New pledges announced in Queen’s Speech for the Armed Forces

While I agree it sounds ominous, there is actually the potential that this could be of benefit to the MoD. Based on what Cummings and Boris have been quoted as saying, it’s defence PROCUREMENT that they have the biggest issue with.

We’ve all been moaning about MoD procurement for decades. Projects that end up costing double the original estimates, are years late, and often have faults that the MoD then pays to correct. We COULD be about to see a massive overhaul of how the MoD funds projects, for example paying the lower upfront cost instead of paying more in installments over multiple years to fit into restrictive budgets (like the T26 programme).

Not saying this is definite or even likely, but it’s plausible enough that it’s worth considering.

I tend to agree Callum, it could be the harbinger of doom … but I think (and hope) its a signal that BAE Systems and other key players, gets a gun put to its collective head, with the strong message of stop fleecing the tax payer or else!

As we have discussed before here, the MOD has to start doing its core job regarding procurement, I hope this is the primary area DC sets the wrecking ball into:

Its not rocket science…

Provide the equipment the armed forces actually ask for, in a timely and cost effective manner, instead of the current policy of moving as fast as treacle, looking for a domestically manufactured alternative, virtually always late, often at double the cost, Watchkeeper, Wildcat, etc etc.

Caveats to this are Warship building being UK based, but everything else, should be open to industry to bid for…

I’m all for project Tempest, but not at the cost of draining the defence budget dry. Its up to BAE to prove they can build a strong international base for it to continue, hopefully they will achieve this goal.

The MOD has to stop being the public relations department of the British arms industry, this is the job of the DTI, not the MOD!

Once again I agree with you John.
I’ve said it for years, the needs of British industry are always put before the military. Military contracts are seen as industrial policy giving nice juicy carrots to local constituencies keeping their MP happy, or retired brass get their vested interest nests nicely feathered.

Under Corbyn this would have been the same only far worse.

I hope DC shakes MoD procurement to the core.

If as others suspect he takes that further and interferes with structure, policies and the Orbat then I’ll be the first to complain and happy to admit I was wrong.

Until then it is the usual speculation doom and gloom.

There’s little doubt (and none as far as I’m concerned) that business has too much sway with MOD procurement. If this is going to be the target of any government attempts to save our tax money then I’m all for it. Its not just the big items like ships and aircraft, the price of pretty much everything in the stores system seemed vastly inflated.

A lot of Western democracies have the same problem, instead of serving the M.O.D, the Armed services, Government and British people…they serve their own interests and shareholders.
Boris Johnson needs to chair a meeting of UK defence contractors and tell them in a stern but polite manner that they need to do as they’re told or they’ll lose the very lucrative contracts they have.
In my opinion, BAE systems is probably the worst culprit for this and if I’m honest it really pi**es me off, this is our taxpayers money they’re using and they need to get their priorities right.

If defence procurement gets shaken to the core U.K. Defence will suffer for years after. Remember, no industry, no jobs, no economy, no taxes, no military, no defence…

Skeptical? More like “prophet of doom” I say.
The British military industrial complex needs a big shake up, they need to be told to get their priorities right or they’ll get penalties for missing vital deadlines, over spending etc.
If the Government don’t get control, they will continue to call the shots and dictate what goes on.

They do it Daniele because they’ve been allowed to do it for decades, it’s highly unethical in my opinion and they should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves. It’s our hard earned taxes that fund our Armed Forces and they should get the best hardware quickly, efficiently and at a price that is not extortionate.
It should be their aim to do what’s right for our Armed Forces, not what’s best for them….or should I say “you’ll get it..eventually, but at a time and cost that suits us and our shareholders”
Our defence industry isn’t the only one that operates like this, just look at how controlling the US military industrial complex is as another example but…….Big Don Trump has been putting a rocket up their backsides, especially with the F-35 programme. They soon banged those out once he cracked the whip. LMAO!!

I totally agree John, it’s all these delays and delays and farting about over procurement that eats up tens of millions, probably pore actually, every single year. Every single time one of these companies gets a contract to design and develop something, we’re been held up and robbed, they might as well wear a flouncy coat have a musket pistol and be Dick Turpin for Christ sake.
I could sit here and list shed loads of Projects that are underway… apparently…and not one of them is going through or went through the process quickly, easily and efficiently. NOT ONE!!
Even though BAE systems are a brilliant company that come out with some fantastic hardware, they dick around for ages and cost us taxpayers a ruddy fortune.

Personally I will be interested to see what they come up with. Are we buying the right kit at the right price? Ever since the dawn of time armies have been guilty of kitting themselves up for the last war and not the next.

It is in the interests of some of the suppliers to sell old expensive kit when what we might need to cheaper inexpensive kit. Sometimes an outsider can give a new perspective. DC does like to cut through the c**p and challenge conventional wisdom. Worth listening to what he has to say.

I bet that all of the negative comments on here are from scaremongering remoaners, Boris and his advisors know what needs to be done and they’ll do it whether Bae systems likes it or not.
Their purpose is to design, develop and supply the best military hardware available to our Armed Forces quickly and efficiently. They fart about all the time because unfortunately for us, their delays costs tens of millions…. probably more.

Callum, this is extremely complicated. Many clever people have had a go at procurement reform and reorganising DE&S. Every reform has had its little successes but equally its string of failures, has distracted key staff from the job of procurement and set back the equipment programme by years. Show me a single major procurement programme, public or private that hasn’t run into difficulties? It’s the nature of the beast.

