It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Future of The British Armed Forces?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 12:31 PM
link   
okay just want to talk about this really,

as many will know, the 2003 white paper 'Delivering Security in a Changing World' outlines cuts in the british armed forces!

yet with these ^so called^ cut backs we have increased our spending every year since 2003
- therefore i am totally confussed as to what the future hold for the british armed forces.

according to sources:-
-------
2005 - UK has the 2nd highest defence budget in the world
2nd largest spender on military science, engineering and technology.
2nd highest military expenditure in the world
2nd largest navy in the world in terms of gross tonnage

source - en.wikipedia.org...
-------

we also have some niffty project in development:-

The new carriers
type 45s
f-35 LightingII
Typhoons
Astute Class Subs
New Nimrod MRA4 - (supposly with bomber role)
& other things

so yeah i'm confussed is to how the UK's armed forces is going to look in 20 years, to me the future looks bright.

just wondering what everyone elses views are? thanks.




posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Well i don't consider myself an expert on such matters i believe that the uk armed forces are taking a much more technology led approach. Their have been alot of cutbacks in troop numbers ( i think thats where they get the cutbacks from, not cost but numbers) recently and they are not quite making their targets in recruitment.

While technology is good, i still think you must have the boots on the ground.

[edit on 14/9/06 by manta]



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 03:40 PM
link   
I'd like to refer you to my indepth response to the posted thread:

Britains Armed Forces too small?

I've given a complete breakdown of most of the fighting arms - excluding Special Forces.

Hope this is of some use to you.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 04:07 PM
link   
The British forces are small as it is, but in our case, size is not important.

Here's my take on our military;

The British military forces have never been designed to stage an invasion or major military operation on it's own. The US military, in my opinion, is. We basically follow them (or another nation) into a war or operation.

Defence wise, Britain is pretty much defended against any attack, to the west lies America, who we trust would not attack us, to the east, Europe, again, no major enemies lie there.

Now this is my opinion on our military, it could be wrong, it could be right.


Back to cutbacks though. I believe they are necessary as new technology comes into play. New technology is so good, not as much is needed.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 04:10 PM
link   
Well they should maybe put a bit of money into actually recruiting more and expanding the armed forces..especially into the Army.Cutting the regiments has really left Britain scrapping the barrel when it come to expeditionary deployments..especially when areas like Afghanistan and Iraq require reinforcements.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 06:36 PM
link   
One has to question why they need to cut back on the defence budget....we all remember when the 6 RMP died from lack of ammunition.
We all also remember the stories of british squaddies sharing battle armour....
Frightening but true.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 10:27 PM
link   
Well thought I would post this here since it is about the UK Armed forces.

The British Army has invieled a new armour vechile. Which will suppossingly cut the number of British Soldiers killed by roadside bombs.

Here is what Ii found out about this new armoured vechile:


Cougar is a multi-purpose, 12 ton mine protected armored patrol vehicle. The design uses a monocoque, bulletproof and blast-proof capsule fitted with transparent armored glass, which protects the driver and crew from small arms fire, mine blasts and IED. Typical roles for the vehicle are armored, mine protected troop transport for security, stability and peacekeeping missions, protected weapons platform, law enforcement special response vehicle, counter IED an EOD / Range Clearance vehicle. The vehicle can accommodate 10 passengers in a 4x4 configuration and 16 passengers in a 6x6 configuration. Cougar was selected to serve with the US Marine Corps as a Hardened Engineer Vehicle (HEV), to support engineer mine clearing and explosive ordnance disposal teams deployed in Iraq. As of June 2006, there are more than 130 Cougars and Buffalos in Afghanistan and Iraq. Since their deployment to Iraq in 2003 the Cougar and Buffalo vehicles employed with explosive ordnance disposal teams and engineers units have taken about 1,000 IED hits without a loss of life,


Cougar

Now im not familiar with all these new armoured vechiles maybe someone can educate me on this one.

But as far as I know the UK has bougt 100 of them so far.

Also will this protect the British Soilders alot more?

News Article



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 01:49 AM
link   
Well Spencerjohnstone, I'm afraid you are so behind the times on this.

Having procured these vehicles above the objection from the MOD specialists, the government went ahead with the development.

The delivery date came and went, with the first veh rolling out about six months late. Operationally, they were not up to the task and the project was cancelled.

This was reported in the Sunday Observer and the Sunday Telegraph a couple of weeks ago.

Cost to the taxpayer Fifteen Million Pounds!

Sold to the higest bidder Foutryfour Thousand Pounds!

Government incompetance
priceless!



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 05:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by fritz
Sold to the higest bidder Foutryfour Thousand Pounds!


Your thinking of the Mamba, what spencerjohnstone is talking about is the Cougar.


£4.5m armoured cars sold for just £44,000 - because they were too heavy

The Ministry of Defence ruled that its £4.5million fleet of 14 Mamba troop carriers, which were bought for use during the Balkans crisis of the late Nineties, were 'too heavy' for patrols - and sold them all for just £44,000.


Although selling them all for such a low price was very foolish, they could have gotten a much higher price for them.

