UK Defence in Numbers

For everything else UK defence-related that doesn't fit into any of the sections above.
Post Reply
User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1756
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Contact:
United Kingdom

UK Defence in Numbers

Post by The Armchair Soldier »

So, the MOD has published a new document which, to quote the MOD, "offers a snapshot of the United Kingdom’s defence capability in numbers.". You can read it here: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... screen.pdf

I haven't read through it fully yet, but I noticed a few unusual figures on the equipment page (Pg 7). 125 Tornados, 9 Challenger 1s, 254 Challenger 2s, 5 FH70 Howitzers, etc. I'm guessing it's listing things that are used for training as opposed to things that are active and in operational usage?

User avatar
GibMariner
Senior Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17

Re: UK Defence in Numbers

Post by GibMariner »

The Armchair Soldier wrote: I haven't read through it fully yet, but I noticed a few unusual figures on the equipment page (Pg 7). 125 Tornados, 9 Challenger 1s, 254 Challenger 2s, 5 FH70 Howitzers, etc. I'm guessing it's listing things that are used for training as opposed to things that are active and in operational usage?
I also noticed a few inaccuracies on page 7 - Technically they're covered as a lot of the content of the document is for the period 2014-2015 and they don't state a date when those figures were active, but it doesn't provide an accurate picture of current force levels.

For example, it states there are 4 "Landing Platform Helicopters/Docks" - must be including HMS Illustrious which was decommissioned in August 2014 - also doesn't take into account HMS Albion isn't active either. It also states there are 7 "Trafalgar/Astute Class" - HMS Tireless decommissioned in June 2014 and HMS Artful is not yet in commission so there are 4 Trafalgar and 2 Astute SSNs. As you say it also doesn't take into account things like the status of aircraft - as Parliamentary Q&A showed there was quite a difference between what is currently active/operational and those in various states of readiness/maintenance.

Only 17 Merlins? Hopefully the projected manpower on page 5 will be revised upwards in the SDSR, still seems too low - especially if the RN is going to be expected to operate both carriers.

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: UK Defence in Numbers

Post by marktigger »

5 FH70 could be trials or are gate guards declared under CFE arrangements

9 challenger 1

where's the panther fleet?


User avatar
whitelancer
Member
Posts: 619
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:19
United Kingdom

Re: UK Defence in Numbers

Post by whitelancer »

The whole things utter rubbish.
Who did they get to compile it, someone on work experience?

Online
bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2704
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: UK Defence in Numbers

Post by bobp »

Whatever civil servant wrote this garbage is probably on a huge salary with a beautiful pension for his old age. They don't fool anyone so what is the point of it exactly.

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: UK Defence in Numbers

Post by arfah »

-<>-<>-<>-
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

downsizer
Member
Posts: 896
Joined: 02 May 2015, 08:03

Re: UK Defence in Numbers

Post by downsizer »

arfah wrote:Jet Provosts... :roll:
Training aids at Cosford

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: UK Defence in Numbers

Post by arfah »

-<>-<>-<>-
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1756
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: UK Defence in Numbers

Post by The Armchair Soldier »

Helicopters That Can’t Fly and Vintage Artillery Museum Pieces Included on MoD List of Military 'Assets'
They might have intimidated Soviet generals during the Cold War, but a jet trainer that first flew in 1955 and a helicopter that first saw action in the Borneo confrontation in the mid-1960s are unlikely to worry their modern counterparts, defence experts have warned.

The inclusion of retired jets, grounded helicopters and ageing tanks in an official Ministry of Defence (MoD) list of Britain’s military assets has been labelled a “disingenuous” attempt inflate the military’s size and plaster over gaps in defence capability.
Read More: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 98386.html

I'm glad the media has taken notice.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: UK Defence in Numbers

Post by shark bait »

Wasn't really sure where to put this, but came across a nice info graphic from the BBC this morning. It presents some defense numbers nicely and seem like they have a higher caliber of work experience interns than the MOD

Image :lol:
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
2HeadsBetter
Member
Posts: 209
Joined: 12 Dec 2015, 16:21
United Kingdom

Re: UK Defence in Numbers

Post by 2HeadsBetter »

Reserve recruitment/retention not going well:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... owers.html

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: UK Defence in Numbers

Post by arfah »

-<>-<>-<>-
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: UK Defence in Numbers

Post by GastonGlocker »

arfah wrote:There are many factors that affect recruiting and retention.

The employer, university, family, health, on holiday or on a training course. These are all expected.
A good reservist is one who attends for at least the minimum required amount of training days and passes the required tests. Not every reservist can attend the same as anyone else.

Soldiers who cannot strip and reassemble a rifle? How did they pass basic, then?

Retention comes down to unit espirit de corps and pushing the reservist to take the next step in their role, trade, promotion, etc.

I can only speak for my old unit where after being in limbo for 2-3 years, losing bodies as a result as we awaited for the results of FR2020 and probable re-role. Numbers are climbing but it is gradual
Good assessment. I would add that deployments (multiple for many) enhance the spirit de corps in my unit. I would say post-deployment retention was actually quite high for those under the 10 year mark. Those over 20-25 years exited either before or immediately after their first deployment.

We notice these days that many newbies are just doing the initial enlistment and without that deep sense of "purpose" of a deployment tend to not stick around. So, we have a decently experienced force with those with 10-20 years under the belt and a very green force under 10 years, on average, in my unit.

A factor for some is economic and depending on location can impact retention.

Just some observations from abroad.

Always an ebb and flow....I do wish knowledge and lessons learned from top down could be mind-melded to the next generation!

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: UK Defence in Numbers

Post by arfah »

-<>-<>-<>-
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

Post Reply