Admiral Sir Tony Radakin is new Chief of the Defence Staff

I was not thinking of cuts, I was thinking of Strike.

Carter was CGS from 2014, and CDs from 2018.

I hear, unsure of course, that Messenger is less of a yes man for politicians. Maybe any CDS will be in reality, to some extent.

The money existed in 2015 to update our Tanks, SPG, Warrior, and replace the CVRT fleet. To recapitalize our 3 Armoured Infantry Brigades properly. Get that done after years of neglect. Properly. Then move onto Strike.

No. Rather than getting the job done the army jumps from one plan to the next, namely the new obsession of wacky races to Tallinn, and blows more money on Boxer, and wheels.

Resulting in a ridiculous half way house where we have sub standard Armoured Brigades and half baked, to put it mildly, Strike Brigade plans who’s main firepower is on tracks with Ajax, which lack the HET to move them properly, artillery of any sort other than LG, next to non existent SHORAD, and leaving Boxer with a RWS on the roof, which is still the situation I believe.

Because there is no money to arm them properly because of the rest of the money has been blown on Ajax.

In effect, Strike has dragged down to hell with it one entire Armoured Brigade.

On his watch the Cap Badge Mafia remain supreme, WCSP has collapsed, FV432’s are still running around, their replacement nowhere in sight, no sign of ABSV, JLTV is stalled, our artillery is obsolete, and Ajax…well, is Ajax!

Maybe a RM would have done things differently.

Absolutely spot on mate!

There does seem to have been a lot of money and time pissed up against a wall of ohhh so shiny toys, that were never delivered.

yup

bang on

Hi Daniele, I thought you might be interested in reading this publication from the HOC.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5802/cmselect/cmdfence/221/22102.htm

Morning Nigel. I will. I’m sure it will cheer me up over breakfast no end!!

😄🍽

Radakin broke the link between crew and ship which was traditionally thought to be critical for team spirit. And steered the navy through T26 /R2/T32/BAE/Babcock budget choppy waters. Transformational thinker. Vision, persistence, persuasive…lots of good skills.
The relationship between regiments and brigades and procurement need similar creative thinking. It will be easier for Radakin to make these changes than Sanders, who in other circumstances would have been a good choice I think. Just my take.

When you put it like that. An outside observer looking in at Army procurement can only conclude that the last 12 years have been an unending unmitigated disaster. How heads havent rolled I just dont know.
I think if i wasted billions of £ of taxpayers money I would be in jail right now.

Couldn’t agree more Mr B.

No one is ever held to account. They have probably been promoted or on the GDUK Board!

I’m not thinking that will work well. Healthcare systems are hard work for people who have spent their entire lives to fully understand, it’s just one vast sea of untended consequence waiting to happen, with the outcome being harm and misery.

What actually needs sorting out is:

1)the demand for healthcare. That flows from crap adult social care, a system of child services that allow the creation of Broken adults and a population that’s thinks their own health is someone else’s problem.

2) constant political interference, when the party in power wants to do something. The langsley reforms are a great example, pissed away billions in tax payers money just to change around the high level organisations that planned care, move it for around 1 PCT a county to, in some places 3 or 4 CCGs to small to work, a CSU ( which was just a way to sell of the back room functions to big business), an NHSE region to commission primary care and specialist services, NHSI to over see hospitals and create foundation trusts, ( with a plan to make them independent businesses, for easy sell of) public health and health visiting to county councils, all run by a centralised NHSE. It took us all years to figure out what the hell had happened and who we needed to talk to in the lunatic number of organisations langsley had created ( all as a way to chop up the NHS into nice marketable chunks)……….we put it all back together as best we could…. just ad the politicians realised chopping it up had been a crap idea and have now asked. Us to put it all back pretty much like it was under the last labour government ( which I’m afraid to say did have a bit more of a clue about running a healthcare system), even if they were a bit shit at saving for a rainy day.

what people/Politician Actually need to get into their heads is the NHS is not the best western health system, but it’s the most efficient at delivery and the most equitable. if it was give a clear “ this is what we want from the British people” and “your getting the average OECD amount per head to deliver its” message and then left alone to actually do its job…..it may just be More competent than people who know nothing about healthcare delivery ( what’s really funny is the forces send their medical staff to the NHS to learn their skills and I’ve taut many an army medic Leadership in trauma skills.

Great post

Now if we can get the NHS onto an IT platform instead of endless letters and reliance on one admin person per department we might make headway

Seconded. I always enjoy listening to J’s expertise on medical matters.

Cheers Daniele, I think most people on this are all pretty good posters, but maybe that’s because we are all actually grumpy old men on this site, who love a good well thought out moan.

Oh yes getting the digital right will make a massive difference. One thing we could do is make it a legal fact the the NHS is a single organisation in regards to patient data. What most people don’t realise is that all the GP practices, hospitals,community services etc are all legally different organisations and so have some significant legal barriers to sharing data and information. The number of times people have said to me, why do you need to ask that, it’s all on my record..assuming I can access all the information held by their Gp, district nurses ect, but I can’t.

