The US State Department has approved the potential Foreign Military Sale of AH-64E Apache Helicopters to Poland, a deal estimated to be worth $12.0 billion.
According to the Defense Security Cooperation Agency’s announcement, Poland has expressed interest in purchasing:
- Ninety-six (96) AH-64E Apache Attack Helicopters
- Associated equipment including two hundred ten (210) T700-GE 701D engines, ninety-seven (97) AN/ASQ-170 M-TADS/PNVS, thirty-seven (37) AN/APG-78 Fire Control Radars, ninety-six (96) AN/APR-48B MRFIs, one thousand eight hundred forty-four (1,844) AGM-114R2 Hellfire Missiles, four hundred sixty (460) AGM-179A JAGMs, five hundred eight (508) Stinger 92K Block I Missiles, and seven thousand six hundred fifty (7,650) WGU-59/B APKWS-II Guidance Sections, among others.
- Additional components encompassing radar sets, communication systems, training devices, simulators, ammunition, and various support systems.
The move is seen as a way of enhancing the security of a key NATO ally, thereby ensuring stability and economic progress in Europe.
“This proposed sale will support the foreign policy goals and national security objectives of the United States by improving the security of a North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Ally that is a force for political stability and economic progress in Europe.
The proposed sale will improve Poland’s capability to meet current and future threats by providing a credible force that is capable of deterring adversaries and participating in NATO operations. Poland will have no difficulty absorbing this equipment into its armed forces.”
“96 AH64e” to Poland. The Poles are starting to catch up/overtake Europe’s other militaries with respect to their spending, I expect them to be the number one spender in the European NATO nations soon.
It puts the UK’s Merge 50 in stark contrast. Hopefully, someone remembers how to make the Longbows of Henry V’s era. Because the UK loses importance with replacement platforms always decreasing in number.
We’re not in competition with Poland or our allies but yes, there might be a bit “more than us” envy creeping in. Germany might be feeling it too. You’d hope the UK heads can top up on defence platforms a bit more too. Polish defence is probably coming up off a lower base and it is the significant buffer wall against Russia and Belarus.
I’m flabbergasted at the sheer size, speed, frequency and dollars of these US sales. Is UK industry missing a trick here?
Frigates, AW101, CAMM and a licence to produce AS90 Braveheart turrets for their Krab SPG.
Not to bad.
The Poles are beginning to drop some serious coin of the realm on defense/defence. Bravo! Not only the political class, but the population as a whole, remember the TLC administered by the Nazis, and subsequently, by the Soviets. Unfortunately, the members of the winning WW II coalition appear to have forgotten hard won lessons. 🤔
Morning M8 😉 Sorry but we haven’t forgotten and have been upping the ante for the last few years just not on the same things as Poland. Year on year we spend more money on defence than anyone in NATO other than the US. Poland is arraying out a massive one off uplift in conventional forces but it isn’t really that well balanced, mainly Land Warfare and little else.
What many people forget about U.K. spending is that our entire CASD is declared to NATO. We do have the option of using it when our National Interests are threatened but only in extreme circumstances ( as per US/U.K Mutual Defence and cooperation agreement).
Quite what extreme means is anyone’s guess.🤔
French and US Nuclear weapons are national assets and not declared to NATO which probably explains why Mr Putin and gang tend to wag their Nuc threats at us more than others.
Designing, building and maintaining 4 SSBN 24/7/365 plus a stockpile of 242 Warheads sucks the life out our budget.
To put it in context that single project to replace the boats is estimated to be £31 billion plus £10 billion(contingency which will probably be needed).
The actual cost over the lifetime of the boats including the Missiles and Warheads is estimated at £203 billion.
So we are comparing Apples and Oranges and the same can be said for US and France both are in their replacement process and even the US is struggling to increase conventional expenditure whilst doing that.
I am not surprised that Poland is really going to town on this one as they have a long History of conflict with Russia.
What concerns me is by literally buying an entire new Airforce, Navy and Army what happens when it all needs replacing in @25 years time.
And yep there is one WW2 ally who seems to be asleep at the wheel and they are in your neighbourhood. It may be time to give them a nudge such as a CAG circumventing North America by the Northern Route. Borrow some Icebreakers 1st 😉
I understand what you’re saying but at the end of the day these are tactical assets only. Poland does not have strategic assets such as the Nuclear Deterrent, SSN’s and Carrier Enabled Power Protection. They most certainly have the means to aggressively defend their borders but limited ability to affect world events.
@BigH1979 : Strategic assets don’t tend to be deployed to the border of Russia as some of our troops are with only a dozen tank and a helicopter.
People might say “but we’re in NATO”. The problem arises when something pops off and the host countries forces look to protect their homes and families (and quite rightly too). It leaves a few hundred isolated British soldiers stuffed. In other cases, it leaves a ship isolated and in a dangerous location. The school bully tends to pick on the smallest kid. They don’t pick on the small kid who is also a tae kwon do champion who will give them a bloody nose in immediate defence.
We may have carriers, but not enough crew, half the load out of planes for one. Frigates and Destroyers are either elsewhere or not available. We now read the F35B order may not go past
4846 of the Block 1Westminster’s hubris is always writing cheques our armed forces cannot cash!
