How to squander £630 million on UK defence in one week

[KimberleyChris]

I can't understand why we are building them in the first place.

I was in the Navy. OK, I wasn't exactly Nelson, I was just the Radio Operator.

When I was in, it was mainly configured to fight the Soviet submarine threat and the airborne threat to our aircraft carriers. Once the Soviet threat faded, it could then have been re-configured in two ways.

It could have become an invincible wall to patrol our waters, defend our islands and the odd remaining dependancies.

Instead, it has been configured as a 'blue water' navy. One which straddles the world in a 'Police' role. Most of its newer ships are built for either air defence or the support of land invasion. Even the submarines are designed to rush to far-away trouble spots unseen and gather intelligence to prepare the ground for when the surface forces arrive.

Why?? Do we 'rule the waves' any more? ... No. Thanks to the EU we don't even rule our own waters. It just seems like an obscenely-expensive PR exercise, to try to make a world that regards us as 'peanuts' that we are still important, and to 'pander' to the long-dead 'special relationship' with the USA.

[AtW]

I can't understand why we are building them in the first place.

Perhaps you should spend some time studying history before showing your ignorance?

To put it in simple terms that you can understand - USA kept Western Europe defended against USSR whilst it was in force, USA spent more money on powerful military force than Europe was prepared to, essentially this means it could spend money on something else (welfare state).

Even USA now need to trim costs, given that defense of Europe should be primary concern of Europe itself, it is only natural that European states would spend more money on its own defense.

[scooterscot]

The greater question here is whether the public sector should be used as a job creation scheme for British workers, or should it be trying to be as efficient as possible with tax payers money. The former might sound good in the newspapers (and in Gordon Brown's head ), but that's what's short-termist thinking.

Exactly. In 5 or 7 years time we'll be screaming our heads off at the multimillion pound refit of a UK built vessel.

It is entirely wrong IMO to spend money on a feckless business for an overpriced, probably massive cost of ownership, vessel when the same function can be bought off the shelf in the far east for a fraction of the cost.

If manufacturing in the UK wants to succeed again it needs to be doing it better and cheaper. Look what BMW did with a great British icon, how we're we unable to do the same? Answer that answer the problem to the unemployed masses.

[scooterscot]

I can't understand why we are building them in the first place.

I was in the Navy. OK, I wasn't exactly Nelson, I was just the Radio Operator.

How old are you!?!!

[KimberleyChris]

How old are you!?!!

54 with a following wind.

I can still send morse code at 25 wpm. May come in useful one day, but not today :-)

[KimberleyChris]

Perhaps you should spend some time studying history before showing your ignorance?

To put it in simple terms that you can understand - The USA kept Western Europe defended against the USSR whilst it was in existence, The USA spent more money on powerful military forces than Europe was prepared to. Essentially this meant it could spend money on something else (welfare state).

Even the USA now needs to trim costs, Given that the defence of Europe should be of primary concern of Europe itself, it is only natural that European states would spend more money on their own defence.

FTFY

Semi-literate drivel I'm afraid. Britain always made its fair contribution to NATO. The level of our involvement was decided at very high level, and our specialisation (ASW) was also allocated at joint Mod/USDoD level. This arrangement is still in force now, but has had its emphasis changed to reflect the changed nature of the threat. The transformation to a world-cruising blue water navy is just a symptom of the UK following the USA around like a lap-dog. If the USA politically needs our contribution in materiel, so it is not seen as acting alone, then it can help us with the cost of it.

[scooterscot]

54 with a following wind.

I can still send morse code at 25 wpm. May come in useful one day, but not today :-)

Just when I heard radio operator, a function I'm sure is now long since obsolete.

[KimberleyChris]

Just when I heard radio operator, a function I'm sure is now long since obsolete.

Yes, it's all done by advanced IT and satellites now, but it was still very much 'radio' then. Usually done using radio teletype, with ancient Siemens punch-tape machines working through a 'literaliser' - essentially a more modern 'enigma' machine :-)

Every ship had two Radio Ops. One (the 'tactical' op) up on the bridge to handle short-range UHF stuff between ships within a force, and me - the 'general' op - down in the bowels of the ship. We handled the long-range HF stuff between us and home.

Happy days, sometimes.

[xoggoth]

Semi-literate drivel I'm afraid

You must have an enormous problem texting if your brain cannot fill in a few THEs left out for brevity.

[KimberleyChris]

No problem, I was just being sarky. If you read down the thread, you will see that the insults started with him, not me.

As the poster is in the second-bottom rank, only one step above Sasguru, perhaps all to be expected.

How are you this fine day, Sir.?