Doug97The battle over forces spending
The battle over forces spending
A group of former military chiefs and politicians, calling themselves the UK National Defence Association (UKNDA), has launched a campaign for a major increase in funding for the armed forces.
It is rare for former top brass to start such a public campaign, let alone in such a sensitive political area – but they believe it is time to speak out.
The establishment of the UKNDA can be seen as a sign of the growing gulf between ministers and some in the military over the course of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There are claims that the government is no longer honouring the military covenant, Britain’s duty of care to its servicemen and women.
Winston Churchill, former MP and grandson of the UK’s prime minister during World War II, is president of the group and insists that the government must prioritise spending on the armed forces.
“Successive governments have let people down,” he says.
“Whereas health and education have seen surges in spending, defence has seen a decline, and that needs to be reversed if we are to ensure our men and women on the front line have what they need.
“That decline in spending also means that when they come home injured there are few defence medical facilities for rehabilitation and some have to rely partially on charity for funding.
“While in terms of compensation, they get a fraction of what a civilian would receive for injuries.”
‘Let down’
The recent case of Rifleman Jamie Cooper, who at the age of 18 became the youngest soldier to be badly injured in Iraq, is one example.
He lost the use of his right hand and one leg, and suffered severe stomach injuries when he was struck by shrapnel from two mortars in Basra last year. He is still in hospital recovering from a super-bug infection he caught after his latest operation.
He is to receive £57,000 in a one-off compensation payment from the Ministry of Defence (MoD), on top of a small annual income when he leaves the Army.
His parents are planning to appeal against the compensation amount.
“Jamie feels very let down,” says his father Phil.
“Yes, he chose to join the forces, but the MoD should look after their own – he’s a young man who needs to be able to rebuild his life.”
Jamie’s mother, Caroline, says their appeal is not just on behalf of their son.
“I feel disgusted, angry and upset,” she said. “These are the forgotten soldiers, the ones coming back injured, and we want more for the next soldiers to be injured too.”
Another former chief of defence staff and UKNDA member, Adm Lord Boyce, agrees that servicemen and women fell let down by those in charge.
And he says that feeling could hit troop recruitment and retention hard.
‘Public debate’
The UKNDA’s launch comes after the establishment last year of the British Armed Forces Federation, a staff association set up amid growing discontent among the rank and file.
It also follows a report by the think tank Demos on Monday, which warned that the future for Britain’s armed forces looked bleak unless steps were taken to improve pay, housing, training and recruitment.
The report’s authors, Dr Timothy Edmunds, senior lecturer in the politics department at the University of Bristol, and Professor Anthony Forster of Durham University, said Britain needed a “pragmatic and public debate” on defence.
That debate should focus, they said, on what role the armed forces should be playing in the 21st Century and whether their work in Iraq and Afghanistan was making Britain a safer place.
In July, the MoD was awarded an annual 1.5% real-terms increase in its budget. That compares with 4% for health and 11% for international development.
The MoD also announced extra spending on accommodation for servicemen and women, bringing the total defence budget for 2008 to £34bn.
In a statement, the department said overall spending would increase by £7.7bn by 2011.
This, it said, was “evidence of the government’s commitment to defence and to the men and women who serve with the utmost bravery in our armed forces”.
The MoD also said it welcomed the contribution of the UKNDA to the spending debate.
“The UKNDA’s supporters include prominent former senior military personnel, including chiefs of staff, and their experience will undoubtedly be invaluable in any such debate,” it said.
Doug97So you’re telling me that you need an advanced degree to understand that if you exceed the airframe’s design limitations re. hours something bad might happen? Funny, I’d think a five year old could understand the concept. Sure, you need the brains to figure out life cycles given a set of conditions but then we’re not talking about specifics now are we? Again (and more to the point) one can’t broad brush it and say that since the B-52 has been used for fifty years that ALL aircraft can be.
No, that’s not what I’m telling you at all. Read my post again.
Although I agree that the lifespan of the B-52 is irrelevant.
No – you don’t need a genius to tell you if you exceed the limits bad things happen.
But you do need the knowledge to calculate the design limitations, and how various flight maneuvers impact on the airframe aging (actually, the aging of various parts of the frame).
Exactly.
Doug97The overall concept might not be rocket science, but the overall concept isn’t going to tell you if your F15s can fly or not. That will take, more or less, “rocket science”.