Going through this right now with my wife’s pregnancy. She’s pregnant with gestational diabetes. Getting the Dr’s surgery to open, read and action an urgent letter from a hospital Dr apparently takes 20 days (their quote) when her current supplies of the various paraphernalia required to test/manage it run out in 12.

Why oh why can’t the systems be linked up as intended when we signed for the ability for the NHS to share data between its various constituent parts a few years back? What did that exercise actually achieve? How much did it cost? Crazy.

Hi Steve. 20 days to review discharge information from an acute trust is not appropriate or acceptable.I would suggest contacting your local CCG Pals team or NHS England’s complain service.

The last time they tried for a single patient record the good the best IT providers and developers in the World, gave them 12 billion and in the end the IT companies gave up.

Unfortunately a single patient record is at present a fantasy ( there are individuals who’s records literally would take up a whole room. Information is scattered across 1000s of organisations, in different formats, from hand written notes to a gps electronic system, to a babies red book held by parents. Some of it can only be shared after review by the clinical recording it ( can’t share all data due to safety). Some information held on a record will related to other people and can’t be shared ( husband was and did ect), some information has safeguarding concerns, some is just wrong and needs to be removed. Some patients don’t want anything shared, some want all some want a bit not shared.

when you think of say a 80 year old woman born in the 40s moved around a bit, had 4 kids, moved a bit more, went into a few different hospitals, Been to see her GP hundreds of times, had hundreds of different prescription. Drugs, may have been in prison with prison health records, in the army with forces records only the last 10 years would be digital all this life times information held by tens of different nhs organisations some of which my no longer exist or the records are help in archives or national archives. Then times that by 60 million. It would be the work of ages.

Yeah when you put it like that…what a task! I would begin by having all newborn records from a certain date so the backlog doesn’t increase though. The red book (which is a pain in the bum in itself with records added to it, falling out etc) could easily go digital and perhaps is the place to start, especially as it’s not possible to digitise the whole populations records.

Thank you for your advice re: Pals team, we’ll get in contact after one last try with the GP practice this evening.

Any thoughts on the Italian NHS?
Regional authorities funded by mix of local and central taxation, clear national green/red list of treatments free/ payable, regional authorities commission optimum mix of public/charity/private suppliers as appropriate in hospital/clinin/ nursing home etc . Suppliers can offer green and/or red treatments. A flexible system which is well regarded I think.

What is really interesting Paul is that the Italian and U.K. systems are essentially identical with some variation even to the extent that they both have the same name…national health service.

The big difference is age of the systems,the Italian system was created in 1978.

it tends to go though the same cycles of centrally lead reform As our nhs.

Both systems have the same sort of strength and weakness. And if you compare outcomes one is better than the other at some things.

They are both mixed arrangements of private, state owned and third sector. Although I believe the NHS has a greater amount private sector providers as our entire primary care system is made up of private sector providers ( some of which are limited companies owned by some NHS foundation trusts).

big challenges for the Italian systems are the same as the nhs really:

1) cost control, it’s suffering from a bit of out of control costs at present ( but every system is so Im thinking it’s more about Italians ability to pay over the health systems cost control methods)
2) regional variation is quit high.
3)very low numbers of care home beds.

The big thing we can learn from the Italian system is making healthcare more localised with greater local accountability. I’m a great believer in removing the NHS from central control and making it accountable to the electorate in a region. The other big thing is for the wider country and that’s life expectancy is a function of personal lifestyle choices not the healthcare system.

for Italy they could take a note of how the NHS controls costs (we are universally acknowledged as a world leader in this) as well as management of long term conditions ( again that’s a great strength of the NHS, management of things like diabetes, mainly because it’s a great way of controlling costs).

All in all the two systems are both fair equitable and credits to their nationals moral and ethical bedrocks.

Yeh, I’ve no doubt your right. He may be RM, but I would not be surprised if he’d asked for the easier job first – fixing Ajax, et al!

Yes I bet he was just thrilled to have that land on his lap. Sad thing is he’s being asked to look at something totally outside his skill set when there is so much that needs doing that needs his knowledge and talent.

Great leaders place the right people in the right place. I think this says a lot about the present political classes and their leadership.

I’d read of that. That came across to me as personal.

Yes agree, there was something more than well thought out professional disagreement.

Indeed.

A large budget that is not only spoken for but over committed. No amount of VSO pruning is going to change that.

But the NAO report on the equipment plan made clear that the black hole was largely caused by naval programmes – carriers, the aircraft to operate on them, Astute, Dreadnought and the Type 26.
Certainly, army programmes have wasted money, partly because our domestic manufacturing capability had been allowed to all but disappear. But I’m not convinced the RN have shown they are any better.

