The Chairman of the Scottish Affairs Committee, Pete Wishart SNP MP for Perth and North Perthshire, has cited ‘regular order’s for Royal Navy warships and ‘increased investment’ as being responsible for the ‘good shape’ of the shipbuilding industry in Scotland ahead of the publication of the findings of the inquiry into military shipbuilding in Scotland.
Pete Wishart MP, chair of the Scottish Affairs Committee, said during an evidence-gathering session today:
“What we have concluded is this, the whole defence sector in Scotland is in pretty good shape. There seems to be regular orders, there seems to be increased investment, it all seems to be good news.”
The Scottish Affairs Committee scrutinises the expenditure, administration and policies of the Scotland Office, and its associated bodies. The Committee also examines the wider UK Government, to assess policies and legislation that lead to direct impacts on Scotland.
The remarks were made ahead of the upcoming publication of the findings of the inquiry into military shipbuilding in Scotland. In its own words, the inquiry is looking at…
- What impacts are the Government’s Shipbuilding Strategy and National Shipbuilding Office having on the shipbuilding industry in Scotland?
- How many and what types of Royal Navy ships will likely be built in Scotland in the years ahead? Will the sector grow?
- How does the procurement approach for each class of Royal Navy ship being determined on a case-by-case basis (including whether or not there should be international competition) affect Scottish shipbuilding?
- To what extent does Scotland benefit from exporting military ships (or parts of them) and/or their design licences? How can these opportunities be maximised?
- What more could the UK Government do to maintain and foster military shipbuilding in Scotland?
I even submitted evidence to answer those questions, you can read my work here.
We’ll be covering the report in full!
Very decent of him. Can we keep Scotland now please. I like it up there.😉
I think this is the SNP way of calling of indiref 2. 😀
If only!
Is that a different hymn sheet? A Hyrm sheet, perhaps?
https://www.aol.co.uk/news/sturgeon-unveil-first-paper-scotland-175038059.html
Wow, I thought AOL died years ago
Nope. Similar vintage as me – and I’ve been resurrected this year as well. 👻
I am making $92 an hour working from home. i was greatly surprised at the same time as my neighbour advised me she changed into averaging $ninety five however I see the way it works now. I experience mass freedom now that I’m my non-public boss.
That is what I do.. http://Www.Profit97.Com
From a party whose sole aim seems to be ending it with independence.
I have just realised the Type 26 Frigate is not much smaller than a Type 45 destroyer
You don’t say.
Are you sure this guy is in the SNP?
… not for long 🤔
The SNP putting the record straight after previous statements from SNP party members. Wonders never cease.
Phew what a relief, haven’t seen an article on shipbuilding in Scotland for at least a couple of days.
Hi Stuart, we write articles we want to write and we do it in our spare time, for free. If you want to see something else, write something else. It seems a bit odd to complain about a free service…
And an excellent resource it is too. Well done for getting input with the big boys. Seems more and more people want your opinion on matters.
George for MP!
Well said George, these articles set the record straight for those ‘newspapers’ that are unable to research for themselves.
As for the site being free, I for one would be more than happy to donate a couple of quid a month to help with running costs, maybe a Patreon page could be setup for anyone wanting to donate, no pressure to donate obviously, just if someone wishes to be generous.
You do do some great articles. Thank you!
Many thanks George and well done with your evidence to the inquiry. The years of dithering seem to be coming to an end. One cloud hovering on the horizon though seems to be the strength and depth of the recession.
Thank you George.
No harm in repeating real, hard facts in the face of propaganda.
You never know the message might get across that UK is spending £Bn on warships that are all built in Scotland.
It might also sink in that both T26 and T31 designs have exported rather well so the supply chain, jobs and R&D, benefits from the investment as well?
