SDSR 2015 General News & Discussion

[LordJim]

The leaked shortfall is on top of the difficulties the 10 year procurement plan is encountering in meeting all its goals. Yes I stated a worse case scenario with a dramatically reduce military but it would be fully equipped, manned and modernised. I really hope I am way off the mark but I think the Armed Forces are going to struggle to maintain the status quo regarding both capabilities and especially capacity.

The RNs amphibious capability could be under real threat with regards to the Albions and Ocean, with all three going but retaining the bays, purely to ship equipment around. The RM would be retained as a second high readiness force and for shipborne deployments and maritime security duties. Small scale recce and raids would be the only exception to their role as elite infantry. With this reduction there will be sufficient escorts to cover the available CVF OR carry out other duties when it is not with the probable exception of the vessel designated to patrol UK waters which will be permanently available.

The RAF will probably maximise deployments of fast jets at 12 Typhoons with a surge of 24, with the F-35 being more a flag waving tool until the late 2020s.

The Army would be able to deploy either and Armoured Infantry Brigade OR a Light Role Brigade as a maximum with a
Battalion sized battlegroup being the norm.

We could try to maintain the current size of our Armed Forces but additional funding for extra personnel may not be available and the military will have to get by with ever aging equipment, like seeing the FV320s serving until 2030. For me, a drastic reduction in size, especially the Army, but allowing the remaining units to be up to strength and properly equipped is a viable option, as all the military would be useable unlike today where units of all three services have to strip others to achieve their full capability.

This is a glass half empty assessment, but then anything on top is a pleasant surprise which is better than being overly optimistic and being repeatedly disappointed.

[dmereifield]

"being overly optimistic and being repeatedly disappointed"

I'm afraid I'm still at this stage - cutting capability or capacity completely flies in the face of the global vision and status HMG apparently wants to achieve post Brexit

[Gabriele]

Someone has got to explain where the money goes. The budget isn't small at all, yet there seems to be the constant, complete impossibility to bring a programme to conclusion. How is it even possible? It is not like the army is swarmed over with programmes: it is currently buying zero new vehicles per year, more or less, with Foxhound deliveries over and even the upgrade to Warrior and Ajax are currently delivering less than 20 prototypes each. This has been the reality for a few years now, with more or less zero programmes ongoing. No major upgrade is in the delivery phase, less than ever any new purchase.
Where does the money go? The army gets half as much in a year as it takes to run all three (four, including the Carabinieri) services of the italian armed forces. The italian army in the last few years, out of an enormously smaller budget, has: - continued to purchase VTLM Linces, by now in the thousands, achieving what the british army hasn't been able to do through UORs, Husky, Foxhound, Panther, now MRV(P). A load of programmes that have delivered only a logistic nightmare and limited numbers of actual vehicles.
The Freccia 8x8, with two brigade sets progressing (one delivered, one in delivery, albeit slow, plus a planned 130+ in Recce FAR and Recce CLOSE variants to follow. It has developed the Centauro II and will order the first batch. It has upgraded 32 Mangusta and funded development of a new attack helicopter. Adopted a new service rifle. Re-introduced the 81mm mortar in addition to the 120mm. Is procuring 60 NH-90 and 16 Chinook, bought SPIKE missiles to replace the old systems on helicopters, infantry use and vehicle use.

The only stuff the British Army has been able to procure in the meanwhile have been UORs funded urgently by the Treasury, with everything else virtually motionless save for VIRTUS (which hardly breaks the bank or is procured very quickly in big numbers...), FIST STA sights, 34 Wildcat and 54 Watchkeeper. Most Ajax expenditure, as well as all vehicles, have yet to begin.
Where does the money go? I seriously struggle to figure it out.

[LordJim]

There are a multitude of guilty parties when it comes to defence spending. The Armed Forces are overly cautious about it programmes and what capabilities they want. Funding and in year restrictions mean programmes are repeatedly drawn out but seem to deliver nothing to the front line, in fact it is the RAF who mainly achieve anything. I have advocated that the Army especially needs to look at bring "Vanilla" platforms into service and then develop them further in service through a series of structured upgrades. But the army in particular want it all sing and dancing from the start. The length of programmes mean the specifications are in a state of flux due to changes in threat and funding. All of the above keep most programmes in the assessment or at the most the development phase prior to Main Gate approval. It still cost millions but nothing is delivered. This has been going on since the beginning of the 1990s and became the usual state of affairs after the 1997 SDSR where funding failed to materialise to fund what had been agreed. The Governments publically stated aspirations have never been matched by actual funding and levels of capability and capacity but the voting public don't care, even when body bags are being off loaded from C-17s. No public outcry no funding it is as simple as that for the Politicians and worries about funding mean the MoD is scared to make the tough decisions in case their hi-tech crystal balls are wrong.