Too many years between procurements leading to a loss of expertise in industry and a new generation having to relearn the mistakes of the previous. That’s the fault of government, not MoD or Service Chiefs.

The famous conspiracy of optimism between MoD and industry. Industry over promises and underquotes to win the competition. MoD laps it up and drives down costs further in negotiations because that’s its job. In the end it’s no wonder programmes come in late and over budget. But without that conspiracy of optimism major programmes would never get launched. MoD would deem them unaffordable and industry would lose too many bids. One option is to go back to cost-plus procurement with strong gain/pain incentivisation clauses. Another is just to buy everything off the shelf. Only working, proven technology. But that would mean the end of the national industrial base.

One point you mention is up-front funding. Good point. There should be much more up-front funding to de-risk proposed solutions before launching them. Governments don’t like that however. They like to string out procurement into the never never making it someone else’s problem in the future and not having to spend money now. Invariably that results in gross over-spends in the life of the programme.

Most modern technology relies on software driven systems with massive integration challenges. We have a severe shortage of decent software engineers and the good ones are working in high paying jobs in tech companies with budgets bigger than national economies. That’s the fault primarily of our educational system, but it’s a curse that affects the whole of Europe and even the US. China will inevitably win this race eventually.

Finally Service Chiefs have a lot to answer for here. Key User Requirements change many times and in many instances pressure is exerted on industry to put systems into production even before designs are mature with the result of atrocious entry into service problems.

It’s easy to blame MoD, DE&S and industry when the real culprit is the way governments spend money but still demand quick propagandist headlines. I don’t think DomCum will prove any better than his predecessors at ‘sorting out’ procurement. He’ll just wreck havoc, destroy morale and set back (or slash) the equipment budget. We shall be feeling the effects of this latest bit of political propagandism for years to come.

Well said. Project management is not easy. Naval gazing is fun! But the truth is we don’t do too badly compared to our peers.

He’s also stated that our defence budget will increase over and above the required 2% of GDP so, in my opinion things will get better for our Armed Forces. The procurement process needs streamlining and this is what I think they’re talking about when it comes to “cutting the cloth”. Look at how long we’ve been farting about over the Ajax program, all the farting about with the upgrades to both the Warrior and Chally 2 etc.. and time costs millions and millions in this industry…money that could be better used elsewhere.

You have a point there!

I fear, as an electorate, we get the government that we deserve! So few are prepared to stand up for their beliefs. There needs to be a greater involvement in grass-roots politics from the electorate. Education is the key to this….so many don’t know or, don’t want to know. Liars and cheats are accepted, as long as they win.

I agree. My dad voted to leave based entirely on fake news… Much of it written by Boris decades ago when he was at the Spectator! I asked him to explain how the EU worked and he merely said “I Don’t care, I know it is undemocratic and that is all I need to know”… Our countries future is decided by people like him!!! He still hates France for helping Argentina throughout the Falklands war despite that being totally untrue!

Unfortunately you can’t legislate against ignorance. As Sole pointed out a few weeks ago, the popular press in this country bears a heavy responsibility in promoting myths and scandalous untruths mainly to sell newspapers, but also for unscrupulous political purposes. Unfortunately, many simply do not want to address these issues….they feel comfortable with their own prejudices and read or listen to the media that supports them!

This is the issue. To be honest I do not really blame the tabloid press, it is a business trying to make money. They are able to make money because people buy their papers. Those to blame are the ones buying papers that are known to be biased and could not tell the truth if their lives depended on it.

If someone reads that rubbish and blindly believes it then they are the problem we have right now. Basically most people simply can’t be bothered to spend even a tiny amount of time researching things either because they are too lazy, not educated enough or just purely because they do not want their view on the world challenged in their own minds.

Ah, Plato’s Cave….it was ever thus!

Indeed… My dads shadows are the racist, homophobic and insular attitudes of his time. To exit his cave he would have to accept that much of what he knows is wrong… He is not going to ever do that.

I mean, he genuinely thinks that Black people are an entirely different species to white people!

And he gets to vote!

I have a similar problem with an older brother. When it is family, it makes things so difficult. I lost my father when I was 13….I wish that I had spent more time talking to him…regardless of any different views that we may have had. In the early 1980’s I put my first oil-rig online…a jack-up in 200ft of water. Laid a buoy pattern and brought the barge onto location….the nav was dropping in and out and the rig was lit up like bloody Manhattan…it was 2 am in the morning….squeaky arsehole time. After chain smoking a pack of fags I went out on deck….my first thought was…I wish my Father could have seen that. Whatever your differences, at the end of the day, you need to do your best…don’t leave it too late!

Oh I still talk to him when he is not shouting about crazy stuff. I utterly disagree with much of what he says though as most of it is just idiotic tosh. But then he did not finish school so it is no wonder he is not brilliantly educated.

So only one side ever lies? Only one side ever wants to win an election with untruths and bluster? A persons view is skewed to believe the info out put by the party they support, and to disregard others, no matter the real truth. And because others vote differently or have a different view point that are deemed uneducated? That’s rather an arrogant viewpoint, which has ensured that the Tories get a majority and will remain in power for 10 years! The presumptuous attitude that you are right and others are wrong, shows a lack of maturity and life experience. Be careful of that echo chamber mate!