I agree with your general sentiments but i replied to your specific comments. Poland’s defence spending will not overtake the UK or France’s whilst we are manufacturing/maintaining the strategic assets i mentioned. Lets compare apples with apples.
@Ex-marine I’ve not heard anything about not making further F35 orders, do you have a source? Fully agree with your hubris comment.
Yes but you have to have a blended mix- we have far to much exquisite kit but not enough of it in terms of attritional reserve or standing power.
Im not arguing with that. Just saying that Poland’s defence budget is nowhere near being the highest in Europe as it doesn’t have the strategic assets. It does have a great looking Army, highly motivated and presumably well supported by the civilian population for obvious nearby reasons.
It’s surely is impressive in the numbers terms,
BUT.
Can Poland design and build its own aircraft carriers? Stealth fighters? Nuclear submarines? Space assets? Etc etc.
Deploy and sustain said forces independently, concurrently with other independent assets and work in an alliance globally?
Yes we wouldn’t will in the numbers terms but we do have a whole host of assets most nations can only dream of which requires significant funding, I’d rather those numerous platforms than 1000mbts….
The main reason the UK Treasury is cool on defence is the island mentality. Also, it does not rank in order of national spending nor is seen as a vote winner. The majority of the UK population cares very little about the armed forces as other more pressing economic issues dominate their lives. In truth, that has always been the status quo until the realm is under threat then the public expects our forces to be ready and well-equipped. Poland is building up its forces because of its geographical importance in Europe and like Japan has placed a significant proportion of its GDP on defence. Britain on the other hand finances its defence principally on being an island even though it operates the majority of its forces abroad. The UK’s level of urgency and military mass is on par with Poland and Japan (Also an island) and our forces are currently on high alert but have to cope with the modest ageing equipment. The men and women in grey suits in the treasury look upon the MOD as a constant pain that refuses to go away and, I guess, No 10 &11 think in similar terms or the state of British defence would be on another level. The ISD for the Army’s new equipment is laughable considering a raging war is being played out in Europe and the current dilatory attitude in Westminster is mind-boggling.
I do wonder about our government 🙄
Poland is rapidly becoming the strongest military in eruope, at least from a ground forces perspective. Pretty impressive considering the size of their economy. Memories of nazi followed by soviet occupation no doubt.
Expect the order for 96 to drop dramatically. $12BN? Have they found a disgruntled oligarch to fund this?!
Nope they are quite capable of funding it themselves. Their Economic growth simply spectacular (one of the fastest on earth). Even taking COVID and the fuel crisis into account 4% growth average over the last 5 years is ….
Compare that to ours ? Which is why we can’t afford an uplift like theirs (that and the debt interest payments).
Seems like a high ratio of Stingers to other weapons, I wonder if having large numbers of a relatively cheap helicopter-borne anti-drone weapon is a lesson coming out of Ukraine.
Thank goodness for war hu?…
And that Ladies and Gentlemen was how to milk the European Union; lesson learned?
The Balts have – £5 – £6Bn for a conventional railway line that conveniently has a trace twice as wide as the EU norm and came in at just below the EU baseline figure, using far cheaper land and labour.
And here we are in the UK when the EU would have spaffed Bns for a HIGH speed link to Scotland.
As the Fun Boy Three once sang… “ain’t what you do, it’s the way that you do it, and that’s what gets results…”
We should always have built the northern part of HS2 first and the east – west Pennine links. Link Scotland to England and cut the SNP off at the knees.
London and the south east are suffering congestive heart failure. Post Brexit the City’s influence is waning. Paris Charles de Gaulle is now the busiest airport in Europe, ahead of Heathrow.
Scotland and the industrial North and Midlands were the heart of the innovation and production of the industrial revolution wealth.
Instead of spending £billions to prop up the Houses of Parliament, Parliament should be moved to where it was born – de Montford, Leicester.
Poland know to play the EU game. We refused to play. Jumped out of our pram.
I’m a Northerner who moved south to live and work. Honestly, it’s missionary work.
Heathrow is still the largest airport in Europe with about 5 million more travellers than Paris
Depends on the unit of measure I think ; available seat kilometers ( LHR) or passengers ( CDG). Since I’ve no idea what an available seat kilometers is I will concede defeat:-)
Poland’s defence budget in 2022 was @$14b. There is a commitment to raise it to 3% of GDP or around $20 b. Personnel numbers, including territorial troops, will increase to 300,000.
Given how much of the increased budget is being spent on full cost US,S Korean or UK equipment, it is striking how much you can afford if-
* you focus on a known major threat
* you don’t have strategic weapons
* you don’t have global pretensions that need a blue water navy and carriers to sustain them.
This is almost the opposite of the approach of the UK Integrated Review.
Global pretensions ? The uk needs a blue water navy as it has 14 overseas territory’s to defend Poland is just a land force which makes sense looking at its geographic position the uk is a island if anything it needs a bigger navy
I was anticipating the comments, which have indeed appeared subsequently, about how little Britain seems to get for a much bigger defence budget. The IR identified Russia as the biggest military threat but then lost sight of that in the rest of the paper as it tried to cover any threat anywhere.
The reason the UK has a blue water navy ( at least a part time one) is not to defend 14 fag end overseas territories, many of which actively undermine the very tax system that funds our forces. It is because we continue to see ourselves in a global role, long after the need for that role has largely disappeared.