[AstuteAssassin]

Where does the money go? I seriously struggle to figure it out.

Into the BAE black hole

[whitelancer]

Couldn't believe Fallon on the Andrew Marr show. He was claiming that the strength of the Army was increasing!! The current strength being around 79000, he was somehow claiming that reaching a strength of 82000 by 2020 would be an increase even though the Army should not have fallen below that figure in the first place.
Is that spin or a blatant lie?

[JayDee]

This is from MOD part of the government website



https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... ch2017.pdf

If you want to have a scan ^

[LordJim]

Fallon knows sod all about defence and doesn't really care. He is basically a highly trained "Spin Doctor", given a knighthood and told to cover the Government's backside if any awkward questions are asked by the media.

[whitelancer]

Agreed.
He is certainly one of the worst, which is saying something considering some of the appalling defence ministers we have had in the past!

[Frenchie]

The United Kingdom defence budget is the highest in Europe and I am astonished as Gabriele. For take an example, the Foxhound, which is made in the UK, is entered in service in 2012 in the British Army, and it will be replaced by the US L-ATV as part of program MRV-P. It is crazy. In France it would be used as reconnaissance vehicle for Leclerc tanks and would be used for at least 30 years. The MoD waste money by incoherence.

[Zealot]

the Foxhound, which is made in the UK, is entered in service in 2012 in the British Army, and it will be replaced by the US L-ATV as part of program MRV-P. It is crazy. In France it would be used as reconnaissance vehicle for Leclerc tanks and would be used for at least 30 years. The MoD waste money by incoherence.

The replacement of Foxhound has not been confirmed; Although it has been stated that it would not be replaced until the end of its life, which is expected. It wouldn't make sense for such a vehicle to be replaced when the British army are spending a lot of money to make use of them. Not like the MOD know much about sensible decisions mind you.

[LordJim]

I agree disposing of the Foxhound and replacing it with the MRV(P) doesn't make sense but the decisions of the MoD's bean counter and that of the Treasury rarely do. Someone has probably said if we by X amount of MRV(P)s we will save Y in procurement costs and if we replace the foxhound we will also save Z in operating costs through having only one platform to support and maintain. however if this is the argument then they should have scrapped the Warrior all together and used the Ajax to replace it as well with only a modest increase in the programme but using the hulls for different roles.

[Frenchie]

I agree with you about Ajax, the MoD should develop either the Ajax program, either the Warrior program, but not both, and then buy vehicles like the Fennek, with an observation package mounted on an extendable mast. Or why not use the Foxhounds as observation vehicles ?

[ArmChairCivvy]

a deficit of £2b per annum (out of £38b)

... the previous black hole ( of 38 bn) could have been closed with a one year capability holiday.

Actually, nobody ever got to know what it consisted of and - worse - how it was supposedly eliminated.

[dmereifield]

So we will have a review of SDSR2015...

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/stra ... ementation

One hopes of course that this will lead to better funding, but the realist in me fears cutbacks....

in addition the NSS appears to have been linked into it, and the following seems to indicate that we aren't going to hear anymore about the NSS until after December:

"The government is committed to report annually on progress in implementing the NSS & SDSR, and published its First Annual Report on implementation in December 2016. Further progress on implementation of the NSS & SDSR, and related work, will be reported in the Second Annual Report after the end of the second year of implementation"

[LordJim]

It is highly unlikely there will be any more money. Rather there will be some headline announcement regarding improvements in the numbers and capabilities of the security services in response the attacks earlier this year. The trade off will be a reduction in the much vaunted 10 year equipment plan which already is underfunded,, with a number of programmes pushed further down the line, as usually happens. I doubt there will be any actual programme cancellations but numbers could also be cut. Achieving the IOC for HMS Queen Elizabeth will probably be the highest priority for the defence side so the initial purchases of the F-35 and probably CROWSNEST will be unchanged. The navy could lose the GP T-23s earlier and see other ships laid up. The T-26 could end up being ordered in three batched (3+3+2) with the fate of batch 3 undecided. The Tornado retirement could be accelerated and the Tranche 1 Typhoon squadron retention re-evaluated as could the retention of the C-130s. The Army's re-equipment programme could be seriously hurt with only Ajax and MRV(P) going ahead as planned. The CA2 CIP could vanish and the Warrior upgrade could move forward even slower, if that is possible. The conversion of Warriors to support platforms could also be further delayed, with Ajax variants covering the gaps in any operational deployments.