Well done for keeping it real George, great stuff. Keep it up 💪
Well it is fishing for a reaction, as to be very honest, its just so boring now, and fine if you want to break up the Union, maybe let the entire Union decide.
as weeeee Jummy Krankie would piss herself if the English kicked HER out the Union.
just a bitter little skank
Stuart, if you saw the amount of Guff that is posted on Social Media about ship building in Scotland you might understand why George feels the need to report on Scottish Shipbuilding a lot.
Or perhaps you’re one of those posting Guff on Social Media.
Not guilty.
Agree lots of guff on this and on other topics posted on social media by all sides in the debate.
The content on this site is usually really good, informative, provoking interesting debate but to constantly regurgitate a slightly different version of the same story over and over again to suit a particular political bias is just dull.
We get it George has major understandable issues and fears around the independence debate as many of us do. But to keep doing the same, slightly different, article over and over again wouldn’t seem to be a good use of his obvious skills and knowledge. But it’s his ball, he can do what he likes with it. Just imo it doesn’t do the site and its purpose, impartial and current any favours.
Again, I suggest you go on twitter or FB and see the number of times George has to deal with “Westminster Promised us 13 Frigates and only gave us 3.”
This isn’t issues or fears, this is countering actual disinformation.
And making sure that the actual real information is updated and has a recent date stamp on it.
Strange ‘one of many’ such articles you decided to comment on, though, Stu. The essence of the piece is the conclusion drawn by an SNP MP during an enquiry – to which George contributed evidence.
Could it have touched a nerve? Well, no, of course not.
Not really Gav, thought it for a while and yet again another one popped it. No issue with the content, for the SNP to say the money spent in Scotland on shipbuilding is not a benefit would be silly. A bit like your comment.
You’re always welcome.
Rgs
He must be the resident SNP ‘Rocket Scientist’? I wonder if they understand that batch2 for type 26 and any part of Type 32 won’t/can’t be placed while it’s going on?
MPs says “Orders for building ships is good for ship building” as everyone tries to figure out if he is being insultingly obvious on purpose or if he’s just a bit slow of wit and needs a pat on the head or a punch on the nose.
Comedy gold. Is giving ship building direct to Scottish yards rather than offering them elsewhere good for Scottish yards? Lolololololol
Whats even funnier is Scotland having ferries built not just outside Scotland but out side the UK and EU. You couldn’t make it up.
Hang on… Doesn’t the Scottish government own it’s own shipyard that builds ferries?
Yep but they made a mess of the first 2 and they’re massively over budget and late. Scotland needs more ferries pronto so placed orders overseas!!!!!
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/two-new-calmac-ferries-for-islay-to-be-built-in-turkey-3607547&ved=2ahUKEwjz3e2mha34AhVuQUEAHWCPBjIQFnoECAgQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2-HPqS6rnPTeesS9FxRLT8
I see FM Sturgeon is to announce an Indyref2 campaign and planning it for next year as promised.
Interesting times.
if by “interesting” you mean “depressing” i’ll agree….. the whole worlds going backwards geopolitically, so hell, why not carry on with yet more political f*ckwittery….. honestly f*ck ageing politicians with agendas and dreams of personal legacy, and unfortunately this seems to be a global problem!!
FTF, I think you pretty much nailed that.
👌
Yes. In a word.
But she has no power or mandate to call one.
Those powers are for the UK government.
Reckon she’ll take it to court. Such a dangerous game in which they’ll be no winners.
She can start whatever she wants but
a) she needs Westminster to be in agreement that a referendum should be called
b) the backing of over 50% of Scottish voters
c) a whole load of other hurdles to get through not least campaign finance.
I would say it’s a non starter. It will be a political game so it can be said Westminster is scared to allow a referendum and the SNP can declare they are doing what they promised etc etc.
I’ve actually change my mind from voting yes last time. Sorry SNP. You may be good for Scotland but only as part of the U.K. just now.
I couldn’t agree more. Perhaps the details of any independence deal should be thoroughly hammered out and voted on. By all nations.
Personally I think it is more the financial mismanagement that destroys the SNP’s credibility?