The main reason the Carriers for one were over budget was down to the chuckle bros Messrs Cameron and Osborne nothing to do with the Navy.

And that was why T31 was born.

The carriers cost blow out was almost all down to political interference. Slowing the program and the EMALS swerve.

T45 down to Sampson dev costs and sclerotic pace.

T26 to reducing numbers and artificially extending build time.

The Treasury can’t blame the customer for the Treasury constraints?

I can, and I’ve read of it. CF2035 talks of a “Corps” of 3 Divisions!

They’d best get cracking. As the outlined changes so far are no where near it.

I believe CF2035 also talks of Combined Arms formations, as yet no sign of those either.

Not trying to be negative at all. It is just such a blank canvas to start out from the state the army is in to make this a reality.

Yes we are well behind the curve – Milrem and others need to move to UK, the DSTL mobility rig needs to become platform in double quick time. We need to make UGVs that can work with Ajax, Boxer and C3. If we can’t fix Ajax bin it. The swarming tech developed by the RAF needs to get into the Army – MBDA need to be making loitering munitions. A lot ot do.

Between 1936-40 we managed to put the whole army in trucks and give them radios. We still had only two experimental armoured ‘divisions’ (they were not really Div sized), and had to await Rommel to learn how to use them. But we had at least made the army mobile – ok we had to do it all over again after Dunkirk, but the kit was in production and the model was set. Something like that needed now. That mobile force was able to defeat the old style foot slogging Italian army during operation compass with a negative ratio of 10:1 in manpower (the Italian army in Libya had very few trucks, little radio comms and no motorised artillery and was thus difficult to supply and confined to the coastal strip). Mobility trumped numbers.

Ah, General O Conner. Total debacle for the Italians.

I admire your positivity James. I hope it’s realised.

Yes, indeed – much to do. The Italian Army of Libya have not been served well by history. They were not as bad as has been made out, but were thinking they had little to do but march into Egypt as they had overwhelming superiority in numbers. O’ Connor and his modern technology – especially improved mobility, comms, naval gunfire support and logistics – proved them wrong.

How true, the lessons from the past still resonates today!

Russia is introducing unmanned vehicles as early as next year, with limited numbers of army personnel this could be the smart way forward for us?

“The Russian Ground Forces are to conduct large-scale tests of the Uran-9 armed unmanned ground vehicle (UGV) in 2022 to inform decisions on the total number of Uran-9s to be procured, Russian armed forces chief General Oleg Salyukov told the Ministry of Defence’s (MoD’s) Krasnaya Zvezda ( Red Star ) newspaper on 1 October.”

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/land-forces/latest/russia-to-conduct-mass-testing-of-uran-9-ugv-in-2022

Yes, they have been used extensively in Mali too.

Why does that unmanned vehicle have a window for a driver? Is it “optionally manned”?

Good spot. It might very well be the case or additional sensors/lights looking at the lighter blue circles x2?

Conversely, we also need to consider how to react to a technologically advanced opponent, that uses unmanned vehicles (air/land/sea) to multiple its numbers. Consider how Azerbaijan took apart the Armenian defences is a good example, of what can be expected in the future, between an old school way of fighting and those who have embraced technology. But also the conflict in Ukraine should also be considered where both sides are pretty much on par and are quick to develop new countermeasures to new threats.

When Russia deployed the Uran to Syria, it was a very courageous move. They new it would fail, but by putting it into a conflict zone, they could find out what failed, but also why. Then build on the lessons learned from that experience.

In short communications between the vehicle and the operator was found to be the biggest weak link (Operator tunnel vision was also another big operational problem). Anything out of direct line of sight is open to attack through electronic countermeasures or through kinetic means. Therefore, the supporting infrastructure that makes long distance unmanned vehicles feasible, must be the first priority to attack, i.e. satellites. As soon as you remove the ability for long distance communications, you have to revert to using a “mother” vehicle or pretty close direct line of sight communications.

For aircraft, this isn’t so much of a problem, as when using V/UHF data-links like Link-16, you can be 10’s of miles away. But on the ground or sea, then you need to be within visual range, due to the Earth’s topography and horizon. An option would be to use a small drone as a data node, so that you can communicate over the horizon or when in built up areas. But then that drone soon becomes a priority target, so you’ll need lots of replacements.

In essence, unless you are facing an opponent who has not embraced unmanned technology, then the fighting will be in your favour. However, if facing a peer the technological advantage will be nullified and it will fall back to attritional warfare.

Don’t forget the phasers and photon torpedoes.

Imagine an EMP burst , then all this 21st Century Tech is back too manually operated Kit ie Rifle bayonet ?

Cheers Pac. Appreciated. He can take whatever approach he likes, I think it’s hillarious.

Oh dear handbag boy!

😍

Seconded.

Why do people bother to engage this clown in conversation???

I know, im one of them, but I think its the same as when people went to old fashioned freak shows, its amusing and intriguing to see the weirdness of some people.

