• Welcome to the E-Goat :: The Totally Unofficial RAF Rumour Network.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Scaremongering or Necessary?

Digzster

Sergeant
871
0
0
Regarding Kryton's post # 17,

Have you ever thought of starting up a party for Parliament mate? I think I can currently state that approx 173,000 votes would be available to you. If the election happens in May, there may be a few thousand less votes available due to SDR cuts.

Brilliant rant / thoughts
 

Kryten

Warrant Officer
4,266
206
63
Regarding Kryton's post # 17,

Have you ever thought of starting up a party for Parliament mate? I think I can currently state that approx 173,000 votes would be available to you. If the election happens in May, there may be a few thousand less votes available due to SDR cuts.

Brilliant rant / thoughts

If I honestly thought it would make a difference, I would do it, mate - but an old Sqn Ldr of mine once pointed out a very true fact: "The British public love the Armed Forces to a point, but they love schools, hospitals and welfare handouts even more...in a budget constrained environment, guess who the losers will be?"

Besides, being an MP is all about image, and I look like someone who got hit by a bus after falling out of the ugly tree.....

Still, its good to know that my rant wasn't too far off the mark...
 

MAINJAFAD

Warrant Officer
2,485
0
0
In a similar vain THIS from the Times I thought was quite good and straight to the point.

" The RAF, too, must transform itself from a fast-jet flying club into a tactical air force. It must shift its focus to helicopters and transport aircraft, whose pilots are the real light-blue heroes of current operations. But instead the Eurofighter, a ruinously expensive air-superiority fighter, is being subtly rebranded as a “fighter-bomber” — that’s like putting a roof-rack on a Ferrari and calling it a family car. This is no way to deliver fire support to ground troops. "

Just shows the guy doesn't know what he is talking about, which the exception of the A-10 and the AV-8B all US ground attack aircraft are based on air superiority fighters (F-15 / F-16 / F/A-18). Likewise for most other air arms. The reason dates back from WWII in that unless you have total air superiority the slow ground attack aircraft is a dead duck (Even with total Air Superiorty in GW1, the USAF A-10 force took a bit of a kicking with 6 aircraft lost and 13 damaged by AAA/ShRoAD). You can make an excellent ground attack aircraft out of a Air Superiority Fighter...It's very rare that you can make a good fighter out of a bomber (Hawker Hind, Mossie and Harrier are about the only aircraft that I can think of that have managed to do it, and even then the Mossie in the fighter bomber role tended to come off second best to any FW190 it came across). As for the roof rack on a Ferrari....Those 6 weapon plyons on the Typhoon were in the design from the gitgo as it was designed to replace the Phantom and the Jaguar. As regards the other tactical air assest, yes we do need them and the other bits and peices required for a balanced air arm that can met any task.
 

Joe_90

Flight Sergeant
1000+ Posts
1,727
0
36
I read the whole article mate, he's an ex pongo who only knows about the Army. It's nothing more than an ill informed article trying to parade itself as some sort authority on all the Forces.
 

Tabber

LAC
65
0
0
Mr Mallinson also writes Barbra Cartland style "napoleonic"war books (see WH Smith at any major airport) in an effort to repeat the success of Bernard Cornwall. What the "great author" didnt say in his article is why we maintain 20000 soldiers and their support staff in Germany. How much do all those challenger tanks cost to maintain in a cold war focussed Armd Div?
 
E

eric the red

Guest
I reckon all defence correspondents writing for the rags we call newspapers in the UK do it just to wind us up because they have neither the knowledge nor intelligence to do any better. Just look at some of the sh*t printed in the Observer, Guardian, Mail............. and the list goes on.
In my many years of Service not a lot has changed regardless of whether its Labour or Conservative and it wouldn't matter with Liberal, Greens or Nationalists in charge either.
Historically we have always been caught napping when a conflict breaks out. We know we need more manpower and equipment not less, we know we need to plan for any future conflicts not just the present. Unfortunately politicians, and I'm afraid some of own Generals, Admirals and Air Staff, obviously don't learn from history and until mainland Britain is again threatened with invasion the military will continue with the trends it has seen since the 50s.
I think we have to expect that, with the current lot, we will by 2015 be down to 30,000 front line only airmen and officers who can expect to be away more often than be at home. Civil Service support will be cut but our reliance on civilian services from companies making a nice profit will increase. For a short while this may appear to save money from the military budget and be value for money. I suspect though that if we look at all such money saving civilianisation schemes over the last 20 years and see their value 5 years after introduction they are either now costing more or we have had to put back some of the Service infrastructure including manpower to make them work to an acceptable level.
After saying all that I admit to not knowing all the answers but I do know we need an Air Force and we need equipment and manpower for what is happening today and also for what could happen tomorrow.
 

muttywhitedog

Retired Rock Star 5.5.14
1000+ Posts
4,616
660
113
Why do we have so many members of the British Army based in Germany, draining the defence budget of not just LOA, but Boarding School Allowance?

