Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

UK Defence spending boost

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Not going to happen. It's a Chinese port that can refuse the entry of a foreign warship ... and you can bet there's no invitation coming.
    A FONOPS then

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
      A FONOPS then
      Can't see it happenning in the next 10 years. Too much work to be done. First you need a shake down cruise, finding out the quirks of the ship. There's going to be things the Brits will just have to live with but you have to find them out first. You will need to train 3 sets of crews (1 coming up for deployment, 1 deployed, 1 standing down). You will need to do that within range of a friendly port just in case anything goes wrong. I think only Australia and Okinawa could be counted as such but you have to get there first.
      Chimo

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
        Big difference. Countries like India and Canada got to beg, borrow, steal for even $100K over budget. The Americans didn't even blinked for $100mil over budget.
        Why would a developed country like Canada beg, borrow or steal?
        Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles! || Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain! || I am a far left millennial!

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Oracle View Post
          Why would a developed country like Canada beg, borrow or steal?
          Anal beancounters.

          Chimo

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
            Anal beancounters.
            Also, threat perception? It becomes difficult to justify massive defense spending when there is no one out to get you. Not when you can spend it all on social welfare schemes to improve the lives of your citizens. Most of the formerly powerful western militaries have fallen into this trap because they ran out of enemies after the USSR fell (and they were no longer fighting each other like they used to in centuries past). The US is the only exception. Only now is the rise of China starting to reverse the trend a bit. But the Chinese still aren't a direct threat them like the USSR was.

            As for Canada, your only real threat is an internal rebellion by your moose population. Doubt you need tanks and F-35's to defeat them.

            Unless of course someone manages to convince Trump that his best shot of staying in power and become popular again is to declare war on Canada.

            Click image for larger version

Name:	tenor.gif
Views:	64
Size:	61.5 KB
ID:	1569077
            Last edited by Firestorm; 25 Nov 20,, 05:04.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Firestorm View Post
              Also, threat perception?
              Canadian threat perception has always been two fold. Threats to Canada (historically US but the USSR during the Cold War) and threats to our trading partners (historically the UK and then NATO). The latter is what dominates our military thinking since the end of WWII. Canada simply cannot survive without trade and thus LOCs was of the utmost strategic importance to us. Hence, during the Cold War, ASW was our primary duty. That perception still continues today. That also includes air and land force elements in that we're planning to take the fight to the enemy, ie destroy ground based threats to the sea lanes.

              Still the budget fights ain't fun and yes, you are right that we're up against Trudeau's pet projects of universal basic income but a few things have been in our favour. We've earned a battle hardened reputation in Afghanistan and the demand on us have not lessen. Trudeau dare not cut too much or he loses standing within the NATO alliance. It's one thing to thumb your nose to Trump. Quite another when Merkel asks for a Canadian battlegroup in the Baltic States.
              Chimo

              Comment


              • #22
                Colonel, absolute Canadian Forces resolution, professionalism and expertise has been burnished by Afghanistan. When we took our eyes of the prize and headed to Iraq it was the Canadian Army that picked up the slack. Anyone who doubted Canada's fighting ability did so at their peril....all you had to look at was Queenstown Heights to know that!

                I would add one other theater where Canada needs to focus is the Arctic. With global warming lanes in the ice are opening and that brings Russia more into play for you. Your abilities n the Arctic have allowed us to let our's slacken off...something the current Coast Guard Commandant is trying to counter by getting 2 new icebreakers into the budget.

                https://www.arctictoday.com/trumps-2...ic-priorities/

                And again, this entire story reinforces the entire concept of collective defense which is the bedrock of NATO...which goes to the thread topic. The QE2 & POW will go a LOOOONNNNGGG way in enabling the UK to project power.

                And the cost of sustainment is the single largest cost of any defense budget and maintenance is a combat multiplier.
                “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
                Mark Twain

                Comment


                • #23
                  I seem to recall there was some talk of only operating one carrier task force full time, using the other carrier for spares etc... but that may have changed with this extra funding. I imagine one area that may get more consideration now rather than before for a carrier force deployment would be the Baltic.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                    It's an absolute increase when compared to the force before. The Falkland Task Force would stand no chance agains the HMS QE II. But only a slight relative increase vis-a-vi the other powers, ie Russia and China whose land based force could swamped the QE II if with nothing else than missile magnets.
                    If it's an increase where is the threat perception coming from then ?

                    Why don't you call it maintenance if as you say opponents have increased their capabilities. And presumably this increase is to maintain that edge.