Britain is an island nation, Poland is not.
It’s amazing how Poland which has a vastly smaller defect budget than the UK can afford to purchase over 90 Apaches compared to the 50 we have, something isn’t right, we have one of the biggest defense budgets in the world yet have so little to show for it.
We have a blue water navy with 2 carriers and one of the most advanced sub fleets in the world Poland has some tanks and some helicopters
We have a lot to show for it and it’s the expensive stuff that Poland doesn’t have or need. Nuclear submarines/weapons, carriers, destroyers, frigates, forward deployed ships, naval helicopter fleet that’s bigger than most countries airforces, intel aircraft, satellite comms, secret services, listening stations, over horizon radar etc etc. That stuff all costs money. Now all that can be dumped and that would allow lots more tanks, helicopters to be bought but is that what an island nation on the edge of Europe with world wide places to protect needs? Perhaps a rebalance is needed but what to cut to grow elsewhere?
A lot to show for it? An army which could comfortably fit into Wembley stadium, about a 100 Typhoons, a pitiful 148 tanks, 12 frigates, 6 Destroyers which seem to spend more time in dock being repaired, a few dozen or so artillery guns, it’s strange because many other countries with a defense budget far smaller than ours have much more of everything, god knows where the moneys going but it doesn’t seem to get our armed forces much.
That’s an extremely over simplified and limited view of our Armed Force’s, and it’s capabilitys.
Well maybe it is, but I’m not wrong, and it’s far from me saying so, even many in the USA military say the UKs armed forces are so small they no longer regard us as a credible fighting force, I must point out that what we do have is overall pretty good, just nowhere near enough of it, in terms of manpower numbers, aircraft, ships, etc, like I say, many countries with much smaller defense budgets than ours have pretty much more of everything we have.
They don’t have much more of everything. Some nations have more tanks, but don’t have nuclear submarines. Or a nuclear deterrent. Or the ability to deploy globally. And the ability to sustain global Operations. I didn’t see Poland able to deploy to Sudan or Kabul to evacuate nationals. Egypt has a huge army for example, but can’t deploy it beyond its own borders. Simple numbers only tell one very small part of a nations Armed Force’s capability and a nations influence. That is why the UK is still ranked as the 5th most capable Armed Force’s on the planet.
Well I hope you’re right and the many former UK/US military top brass are wrong when they state that all branches of the UK armed forces are to small to sustain operations against a credible opponent, time will tell I suppose.
Well a credible opponent being Russia. And they are getting their arses handed to them by Ukraine.
Only with copious amounts of USA weaponry, predominantly air defense missile systems, without which things would be very different.
And copious amounts of UK weaponry. Still. The largest army in the world has shown the world how exactly how not to invade a neighbouring country. Russia isn’t even close to achieving air superiority. Utterly useless.
“Predominantly Air Defence missile systems”, er wrong, do some research on kit and platforms gifted to Ukraine and you will see your posts is incorrect.
Regarding credible opponents, it’s quite interesting to read their findings.
RAND and the Special Competitive Studies Project brought together technology experts from outside the Pentagon to help run a wargame around China and Taiwan. These are the findings.
As was this should our carriers and escorts be called upon to intervine in such a conflict. The UK still has the best service men and women anywhere and some excellent kit, but we could do with more of both!
F-35B
Its top speed comes in at 1.6 Mach or 1,200mph – that is 1.6 times the speed of sound – and its maximum thrust tops 40,000lbs. The jet has a range of 900 nautical miles and a combat radius of 833km.
Today’s F-35As Not Worth Including In High-End War Games According To Air Force General
“Air Force Lieutenant General Clint Hinote, the service’s Deputy Chief of Staff for Strategy, Integration, and Requirements, made his remarks regarding the F-35A in an interview”
Robert Blay will know more than him of course 😂😆
LINK
“Today’s F-35As Not Worth Including In High-End War Games According To Air Force General”
I think you are being very disingenuous by not posting the full context for a quote made back in 2021. The general made that quote with the regards to a war game that included several scenarios around a full scale Chinese invasion of Taiwan. He was specifically referring to pre TR3 blk4 versions of the F-35. You conveniently left out the part where TR3 F-35s were actually the work horse of the war game and the major limitation was the vast distances need to cover to operate over Chinese airspace which would in this specific scenarios in the war game was left to the future NGAD fighter.
https://www.defensenews.com/training-sim/2021/04/12/a-us-air-force-war-game-shows-what-the-service-needs-to-hold-off-or-win-against-china-in-2030/#.YHR3VTpA2e8.twitter
Ah yes, TR3 blk4 versions of the F-35. And how is that panning out beyond 2030 with an invasion of Taiwan likely before then?
LINK
“An unknown number of new F-35s will be held up as a result of ongoing testing for the TR-3 system, with deliveries expected to start between December 2023 and April 2024.”
And counting, just like the Blk 4 software upgrades.
LINK
And so it goes on.
“The UK is to delay declaring full operating capability (FOC) for its Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning fleet, with a government minister saying it will now happen in 2025 rather than the earlier stated 2023.”
And counting.
LINK
“And how is that panning out beyond 2030 with an invasion of Taiwan likely before then?”
