UK Defence Force General discussion

[spoz]

There was a time though when being a “Royal Yachtsman” was a source of pride.
One of my RN PWO classmates ended up being the Jimmy in HMY, I suspect because he attended Eaton School because it certainly wasn’t for his prowess as a PWO.

Yes, one of mine too - although I have no idea how good a PWO he was. But then, provided he looked good, spoke nicely, didn't hit anything and kept his mouth shut about what went on onboard that was about all that was required I should think. Not too many defaulters in that ship I reckon.

 

[StobieWan]

There was a time though when being a “Royal Yachtsman” was a source of pride.
One of my RN PWO classmates ended up being the Jimmy in HMY, I suspect because he attended Eaton School because it certainly wasn’t for his prowess as a PWO.

It might be but we're kinda short handed as is so losing some crew to a fairly useless boat doesn't tick a lot of boxes.


Particularly if we're trying to shake out some more sailors for a follow on order of Type 31 or whatever.


I doubt Liz will see the thing other than when she boffs the bow with a bottle of sparkling wine - she's 90 odd so sticking her on a yacht or any other place that's farther than a five minute air ambulance ride to the nearest hospital will start to look a bit unwise by the time she's built.

I'll be cynical- I think the contract will go to an English yard which will turn out to be owned by a party donor.

 

[spoz]

The Yachties were a mixture of normal RN personnel and ex-RN people who signed on a special arrangement which meant they only served in the yacht. I believe they were subject to modifications to the usual conditions of service in other ways, but it’s many years since I perused the relevant section of QRRN - like the early 70s. That made them experts in the way she was run and a core around which the floating mix of actual RN revolved.

 

[John Fedup]

This article at the end suggests the UK couldn’t rally for the defence of the Falklands. The RN may not be as formidable today as it is as in 1982 (debatable), but Argentina is pretty much knackered economically and militarily. As for China and Russian opposition, which hey have other priorities.

The 40th Anniversary of the Falklands War: 'Global' Britain and Reality - Second Line of Defense

By Kenneth Maxwell On 14 June 2022, the UK remembered the 40 year anniversary of the Falklands War. Looking back provides insights as well with regard to the state of “global” Britain. In the age of the Brexiters self-proclaimed “global Britain’ two very distinguished British historians, the...

sldinfo.com

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

SAS operatives in Afghanistan repeatedly killed detainees and unarmed men in suspicious circumstances, according to a BBC investigation.

|"A senior officer who worked at UK Special Forces headquarters told the BBC there was "real concern" over the squadron's reports.

"Too many people were being killed on night raids and the explanations didn't make sense," he said. "Once somebody is detained, they shouldn't end up dead. For it to happen over and over again was causing alarm at HQ. It was clear at the time that something was wrong.""|

Ill not give any comments, because i lack any knowledge about the details/circumstances of these actions.

SAS unit repeatedly killed Afghan detainees, BBC finds

Internal emails seen by the BBC show top special forces officers were aware of concerns over killings.

www.bbc.com

 

[STURM]

Ill not give any comments, because i lack any knowledge about the details/circumstances of these actions.

Indeed. We don't know anything more at this stage.

All I'll say is that night raids and certain actions undertaken by foreign troops went a long way in ensuring that a large portion of the Afghan population supported the Taliban. It also led to the Karzai government being seen as a foreign puppet which was unable to protects its own citizens. Karzai came under a lot of pressure to do something about civilian deaths and he pressured his foreign partners but ultimately the damage was done. To many Afghans; their lives weren't worth much in the eyes of foreign troops/governments. The result is that many supported the Talibs not because they subscribed to their ideology but because they were fighting against foreign occupation.

I read this last month. It's highly essential for anyone with an interest in what went wrong.