It’s Sport. Troll baiting.

Why should they have a platform that goes unanswered. Apparently I’m not allowed to speak. 😎

I agree mate, as you know he is sat there gnashing his teeth wanting to gob off but hasn’t the brains or ability to do much else than sad one liners. I find both him, and baiting and hooking him slightly amusing mate.

Then it is open to you, as invited up the thread, to put forward your qualifications and experience if you wish to add weight to your arguments / position(s).

He is a well known troll, previously TH, Harold, PierrLM, just posts sad shite mate!

SB knows mate, he knows.

Like me, for his sins, he does attempt to reason.

It is wasted on some, alas.

😂 so that’s where that daft wee Kent pretending to be a Scot Harold went? and here’s me thinking he had given up posting on here in favour of that shitehoose wings over Scotland pish .👍🏻 bravo good to have him back spouting more shite than me on here 😃👍🏻

mucho appreciated for pointing him out .

is Herodus or Herotus ?? Canny mind exactly but you know that relic of Greek Mythology still alive ? He’s dropped off aswell ?

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇬🇧

I’ve suspected him and the others for some time.

( There is a film quote in there….)

Herodotus. Not seen for months.

ha ha racking my brains for the film??? 🤔

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇬🇧

Want any clues!?

TBF in the film they say “He’s” not “I’ve”. LOL

Ok I’m going out on a limb I was thinking Usual Suspects but my final answer is Harold the daft Kent I mean The Thing ? ⚠️

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇬🇧

😂

“Broadsword calling DANNY BOY!”

Crikey, “Danny Boy”….that’s apt considering tonight’s latest mystery sex debacle!!

Where Eagles Dare, mate.

Admiral Rolland suspected Colonel Wyatt Turner for some time, like I have suspected “Mike” of being Harold / TH / for some time.

https://hero.fandom.com/wiki/Vice-Admiral_Rolland

🙈ffs 😂 I shuda got that damn it man 😫

OOT the plane no parachute for old Harry boy 😂👋🏻

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇬🇧

I don’t think anyone would ‘dare’ with Mike, mate. You’d have to find it first. 😉

That’s him mate, sad to say that’s him!

Mark yer target when it comes…..

A rather large target if we’re gonna go off his picture!

😎

Another absolute classic!

And it’s bite time, gnash gnash gnash you are easy meat troll boy!

I hate to be the one to say it, but Daniele has a set of fruit and veg between HIS legs.

😂🤣

Er? Fruit? Or meat and two veg. Asking for a friend, who is lost.

It’s the Italian side of him. Two tomatoes and a bloody curly Tenerumi.

😶 Only a Tenerumi…..?! And curly!????

Tbh mate, I’m not really the sort of one that would examine you in such ways. Perhaps I could upgrade it to chorizo if it makes you feel better? I wouldn’t examine Mike in that way either – it’d be bloody hard to do so. What roll would it be hiding under? Still, he’d make a bloody good damage control man; we like using bungs. 🙂

Curly because Wee Cranky informs me that submarines are bad and will make me grow thirteen heads and will affect vegetable growth and kill us all. Also because you’re a fancy guy and I bet you can make things curl.

😆

I think we’d better get back to defence mate!!!

Yah. I actually quite like Radakin’s direction. He comes across as someone with a vision for the future, much like some of his historical counterparts. I’m keen to see how he advances UAV/POD/technological advances across the forces and how he proposes to integrate them with the traditional kit. But he’s also a naval man by heart and I’m also keen to see how this helps shape the navy in years to come. Hopefully, we’ll see an uptick in numbers (cut the waffle and pointless projects and commit to numbers) and availability, while continuing the pace of deployments that we’re seeing now.

Terrible business with the RM as reported in the article linked below, though.

This Italian side you mention, does he perma dress in white too, just in case?

Have a row with the wife, did you? Best go for a pint mate..

If you’ve been led, you should know it might be quite normal to think less than favourably about your imposed seniors.

Carter could be erudite but his management skills are shocking given Army procurement; whose head did he decapitate? How many PIDs have been lost? Did he even think to gift some to Royal (c/o Royal Navy) thereby maintaing a very effective Brigade fighting force?

More on here with very much more recent experience. As to me, I was just a STAB RMP… feel free to ignore.

Well i don’t think British Army is combat capable if a peer to peer crisis occur today.

MBT’s starting upgrade. probably existing ammunition is too old.
Boxers: arriving with only an machine gun.
Ajax: not operational
AS 90+MRLS probably the only part of the land army combat that works.
AA. inexistent.

With this i see British Army being only rear guard, occupation force.

Why is that reply to me?

In a manoeuvre scenario with armour yes.

But that just accounts for 3 (UK) Division. Is the rest of the British Army also not combat capable? The infantry of 1 (UK) Division? The ISTAR elements of 6th Division? The CS & CSS Arms?