Nope. Nope and more nope…

You are correct in that politicians on all sides have a tendency to lie. Some voters are also never going to vote for a party other than the one they have always voted for. But I did not say everyone was stupid. I said some people are stupid, others just do not want their views challenged and others are simply ignorant. (There is no other explanation for those that defined the likes of Corbyn, Johnson and trump etc on everything they say or do).

I mean what would you think of a person that regardless of the evidence still thinks the French were fighting with the Argentinians in the Falklands (which by the way was one of the reasons he voted to leave the EU) or that Black people are a different species (again one of the reasons he voted to leave)?

That’s one person, your previous post stated, presumptuously that most are “lazy, not educated enough or just…”. That comment alone is lazy. Most people form a judgment through their own experience and learned knowledge. Is that wrong, is that uneducated? Is that lazy? Again just because someone has a different view doesn’t mean that’s wrong and yours is correct. And be aware who you use as an echo chamber, as it’s easy to pat each other on the back about how righteous you can be and how misguided/wrong/stupid others are. Cheers.

I have not met or heard of a single person that voted leave who knows how the EU even works… Every one of them accuses it of being undemocratic… Every one of them also seems to ignore or own democratic failings and also seems to think that the referendum was a first past the post vote and therefore legally binding and so I democratic to disagree with.

And of course people can have differing views. However if they are based on lies then this opinions are not exactly too valid… I mean how many people still think that the EU banned bent Bananas?

As you have never met a “leaver” who knows how the EU works, I presume all the “remainers” do? I presume you know how the EU works? By saying that simplistic comment proves my point. Your thought process is skewed by your beliefs, in this case it’s about the rights/wrongs of the EU, and your reasoning about the people not on “your side”. However one thing is certain, and in this you are correct, that our Parliament has certainly shown its un democratic side over the last 3 years, and in doing so has ensured an election happened, resulting in a Tory majority, and that Brexit will happen. By trying to force a second referendum, refusing all options put forward and eventually forcing Johnson to call an election (in which they arrogantly presumed they would win) they have ensured Brexit happens and they only have themselves to blame!

Parliament being in deadlock was not undemocratic. Trying to overturn the referendum was also not undemocratic. However, trying to shut down parliament for reasons to stop parliament carrying out its duties is indeed undemocratic. Also our first past the post system is a little weak democratically too given that a disproportionate amount of power can be gained (or lost) compared to votes won.

And yes every remain voter I have spoken too has either k own how the EU works all along or found out for the purpose of the referendum. All of them knew that many of the EUs laws that leavers hate so much were initiated by the UK… All knew that half our immigration has always been controllable but we have never done anything about it. And all of them were at least aware that the UK effectively invented freedom of movement… Oh and all of them were aware that the £350.million in the side of the bus was a lie.

The fact that Johnson is in government right now is far more to do with Corbyn being so horrific a prospect rather than Boris being a great one… Many saw it as a two horse race and decided that out of the two appalling choices, labour was the worst one.

And your reply confirms exactly what I am saying in regard to a persons thought process in support and justification of their position and stance. A leaver can come up with viable reasons why you are wrong. Oh and be careful what you wish for in regard to knocking the first past the post system. I presume you are in favor of moving to a proportionate representation system? If that’s the case then stand by, 2015 election, UKIP 4.4 million votes, no MPs! Imagine if we had proportional representation then! A lot more votes than Lib Dems and SNP (who with 1.1 million got 54 MPs if memory serves me). As you mature, gain life experience, things are never so black and white!

No, this is the point. It is not a matter of opinion it is a matter of fact. Fact and opinion are two very different things. It is unfortunate that the likes of Trump and Dominic Cummings are blurring the lines between fact and opinion but this is purposeful on their part.

It is fact that the referendum was not legally binding. A referendum in UK law is merely an opinion poll. It is a chance for Parliament to ask the public their general view. The referendum on leaving the EU told the government that the country was pretty much split in whether to stay or leave. Their is no requirement for Parliament to do anything particular with that information and it is their to help MPs form their opinions on what to do. (Let’s not forget that Dominic Cummings has said that if the result was the other way around he would have made sure the result was invalidated)

Shutting down parliament however was illegal and therefore an undemocratic move and this was proven by the court decision.

It is also a fact that our representation is not proportional and this can lead to some strange effects. The SNP for instance have a much smaller proportion of the vote than the Lib Dems yet have 4 times the number of seats. The conservatives increased their vote by a smaller amount that the Lib Dems and yet gained a load of new seats while lib Dems lost a seat… The green party got roughly the same number of votes as the SNP yet got one seat compared to 40+ for SNP. So we can say as a fact that the SNP have a disproportionate amount of power in Parliament.

Well it’s not a fact it’s your opinion. So do you agree with PR then, as what other methods do you suggest? If first past the post isn’t your thing, what do you suggest as PR would have made UKIP the third biggest party! And you ignored my point about the election and the fact the remainers have ensured the Tories are now in. Thoughts?

How is it opinion? It is clear fact!

Remainders did not ensure that Johnson won, corbyn and momentum did that by being even more unelectable than a pathological lier who hid away from the electorate at every opportunity. That was some going but Corbyn was so bad it was a forgone conclusion.

And there are various forms of PR voting. If it ended up with UKIP as the third largest party then so be it if they have the votes to warrant it.

Step back a moment mate. I replied, and am stating that your post saying that leavers were uneducated etc was your opinion not fact. You decided to elaborate in your response, with more statements. You still have not addressed, or purposely ignored my comment in that, your statement was out of order and certainly not a fact that levers are/we’re uneducated etc.