                    Let's be clear, they got this through because they have the numbers in parliament and it might get harder to do so later if economy goes into a slump.
                    Last edited by Double Edge; 01 Dec 20,, 10:31.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post

                      Can't see it happenning in the next 10 years. Too much work to be done. First you need a shake down cruise, finding out the quirks of the ship. There's going to be things the Brits will just have to live with but you have to find them out first. You will need to train 3 sets of crews (1 coming up for deployment, 1 deployed, 1 standing down). You will need to do that within range of a friendly port just in case anything goes wrong. I think only Australia and Okinawa could be counted as such but you have to get there first.
                      Yes, it would be ambitious to send a new carrier out there so soon.

                      Also a British CBG would be sending a big message to China. What for. There is no need for the UK to do that just yet.

                      They can use destroyers like France & Canada if they want to do FONOPs.
                      Last edited by Double Edge; 01 Dec 20,, 10:29.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post
                        I would add one other theater where Canada needs to focus is the Arctic. With global warming lanes in the ice are opening and that brings Russia more into play for you.
                        I've read articles saying the Arctic will become a new trading route as it allows to shorten existing routes.

                        More FONOPS through this new route will be required in that case.
                        Last edited by Double Edge; 01 Dec 20,, 10:30.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Firestorm View Post

                          Also, threat perception? It becomes difficult to justify massive defense spending when there is no one out to get you. Not when you can spend it all on social welfare schemes to improve the lives of your citizens. Most of the formerly powerful western militaries have fallen into this trap because they ran out of enemies after the USSR fell (and they were no longer fighting each other like they used to in centuries past). The US is the only exception. Only now is the rise of China starting to reverse the trend a bit. But the Chinese still aren't a direct threat them like the USSR was.

                          As for Canada, your only real threat is an internal rebellion by your moose population. Doubt you need tanks and F-35's to defeat them.

                          Unless of course someone manages to convince Trump that his best shot of staying in power and become popular again is to declare war on Canada.

                          Click image for larger version

Name:	tenor.gif
Views:	64
Size:	61.5 KB
ID:	1569077
                          And steal the Colonel's booze stash after Canada is conquered.
                          Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles! || Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain! || I am a far left millennial!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            “Warning to the United States!” China Fires DF-26B & DF-21D Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile (ASBM) “Aircraft-Carrier Killer” into South China Sea | Andrew S Erickson | Aug 26 2020

                            This would be China's response to Pompeo's Nixon library speech.

                            So the UK aspiring to have a good navy is looking to keep up and match the PRC navy.

                            All other allied navies will have to do the same or become missile magnets.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                              If it's an increase where is the threat perception coming from then ?
                              Where is it NOT coming from? You've got Iran, China, and Russia making big noises.

                              Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                              “Warning to the United States!” China Fires DF-26B & DF-21D Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile (ASBM) “Aircraft-Carrier Killer” into South China Sea | Andrew S Erickson | Aug 26 2020

                              This would be China's response to Pompeo's Nixon library speech.

                              So the UK aspiring to have a good navy is looking to keep up and match the PRC navy.

                              All other allied navies will have to do the same or become missile magnets.
                              So let me get this straighjt. An ANTI-SHIP-BALLISTIC MISSILE successfully hit ... water. The RN is still decades ahead of the China Navy even without the QE II. Don't think any navy got anything to worry about the Chinese DF-wetdreams.
                              Chimo

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                                Where is it NOT coming from? You've got Iran, China, and Russia making big noises.
                                I'm seeing UK doing what NATO needs to also do which is update its naval doctrines to deal with the Chinese Navy.

                                They train to sink ships, you guys work on projection of force or supporting land forces.

                                Your naval doctrines have not been looked at in over thirty years and there's some catching up to do.

                                I'm going off what Captain Fanell said in this discussion

                                Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                                So let me get this straighjt. An ANTI-SHIP-BALLISTIC MISSILE successfully hit ... water. The RN is still decades ahead of the China Navy even without the QE II. Don't think any navy got anything to worry about the Chinese DF-wetdreams.
                                Those missiles, DF21 & 26 are touted as carrier killers. Anti-carrier ballistic missiles

                                This is the first time they were fired into the water in a public demonstration. They usually fired them at test ranges in XIanjiang.

                                We don't know if there were moving ships in that closure area they landed in.

                                They could have provided the video of those missiles doing just that ie hitting ships but decided to leave it out.

                                Next time they want to raise the temperture they'll launch them at a ship.
                                Last edited by Double Edge; 03 Dec 20,, 02:59.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X