You might be in possession of some ccp inside info that not even the cia has.
Honestly I use to share this point of view but I’m not so sure anymore. The Chinese economy is on very shaky ground and there is simmering discontent among many Chinese citizens. They are also very convinced at this point that the US will come to the aid of Taiwan as both US political parties seem to be in lock step on this issue. Why risk decades of economic and diplomatic progress on a costly war that they are highly likely to lose?
“Why risk decades of economic and diplomatic progress on a costly war that they are highly likely to lose?”
As I posted above and in the war games you mentioned earlier and at what cost without including Tech Refresh 3/ Block 4?
LINK
Keep in mind that those were war games with specific parameters and limitations applied to test different scenarios. There is no telling what those limitations were and how it would actually play out in reality.
“There is no telling what those limitations were and how it would actually play out in reality.”
Clearly, but it doesn’t sound like a clean win either.
Never underestimate your adversary.
“Never underestimate your adversary.”
No arguments from me on this.
👍
I tend to agree that we rely too much on NATO and would be more secure if we built up our land-based ballistic missile defence system.
In the short term, we have the best-trained men and women and a useful package to add to any combined NATO threat to ourselves and our allies.
Bravo. Some comments here are a little basic to say the least.
One cannot compare nations circumstances nor military ability on just numbers.
Unbelievable some people’s views. Looks like our Nigel has missed me over on the Australia post 😄
What countries with smaller budgets have more than Britain?
Your example of Poland is poor. They have just 48 F16s, 2 frigates, 1 SSK.
Poland has no SSN’s, no SSBN’s, no C17s and no carriers.
The polish army’s backbone is still BMP-1, 2S1, BRDM-2, Grad, Dana and until recently, T-72.
For one example of hundreds, the Spanish air force has at least 168 Frontline fighters, Typhoons & F18, the UK can Field about 135, Spain doesn’t even come in the top 10 of the biggest defense budgets, I can go on if you want??
Do you think Spanish people are jumping up and down and comparing themselves to the UK that they lack 2 Carriers of QEC size, SSN, SSBN, GCHQ, the RFA, a network of overseas bases, and a whole list of what else?
Or are they fitting their own military for the strategic circumstances they find themselves in as a nation.
Poland prioritises its land component. For good reason. And they must be kicking themselves that they lack SSN for their littoral Navy…🙄
If you believe our two carriers would last long against the likes of China I’ll have some of what your smoking! Our entire army can comfortably fit inside Wembley stadium, but hey ho, keep cutting and cutting our armed forces down to the bone and we’ll still win against anyone! Doh!!
How about actually answering the points I made Deebee rather than bringing China into the equation?
You’re the one comparing the UK to Poland and to what the Spanish have vs the RAF.
Spain has fewer Typhoons than we do. And they have not been upgraded to the FGR4 standard. We are spending 2.35bn on Typhoon upgrades alone. And Spain does not have F35. Spain does not have the ability to deploy its Typhoons on multiple operations around the world. Its another meaningless comparison. Apart for the fact Spain is an ally. It does not have StormShadow capability or Brimstone 2. Or the litening 5 targeting pod. Or Striker 2 Helmet mounted display. Or the PIRATE system. Nor is Spain getting the ECRS MK 2 Radar. Or the Striker 3 digital helmet mounted display. That is the difference.
Much of your arguments seem to be based around on ‘ what can be deployed abroad ‘ yes the UK has an excellent expeditionary capability, but as I keep saying, nowhere near the amount of manpower, hardware necessary to make any difference, fact.
No, most of his comment there was on capability.
Let me quote them for you.
“It does not have StormShadow capability or Brimstone 2. Or the litening 5 targeting pod. Or Striker 2 Helmet mounted display. Or the PIRATE system. Nor is Spain getting the ECRS MK 2 Radar. Or the Striker 3 digital helmet mounted display. That is the difference.”
Nothing about expeditionary abilities beyond a single sentence.
Once again I can only point out the undenial fact the entire UK military has been cut to the bone, capability comes with numbers, you and others can keep denying this fact all you like, keep deluding yourselves, but an army of 80,000 can’t do what an army of 100,000+ can, a navy of 18 ships can be in as many places as a navy of 20+ ships, an air force of 130 jets can’t achieve what an air for of what 200+ can, all military expects say just the same, what would they know? Goodnight.
Morning Deebee.
I think the point of contention here is that you are only looking at numbers while others look at other factors alongside the numbers issue.
I do not disagree with you regards the cuts and numbers, that has a value all on its own. You’re right, a ship can only be in one place.
But look what numbers did for Iraq, or Russia now.
It is a balance between Quantity and Quality, that Quality being other factors – training, logistics, professionalism, experience, strategic assets we pay for and maintain that others like Poland and Spain lack.
You bemoaned in your first post what they, Poland, get for less spend compared to the UK and why that is. Well posters, including me, are telling you! You ask where the money goes. Look at this site over many years and the articles on the tens of billions on maintenance of kit, infrastructure, and logistics, add to that the nuclear factor, and there is your answer. And the government and MoD issues with procurement costing more on top.
It is not merely a numbers game.