So if you aren’t keen on our current way of voting,(which you raised when criticizing a Johnson win) first past the post, why not give an opinion on another option? Was first past the post only bad if your party of choice didn’t win? Will 13 plus million or so Tory voters agree? It’s all about perspective and opinion. PR would ensure UKIP would have pushed Brexit through 3 years ago and the SNP would have a lot less seats. As it is, remainer MPs have ensured Johnson was forced to call an election, he won, we will leave the EU, and their gamble wirh the opinions of the “uneducated” electorate did not pay off. Any way shall we get back to military matters, as this is indeed a military comments site! Regards.

The statement you gave that leavers are “uneducated blah blah” is certainly not a fact, that is your opinion. This is not rocket science, all your other continued statements, which you post then refer to, I am not at all interested in or challenging. I am challenging your original assertions that all leavers are uneducated etc, is not a fact and is your opinion. Try to stick to this, instead of an attempt to put in a smoke screen with other assertions and comments.

And remainers DID ensure Johnson won (you need to understand politics) as Parliment voted against Johnsons deal on 3 occaisions, Lib Dems wanted an election (and stated that), and by MPS refusing the deal a last time, the only way to break the deadlock was an election. They could have agreed Johnsons deal, but wanted to try for another referendum. MPs though there would be a hung Parliment, after an election, and thereby ensuring more deadlock, but they got it wrong. Yes Corbyn was partialy to blame for Labour losing (or a number of important reasons) but that was AFTER an election was called. Remainer MPS forced the election, and got burnt.

As for pathalogical liar, again all politicians lie, but is that a fact, or your opinion? methinks thats an opinion. And not sure where you are going with the PR thing. You critisized the current sytem, and when i said if we had PR then it would certainly not be in the big 3s favour, you then post telling me we dont have a PR system? I know that, and am saying be careful what you initialy wished for (yet again going back to your original post, which again you seem to be ignoring). As if we had PR, as opposed to the current system, UKIP would be pulling the strings, Lib Dems would be in the weeds, and we would have left the EU 3 years ago.

Anyway back to the military subject matter in hand, what do you think about the current defence budget, the promises made by the Tories, and the future of NATO?

I have to say I am bored now (maybe its because im not educated enough, who knows) and we will continue to disagree Iam sure. Therefore I will wish you a happy new year and lets hope Brexit turns out to be in everyones favour.

Johnson has made a career out of lying! Many of the myths that surround the EU and that many leavers believe are true come from Boris when he was a journalist for the spectator. He made a living out of selling stories that were entirely made up! He then becomes a MP and again lies… £350 million (okay not his idea but the idea of his advisor), kippers being frozen to satisfy EU law… Oh and the fact check service they masqueraded as… Yes politicians lie to some extent but analysis of the conservative campaign material showed that 80% was peddling falsehoods! 80%!!! 40 new hospitals… Refusing to acknowledge things he has written. Agreeing to interviews then refusing to take part. He can. Or help but lie. I suppose you could ask his ex wife about that too…

And as for remainders being uneducated. I did not say that all.ofbrhem were. However if you analyse what their claims are then clearly they have no idea how things really work. So why is that? Especially when they are so adamant about their claims. Johnson would not be able to get away with the lies if people were better informed.

As for defence spending. I will believe it when I see it. The conservative spending plans are unaffordable so I doubt we will see the spending that was promised. I would love to be proven wrong but I doubt I will.

No you said “most” leavers (not remainers, you are confusing yourself). And if we “analyse their claims are then they have no idea how things realy work”. Damn you just cannot stop yourself mate, what is it with some people. That sort of attitude ensured that most people outside the London bubble chinned off the remainers, with their self righteous, ” I know best, you know nothing” attitude. Take a step back mate and realise thats it isnt the way to go.

Lol yes leavers not remainders…

Every single leaver I have spoken to claims that the EU is undemocratic. They also can not explain how the EU actually works…

What does that tell you! They also believe the lies about kippers being restricted by the EU (just because Johnson said so) and nice that the EU has banned bent Bananas (again a Johnson lie) In fact all.of them also blame the EU for Abu Hamza taking so long to be extradited! The EU is not perfect but the false myths are extraordinary and are almost entirely peddled by UK tabloids and leave MPs… Now if people properly educated themselves on the matter then they would obviously know these were lies, however they do not and as such are either stupid, ignorant or simply do not want their views challenged.

There you go again, you can’t stop can you, the presumptuous attitude that all leavers are stupid etc is wrong, and is a rather simplistic childish view which has no evidence or facts to back it up. What a terribly arrogant and sadly presumptuous attitude.

Thanks for an attempt at patronizing me, in regard to opinion/fact/referendums etc, I’ve been around for a while, and understand such things. It’s that attitude that has turned people away from the self righteous left mate. Cheers

I am not on the left, I have voted conservative in every general election apart from the latest one. I am far from a leftie. I was also not patronising you, it is just that nothing you have said leads me to believe you can discern fact from opinion.

Thanks for another effort at talking AT someone, not TO!

And you said most, not some.

And I know a couple of Uni snowflakes who voted to remain in the EU so the didn’t have to “change their money” when traveling to the EU???? Nope me neither? It takes all sorts doesn’t it!

1989? great year to start, still with a cold war budget, then came options for change, did you see much upheaval in the early 90s?

Operational analysis is an interesting field, I work a lot with other forces and its interesting to see how they conducted certain operations successfully in a manner we would never of even attempted.