[dmereifield]

It is highly unlikely there will be any more money. Rather there will be some headline announcement regarding improvements in the numbers and capabilities of the security services in response the attacks earlier this year. The trade off will be a reduction in the much vaunted 10 year equipment plan which already is underfunded,, with a number of programmes pushed further down the line, as usually happens. I doubt there will be any actual programme cancellations but numbers could also be cut. Achieving the IOC for HMS Queen Elizabeth will probably be the highest priority for the defence side so the initial purchases of the F-35 and probably CROWSNEST will be unchanged. The navy could lose the GP T-23s earlier and see other ships laid up. The T-26 could end up being ordered in three batched (3+3+2) with the fate of batch 3 undecided. The Tornado retirement could be accelerated and the Tranche 1 Typhoon squadron retention re-evaluated as could the retention of the C-130s. The Army's re-equipment programme could be seriously hurt with only Ajax and MRV(P) going ahead as planned. The CA2 CIP could vanish and the Warrior upgrade could move forward even slower, if that is possible. The conversion of Warriors to support platforms could also be further delayed, with Ajax variants covering the gaps in any operational deployments.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I hope it's not as bad as all that....
What do you think this means for the T31/NSS?

[ArmChairCivvy]

Well selected points; I'll try to give the alternative scenario, in-line:

The navy could lose the GP T-23s earlier and see other ships laid up.
- yes, two more (one practically has been already). Solve the manning crisis and save on 2+1 upgrades in one fell swoop

The T-26 could end up being ordered in three batched (3+3+2)
- likely, and T31s will step into the time intervals (there is some capacity that needs to be shared between the two prgrms

with the fate of batch 3 undecided.
- the prgrm is so far into the future that this embarrassment can be saved up for the next Gvmnt to serve

The Tornado retirement could be accelerated
- doubt it, the capability gap would be yawning as the relevant tiffie prgrm has only just moved into the first airborne test launches

and the Tranche 1 Typhoon squadron retention re-evaluated
- we could see even smaller sqrns for these, the two airspace watch & rapid reaction fields having just 6 (to hand), each

as could the retention of the C-130s.
- selling them at the rate takers are found (two for Bangladesh was the latest). Send ours to the joint Franco-German Herc sqdrn and get the deep maintenance for all of those planes for Marshall's in return

The Army's re-equipment programme could be seriously hurt with only Ajax and MRV(P) going ahead as planned.
- I doubt that there is a formed plan for the latter; we just "hit" the already negotiated price when it was still available

The CA2 CIP could vanish
- the ambition is so low that it would be hard to envisage that happening. Having just two AI bdes will reduce the numbers and all fancy gubbings (APS) will fade into the future, ie. only appear on the next MBT

and the Warrior upgrade could move forward even slower, if that is possible.
- yes, it is, the fleet will be run to ground and it will be announced that the army will turn the next leaf (with MIV; in this way it can be bought "rea-all slow"), whereas

The conversion of Warriors to support platforms could also be further delayed
-the numbers of these required will have gone down from the 5-6 dozen by a third, and this conversion will get (finally) done to keep the two AI bdes "battlefield capable" (will the horror story re-emerge that the Strike bdes will be formed in such away that kit will be bought in numbers to field just one at a time??)

[ArmChairCivvy]

The above scenario delivers what the Parliamentary defence committee asked for and the top brass promised: one division capable of manoeuvre warfare
= 1 x AI, 1 x Strike (ex Heavy Cavalry), 1 x 16X (air assault)
With such a feeble force we will have to go back to the origins of 16X and have ATGW teams helicoptered around, to plug the gaps emerging
Just in time for the era where the whole class of weapon is sinking in importance as the APSs can deal with most, even with "top attack"
- but the good news is that the Wildcats bought will find their place in the order of battle, rather than continuing to be an acute embarrassment (from the VFM POV; fine machines as such).

[LordJim]

16X could be a very useful and effective formation, and for it to realise its full potential would not cost all that much. Organised with four Infantry Battalions including two Parachute units, with these also being trained to operate in support of the UK's SF. Its integral artillery needs to be either lighter or heavier, referring to the Brandt 120mm rifled Mortar as use by the USMC or the M777, Ideally both would be purchased with the former replacing the 81mm in the infantry Battalions. Provide each Infantry Battalion with a Recce platoon of between eight and twelve Jackals and use the Logistics variant as the tractor for the 120mm Mortars. Equip the Jackals with Javelins and 12.7 HMGs so the can also operate as FSVs.