I don’t think they are not combat capable. The quality and training of the people remains even if the modern heavy kit is lacking.

What about a peer on peer infantry situation like FIBUA? Or in the littoral? The strength of the British Army I believe has always been its infantry.

The British Infantry have been modernized, and are experienced professionals. The RM, the Parachute Regiment, the Special Forces.

Saying the British Army is not combat capable needs clarifying.

British Infantry is not combat capable.

The Kings Own Royal Border Regiment have been merged with the QLR and Kingos… Dukes are now capable of… pulling off… a drag queen act theft of the highest order, with nails and high heels at the ready.

Of course the Royal Irish Rangers have also been gender re-assigned having lost their hackle and caubeen.

Before MP, I served in both and even Airbourne might tip the nod to the KORBR forerunners, the Border Regt, a nod for Arnhem, and the Rangers have always led the way.

All is lost, I tell ye! FAB.

Mate so many people forget or don’t realise that a vast amount of lads on Market Garden didn’t parachute but came in gliders! Probably the most dangerous bloody way, a controlled (hopefully) crash then getting out and cracking on fighting! Top blokes, great Battalion history and another to fall by the wayside by amalgamation. However that’s another story as I do think we need to reassess the Regimental structure…..but that’s a full time, full on debate for another day lol 👍

Reassess the Reg structure.

That’s interesting mate. I thought that was one of the army’s strengths? Or maybe not.

It is and I’m a full supporter of it, if it really achieves and means something but it’s not. Most units are really more tight and proud, at sub unit level, Coy, Sqn, Bty etc. Obviously some Units are the exception but having that sub unit level close knitted team, and pride, brings the possibility of combined arms unit, full time, onto play. But mate we need more time to waffle and discuss that one, cheers.

I think it may be coming judging from the leaks of potential plans for the infantry that have been leaked to the DM.

Divs of Infantry reduced to 4, all linked to 1 Bn of the Rangers.

With over 30 Bns of Infantry and just 13 currently in a deployabe brigade ( that includes 16AA and the 4th one added recently, plus as we know is 16AA really deployable as a whole brigade now? ) changes are inevitable.

I have argued before for an increase in CS / CSS rather than more RAC / Inf so I hope some is redistributed to create more of these vital enablers.

They keep going on about speed and tech replacing mass so these BCT or smaller combined BG being created will need more integral from all areas to achieve that.

What happens when they meet an enemy with mass in a war of attrition is never answered, but hey ho!

Airborne probably wants more PARA 🙂

(Policing nightmare in the ‘shot early 90’s)

However, he is right but with one of several caveats, do we want more black mafia in charge?

As to structure, an expanded Army Reserve carrying forth the Regimental Colours at Company level, (AR is a whole thread) with a common infantry pool (Scottish Regts issue?)with a common infantry you would lose alot of the middle head shed with Colonel (fmr) Loamshires writing into the Telegraph about loss of unit fighting cohesion because we will lose our identity…

No, an expanded Royal Div with, a fighting first, enhanced RMP Div behind them in the peacekeeping role, would see us field a top rate 21st Century army capable of deployment anywhere in the world.

Airborne knows it makes sense 😉

Could individual regular infantry Coy’s, RAC Squadrons, RA Bats and REME, RS, RE Sqns also be renamed to continue these regimental names? You’d then be able to bring lots of old names out of “suspended animation” with the wider reg above it more akin to the Rifles.

The Bns of the Scottish, Welsh and Irish Division are a political hot potato they cannot get round unless more chops for the English country Regs.

RMPs been reorged and cut repeatedly too Barry. Its very hard to keep track of where the RMP Coys are now.

Danielle

I was trying to bait Airborne by advocating 2 Divs of Royal Marines and MP 🙂

At a reunion next weekend and will catch up and let you know re. MP, but, it doesn’t seem good re. gdp’s but CP need a gene pool to perform their role, so…

David

I know, mate!

Now days its pretty much 3 regular regs with a couple of AR coys, plus the SIB Reg and S Ops Reg. Would be interested in any new info you hear.

Me being baited? Never do I bite to such crazy concepts………grrrrrrrrr! I am a firm supporter of all our colleagues in the same uniform but different units…….never ever ever was I a brainwashed Tom cutting about calling everyone a hat or being an arrogant git thinking we are the only ones in the Army which can do anything……we’ll not after Sgt”ish” anyway 😝😝😝 On a serious note it’s good to be confident of your abilities but careful not to be to arrogant and ending up believing your own chuff…..(like the RAF Reg do) cheers 🍻

I got dicked to minibus your senior ncos back from a NYEs do. Your God deemed he should be the last to be dropped off and he kicked off when there was just him and his lady.

Stopped van, pointed out that RE PARA had the nearest guard room and I didn’t mind arranging accommodation for him; his wife was considerably uninebriated and told him to apologise sharpish to the young corporal. Memories. How I loved PARA.