The problem with changing the requirement is for you its a massive f**k about but you would will probably find that the spec was wrong to start with because of the reasons you stated up thread, 1 X random officer with his career to promote. Also, you have to take into account the time it takes to develop a system, the world changes so quickly some requirements have to change, look at TRACER/FRES/SCOUT/AJAX.

I think defence procurement is totally messed up, off the shelf is the way forward, I don’t not take a bus because it doesn’t drop me off at my doorstep, some specs are close enough, like CV90 for Scout.

What do you do now if you don’t mind me asking?

BV

Yeh, options for change nuf said.

Operational Analysis (OA) is applied to a wider range of uses these days. We did have a analysts who deployed with various HQ’s on training and operational deployments. I was involved in supporting procurement (being a disabled person going front line was not open to me, sadly). OA actually started as a front support specialism…

Getting the spec right is a challenge especially when seeking to develop new kit and you are right the spec can go out of date. However, we had developed tools to help us and the military advisors we worked with anticipate future developments. We also had access to a lot of scientific advice so being totally wrong was unlikely.

What was more probable was that the spec would be designed to meet a too arrow set of issues, often current. A well drafted specification would include ‘stretch’ sometime refered to as ‘fit for but not with’. Unfortunately, that became too useful to the politicians as a way to make cuts, but that is another argument.

I believe that rather than trying to change the spec and then expect the first of type to meet that spec a better approach would be to freeze the spec and get on with the development of the equipment. Any required changes could then be carried forward into the first capability upgrade. That way the basic kit gets into service quickly and capabilities required can then brought into service as new threats arise, as they will throughout the service life of the equipment.

I think you are spot on with the spec, if you design in modularity knowing full well a spec isn’t going to be 100%, and assume and budget for an A1/A2 variant things would work so much better. What would that look like practically in something like a ship or tank? more space around white boxes for growth? more space for gun upgrades?

BV

The Astute class subs underlined that building big is an advantage not only for growth in capability but also with maintenance. That lesson appers to have been taken forward into the T45, T26 and even the T31 classes. Steel is cheap and space is free. OK bigger ships can put a strain on dockyard space, but the significant upgrades to the quays for the QEC was massively expensive when compared to the cost of the capability it is supporting and, if looked after properly and built to spec, concrete can last a very long time.

As for tanks and other vehicles that can be more of a challenge as they are more limited in size and building big can have negative tactical and operational impacts (more so than at sea I think). Neverthless, putting some thought into future developments in the basics (armour, mobility and fire power), defensive aids suites and novel [additional] weapons such as RF or laser directed energy weapons and you could potentially give yourself room for significant future developments.

All electric power systems will come as wider society moves in that direction, so any next generation vehicle will likely be heavily influenced by that trend. No good trying to stick with diesels if the rest of the world stops using them and the refinaries close down. I think the defence equipment programme, particularly with vehicles, could find itself trying to deal with some very disruptive changes in the next 20 years – which is not that long. A colleague of mine was modelling operational stuff for the QEC 20 years ago!

Another disruptive tech is hub drives. Search hub motor for cars. Then think about putting a 50hp hub drive in every road wheel and all 4 sprockets and you could put 800hp on an armoured vicle without taking up any space in the hull! I believe this has already been done experimentally as well…

Challenges and opportunities abound – such is the complexity facing decision makers and boy it is a tough set of choices. Easy to critise them but those who make the biggest noise should try making the decisions…

Could have sworn I left a reply but thank you both for this discussion. This is the sort of stuff I was hoping to read when I found this site, guys who know what they’re talking about on a subject I know little. I still think the MOD pays vastly over the top for a lot of the small/consumable stuff as well as the larger stuff.

Good explanations, I have never looked at size from a maintenance point of view, having space around a an engine for instance means more efficient work, not having to contort your self hanging upside down to reach a component with a tool you had to manufacture your self to make it easy.

All electric is a fascinating area of development, I have seen some examples for an all electric AFV from the 90s and it was awful, it would be interesting to see what we can make now with decades of civilian investment.

Here are some questions bases on what you have said about hub drives. Basic spec, warrior size composite hull, driver front left small generator front right, large array of batteries under the floor with in hub drive and any turret to fit the requirement.

Concept of ops #1. 1980s style cold war situation in West Germany, 99 red balloons on the radio and bad moustaches aplenty. Said vehicle advancing east towards those Commie bast***s and happens upon a blue feature running north to south. Instead of waiting for an engineer to put a bridge in, said vehicle switches to battery (ala U-Boat) and plods under the river and out the other side, the air trapped in the vehicle being enough to sustain the crew for the 30 seconds needed to cross.

Concept of ops #2. Same 1980s situation, said vehicle takes a hit to its engine and is “M” killed, Troop corporal comes along, unravels a 30ft power cable (a brown one, all cables were brown back then) and plugs both vehicles into each other. Both can now self recover back to the rear for a pack change without REME assets.

Question 1. Power. Would the small generator provide enough power to run the electric motors plus some left over for battery charging?

Question 2. Weight management. would the weight of the batteries, motors, cables have a detrimental effect on the overall weight of the vehicle?

Question 3. Cost. Would this system be prohibitively expensive due to the expensive materials used?

Where is Elon Musk when you need him.

BV

Hi BV,

Here are a couple of QinetiQ projects. The Plastic AFV was parked in the yard at Farnborough while it was being developed and I got to have a brief look at it.