You have a very basic understanding about our Armed Force’s. Or the capability we possess. Just gifting UK hardware to the Ukraine is making a massive difference. If a conflict with Russia broke out, NATO would wipe it out. Easily. The Russians can’t deploy any warships without a fleet of tugs following. Their one and only carrier set on fire and near enough sunk in dry Dock. And you are questioning the UK’s fire power.
No mate, I’m afraid you have a difficulty coming to terms with our military capability, you’ll learn one day, goodnight.
Considering he was in the military himself, what does he need to learn?
Numbers alone do not create capability, there are other factors like high tech that Robert has already mentioned.
Hello mate, been away for a couple of days and left ( deliberately) my phone at home, look I must say you have made some excellent unarguable comments, I got a bit flippant with some of my replies, my original comment was pretty much about how despite the UK having the 6th or 7th biggest defense budget on earth but basically seems to lack ‘bang for buck’ so to speak, I seem to have side tracked myself with some rather flippant comments, I didn’t mention my main gripe which was MoD procurement procedure, take the Ajax debacle for instance, literally billions spent/ squandered yet is there even a single Ajax in service yet? Or going back to when the Type 45 Destroyer program, I think the navy said they needed at least 12 to replace the T42s, the 12 was cut to 10, then 8 then 6! Flipping half the number of what the navy needed, I know it’s not all about numbers, trust me I agree with you 100%, i personally happen to believe far to much of our defense budget is wasted on trident, which we could almost certainly never use without US say so, i just think we could use those billions on giving our conventional forces better & more of what they need, just my opinion of course.
Is that to me or Robert? You replied to yourself so unsure!
If it was to me, no worries mate. Will expand later.
I had a bit to much to drink last night so in all honesty no really sure, but I suppose it could be either one of you guys seeing as you both kind of agree with each other, would you be willing to tell me service you are/were in, I respect your thoughts & comments.
😆 Me, no service, I’m just a civvy researcher.
Robert was in the Royal Navy working on the 3 Invincible Aircraft Carriers amongst other postings. Anything FAA and related Carrier air ops, he is the SME here.
Ok thanks, likewise I’ve never served, I just have an interest in all things military, I blame watching the A-Team as a kid, I’ve only recently come across this site and it makes a change from YouTube, where several months ago some moron from Australia was trying to convince me his country developed the kestrel/Harrier, (seriously) I lost the will to live!
Well this is the site for you to learn. Some characters of note, and there are so many so sorry if I leave some regular posters out.
GB, Gunbuster, is your man for all RN stuff, and is revered, with good reason.
Airborne, as in the name, the Paras.
Dern. Still in the army.
Graham. Many years in the REME.
Davey B, amazing knowledge on all things missiles, avionics, radar, and ex military.
Deep. Clue in his name, served in the Silent Service, SSBN and SSN.
Klonkie. Ex SAAF Vet.
Ian M. Royal Armoured Corps.
Chariot Rider, was MoD in the engineering and science areas.
Sky Blue 1, AAC pilot.
Lusty, not around much, another RN vet.
David Barry, ex RMP.
Richard, Royal Marines.
Robert Blay, as mentioned, FAA.
Farouk, Royal Engineers vet and says it how it is, great in depth research.
Tip if you’re new, click on the posters name, or grav, and you can see their full comment history.
You’ll learn much. 👍
Bloody hell, it’s like a Mafia/ cartel, ok thanks,now anyway about the size of our army…. (Joking)
Firstly, I listed serving or ex I am aware of who post regularly, and I need to ad SB, Supportive Bloke to that list and also BobA.
On the Army, this may surprise you. Although I agree 73K is too small for a nation with a huge budget and one of the worlds biggest economies, I can accept it IF it is equipped and organised effectively. At the moment the ORBAT is a bit of a fudge due to previous screw ups regards General Carters Strike Bdes plan of 2015.
I’d rather a 73K army fully equipped and trained to a 100K one that is not.
I’m also of the RN, RAF, Intelligence first school, which I know my fellow regular posters Dern and Graham disagree with, being Army they would. But as Dern points out, Armies are the ones who win wars, and I cannot really answer or disagree with the point. I just feel with our Island status and the importance of the sea and trade for the UK the RN and RAF should be priority.
But I respect their view entirely.
Anyway, welcome to the forum!
Hi deebs, I see you have chilled out in your responses to others, however did notice you “recently come across this site” 2 years ago mate as selfco 81? Cheers……
In all honesty I have a bit/ a lot of a drink problem, including cocaine use, if I first commented on this site two years ago I really have no recollection of it.
Yes, it’s good to see when someone winds their neck in and then offers an olive branch saying they were a bit out of line.
I was only too happy to accept. So many on here hide or won’t face up, reply, make up, whatever, after taking offense at posters attempting to correct an error or offering an alternate view.
Deebe did, that should be respected.
Agreed mate, we take things at face value, and give everyone the benefit of the doubt, and as much info, advice, guide and subject matter experience as we can! I have to say I have learnt a lot of info from the SMEs on this site mate, and that includes you for sure 👍
You’ve picked 1 category. Pretty pointless if you do that.
Spain has 1 small carrier that only operates Harriers. It has no nuclear deterrent, just 2 submarines which of course aren’t nuclear powered. Spain has no C17s and no Point class equivalents.