That excellent “dicking” to be minibus driver, to a load of pissed SNCOS, ah we have all had that pleasure……;0) nearly as good as being a Tom and doing the waitering in the mess on a friday night Mess do…..

Ah the Rat Pit, the 5s, amongst other very user friendly public houses in the Shot!!!…..😝! But as I alluded to, I’m a supporter of the combined arms teams, but fully formed and co-located in peacetime. You can have a Regimental structure and the RHQ, but with a number of sub units based and allocated to the combined arms teams at various locations. Train and plan as you will fight. As for more PARA Bns bloody hell Dave were lucky so far to keep the Bns and supporting arms we already have!

Daniele, I think the 250 strong battalion is likely to become the norm (FCF and Rangers are testbeds maybe). With dispersed – largely autonomous – small 3-4 person fireteams. These are difficult to find and ideal for infiltration tactics in scenarios where there is no ‘front line’ (as we encountered on battlefields in Afghan and Iraq -and also is the norm in Ukraine).

Of course they need C3 and much more (and different), ISTAR, logistics and longer ranged precision firepower to succeed.This is where combat cloud enabled comms, drones/UGVs and loitering munitions come in. They also need much better and again specialised Shorad support (C-UAS and anti-missile especially).

A platoon might have a swarm of small UGVs and drones (maybe launched from UGLs) to operate as a screen, tripwire and to operate ‘on point’. Also ranged loitering munitions like Switchblade 300 (10km range) for precision strike, larger quadcopter drones and a platoon UGV provide logistics.

Infiltration tactics means that long range airmobility becomes more important for light infantry, so more medium and heavy vertical lift – and longer ranged platforms. Lightweight air portable vehicles such as those being currently tested can improve ground mobility in some circumstnaces (remote areas, deserts etc.). Mech infantry uses Boxer to deploy overland, and light infantry in urban environments or where they need to be persistently deployed has access to MRAPS like Mastiff/Foxhound.

Ranged fire is from mortars, larger loitering munitions and BVR anti-tank missiles at battalion level, with new mobile longer ranged light fires at BCT level. Larger armed ISTAR drones and attack helicopters working in teams, and with clusters of small swarming drones. provide mobile precision fire support and electronic attack capabilites for dispersed teams. ISTAR Platforms such as low earth orbit sattelites, Shadow, Protector and new systems able ot penetrate A2AD are also important to enable tactical advantage.

Comms are networked into the combat cloud to provide an information advantage and targeting devices included in the platoon kit, and each platoon will have a lightweight C-UAS system, self-defence anti-tank and anti-stucture weapons – and the infantry will multitask – adopting new capabilites as needed via the logistics system.(or carried on the UGV). Close combat occurs when the hostiles are isolated and overmatched, or as a last resort. CC is primarily to mop up/take ground after the ranged precision weaponry has done its work.

All of these technologies are out there – many in production.

Really interesting post James, thanks.

Quite a shopping list there. I assume some of this is what the Strike Experimental Group has been doing for the last few years, without most of the kit of course.

When will the army start buying this stuff in quantity? As you say they are out there.

Hi James

I have modelled this based upon 6 man and 4 man fire teams, with the aim of retaining as many infantry as possible and making up the shortfall in assets through equipment.

A deployable all arms company can come in at 264 with 96 dismounts and the smallest battalion (protected) would come in between 840 to 1200 dependent upon the support element assigned.

I have come to the conclusion that 6 man fire teams and a light infantry company of 120 persons is optimal in the new 72k force size. Problem is this means we have to buy really good equipment and make it work super hard.

So a boxer may need to have a full CISTAR capability as well as a fully automated turret (40mm or even 105mm) with 6 dismounts, I suspect the bean counters won’t like that, but as you have said we need to disperse such a small force.

Is boxer now too big?
Why are we spending so much money on support versions?

Whatever we do we need to stop the nonsense of having kit that is undergunned, we really need any battalion to be able to create a bubble that they can operate within. That means 5 battallions to provide 360’ screening with a centralised Combat support and command group operating inside it providing AAD, precision fires, etc

Creating this bubble take a massive amount of resource and people, but we have to assume that with such a small force at some point we will be surrounded and need to manoeuvre under this shield.

Pretty sure the British Army’s Apaches would spoil the day of any opposing force.

“Pretty sure the British Army’s Apaches would spoil the day of any opposing force.”

I don’t understand where this kind of arrogance came from….

US Apaches are getting 30km range Spikes missiles, also able of firing behind a hill due to threat from AA missiles.

deffo….

No but they are insanely into make really fast off road commercial heavy vehicles, they make the fastest commercial tractor in the world for those farmers in a hurry ( 70kph), the have made a 120mph backhoe digger.they have also made the fastest tractor in the world at 167mph.

And they have developed a commercially viable engine that runs on hydrogen to power heavy plant; it is already going into production.

I agree with Jonathan.