The American War in Afghanistan

"The American War in Afghanistan" published on by Oxford University Press.

oxford.universitypressscholarship.com

 

[the concerned]

When the UK had its last defence review it mentioned improved GBAD. I know we are currently getting the sky sabre system but surely that's nowhere near enough to defend the UK. Again we have been told that the UK will be increasing its budget upto 2.5% then isn't it time to prioritise something more capable.

 

[ngatimozart]

When the UK had its last defence review it mentioned improved GBAD. I know we are currently getting the sky sabre system but surely that's nowhere near enough to defend the UK. Again we have been told that the UK will be increasing its budget upto 2.5% then isn't it time to prioritise something more capable.

Sky Sabre is quite capable but it is short ranged ~40km from memory unless they use the CAMM-ER. It's definitely a lot better than the system it's replacing. The real question you should be asking is how much would it cost for the UK to design, test, install, and operate a multi-layered IADS that covers the whole of the UK? The next question would have to be, how would you fund such a capability? Given current UK defence funding and procurement policies I would suggest that it would be very much of what existing capabilities do you want to lose in order to fund the IADS?

 

[the concerned]

With the current crisis going on many tabloids are suggesting that if Russia and NATO do come to blows over Ukraine the first target is London. Does the UK look at Thaad or develop further with Aster. One of the new PM candidates is suggesting a 3% defence budget which would be quite a increase.

 

[swerve]

Sky Sabre is quite capable but it is short ranged ~40km from memory unless they use the CAMM-ER. ...

Officially "more than 25km" - but not said how much more, or in what circumstances. Jane's has said that it's been tested out to 60km, but that isn't necessarily a range at which it could be effective. Maybe flight range of the missile.

CAMM-ER is officially "more than 45km".

 

[ngatimozart]

With the current crisis going on many tabloids are suggesting that if Russia and NATO do come to blows over Ukraine the first target is London. Does the UK look at Thaad or develop further with Aster. One of the new PM candidates is suggesting a 3% defence budget which would be quite a increase.

Tabloids are tabloids and speak through their arse. They are only interested in their circulation figures. If / when Russia and NATO get into fisticuffs use your head and think what would the first Russian response be? They'll most likely go all out conventionally on military targets that can damage their forces. If they use nukes on London or any NATO capital city they know that Russia will cease to exist because that's an all out strategic nuclear war straight away. Think about it - Putin and his mates want to live to enjoy the trappings and baubles of their power; they certainly don't want to lose it all holed up in a bunker like Hitler.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

When the UK had its last defence review it mentioned improved GBAD. I know we are currently getting the sky sabre system but surely that's nowhere near enough to defend the UK. Again we have been told that the UK will be increasing its budget upto 2.5% then isn't it time to prioritise something more capable.

Although named "air defenses", the ground based systems are typically more of a reserve in most missions.
In any case, usually manned aircraft are the first responders, and if need be, defend the airspace from enemy aircraft and certain munition types as well.
So as far as protecting the UK, it's not in a bad state. But if beefing up is necessary, there's quite a lot of work to be done. Multiple layers need to be added, and even if the most efficient and fast tracked solution is acted upon (in peace-time setting), and money is a non-issue, such work can take well over a decade.

 

[OldTex]

The updated UK Defence Command Paper (DCP23) has been released. The DCP is reported to earmark an additional £2.5 billion for the enhancement of stockpiles and proposes the establishment of a UK Global Response Force. This Global Response Force is intended to ensure the UK’s ability to “get there first” in global conflict situations, in the words of one of the ministers responsible.

The DCP states that the UK will “become a science and technology superpower, enhancing our capabilities in fields such as robotics, human augmentation, directed energy weapons and advanced materials, to gain the edge on the battlefield.” Although based on past and recent performance there is very much a sense of it just being a load of weasel words. The proof of the document will be the actual implementation of organisational plans and actual equipment procurements which deliver real and increased capabilities.

 

[StobieWan]

That doesn't fill my heart with joy. Lots of buzz words. Ah well.