You have also miscalculated the number of fighters jets. There are 137 Typhoons and 32 F35B. Funnily enough that gives 169. Of course this isn’t an adding numbers game. The Spanish number consists of old F18s and Harriers. Only 68 of that total are Typhoons, the others are of far less quality. F18s above 35, Harriers nearing 40. Not comparable at all to a mixed F35B and Typhoon force.
Not according to my sources, 101 operational typhoons, 31 F35s, like I say that’s just one example of many I could make, people like you can fool yourselves into thinking neverending cuts to our armed forces won’t make any difference if we should ever come up against a credible opponent, I wish I had you’re confidence, but history tell a different story, bulk/numbers still very much matter, and we don’t have such.
What is your source?
Tranche 1s out of service date is 2025, there are still 137 in service.
You are aware Britain is an island nation right?
Numbers are nothing without training and capability and logistics. Without capability, you might as well stay at home. Russia has proven numbers mean shit if you don’t have the training and capability to go with it. Only the US with its huge defence budget and economy can do both.
RAF has 137 Typhoons and 32 F35B. Of those, 30 are Tranche 1.
Spain has 68 Typhoons, 88 F18s and 12 Harriers. 55 Typhoons are Tranche 2 and 3, so in actual fact there is 139 aircraft vs 55 aircraft.
Of course the Spanish navy is tiny in comparison to the RN as well.
and to add to your post Louis- they have no nuclear subs either .
It’s a completely ridiculous comparison.
As you say they have no nuclear subs, but it goes further than that. Currently they have just 2 very small, 40 year old subs. It’s one of the worst submarine capabilities within NATO, alongside their air force being one of the oldest
ya preaching to the converted Louis. I couldn’t agree more with your commentary , spot on sir!😉
Do look at the Spanish AF platform types, ages and capabilities, and you will see your post is yet again lacking any depth knowledge, but please do go on as when you post it seems you confirm to all your lack of real subject matter knowledge. Thanks.
You have to remember the nuclear deterrent the UK brings to NATO to help deter countries like Russia and that costs a great deal of money Deebee.
If we removed that from NATO’s defence and spent the monies saved on conventional equipment it would paint a very different picture providing we spent it on our armed services of course.
It was promising to see Spain upgrading its fleet of aircraft including additional Typhoons.
Spain Planning Phased Fighter Acquisition.
Not quite, our numbers are low due to politics but capability in a number of areas are second only to the US. Please research a little more and understand both strategic and tactical capabilities. Thanks.
You actually have to admire the Polish response. They’ve looked at the threat Russia represents and just gone out and purchased the precise equipment needed to militarily defeat the Russian army and air force in the field.
Singularly effective and rational thoughts. It is a threats based response vs UK capability based response. If we had a military based around the threats to the UK we would definitely have a much bigger navy and air force optimised for UK home defence and defence of overseas territories and protection of our national interests and allies.
Already replied, and you spout so much crap it’s comical!
You are stating your opinion, then arguing with posters who reply and challenge that opinion. Why don’t you debate, provide facts and “sources” and back up your comment with reasoned debate instead of child like one liners? No one here doesn’t think that the UK military is underfunded and struggling to maintain some key capabilities, and if you read those posters previous comments you will also see them raising the same issues. However the difference is, those commentators have a much more in depth knowledge and understanding of the issues and the various militaries capabilities, and can see past the single click bait type one liners you are sending out. Do we have enough platforms and people, no, have we ever had enough of both, no. But in the military, you play to your strengths and mitigate your weakness, and in working with allies and partner nations ALL militaries can achieve what is expected.
Does Poland spend north of 40 billion every decade on nuclear capability?
No.
For starters.
Defence goes a lot further than the Army, RN, and RAF. Industry, politics, and the nuclear deterrent take a huge slice.
Can you also describe Poland’s ability to project these forces, which do not yet exist, on operations at range beyond their area of northern Europe, compared to the UK?
Can you also list the many overseas bases that Poland has that they need to pay for, legacy of the vast Empire they once possessed, compared to the UK?
Can you also explain Poland’s training, overseas DA network, personnel professionalism, pay and conditions, C4, intelligence apparatus, SF assets, and logistic tail to enable them to actually fight, and how it compares to the UK?
Can you also outline how much Poland spends on R&D, compared to just buying OTS, compared to the UK?
Can you also outline the Polish versions of Successor, the AWE, and Tempest, to which tens upon tens upon tens of billions are allocated over the next decade. compared to the UK?
I await your explanations with interest!
And I’m still waiting……
Bless ya for your patience Mate! A quick question. 96 Apaches is a chunk of change. Do you know if the American subsidized this purchase?
In the 70’s and 80 s they did have NATO “mates rates” for some NATO states. Spain Greece and Turkey received financial support- F4 phantoms and F16s to Greece and Turkey in the 80s.
Morning mate.
I have no idea on that.
all good -thanks DM.
Does Poland spend 40 billion on nuclear deterant which couldn’t be fired without the USA say so ? No unlike us they have More sense, remind me how much use was tried during Vietnam, Falklands, Gulf war 1 &2? I await your response. You correctly state Poland has either none or virtually no expeditionary capability, yes the UK does, what are we going to send exactly? One frigate? One destroyer? A RFA tanker? Wow that will terrify the likes of Russia or China, thats your reply!