Each Company within the Infantry Battalions should be reorganised into an HQ, three Rifle Platoons and a Weapons Platoon with 4 7.62 SFMG, 4 40mm AGL and 4 Javelin Launchers with an AD section attached to the HQ with 4 Starstreak Launchers. These units would also together with 3 Cmdo, be equipped with the 7.62 Minimi as a matter of priority. As mentioned above each Battalions would get 8 12omm Rifles Mortars with tractors and have integral Recce Fire Support. At Brigade level there would be an Artillery Regiment with 3 Batteries each of 6 M777A2 able to fire and issued with Excalibur Smart shells as well as SADARM sub munition rounds.

For aviation support, 2 of the RAF's Chinook squadrons would be permanently assigned to the Brigade as would two of the AAC Regiments, one equipped with Apaches and one with Wildcat. The latter needs to be upgraded even though it is still to fully enter service. Improved sensors and the ability to fire at least the Lighter of the two missile currently be integrated on the those operated by the FAA. Being able to fire the CVR-7 Pods currently also used by the Apache would be an advantage as would the purchase of Precision Kill rounds for said launchers as a low cost, low collateral damage option.

As stated, for a minimal investment in new kit provide the UK with a very mobile formation that would be effective in both attack and defence. Together with a semi-mechanised 3 Cmdo, using Viking variants, the UK would have a rapid response force fit for purpose and far more useable than its heavier formations that are struggling it seems unendingly to re equip with up to date equipment.

[ArmChairCivvy]

the Brandt 120mm rifled Mortar as use by the USMC [or the M777, Ideally both would be purchased with the former] replacing the 81mm in the infantry Battalions. Provide each Infantry Battalion with a Recce platoon of between eight and twelve Jackals and use the Logistics variant as the tractor for the 120mm Mortars. Equip the Jackals with Javelins and 12.7 HMGs so the can also operate as FSVs.

- excellent ideas: RM already have such a division, though it is at company level (with vehicles and in light, close combat role). The mortar is easy to trial with the Dutch Marines who already have them
- M777 is an excellent piece, though manpowr intensive. The real killer for it in the 16X is te weight of resupply of meaningful numbers of rounds

together with 3 Cmdo, be equipped with the 7.62 Minimi as a matter of priority.

- for 6 bns, we have enough (at least with the option counted in, on top of the purchases)

Precision Kill rounds for said launchers

- again, v good as the Wilcats can first land Javelin teams, then hover in the background, and when targets are lased by ground team, lift themselves over the tree tops (heh-heh, we are not in a desert here, anymore) for the launch instant and then dive for cover again

[LordJim]

I don't think ammunition supply is a killer for equipping 16X with the M777A2. As the battalions have pretty effective integral indirect fore support with the 120mm, the M777 would be used more as a precision weapon with Excalibur and/or SADARM. There use would not to be moved with the Brigade as such but to provide over watch fore support. A little thinking outside the box could see only half a battery moved forward say to provide support against enemy strong points during an assault and then relocated when the job is done. The Regiment would not to be expected to provide continuous fire on enemy positions for an extended period of time.

In fact I wonder if the chassis of the M777 could be used to mount a 6 cell GMLRS launcher, making it a towed weapon with air mobility. Then equip the Artillery Regiment with 2 batteries each of M777A2 and 2 Batteries of say 4 Towed GMLRS (a lot cheaper than HIMARS etc.) Make this Regiment dedicated to the support of both 16X and 3 Cmdo. Remember Both Brigades Infantry have between 24 and 36 120mm Rifles Mortars with a range in excess of 16Km. These provide the meat and potatoes fore support with a round more effective than the current 105mm, including laser guided and sub munition varieties.

So what new kit do we need to purchase, basically;

18x M777A2
10x Towed GMLRS plus design and development.
Modification of 24 Wildcat to true AH1 standard with improved sensors and weapons fit.

That is really all but additional manpower will have to be found to ensure all unit are at full strength. All personnel must be capable of passing the Para Training Course and ideally have done so. The attached support units such as logistics, engineers, signals and such like will need to be equipped in part with the new MRV(P) but also be able to operate up front with the Infantry if needed so a light weight load carrying vehicle able to be carried by air (fixed and rotary)would be desirable.

