia, I'm sure the Indians would be glad to take a carrier or two off your hands (as soon as you get them built of course). Then maybe the QE and PW could still both enter service in the RN. (I keep reading that the MoD is wanting to scrap a carrier and/or JSF's.)
I don't know about Australia though, they can't even man the subs they already have, I'm not sure if they'd be to muster up a crew for a carrier.
Mark - Virginia

Why not close Heathrow to all civilians and turn it into a giant military base It won't be long before all the armed services would be able to comfortably fit in there. Going even further perhaps we could lease a bit of it back to civil airliners.
No, I haven't forgotten the RN, my plans include cutting a channel from the Thames to allow our 4 punts to moor.
Allan Wiggam - Newport Wales 30 years RAF service