Plastic Tank https://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2015/01/whatever-happened-plastic-tank/

Hybrid System for AFV https://www.theengineer.co.uk/qinetiq-unveils-high-voltage-fighting-vehicle/

Both programmes go back some years now, but stuff has and probably is continuing…

As for your concept 1) an electric driven plastic tank may well float rather like, I think, the M113 was amphibious.

Concept 2) yup! Redundancy is in effect built into such drives. A drive system could be self charging using either a small bio-fueled engine or fuel cells. My understanding is that AFV’s spend a lot of time in hull down positions so battery packs could give a boast power for maneuvering etc. i.e. engine (or fuels cells) plus battery pack to full power… Of course lots of untested assumptions in this idea!!!

You’re welcome, lthough to be honest I am probably getting a bit out of date 🙂

You might be right about the consumables, not sure why that would be to be honest, possibly down to Tressury Rules which are very perscriptive…

And you’ll ALSO notice, if you look on the current Tempest thread, Harold is continuing in similar vein that Tempest is a “vanity” project, just like his comments against nuclear tech in Cornwall recently on other recent articles.

It’s all ideology, an ideology that the UK is nobody and should disarm, withdraw, quit.

You’ll also note a Mac replied to him. Is HE being waspish too? Are you going to pull him up for daring to reply to Harolds comments too?

I’m loving this, pointing out the sheer Hypocricy.

“Daniele, do you spend a lot of time alone in your signal box…it would seem that you do. ”

Not at all. I’m at home. Signal boxes have nothing to do with your evasiveness.

“A veritable barrage of verbosity…most of which is more to do with your own personal justification than anything that I have written.”

Nope, just me contradicting you. It seems like verbosity except you give me cause to use so many words, I have a lot of ammunition. You interrupted my conversation with Harold remember, which gives me the right to justify myself!
Your points now are still not answering my points above where I explained WHY I was replying to Harold.

But I see as usual you have ignored my offer to respond to my points with your own version. So I shall have to re write them again so you don’t make up your own.

” I didn’t raise the issue of Corbyn’s advisors as it is not relevant….the only advisors that are relevant are the ones in the present government. I don’t wish to appear rude but, you address points that I haven’t even made.”

My comment on Corbyn and N Korea and advisors was adding balance to the debate and justifying myself after you “refereed” my responses to Harold, so whether you raised them or not are irrelevant aren’t they.

By the way, this from Andy reeves on the Scottish Government Nuclear Weapons thread on 2/12/19

“daniele keep up all your beliefs, you have the same right to express your opinions on here as anyone. it is the ‘be all and know alls on the site who cannot accept another’s contrary opinions without lashing out with insults and childish innuendos”

And here we are. Your post above – Insults and childish innuendos. What like Signal boxes, 90mph trains, being better behaved and “verbosity”
Your words above, not mine. Nothing to do with the points above between me and Harold and which you STILL Ignore!
The other day another poster was called a “class A Pratt” by yourself. Keep to the comments made please, my points above, not reverting to comments about my job and trains, to which you know nothing.

I cannot find it now, but a while ago when we were discussing the upcoming election and I outlined my fears on a Corbyn government regarding defence you agreed with me! Well my points above ARE about defence to Harold, on the same ideology, and I’m being waspish. Yet another contradiction.

Lets look at your first reply to me –

“Why should Harold’s information and views be any less correct than yours are?”

Nothing to do with my points to him. More like my own leanings contradict your own so you had to intervene.

“I know you want to believe the best of this government….but where is your evidence to suggest that your dreams will come true?”

Again, whats this to do with my rebutal of Harolds newspaper comments, vanity projects and other comments?
Nothing, your responding to my leanings again because you oppose them.

“At the moment only Jonathan Cainer can tell what that bunch of sods is up to. I saw the Tory front bench on the TV this morning….wouldn’t buy a used car from any of them. The worst political representation this country has had this side of the war. At least Thatcher had integrity!”

At least the Cainer comment made me laugh! Nothing to do with my points again to Harold.

My points, questions to Harold were, and I outline them below because like a slippery eel you still will not answer them AS I ASKED.

“Is this the same Harold from VFP broadcasting the same doom and gloom from a few years back?

No reply yet. And just a question.

“If youngsters are so turned off how come the recent “snowflake” recruitment campaign went so well?”

A perfectly acceptable rebuttal to his referring to recruitment.

“The local paper seems very knowledgeable on the program for the fleet? It has been announced already what the QEC will have sailing with it when it deploys for the first time. Did the paper include allied participation?

In response to his comment that that only 3 destroyers are available. And irrelevant as I explained as the RN HAS ALREADY ANNOUNCED what will sail.

“With an ageing population and the UK adding a million people every 4 years to the population what does anyone expect regards NHS waiting? Even with an end of austerity ( hopefully ) and a big NHS boost I’d expect the same for many years until the pressure eases. If ever.
You could spend 100 billion more and it will still be the same black hole. It has nothing to do with our 2% defence spend.
Roads? Yes, there are lots of potholes locally here too.
2% of GDP on Defence is a pitunce compared to the wealth of this nation. So your message for the UK to stand down from world affairs to be replaced by another is just your ideology I suspect?”

My opinions. Which I am waspish to declare.

“Did you vote Corbyn? Or are you another Cornish Independence supporter?”

Simple questions. No response.

“Lots of doom and gloom about. I’m mildly optimistic, as are others. How many times have we bemoaned delays and costs of equipment here?”