Doug97Bargain?
If France had participated in Eurofighter development, its share of development would have been much less than the cost of developing Rafale alone. Based on current planned numbers, France would have paid 32% of development costs. Even though Rafale development has been much cheaper than Eurofighter, it’s still a lot more than that. Divide the difference in development cost by the planned number of Rafales & you get at least as much as the production cost difference between Rafale & Typhoon.
Of course, if France had taken part, Eurofighter would have been slightly different, and would have met French needs.
Yes, all true. And, in my opinion, such a Eurofighter would be a superior aircraft, and would have cost all the member nations less. Think how many would be getting built if, in addition to the armed forces that are currently buying it, the French air force, navy and the RN were also buying it. The more are built, the cheaper each one is. France, UK, everyone, would benefit, and there would be one less competitor for the Eurofighter.
Doug97So Rafale is a stealth VSTOL fighter? Because that is what the RAF and RN want. Also quite weird that you attack the UK for Europe not having a true European fighter, considering it is 5:1 in European participation between Eurofighter and Rafale.
The Typhoon is obviously much more European than the Rafale, I’m just pointing out that the common perception of the French “going off in the huff” does not ring true.
I tried to help to point the fact that the Rafale is a “bargain” for France since a more expensive Eurofighter wouldn’t have able to fulfil all the request of the French AF.
Quite right. Whereas Rafale might have fulfilled the needs of the rest of Europe. But I’m not expecting many people to agree to that one …
Doug97Perhaps the reason is the French attitude to some collaborative programs.
The French decided not to participate in the Tornado project because it wasn’t quite what they wanted and they also wanted to protect sales of the Mirage 2000. Later they pulled out of the Eurofighter project because they were not prepared to compromise and they wanted to have primary design authority. Put simply – the French usually want there own way and if they can’t get it they head off into the distance in a sulk. Then, in the case of the Eurofighter, they build an aircraft tailored exactly to the French requirement, at greater cost. Great perhaps for the French forces who get exactly what they want, but probably not such a good idea if you want to secure export orders.
I think the main problem with Rafale is that it was designed to meet a specific French requirement to operate off their carrier, so it probably doesn’t match up particularly well when compared against the heavier, larger and more capable Eurofighter that it has to compete against for export orders.
LOL, perhaps the British would have done well to have listened to the French requirements, since it would have resulted in a carrier-capable aircraft and we would not have to go cap-in-hand to the Americans for F35 source codes etc. It would also have resulted in a true Eurofighter, with even greater cost savings, and a benefit in commonality between RAF and RN.
You seem to be criticizing the French armed forces for doing nothing more than pursuing their own requirements. Unfortunately, it turned out that their requirements were wiser than our own.
Doug97Was just watching the story of the F-15 grounding on BBC “America”……..pretty informative…except…….they were showing wonderful video footage of an F-14 launching off a carrier. Nice.
LOL, that’s the mainstream media for you. Mind you, it’s not as bad as the MoD’s gaff about a year ago when their website showed the Typhoon labelled as the “latest Russian fighter”.
Doug97Similar to the last built “F-15E”?!
Or Rafale, Typhoon, Gripen …
Doug97Very nice … let’s see those Soviets try the Fulda Gap now!
Oops, 30 years too late.
Doug97One of the problems the A400M has is operational costs. Very expensive in peace time. One can fly a Hercules at a more or less reasonable price in peace time ops, but not an A400M.
Why will the operational costs of the 400M be so much higher than those of the Hercules?
Doug97Found this on another forum, though it was interesting.
F-35 Procurement Schedule, as of Apr 2007:
Doug97hype. The radio signals don’t propogate that far into space.
I thought he was suggesting the satellites could listen to MY radio … i.e. detect the soundwaves or at least what channel it was tuned to.
Doug97Given that the satellites can now listen to your car radio in downtown delhi,
Is that true, or just hyperbole?
Doug97There’s going to be a reckoning one day.
Undoubtedly, but what will the price be? Another Isandlwana/Elphinstone/Majuba Hill/Singapore? I fear that that is what it will take, especially with Gordon Brown now at the helm. It sure as hell won’t be the politicians who are massacred.
Doug97Interesting question. I would also like to know what armaments currently in the US inventory perform the same role.
Sign In