 

[Rob c]

Officially "more than 25km" - but not said how much more, or in what circumstances. Jane's has said that it's been tested out to 60km, but that isn't necessarily a range at which it could be effective. Maybe flight range of the missile.

CAMM-ER is officially "more than 45km".

What needs to be kept in mind is that the range of a missile is very dependent on the altitude of the target that is to be intercepted. the higher the target the greater the range that can be achieved. this is due to the lower density of the air which results in less drag on the missile. I have seen data on some missiles were their low altitude range was as little as a third of their high altitude range. So one must be very careful when quoting the effective range of missiles, unless you have a range to altitude graph. The other point to keep in mind is that some countries can be rather understated with their data, while others have a tendency to over state facts.

 

[Redlands18]

What needs to be kept in mind is that the range of a missile is very dependent on the altitude of the target that is to be intercepted. the higher the target the greater the range that can be achieved. this is due to the lower density of the air which results in less drag on the missile. I have seen data on some missiles were their low altitude range was as little as a third of their high altitude range. So one must be very careful when quoting the effective range of missiles, unless you have a range to altitude graph. The other point to keep in mind is that some countries can be rather understated with their data, while others have a tendency to over state facts.

The only range that really matters with SAMs and AAMs is the NEZ(No-Escape Zone) and there are far too many things to factor into that to make range figures anything but a generalised figure at best.

 

[OldTex]

This Global Response Force is intended to ensure the UK’s ability to “get there first” in global conflict situations, in the words of one of the ministers responsible.

The paragraph in the DCP23 on the Global Response Force (GRF) is long on aspirations (and spin) and lacking in anything approaching reality. The proposed GRF appears to be a tri-service embellishment of the 2019 RN/RM centric Littoral Strike Groups (LSG). The LSG has itself been re scoped, rebranded and generally watered down since it was originally announced.

The RAF has just ceased C130J operations which removes around 14 airframes from their airlift fleet. The hoped for addition of extra A400M Atlas aircraft (between 4-6) has been killed off. The airlift fleet now consists of C-17 (8) and A400M (20) plus Voyager MRTT (9-14). The New Medium Helicopter (NMH) project is moving at glacial pace despite the OSD of the SA330 Puma commencing in 2027. The NMH project will see around 35 helicopters of 4 different types being replaced by as few as 20 new helicopters to provide battlefield lift.

The RN is likely to have to continue to use the extant amphibious warfare vessels (LPDs & LSDs) to deliver the LSGs. This situation is due to the originally proposed Littoral Strike Ship (LSS) being subsumed into the proposed Multi Role Support Ship (MRSS). Currently there is no project for the development and delivery of MRSS to replace the LPDs (2) and LSDs (3).
The LSG(N) covering the Arctic and high North was planned to consist of an LPD and an LSD. The LSG(S) was to cover the Gulf, Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean regions using a single LSD. This has now changed with the Aviation Support Ship (ASS) being extended in service until after 2030. RFA Argus, as the ASS, was built as a container ship in 1980 before being converted to its current configuration after serving in the Falklands War as a STUFT. LSG(N) lacks any vessels with permanent hangers for Merlin HC4/4A helicopters while LSG(S) can hangar 3-9 Merlin HC4/4A but lacks a well dock for LCU.

Despite the lofty aspirations and spin surrounding the GRF the state of the UK Defence Forces make it harder to envision the aspiration being achieved. Especially when both Ministers (Secretary of State and the Minister) state in the introduction that "....in this document there are deliberately no new commitments on platforms at all – because on that we stand by what we published in 2021".

 

[m4heiden]

And then all the talk about cyber and space ..

The only space capability UK defence operates is a SATCOM program.
No EO/ISR constellations or even secure access to launch..

And as far as dual use goes there's really only a minority stake in One Web, whose military purpose is so far unclear.

No secure GNSS access, limited space surveillance abilities at farthingdale that are of course under US C&C anyway..
There's also the loss of access and involvement in Copernicus ..