Perfectly acceptable summary of this current thread and the current mood.

So now will you please answer each and every one of my points to Harold above?

You usually don’t, but resort to insults or innuendo, back down ( as another poster you clash with here stated rightly ) or ignore.

You started this debate, and I will not back down til it is resolved or someone flags it and George removes it.

Hopefully before it is thousands will see it and see the reality.

As for the trains, there was a landslide today! No 90 mph anywhere. That, in case your wondering, is an olive branch, because I get sick of justifying myself to you over and over when you get on your high horse.

Nurse! He’s out of bed again!!!!!!!!
Daniele, I really do think you need some help. I said that you were being waspish today. You seem to have taken grossly exaggerated offence to this…we are all waspish at times on this forum, even me. Might I point out that all you have achieved so far is to prove my point. Why would I even bother to address arguments to points that I haven’t even made. If you are feeling upset by teacher asking you to respect other people’s opinions then maybe you need to take a breath of fresh air in the playground. I know that you think that holding the views that you do is akin to being in a state of grace…but I can assure you that it is not. You are becoming more like your thuggish friends in not being able to brook criticism! Look at what you have written…it is petulant and really childish. Grow up!

Not at all. I responded to another’s opinion ( Harold ) and posed questions of my own back. That is not disrespecting, that is challenging another point of view.

And you still cannot answer my questions I outlined politely above.

What have I written that is childish and petulant? I outlined perfectly clearly my position.

Brook Criticism? Look who’s talking with the words you are using. I’ve already outlined why. Teacher? That is actually half the issue here.

It is now you who is reverting to type as others have said.

“it is petulant and really childish. Grow up!”

No. I’m defending my opinion.

Just like Airborne. I assume you meant him ( who you call a thuggish friend ) is “a class A pratt. Your words not mine.

Just like Chris H, when he corrected your comments, was called “go make your tea for mum Tory boy” which I think George deleted way back.

Childish and petulant? Really?

I’m still here calm.

Maybe in fact it is you who cannot brook criticism, and reverts to wild comments like you have just done.

You will never win. I will respond calmly to your comments as I did above.

By the way I have just asked my wife to sit and read this whole sorry episode. She is quite incredulous at your behaviour…really. And she is a teacher.

Come on chum…you lost it, and what’s more, you know it. Bringing your wife into this is, at best, really weak. 🙂

No, just confirming that you’ve lost it and I made no errors along the way! Chum.

She thinks you’re winding me up…by the looks of it it’s you who are wound up by the hysterical comments coming my way.
As Airborne said “all too easy”

And Harold STILL has not replied to my points with a valid response that would show I’m mistaken in the points I raised.

Now you are resorting to the usual infantile Ya Boo comments of the intellectually challenged. You lost it Daniele and you know it! You absurdly claim that my remarks are hysterical 🙂 That is just silly infantile projectionism. Next time Daniele, if you want to flex your literary muscles, pick on someone that hasn’t got your number!

“You absurdly claim that my remarks are hysterical ”

Infantile. Childish. Nurses. I need help. Petulant. Childish. Grow up. Just a few used by yourself. Thuggish friends. The Intellectually challenged.

Look in the mirror “chum”

You are sounding deranged. Really. As Chris H once said – “those who resort to throwing insults have already lost the argument.” I so hope he’s reading this happy exchange and laughing like I am.

I’ve no more time for you today. I’m currently discussing the merits of the 155mm over on the M109 thread with another knowledgeable poster.
Keep this up on this thread by all means.
You will never win. I will remain calm while you continue to throw those comments my way.

Bless you, you really are a sweetie under all that bluff right-wing claptrap. Have a wonderful Christmas and here’s to a better standard of debate in 2020!

“Infantile. Childish. Nurses. I need help. Petulant. Childish. Grow up. Thuggish friends. The Intellectually challenged.

A better standard of “debate” ???

Good Grief!

“Next time Daniele, if you want to flex your literary muscles, pick on someone that hasn’t got your number!”

I didn’t. You did. Remember? When you refereed my comments and declared them to be waspish.

I’m just responding in kind and thoroughly enjoying myself.

I’m so glad you enjoyed yourself, it is Christmas after all. A time of goodwill to all; but you still lost it 🙂

Got to say pal Daniele smashed you 10-1 on the comments and replies! You must try harder to add some depth to your one dimensional oft repeated replies and comments. I know Daniele won’t approve of me lowering this to a competition, but alas, he won. Never mind H as losing is becoming the default setting for you. And once again, many many thanks for your efforts.

I love the child like attitude you have and portray. It’s all about how someone “else has lost it” and how you have won the intellectual argument. It’s quite sad, but amusing to read. Do you generally feel that you should have been better than you are? Hence your avatar? Have you not quite achieved what you think you deserve? Is it eating you inside and you feel the need to try to feel superuor and dominate the situation? Never mind pal, keep posting as it’s mildly amusing. Appreciate your posts, keep them up as thankfully we still live in a relatively democratic country and the pretentious attitude of some has ensured that.

Mate it’s thanks to people like this that the Tories have a majority, as the patronizing wannabe “know it type” attitude has ensured the regular people in this country have had enough of being spoken to like they are stupid and being told how to behave/vote! We should be thanking H and his ilk! Thanks H, cheers Daniele.

Thanks for that Airbore…the usual proto-fascistic tripe. When it comes to democracy you wouldn’t know your arse from your elbow. And how would you know about regular people in this country? What does that even mean? Grade A Pratt!

