DSEI 2021’s Land Zone will put the power of integration in the spotlight as the British Army looks to build momentum across industry to support its Land Operating Concept for the coming decade, say the organisers.
In order to better adapt to the evolving character of warfare, the British Army say it is enacting a new land operating concept that focuses on integrating government, industry and allies/partners at the highest level in order to drive the tempo of strategic activity.
“Central to this is the ability for Defence and industry to work collaboratively to solve future capability challenges, as outlined under the Army Industrial Engagement Framework launched at DSEI 2019. Industry is now being encouraged to take its place as a lead echelon in the Army’s future force, with new technologies being exploited under the Secretary of State’s Transformation Fund and plans to link the Army Venture Capital Partnership with the National Security Strategic Investment Fund.
Around £100 million has been earmarked for investment in novel technologies in 2021, with hybrid electric drives, human/machine teaming, and the development of a virtual proving ground to accelerate Capability Development and 21st Century Headquarters among the top priorities. Additionally, industry is to play a key role in the planned Army Battle Lab on the Dorset Innovation Park, which will enable small and medium sized companies to collaborate and innovate in a year-round setting that is currently limited to the Army Warfighting Experiment.”
DSEI 2021’s Land Zone, supported by the British Army, will provide a forum for industry to engage with Defence on these initiatives, showcase new equipment and technology, identify potential areas of collaboration, and meet with partners at all levels of the supply chain.
General Sir Mark Carleton-Smith, Chief of the General Staff, said:
“As we look to the future, the British Army will be more expeditionary and more engaged for more of the time and our equipment needs to match the threats and exponential developments in technology. The Army’s relationship with industry will be vital to ensuring it has innovation at the heart of future capability and we will be actively seeking opportunities to develop Defence’s relationship through the Army’s Land Industrial Strategy. On behalf of the Army, I’d like to extend my thanks and best wishes to the DSEI organisers for their help in delivering the Army’s part in DSEI 2021. Everyone is working incredibly hard to ensure the smooth running of the event despite current challenges and this is testament to the DSEI team’s professionalism and its commitment to partnership.”
“It is hugely validating to have the support of the British Army behind DSEI 2021. We believe that DSEI offers the single most valuable opportunity in the biennial defence trade show calendar to connect UK companies and their international counterparts with each other and their end customers across the land, sea and air domains,” Grant Burgham, DSEI Event Director, Clarion Defence & Security, commented.
“We aim to foster business connections at every level and look forward to presenting a world-class industry response to the Army’s requirements as they look to support emerging operating concepts over the coming decade.”
Can someone translate all that for me please?
With £100m at play (peanuts in defense expenditure terms), i think it translates to we are going to throw a tiny amount of money at a load of companies and see if they develop anything useful and to generate a load of news stories that we are heavily investing in modernisation.
Trevor, the key point to take away from the MOD press release is: <b>”As we look to the future, the British Army will be more expeditionary and more engaged for more of the time and our equipment needs to match the threats and exponential developments in technology.</b> Which I read as : ”With the threat of major symmetrical conflict between NATO and Russia on the European mainland diminished , but with a perceived increase of policing actions in 3rd world countries, we are going to take the opportunity to divest the armed forces of proven expensive weapon systems ( MBTs,… Read more »
Alternatively, if 2 blokes setting an IED can kill and maim a AV then either we dont get involved in the first place, certainly not on the ground, or we send in 50,000 and a lot of treasure.
Better still, we involve ourselves a little and train and equip and motivate the locals to defend themselves a lot. Our significant force multipliers in this would we an appropriate trained and equipped cadre of special forces ‘rangers’ to equip and train and work along side out asymetric friends and allies.
It doesn’t work! Having been in that scenario of working with and training locals (Aghans). I can quite categorically state, it doesn’t work. I can’t say why, but after days and days of training, working through ambushes, convoy drills, pepper potting etc, they revert to type. It’s not supposed to be a racist comment, but an observation based on experience. It will take years before they can be competent enough to stand on their own two feet with the capability of not only holding ground. but with enough resourcefulness to go on the offensive. Unfortunately, as soon as they get… Read more »
A fair comment and a well known one.
But as you say … time is needed. Its sad to say but as far as Taliban and ISIS, its a question of keeping killing them as efficiently as possible. But there are other theatres of operations.
Agree farouk.
Sorry, I studied German, some Russian, some Spanish, but did not attempt Higher Beurocratese. Perhaps Babble has a program for that.