If I was in the MoD I would make building up this formation and 3 Cmdo the top priority followed by the two Mechanised Brigades. All other programmes including Ajax should be slowed, reduced or even cancelled in a few cases. A Division so equipped would be extremely relevant both today and tomorrow. Our historical desire of Heavy Formations is not where we need to concentrate or resources. Yes they would be welcome but our allies have these and theirs ae nearer the most probable threat(s) Being able to deploy as force of 2 to 3 Brigades consisting of a mix of Light and medium forces that are mobile and well equipped and supported quickly when tensions rise is far more useful that struggling to ship heavy units over a timeframe measured in weeks. The former formations can delay or even stall any aggressive action by an opponent where said opponent is high tier in nature or act in an aggressive manner themselves against lesser tier opponents using their mobility and fire power. This is unfortunately reliant on the Mechanised Brigades also being properly organised and equipped to a level I have commented on in earlier posts.

[ArmChairCivvy]

I completely agree with the line of thinking, a couple of comments on the detail:

M777 would be used more as a precision weapon with Excalibur and/or SADARM. There use would not to be moved with the Brigade as such but to provide over watch fore support.

- true that the 50 km range can eliminate constant movement/ prepositioning of rounds. I also applaud the dual precision/ anti-tank capability (though for the joint intervention force, together with the French, SADARM should read BONUS)

The Regiment would not to be expected to provide continuous fire on enemy positions for an extended period of time.

- that would logically follow, but this assumption breaks down if OpFor has the capability and capacity (originally, GMRLS was the counter for that)

Artillery Regiment with 2 batteries each of M777A2 and 2 Batteries of say 4 Towed GMLRS (a lot cheaper than HIMARS

- HIMARS pods have two distinct advantages over the idea proposed: the launch pod container... contains a full reload on the sides, so depending on the nature of the target, the loadout could be quickly changed from unitary to AW, and vv. In extremis, as the new Russian launchers of similar size (not the heavies they have had for decades) now have a range of 90 km, the pod can be converted for two ATACMS. The fire power deficit has been acknowledged just in the context of N. Korea, as in http://breakingdefense.com/2017/06/army ... iot-thaad/ ... in the US strategy of sizing the forces for one major plus two simultaneous contingencies, not sure in which category that scenario sits
- if buying HIMARS (remember the portee replica of it?) is a no-go when some of the heavier, tracked units that we have are sitting in stotage - it is the rockets, in quantity, that cost the money! - then we should just allocate the NLOS units (trailer easily helicoptered around, and provides the dual capacity, ie. engaging a tank force at distance, should that need suddenly arise... if we actually have bought warheads for that job; that's a different matter. The original was a combined HE & hollow charge, so any type of armour would be "gonners")

Modification of 24 Wildcat to true AH1 standard with improved sensors and weapons fit.

- absolutely, that is 3 times the original plan (for 3 CDO), which - typically - just faded away, without any announcement

If I was in the MoD I would make building up this formation and 3 Cmdo the top priority

- agree, as you say: Cheap, quick, produces both credibility and effect (and pipe dreams of what we can achieve by 2025 can continue undisturbed)

delay or even stall any aggressive action by an opponent where said opponent is high tier in nature

- our "82nd" in effect, though that one has deliberately been made so light that it can be global
- ours could be West of Suez in one hop, and West of Diego G (using a jumping off & reloading point; Akrotiri or similar, with a protected perimeter in place rather than a civilian airport/ port)

[ArmChairCivvy]

the joint intervention force, together with the French

Fits under the main heading: the first report (2016) on the progress with 2015 SDSR did not even mention the above by name!
- once we have a leader again, may be he/she will have enough chemistry to stop that one from fading into the shadows?
- I think after the latest main exercises it was actually declared "operational"

[LordJim]

Regarding HIMARS etc. my train of thought was to almost take the launcher off the back of the lorry and place it on a towed trailer, based on the carriage of the M777, which is lightweight, sturdy and can stand the stresses of launching max charge 155mm so should have no problem with GMLRS rockets. This would mean any load that can be used in our existing GMLRS tracked launchers can be used as well as ATACMS. In fact you could take this further and make the actual launcher able to be fitted as above or to a SP platform such as a 6x6 lorry and then use it to also partly equip the Artillery Regiments supporting the two Mechanised Brigades in conjunction with a CAESAR type platform using the M777A2. this could even be the same as used for the SP GMLRS!!!!