Ah the thin veneer of your civility! Have to say we do owe you and your ilk one, cheers pal. Keep up the playground taunts and keep plugging away, even now you may achieve that status you think you deserve. Cheers mate you should see my grin!

I was at work that day, but I did my bit by not voting for that sly used car salesmen Blair and persuading others not to.

Holding up the traffic in Westminster that day didn’t seem to accomplish much unfortunately.

Yes you are right John….holding up the traffic didn’t achieve much…but it’s the thought that counts. However, trying to persuade people not vote for Blair didn’t work either. The most successful Labour PM ever!

You’re certainly right there, much like Boris, who will probably turn out to be hated and loved in equal measure Herodotus … We might get three parliaments out of Boris too..

The sad thing about Labours implosion, is the country needs a strong opposition to hold the country to account

When Blair had his landslide, there was nothing to stop or slow his agenda, the irony is that its the strong remain camp that directly engineered the current state of political affairs.

Deliberate blocking of the public’s will by MP’s, caused the Tories to lurch to the right and Labour to lurch to the left, taking us to precisely were we are now….

Certainly very interesting times.

Yes sadly, as a Remainer, I have to agree with you. We got the strategy all wrong! I am so sad about Labour….I was active in the Labour Party in the Thatcher years and saw first hand the corrosive influence of Militant. It ensured a Conservative dominated Parliament for nearly eighteen years. It looks as if Momentum are going to achieve the same sort of self-inflicted wounds on the current Labour Party. What does that clown Johnson have to do to hold on to power with a bunch of dreamers in opposition. Middle England doesn’t do Socialism…Labour will never win under a Corbynist style left-wing leadership. Whilst I have a great deal of sympathy for some of the ideals of the left, they just aren’t the sort of policies that will get them into power! Labour needs to return to being a left of centre social democratic party…..and bloody pronto! Unless they do, your prediction of a three term Boris government is, depressingly, only too real.

Yep, Boris sung the party right and got shot of the remainers, whether it was Boris or Dominic behind the strategy, it was beautifully played.

With the job done, he’s sensibility pivoting to the centre ground, that’s were you build your castle, dig your moat and control the peasants!

Three teams is quite plausible …

I tend to be to the right of center and have no issues with the current state of play, but I would like to see structural reforms made, due to the absolutely disgraceful way the last batch of MP’s behaved….. Though the very public backlash, punishment and utter humiliation they went through, should be a deterrent to future MP’s…. However if it isn’t….

End the fixed term Parliament act

Force a by election if an MP defects

Get rid of the house of Lords, replaced with a
(dare I say it) referendum decided, elected assembly of some sort.

Leading me nicely to referendums …. Make them legally binding and only repeatable every 25 years on serous constitutional matters.

We must never again repeat the vicious and unpleasant division of the last 3 years and allow a rouge Parliament (of any colour) to defy the will of the majority.

Losers consent is an absolutely ‘key’ intrinsic component part of British fair play and the very bedrock of our democracy.

I would come at it from a different direction. First of all I, like many MPs of both parties, subscribe to the philosophy of Edmund Burke who maintained that MPs were not delegates but representatives. That is, they were not there to do the electorates bidding, but had to act by their own conscience. This is a hard one for most people to grasp…but then, Burke was a clever bastard. So, not a delegate; therefore, the MPs that you complain about were perfectly within their right to act on their own conscience; how can I mislead my constituency by supporting a policy that is plainly wrong.
I agree that the fixed parliamentary term is counter-productive and MP’s that swop allegiances should face a bi-election. Lastly, we are a parliamentary democracy not a direct democracy. We elect MP’s to make the sort of difficult decisions for us. Referenda should not be used to get shit parties out of there own internal difficulties. The fact that the Tories have had a plague of metastasising tumours (Dom Cummings words) like the ERG (turds researching their own excrement) and Farage, should not be passed on to the electorate to solve. In short, Referenda are nothing short of weak governments passing the buck. The issues surrounding membership of the EU were too complex for the average voter to reach a coherent decision on. That is what elected governments are for! Oh, and a merry Christmas…nice to have a debate that that isn’t abusive!

Let’s hope the whole country can now get back to reasoned debate, now the electorate have made the decision.

We can blame politics on both sides for whipping up hatred, I only wish the SNP would get the message and stop whipping up their unpleasant brand of nationalist blind hatred.

It never ends well…

Yes, a large degree of political realignment is necessary; Boris has mentioned a return to ‘One Nation Conservatism’, his present cabinet doesn’t look like it! Mind you, apparently a big reshuffle is due in the new year…..I wonder who will exit? As for the SNP, I guess their response is only to be expected….I can quite understand their position!

It’s all about power play, as with all political parties.

Interestingly, there is a detectable annoyance in Scotland with the SNP’s single
‘it’s all England’s fault’ policy, especially when so many domestic problems go apparently unresolved in Scotland.

It’s message is getting tired, (I hear this increasingly from Scottish friends and relatives).

I think we will see the support for indipendance drift away as the new post EU position becomes reality.

We will see, Boris should give consent for a new referendum when we have fully left in 2021, as a blind refusal just plays into their hate your neighbour monologue…

Give them the vote and watch them loose again, as the sensible majority vote to remain.

I would give them no more than 2 years before they start an indy ref 3 campaign!

Then you need to stop using child like abuse then don’t you!