The British Army has carried out an assessment of the equipment, supplies and enablers required to sustain a war-fighting division in a high-intensity conflict, according to Defence Minister Luke Pollard.
Responding to written parliamentary questions from Labour MP Luke Akehurst, Pollard said the Army had examined the capabilities required for a UK Strategic Reserve Corps, including a division able to operate as a credible war-fighting formation.
“The Army has undertaken a broad assessment of the capabilities and enablers required for a UK Strategic Reserve Corps (SRC), inclusive of a division, to operate as a credible war-fighting formation,” he said.
Pollard said the work aligns with existing defence planning assumptions and NATO standards. The review also considers the wider logistical system required to sustain operations at scale, including equipment replacement and battlefield sustainment.
“The assessment also recognises the importance of the entire system to enable divisional operations at scale and tempo, as well as sufficient stocks of munitions, spares, and fuel,” Pollard said. He added that the analysis takes into account cooperation with allied forces and the need to operate in complex operational environments.
“For reasons of operational security, the Department does not release detailed assessments of specific stock levels,” he also said.
Hang on ,I thought this had already been done?
Same comment as the RAF Lossimouth article. The fuel, stores, and munitions locations in the UK and Germany that the Army will depend on are all known and as undefended for the most part as Lossimouth is.
If they are negated, then what?
It would appear they have confirmed that our war stock is negligently low, through various HMGs laziness, incompetence and dishonesty and they are as ever not going to verify it with anyone so nothing needs to be done!
We could have saved them a lot of time. We need more of everything and it needs to be better protected.
More Ads (lots) than story (12 lines).
Oh, good: another review.
Spend money on a review or spend money on buying more? The review will say we are short followed by the treasury saying no and we’ll have nothing