Hi Deebee
I’d encourage you to adopt a more balanced view from the commentary on this site. Many contributors are senior veterans with valuable insights and experience. I have personally learnt much from them.
I think you’ll find it a fascinating and enriching experience, enjoy!
Oh dear, that was a very weak and ill informed post, verging on a bit of a rant. Please see my previous reply, and try to have informed debate (re-look at your nuclear comment, that’s so wrong, yet a very common thought by those who have limited subject matter knowledge, its almost an urban legend). You have not provided Daniele with any sort of reply, which goes past a daily Mail headline level. Do make more of an effort at subject matter research, as it will make your posts have more depth and value, and more interesting. Cheers.
Morning Deebee.
“Does Poland spend 40 billion on nuclear deterant which couldn’t be fired without the USA say so ? No”
Oh dear. Shall I explain the firing chain of the nuclear deterrent from the DCMC and the NTOC to CTF345 upwards for you? It does not require US involvement. You’ve probably never heard of what I talk of by that simple reply.
Would we use the deterrent alone? Unlikely. But impossible, no.
The same applies to France. Our Nukes are allocated to NATO.
“remind me how much use was tried during Vietnam, Falklands, Gulf war 1 &2? I await your response”
Assume you are saying “how much use deterrent was” here with those conflicts. You clearly need to learn about strategic geopolitics and what the nuclear option is for if your including that in the Falklands and Gulf wars. There is your response.
And as I expected, you’ve not replied to even one of the factors I list above explaining why the UK appears to get so little compared to Poland. So, going all the way back to your original post, allow me to quote it –
“It’s amazing how Poland which has a vastly smaller defect budget than the UK can afford to purchase over 90 Apaches compared to the 50 we have, something isn’t right, we have one of the biggest defense budgets in the world yet have so little to show for it.”
Well posters keep telling you, and yet you cannot seem to comprehend or accept the reasons posters are giving you.
As you said to Robert, “you’ll learn one day” 🙄
No one is in dispute with you that the UK needs more mass to it’s armed forces. But to blithely infer that the UK military is unable to defend anything or anywhere is absolute rubbish . Any military engagement or operation that any branch of the UK armed forces have been involved in at least in my lifetime have seen the opposing force come off second best. Despite cuts, they are still a highly professional, highly trained, well equipped and experienced force. You want numbers? Look at Russia, hundreds and thousands of everything, and useless on every level.
And yeah, in a conflict scenario, just one Astute SSN lurking around the South China Sea would give the PLAN admirals some considerable pause for thought and tie down a huge amount of PLAN assets in searching for just that one sub. Imagine there was 2 ….
Spot on mate 👍
Poland really is becoming a serious military power in Europe, blowing Germany away! Indeed, on current trends by 2030 they maybe the dominant military power in Eastern Europe – depending what happens to Russia. When compared with France and the UK they have the advantage of starting from a very low base so no massive and expansive overhang of legacy equipment and local suppliers – they are just buying modern best-of-breed kit from around the world in large quantities (so low unit cost). Also, they don’t have to divert c.20% of their defence budget to nuclear programmes.
Given time no doubt Poland going to be European top dog 🐕,well done to them I say .IF only our government could wake up ⏰🇬🇧.
I suppose most of these silly comments are to be expected. The site really is being dumbed down when people start comparing Poland with the U.K.
Some very simple and narrow mind comparisons are on display..
Just my opinion ,believe me I am all U.K.🇬🇧
Well done Poland. At least they Polish recognise there is a threat, the threat is nearby and they are determined to never be invaded or defeated again. I just wish a small piece of that determination was evident in the current UK government. We desperately need to snap out of the malaise and reinvigorate defence and put back on some serious military muscle. The UK used to be one of the cornerstones of NATO- now we really are not able to muster anywhere near enough military strength.
The amount of people who should know better are fooling themselves into still thinking the UK is still a major military power is disheartening, when we’ve got 100 soldiers left, a hot air balloon for an air force and a few rowing boats for a navy they’ll still find excuses for ‘ that’s all we need ‘ mentality, oh dear!!!
Showing your subject matter knowledge there? I’m still awaiting your answering all my points further up discussing military matters beyond mere numbers, rather than going off on a tangent talking about China and Spain.
“nuclear deterent which couldn’t be fired without the USA say so ?”
I heard that exact same comment from someone on the hell site. They got right royally reamed on their comprehension of what an independent nuclear deterrent is and operational Capability. I suspect that they may have migrated to these pages.
Morning GB. 👍
Have a day off will ya.
You know I’m right, end of.
No you’re not. You need to learn some distinction between capabilities. The fact you had Harriers and F35Bs in the same category says enough.
No. You really are not right. See the pretty long list of commentators who have given you very valuable insights as to how all this works.
It’s a pointless argument Robert, even though your commentary is spot on point IMHO. Another factor in Poland’s favour is that their operating costs are likely to be more affordable than the UK. Lower labour costs, compliance costs et al. Even the basic cost of feeding and housing their army must be cheaper than the UK?
That being said, 96 AH 64 is a sizeable investment. Do you know if the US subsidized this purchase – like they do for Israel and other allied states?
Yes they are
https://pl.usembassy.gov/new_military_financing/
No, that is reimbursing Poland for equipment donated to Ukraine which now needs replacing. The announced mayor purchase contracts seem to be at full price.