Having driven and owning a few bits of, quite heavy, JCB kit: it simply would not be commercially acceptable to have these kinds of issues in a construction/civils environment.

Yep I’ve driven a few tractors and bits of heavy commercial plant. Management of vibration is part of keeping yourself productive, a farmer can’t be off with vibration induced injuries etc. you try and build and sell plant like that your going out of business one way or other.

Exactly – it doesn’t pass the commercial test.

I’m not suggesting that the contract should have gone to JCB armoured vehicles are not their core skillset. However, they do have a lot of experience with heavy tracked vehicles in relevant conditions.

When you are in trouble with a project and need to trouble shoot an element that is well understood by others then it might be time to ask the others how to trouble shoot it?

Solving vehicle vibration problems is not an ‘unknown unknown’ it is the bread and butter of many luxury car / truck / tractor / machinery companies and consultants that have to track these things down and solve them.

Soucy band tracks would be good place to start. The Norwegians said that it significantly dropped the CV90s vibration and noise. The CV90 upgrade program for the Dutch is including band tracks.

The point I’m trying to make is that there are well defined ways of tracking down noise and vibration in cars and commercial vehicles.

40 years ago endless part swaps and instinct were how it was done.

Now bond sensors to the chassis, power train and body panels then you can map the source of the noise. No guesswork needed.

This would cost peanuts, relatively, and there are plenty of consultancies that can do it.

Maybe, maybe not.

Poor alignments can have an effect.

One of the reasons cars are quieter is improved precision build quality.

Oops, my mistake.

Sorry LM… 🙂

Cheers CR

Not entirely sure mate, but a set of UK Dolphins it isn’t. Ours are two inward facing dolphins with a crown in the middle, whatever those are isn’t ours!!

Ta bud. Stay safe.

Pwo badge… Its the latest thing for Ops officers to wear in recognition of the time they spent sitting in an ops room making carp pipes at watch handover during defence watches.

Cheers mate, hadn’t seen one before. PWO’s obviously feeling a little insecure or something to need a badge!!!🤣🤣

I will be asking for a badge to be back dated for WE Ops Room Manager… WEORM…
One for the WE rounds man…
On watch stoker…

that would work but I think you need to pad it out with a few more paragraphs of pointless wordage to make it really politically acceptable.

Bulkheads have hydrophones and all that. 😉

Or HVME as the dabbers call it.

HVME… Hull Vibration and Monitoring Equipment…. a system clankies own and have no clue how it works…. Full of electrickery and magic stuff… Better call in a WE to advise about why its not working properly…. It was a duff fuse in the panel… Tru Dit…

My apologies sir 🙂

I got it Steve, made me LMHO too.

Gotta live up to my name.

Have you surveyed the majority of Britons? Do we have too much immigration, quite possibly, but it doesn’t come from dinghies. As I said, that is blown way out of proportion, mainly by certain tabloids.

Have you surveyed the majority of Britons?

The outcome of the 2019 General Election is even better than a survey. Immigration, migration, refuge, asylum et al, was a cornerstone of the debate at the time. Those in favour of unwanted migrants, uncontrolled immigration and soft borders suffered a humiliating defeat at the polls.

I think wires are crossed here. I’m only saying that very few people come across the channel in dinghies, not that immigration isn’t too high. The vast majority of immigrants come into the UK by normal means, not dinghies. That’s the issue being overblown. Although it is serious from the point of view of their safety.

Agree, Rob.

Though I also feel it is a matter of principle, which annoys so many. I know it certainly annoys me.

Yes, it is small compared to wider migration. Though some may not feel 15,000 coming illegally across a sea is small at all.

Principle. If someone trespass in your back garden or your home, they are kicked out. It is illegal and they are trespassing.

Why should it be any different for your country. Is this not after all our home.

When society then considers this country as our home too and applies the same principles, then this nonsense of crossing in a dinghy and being welcomed with open arms by so many on the left as some sort of hero has to stop.

Claim asylum at an embassy, apply for a visa, in the normal way. No issues then.

The sooner the law is changed that makes it illegal, and then people are processed off shore the better. As it is, there is no deterrent.

Trespass in someone’s back garden is not a criminal offence. Not even a civil offence if they cause no damage and leave when asked. Even the latest criminal justice bill that cracks down further will not make it so.

“Oy, Mr. I was just getting my ball back.”

“That’s six month’s in the pokey for you, my lad!”

Not yet a crime. Not even Patel would go that far.

Fine, so I use the wrong word. It is “Wrong”

Leave when asked? With the HR gravy train lawyers blocking so many deportation flights how many are leaving when asked? I’d be curious to know the figure for voluntary returns.

““Oy, Mr. I was just getting my ball back.”
“That’s six month’s in the pokey for you, my lad!”

Lol, fair one!