[edit on 15-9-2006 by UK Wizard]



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 06:31 AM
link   
No mate, these were intended for service in Afghanistan and Iraq, not Kosovo or Croatia.

However, I have asked my friend in R&D at MOD Bicester and yes, it was the Mamba but the opriginal figure quoted by Telegraph and Observer newspapers was correct - not £1.4M but £15M for 100 vehicles.

He believes they were to go to CVD Ashchurch (SPW) for fitting out and testing, but the contract was cancelled.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 12:04 PM
link   


Cougar

Cougar

Well Spencerjohnstone, I'm afraid you are so behind the times on this.

Having procured these vehicles above the objection from the MOD specialists, the government went ahead with the development.

The delivery date came and went, with the first veh rolling out about six months late. Operationally, they were not up to the task and the project was cancelled.

This was reported in the Sunday Observer and the Sunday Telegraph a couple of weeks ago.

Cost to the taxpayer Fifteen Million Pounds!

Sold to the higest bidder Foutryfour Thousand Pounds!

Government incompetance priceless!



Well Cougar,

Is not me who is behind the times, Must be the BBC or the News Channels that is where I read the article in the first place.

As I said in my previous post, I am not experienced in Military Equipement, Someone with more experience on this would be appreciated.

Your saying that they were cancelled?

How come 100 of them have been delivered then?

Oh is the BBC getting false reports then?



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by spencerjohnstone



Cougar

Cougar

Well Spencerjohnstone, I'm afraid you are so behind the times on this.

Having procured these vehicles above the objection from the MOD specialists, the government went ahead with the development.

The delivery date came and went, with the first veh rolling out about six months late. Operationally, they were not up to the task and the project was cancelled.

This was reported in the Sunday Observer and the Sunday Telegraph a couple of weeks ago.

Cost to the taxpayer Fifteen Million Pounds!

Sold to the higest bidder Foutryfour Thousand Pounds!

Government incompetance priceless!



Well Cougar,

Is not me who is behind the times, Must be the BBC or the News Channels that is where I read the article in the first place.

As I said in my previous post, I am not experienced in Military Equipement, Someone with more experience on this would be appreciated.

Your saying that they were cancelled?

How come 100 of them have been delivered then?

Oh is the BBC getting false reports then?


We're both right, but I was wrong on the veh. Please read my repost above yours.



posted on Sep, 19 2006 @ 07:54 PM
link   
en.wikipedia.org...

well once our navy rises from the ashes and becomes a true bluewater navy again, britain may well brag britannia rules the waves once again


the raf with the typhoon & f-35 will also be a match for anyone.



posted on Sep, 20 2006 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sepiroth
en.wikipedia.org...

well once our navy rises from the ashes and becomes a true bluewater navy again, britain may well brag britannia rules the waves once again


the raf with the typhoon & f-35 will also be a match for anyone.


A the royal navy will not become a "true blue water navy" because it lacks numbers and punch. We may have some of the best gear the fact is we need MORE of that gear to make it worthwhile. No good giving a squaddie the best rifle in the world if he/she doesnt have the ammo or the right boots.

PS, why would the RAF have a carrier launched F-35?



[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]



posted on Sep, 20 2006 @ 12:15 PM
link   
nice link, nice reading about about some of the type22/type23 replacement projects




[edit on 20-9-2006 by st3ve_o]



posted on Sep, 20 2006 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by st3ve_o
nice link, nice reading about about some of the type22/type23 replacement projects




[edit on 20-9-2006 by st3ve_o]

You mean the canceled programe?



posted on Sep, 20 2006 @ 02:27 PM
link   
no 'mr negative' i mean the other 3 options they are looking at.

Medium Sized Vessel Derivatie
the versatile Surface Combatant
Global Corvette




[edit on 20-9-2006 by st3ve_o]



posted on Sep, 20 2006 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by st3ve_o
no 'mr negative' i mean the other 3 options they are looking at.

Medium Sized Vessel Derivatie
the versatile Surface Combatant
Global Corvette




[edit on 20-9-2006 by st3ve_o]

Lol no offence but I like to see myself as a realist, the government has continuely let down our troops since 1939. In the 80's our troops stole argentinian weapons because they where "better" than our SLR's. We still as of yet have an air control and an air defence aircraft, unless you count LOS weapons.



posted on Sep, 20 2006 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Lol no offence but I like to see myself as a realist, the government has continuely let down our troops since 1939. In the 80's our troops stole argentinian weapons because they where "better" than our SLR's. We still as of yet have an air control and an air defence aircraft, unless you count LOS weapons.


I completely agree, hence the title 'the borrowers'. UK troops constantly have to borrow other armies basic equipment! Before we go too hi-tech I think we need to sort out the basics, I mean whats an army on bqasic rations/ boot/ ammo etc?

[edit on 20-9-2006 by Knights]



posted on Sep, 20 2006 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Last year we spent 690 million pound on weapons and ammunition alone, we spent more on: "Hotels, Restaurants & Transportation" than we did weapons and ammunition.
We also spent more on computer services than we did weapons and ammo.

Follow the money...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join