RAF to shrink to WWI levels

Discussion in 'Americas' started by Armand2REP, Aug 9, 2010.

  1. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,397
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    RAF to shrink to World War One levels

    The RAF will shrink to its smallest size since the First World War, under unprecedented cuts being proposed at the Ministry of Defence.

    By Thomas Harding, Defence Correspondent
    Published: 10:22PM BST 06 Aug 2010

    In the most significant changes to Britain’s defences since the post-Suez review of 1957, ministers and officials plan to scrap large parts of the Armed Forces.

    The Services will lose up to 16,000 personnel, hundreds of tanks, scores of fighter jets and half a dozen ships, under detailed proposals passed to The Daily Telegraph.

    But the RAF will bear the brunt of the planned cuts. The Air Force will lose 7,000 airmen – almost one sixth of its total staff – and 295 aircraft. The cuts will leave the Force with fewer than 200 fighter planes for the first time since 1914. In addition, the Navy will lose two submarines, three amphibious ships and more than 100 senior officers, along with 2,000 sailors and marines.

    The Army faces a 40 per cent cut to its fleet of 9,700 armoured vehicles and the loss of a 5,000-strong brigade of troops.

    The Telegraph has also learnt that the “black hole” in MoD finances, caused by orders which have been made but cannot be paid for, is approaching £72  billion over the next decade – double the amount previously suggested.

    While the Strategic Defence and Security Review is yet to be finalised, officials have drawn up a series of likely options to meet cuts of 10 to 20 per cent demanded by the Treasury.

    By the end of this month the Defence Strategy Group, comprising ministers and military chiefs, will be presented with a number of recommendations that they will refine and pass to the National Security Council, chaired by the Prime Minister, in September.

    In October, after agreement with the Treasury, an announcement will be made in Parliament on precisely what cuts the Forces face as part of the comprehensive spending review of Whitehall budgets.

    If implemented, the cuts will mean that Britain will almost certainly depart the world stage as a major military power and become what military chiefs call a “medium-scale player”.

    The proposed cuts – which are certain to face a critical reception from the public – are being considered without resolving the question of who pays for the Trident replacement. The MoD hopes that once voters realise the scale of the cuts to the Armed Forces, George Osborne, the Chancellor, may spare some parts of the military. The plans will lead to the RAF losing its status as the fifth biggest air force in the world.

    The entire force of 120 GR4 Tornado fighter-bombers looks destined for the scrap heap to save £7.5 billion over the next five years. The Tornado was supposed to be in service until 2025, but with a major overhaul due in the next five years costing £10 million for each aircraft, it is now under threat.

    The cut will mean job losses as RAF Lossiemouth and RAF Marham totalling almost 5,000 personnel.

    Under the plans, the number of Eurofighter Typhoons is likely to be reduced further from 160 to 107 planes based at a single RAF airfield to save £1  billion. The entire fleet of 36 Hercules transport aircraft, the workhorse in Iraq and Afghanistan, is to be phased out and replaced by an order of 22 new A400M planes.

    The £3.6 billion project for nine Nimrod MR4 reconnaissance aircraft is also vulnerable, along with a number of other surveillance planes.

    The proposals include a swathe of cuts to the Army’s armoured regiments with the loss of Challenger 2 tanks, AS90 guns and Warrior armoured vehicles.

    While the Army is likely to lose a few thousand soldiers in the coming year, reducing its numbers to about 100,000, it is braced to lose an entire brigade of about 5,000 when combat troops withdraw from Afghanistan in 2015. It is understood that 7 Armoured Brigade or 20 Armoured Brigade, both based in Germany, are the most vulnerable.

    Infantry battalions will be increased from about 600 troops to 750 as a lesson from Afghanistan has been the loss of combat effectiveness through leave and casualties, according to the plans.

    The Royal Marines also face coming under direct Army control from Navy command and the possibility of being grouped into a “super elite” unit alongside two Parachute Regiment battalions.

    A senior Whitehall source said: “These are not Tory cuts, these are Labour cuts as a result of their irresponsible overspending. However, a lot of this comes down to how much political appetite there is to do this.”

    An MoD spokesman said: “The Defence Secretary has made clear that tough decisions will need to be made but the complex process of a Strategic Defence and Security Review will be concluded in the autumn and speculation at this stage about its outcome is entirely unfounded.”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...65/RAF-to-shrink-to-World-War-One-levels.html
     
  2.  
  3. civfanatic

    civfanatic Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,562
    Likes Received:
    2,526
    Location:
    తెలంగాణ
    As the geopolitical importance of the UK declines, its armed forces will decline with it.

    Its only fitting.
     
  4. AirforcePilot

    AirforcePilot Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    192
    Likes Received:
    61
    Location:
    Florida
    It don't look good for Britain's armed forces. Those are pretty severe cuts that will hurt them in the long run. It's never a good idea to tinker with the military.
     
  5. civfanatic

    civfanatic Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,562
    Likes Received:
    2,526
    Location:
    తెలంగాణ
    Let's look at it from a practical standpoint. What major defense threats does the UK face? Is France preparing for an invasion of southern England? Is Norway planning on reclaiming its Viking glory? I'm not so sure. The Cold War days where the UK was expected to defend the GIUK gap from Soviet subs are over. For a country with a struggling economy, spending $70 billion annually to guard against nonexistent defence threats is ridiculous in my opinion.
     