Bring them all back to the UK, accommodate them in the bases that have been closed (or about to be closed) and stop moving them around so much. Hey presto....

Massive saving on LOA.
Massive saving on BSA.
MQs dont lie empty.
Closed bases dont fall apart, and local economies dont collapse.
 
V

Verkramp

Guest
Why do we have so many members of the British Army based in Germany, draining the defence budget of not just LOA, but Boarding School Allowance?

Bring them all back to the UK, accommodate them in the bases that have been closed (or about to be closed) and stop moving them around so much. Hey presto....

Massive saving on LOA.
Massive saving on BSA.
MQs dont lie empty.
Closed bases dont fall apart, and local economies dont collapse.

Far too sensible an idea, you'd make a good Army Officer :pDT_Xtremez_30:
 
E

elnino

Guest
If I honestly thought it would make a difference, I would do it, mate - but an old Sqn Ldr of mine once pointed out a very true fact: "The British public love the Armed Forces to a point, but they love schools, hospitals and welfare handouts even more...in a budget constrained environment, guess who the losers will be?"

Besides, being an MP is all about image, and I look like someone who got hit by a bus after falling out of the ugly tree.....

Still, its good to know that my rant wasn't too far off the mark...

Are you suggesting that we spend more on the armed forces than on education and hospitals???
 
Last edited:

Realist78

Master of my destiny
5,522
0
36
You couldn't spend more on defence than health and education. The UK currently spends 7% of its pot on defence, 10% on education and over 17% on Health. As with all public stats, it's how they are perceived by the man on the street.
 

Kryten

Warrant Officer
4,266
206
63
Are you suggesting that we spend more on the armed forces than on education and hospitals???

No - what I am saying is that when it comes to the crunch defence will always lose out to education, welfare and the NHS - the Great British public would react with justifiable anger if some of their hospitals and schools were closed to divert money into the defence budget

What angers me is that defence is always seen as the soft option, resulting in poor preparation for major conflicts when they do happen
 
G

grumpyoldb

Guest
Tories about to announce a defence re-structure and money re-direction for when they get into office:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/864b12d2-...uid=17aab8bc-6e47-11da-9544-0000779e2340.html

Taking funds from international aid to pay for defence may please many on here!

Now that sounds like something which would get my vote.
We are paying millions to countries like India/Pakistan in aid, while they order aircraft carriers, which we struggle to pay for.
Diverting the money into our forces which help overseas, helps them and us.

Will they stand by it, or is it just another vote generating lie?
50/50. Better odds than the lottery.
 
P

pie sandwich

Guest
Well lets face it, there are many other countries out there that would do that and to hell with what anyone else says, the French spring to mind they are more than happy to p1ss everyone off for the good of their own country.
 

John Lloyd

Warrant Officer
4,436
0
0
By 1968 a further White Paper, in an attempt to stay within a £2 billion cash limit, proposed accelerated withdrawal from Singapore and Malaysia as well as from the Persian Gulf (all to be completed by 1971 The review also signalled the abandonment of further aircraft carrier construction The rationale behind the new strategy was, the White Paper explained, that—

'Long-term planning is essential in defence. An advanced weapons-system may take up to ten years from its conception to enter service and, in some cases, may then have a further twenty years of operational life. If we are to have forces with the right balance of skills and ages, capable of giving a worthwhile return on their expensive training, we need a stable long-term programme for manpower and recruiting ... substantial uncertainties remain, particularly in the fluidity of the international situation, the development of military technology, and the allocation of roles between allies. In these circumstances, the Government must strike a balance between the best estimate it can now make of Britain's probable defence requirements and the degree of flexibility it can afford as an insurance against the inherent fallibility of judgement.'

Not a bad political judgement, pity nobody learnt anything in the last 40+ years

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm199798/cmselect/cmdfence/138/13804.htm
 

FOMz

Warrant Officer
3,317
1
0
Because its cheaper meaning he can make even bigger cuts in defence spending...


Now what sort of state were the armed forces in in the '30's after the recession....

sound familiar?
 
R

Rich_P

Guest
Now what sort of state were the armed forces in in the '30's after the recession....

sound familiar?

What kind of state was Germany in during the 20s and 30s? I think we look more like Germany did with the racial integration problems. :pDT_Xtremez_09:
 
Top