If your don’t plug the trickle it becomes a flood

I need chip in a Bernard Wolley type comment here: Nobody was in favour of unwanted migrants, because if anybody had been, the migrants wouldn’t have been unwanted.

I’m saying this because anyone can tailor their language to make their point of view seem superficially correct when a deeper look shows the the complexity.

I agree that a majority voted in the last election on one issue – Brexit, but the idea that it was solely about immigration isn’t true. The debate was divided into “bubbles”, segregated by a social media that points us in the direction we last travelled. Immigration may have been the cornerstone of the debate you took part in, but it barely made a blip on my screen, which was more about finance and taking back control.

1. Wolley or Woolley? Your first mistake.
2. 2019 General Election was precisely that – a General Election of multiple issues. The singular Brexit issue was decided by Referendum in 2016. Your second mistake.
3. I said “a cornerstone” meaning one of several. I did not say “the cornerstone” as you wrongly paraphrase me. Your third mistake.

Unfortunately it is your last sentence that tells the true story. I don’t know what one Bay can do acting as LRGS and selling Largs Bay was a huge mistake.
The conversion project of one Bay has been put on hold and I can also say with some inside knowledge that the LCU’s are absolutely knackered.
It is an awful state of affairs and although I understand the concept at the moment it is just BS.

Well at least that won’t affect the Bays.

Maybe they will use Mexefloats!

Agreed. As I’ve highlighted here before, so far they have a new uniform, individual weapon, and hand held drones.

When more helicopters, ship to shore connectors, shipping, artillery, and precision weaponry is acquired they may work. Til then it’s spin.

Did you see the leaked slides on Twitter re FCF? Some months ago now. I think they were removed but they did show lots of this stuff, hopefully announcements in due course.

LCUs are always knackered. As are LCVPs.
I looked after the WE side of LCUs on an LPD. The nav system was down. We went on to fix it and then found around 5 other defects leading up to the catastrophic failure. Royal when asked why he didn’t report the first defect when it happened told us that’s what back ups are for…
Royal has no self investment in the landing craft flottila… Jack and Jenny will fix it for them so they don’t give a toss..

Agreed, selling Largs was a mistake, the LCUs are not only knackered but in someways outdated.
As for Albion and Bulwark I question the effectivness of these units as they have no dedicated air support. They would however make good motherships for ROVs etc.
I also understand the concept of returning the RM to their real role of raiding but to do that the RN needs two types of ships, one for the RM raiding role and one to land the army ashore. I think Jackie Fisher said that the biggest weapon the Royal Navy has is the ability to land the Army ashore anywhere in the world when ever we want. Possibly we should revert to that thinking. So possibly the government or RN needs to get away from the idea of naval battles but to do the two things it’s really good at, getting the merchant ships through and getting the Army ashore. To achive the first the T32 if built in the design concept of the Damen Crossover Combat could give a frigate equipped vessel with the ability to land 120 RMs. That would be a good forward deployed multirole combat ship. To land the Army you need a bigger ship to be able to land not only troops but tanks, artillery and a large amount of men as a battle unit. So a Canberra type vessel is needed, possibly three of these with dedicated army battlegroups attached. Now if we built say 6 T32s in the way I am thinking they could combine with the LHDs 2 T32s and 1 LHD give an Amphibious Assault Group with 240 RMs an Armoured BattleGroup

http://www.armedforces.co.uk/army/listings/army311.gif

20 helicopters and 6-8 F35Bs, each of these Assault Groups could have a Bay and a Point attached for a second wave. By doing this we could land 7000 troops over the beach with tanks and supporting units without the need for a Carrier Strike Group as the full Amphibious Attack group would have 24 F35Bs and 66 helicopters.

I do wonder what is a good replacement for the LCUs, possibly a modern CB90. The CB90 if used on a Damen Crossover Combat could also act as a fast attack boat. The Crossover can carry three of these so in the situation where there are swarms of attack boats threatening a merchant ship as is the situation in the Persian Gulf. Not only would the Republican Guard have a frigate to deal with but three attack boats mixing it up.

So what is the cost of my idea for the T32s £3billion for the Canberra type ships £1.5 – £3 billion overall £10 billion max, this would include the F35Bs, extra whirlybirds and CB90s.

The LHDs could serve in other roles such as escort carrier, anti submarine carrier etc.

So that is what I would do if I had the chance to rebuild the Navy and give the Army something to build on.

Yes you might say the cost the cost, this would be a seven to ten year build plan, 40% of this investment comes directly back to the treasury in tax. It would also mean that people will need to be trained and employed saving more money in benifit payments say 10%. Our ship yards and supporting industry becomes more effective possibly meaning more international orders. So the real cost of investment is less than 50% of the total sum.

It is the role of the Point Class ships to land the Army in Europe or in the Middle East with the heavy equipment, and a significant number of troops would arrive by aircraft as well. No point in the Army pinching the role of the RM.

Yes, the Albion’s need to be escorted by a carrier for air cover and close air support.