Fair enough . But the hard reality is a lot of their orders dont seem affordable without some one else paying for it or most of the cost.
The EU is holding back $34 bill in payments because the country isnt *reflecting EU values*
Much obliged for the intel Duker!
Poland is and will now remain as the tip of the NATO spear! Geography and current/future goings on will ensure that Poland continues to improve and develop its tactical capabilities. Very impressive numbers and kit over the last few years but hope training and logistics keep up. Well done.
Agree Airborne however be careful some people on here might think your putting the UK down ,bit silly really has I am sure your all for UK as much has me 👍🇬🇧
Well said, with more kit arriving on a regular basis.
“Poland has received into service the first of 48 Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) FA-50 Fighting Eagle light combat aircraft.”
“Poland’s first K239 Chunmoo multiple rocket launcher (MRL) mounted on a Jelcz launch vehicle was delivered by sea to the Port of Gdańsk on 21 August 2023, the Polish Armaments Agency (AA) announced on its website on the same day.”
Logistic and Support…it’s all about the logistic’s and support contracts.
The big money is made from through life support for kit. The UK Plc can for the most part support everything itself without having to send anything abroad for upgrades. We dont need foreign nation contractors embedded with the forces to fix the kit because we, UK Plc own the rights to most of the equipment. Buying in off the shelf is cheaper for a reason …its the follow up support that costs.
A good example is the Middle East. Saudi Typhoons and their old Tonkas The contract is run by Bae as the Prime Contractor. Hence lots of Brits on the ground fixing and maintaining alongside their KSA work fellows (Never met any German lads working on the pan doing that in KSA). However, RSAF operational capability is partially hamstrung by Germany refusing to provide certain spares because of “political considerations”
Buying off the shelf leaves you at the mercy of another nations political foibles. In the UKs case for example JAGM on Apache to save money on integrating Brimestone, P8 with Mk 50 to save money integrating Sting Ray. What happens if the next US President wants to make the UK and NATO have a friendly sovereign nation cede territory to an aggressor? Do it or I stop supporting the kit you bought. An Apache without an ATGW is useless. A P8 without a Torp is useless.
I hope Deebee reads some of that, yet another factor to consider regards mere numbers on a nation to nation basis.
Good post
Beware AI could be used to control or disable equipment by our enemies.Some countries may be calving up the world at their meetings today….
Poland is buying kit it needs to deter a nasty lot near their home and do not need a Fleet etc. The UK nuc’s also protect Europe as well as us OK. It is an independent deterrent and DO NOT NEED the ok from the US to use either.
A few more Ships would be welcome and with leaner modern manning our manpower numbers do not to be much larger than now. As stated many times we are an island and no one has crossed the channel in almost 1000 years, although migrants get over daily bringing military assets would be near impossible.
We should ensure we spend the money better, i.e. 5 x E7’s as we already have the expensive part of that system, the radars and of course lets ensure the Carriers have enough air assets to bring the big stick to bare. Yes 4 + F35 squadrons and a few more helo’s, both Merlin’s and Wildcats (dozen of each) with a few supporting UAV’s that greatly enhance each unit deployed on.
There is always a lot of kit sitting in storage that comes out when the balloon goes up!
Last landing on Britain as an *invasion* was by France in 1797 Battle of Fishguard
1688 William Prince of Orange landed an army in Devon and after Battle of Reading King James was exiled and parliament changed it from an invasion to a glorious revolution
Pembrokeshire Yeomanry RLC have Fishguard battle honour on their flag , the only unit with one for a battle on UK mainland
Some more good news for the Polish armed forces.
“Poland’s first K239 Chunmoo multiple rocket launcher (MRL) mounted on a Jelcz launch vehicle was delivered by sea to the Port of Gdańsk on 21 August 2023, the Polish Armaments Agency (AA) announced on its website on the same day.”
LINK
I would like to know what countries can deploy at what level, Battle Group, Brigade and division level.
I understand we have cut numbers massively over the years but would like to know how it stands relatively compared to allies/adversaries.
I spent my time as a close protection operative so don’t really understand the full picture.
If anyone can contribute – that would be greatly appreciated.
However, I would like to hear your reply Daniele.
Hi Gav
Wow, thanks for mentioning me, but that would require some answer. On other nations I am not best to comment, and know little. Where I have knowledge is regarding our own ORBAT, that is what I concentrate on.
I think it best if you click on my history on the army articles where the army ORBAT is discussed you can get an idea of where we are at.
Division level? Yes, a small one, at a push, and not enduring, but a one shot effort.
Brigade. Not for an enduring op, we do retain deployable Brigades.
We do deploy Battlegroups.
The army has receded dramatically since 2010, and had been shedding war fighting guns, Tanks and armoured vehicles way before that.
As for comparing with other nations, that is not so easy just looking at an ORBAT. As seen in Ukraine, although numbers matter, so do other factors. logistics, training, professionalism, tactics, intelligence, political will to fight. And we are still a world force in those areas. We can deploy across the spectrum of capabilities, and at short notice in many areas, but on a much, much smaller scale than before.
We are also an Island, and have the RN, the RAF, and most of all defence industry and nuclear deterrent to fund.