  6. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,397
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    They are running a $115 billion black hole in MoD finances. $32 billion is untouchable in the Trident replacement. The first choice is to retire everything prematurely and save money for procurement. Tornados will get the axe if it will save over $10 billion. Making the limited number of EFs multi-role can take up that slack. Cutting back on EFs while retiring Tornados isn't smart when the only thing left will be a bunch of obsolete Harriers to fill the gaps. RAF with only 100 Typhoons won't be comparable to the French ALA, not that they match it today. The F-35s will be going to RN and that will only be enough for one carrier. Glad to hear they will retire the C-130s for A400Ms but at 22 and 6 C-17s, their strategic transport will be half of France. It is pretty certain RN will only get one carrier, Prince Charles will likely be sold to France in an unfinished state for PA2. If F-35 doesn't get its cost spiral under control there is a possibility they will order Rafale M. I don't understand why they would cut three amphibious ships, they are already much weaker than France in this regard and cutting three would eliminate that force. If they think France is going to do their amphib landings for them, they are greatly mistaken. Reducing Army equipment by 40% is only logical when they do not plan on being in any conventional wars. Getting a good future soldier programme can increase combat effectiveness by up to 100%.
     
  7. Neil

    Neil Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2010
    Messages:
    2,610
    Likes Received:
    1,946
    Location:
    India
    this is definitely great news for our IN...all these cuts will mean selling of its aircraft carriers which means we can buy them....kool....!!
     
  8. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    News about AC sale came long back but its too costly and since we are already working on our Own AC projects we will not be going for them . We need to learn to Create AC on our own. For how long we will keep buying such expensive weapons ?
     
  9. Neil

    Neil Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2010
    Messages:
    2,610
    Likes Received:
    1,946
    Location:
    India
    i know but this definitely adds fuel to the fire...doesn't it...??our AC project will take some time....INS Virat is already retiring so why not...have one more AC to showoff our power-costly but why not...??!!

    and about it been costly....we gave $2B for a piece of scrap....we are getting better worth for our money.....
     
  10. Neil

    Neil Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2010
    Messages:
    2,610
    Likes Received:
    1,946
    Location:
    India
    dude....than i think even french should follow suit....neither britain is going to invade them....nor is germany and also not soviet union....
    but still it spends considerable amount to defence forces....so its not practical to decline your armed forces...
     
  11. arya

    arya Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,312
    Likes Received:
    340
    that's the problem with UK they are living behind the shadow of USA
     
  12. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    Any Idea about what cost of their AC will be. If it was affordable we would have gone for it . I think price of those carriers will be upwards 5 Billion.
     
  13. Neil

    Neil Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2010
    Messages:
    2,610
    Likes Received:
    1,946
    Location:
    India
    dude... last i heard was it its under negotiation....and it definitely takes time....yeah may be ....but may be[thats a big IF] considering UK financial position they are ready to sell at some considerable rate than....??!!
     
  14. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    Dood hope this will make you feel Good. 5.2 Billion pound AC .

    http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23861763-mod-may-sell-carrier-to-fill-huge-hole-in-defence-budget.do

    Remember 2 Billion $ for Admiral Gorshkov also include cost of 30 Mig 29 as well. SO its still bloody cheap for us.
     
  15. civfanatic

    civfanatic Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,562
    Likes Received:
    2,526
    Location:
    తెలంగాణ
    Indeed, France should also cut down on their defense spending.

    Both France and UK spend more than twice the amount as India on defense. India has been invaded 5 times since independence, so we need a strong defense. Same cannot be said for any West European country.
     
  16. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,397
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    Have you ever looked at a map of French territory?

    [​IMG]

    We hardly spend enough to defend it.
     
  17. civfanatic

    civfanatic Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,562
    Likes Received:
    2,526
    Location:
    తెలంగాణ
    How many times in the past has Papua New Guinea invaded New Caledonia?
     
  18. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,543
    Likes Received:
    6,547
    How long will USA be able to keep supporting the NATO alliance??? Currently 25% of the alliance are in economic trouble and USA is not doing so great either.
     
  19. Agantrope

    Agantrope Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,247
    Likes Received:
    68
    If we buy this with the Blue Print then we can have know-how tech for nuilding and incorporating in our ships. I feel this is a damn good opportunity to grab apiece.
     
  20. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    Brother convert that 5.2 Billion pound into dollars and cost will go much further . I sont think that they will give us Blue prints. They will not transfer their metallurgical knowhow . Also we will still be dependent to other nations for Engines for such carrier. All we will get is a design of AC with no knowledge of how to build that . Its something we will he to learn on our own. Hopefully our first AC will give us a lot of technical expertise in that field .I also forgot to mention the costs of Aircrafts for that carrier .
     
  21. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,397
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    Funny, there are threats to our territories as well as our strategic interests. Chavez may turn expansionist which threatens Guyana and any Caribbean possession, China or Indonesia could spread into the Pacific Island chains, several of our islands off Africa are claimed by neighboring nations. Clipperton has been invaded by Mexico. Illegal fishing and whaling of French Antarctic waters goes on every day because we can't afford to patrol it. Strategic interests span all over the world from the Far side of the Atlantic to the remotest regions of the Pacific and Antarctic.
     

Share This Page