Many other things too have been mismanaged by the SNP – Education, Health…
I really don’t think they are capable of running the country as an independent nation.
Personally it’s their tampering with Scotland’s educational curriculum that’s always drawn an uncomfortable parallel with other, better known, nationalist parties.
Most countries do distort things.
France – who liberated it in WWII?
Russia – everything
China – most things
Poland – revisionist WWII history
the list goes on an on……
It is only a very few countries like GB and the Nordics that use history in an even handed manner.
We only started to teach people about wars and the military in the UK in the last 15 years. For a long time the left wing elements in teaching had essentially killed off that debate.
You must have gone to a different schooling set up than me then. Endless stuff on war and the military in mine back in the early 90s. I guess schools could pick and choose then though?
Has to be unequivocally in favour of independence so 55% of electorate eligible for voting.
But SNP won’t allow Scottish expats to vote even though it impacts something and fundamental as what citizenship they would hold. Its sad the SNP is willing to completely ignore some Scottish citizens 🙁
So she’s going to do a Catalonia and call an unlawful referendum? As I recall it didn’t end well for the Catalan politicians involved 😆
Well she seems adamant to plough on, irrespective of the damage she could cause to both Scotland and rUk.
Mmmm interesting times.
“both Scotland and U.K.” – there, fixed your copy.
Can we arrest her for treason? I think that still carries a death penalty?
I’d start with arresting Blair. This entire daft devolution nonsense was his idea to begin with 🤦🏻♂️
Then maybe charge him over Iraq too…
Why didn’t Blair follow through and give England devolution? It was all done just to appease extreme nationalists in Wales and Scotland.
Blair did try to follow through and planned devolution for English regions. I think the task was given to John Prescott and the first region to have a referendum on devolution was the North East of England. Thankfully it was decisively defeated by a combination of a campaign run my someone called Dominic Cummings and the common sense of Northerners.
After that debacle, Labour quietly dropped the idea of devolution for English regions.
Thanks Sean. I remember this. I did not ask them for regional devolution. I wanted national devolution for England, our own Parliament – it might have been nice for it to have been in York!
Ah the infamous West Lothian question…
I think a separate English Parliament would require a fully fledged federal structure. There would also need to be safeguards to ensure parts could not simply break-away; ie as in the way Yeltsin as Russian President effectively dissolved the USSR from beneath President Gorbachev’s feet.
Evel. English votes for English legislation I believe it was passed a few years ago now. Only English MP’s can vote on English only matters.
I think that was only ever a convention and has since been abandoned
Because those asked did not want it, iirc.
I was not asked by referendum if I wanted devolution for England.
Well devolution must surely have seemed a pretty good tactic for Labour on the assumption that Scotland would remain effectively a Labour sinecure in perpetuity. A sort of gerrymandering in that they could govern Scotland/Wales irrespective of the outcome of any future general election. The wheels clearly came off with the decline of support for Labour in Scotland (probably unimagined at the time) and a the consequent rise in nationalism as the go to alternative🤔
Oh yes it was certainly gerrymandering, putting political gain above national interest. However as Labour looked increasingly incompetent and irrelevant, the Scots voters looked for another left-wing party to support. It was just coincidental that the left-wing party they chose was obsessed with independence.
Blair if he wanted to go the full devolution route, should have gone the federal route, like the USA, but without any option for breaking away. The confederacy discovered the hard way that breaking away wasn’t an option.
I wouldn’t mind Sturgeon and her goons being wanted criminals on the run.
It would also send a nice message to Spain that we too don’t mess around.
And if the referendum does go ahead. Which by the way I think the UK government said the last referendum was a once in a generation eg 25 years occurence then the SNP lose it. What then? More anti- English rhetoric. More unequal distribution of taxpayers funds. Eg Barnet Formularly and yearly huge budget deficits paid for by HM treasury.
I think if a 2nd referendum is allowed to go ahead. Which i dont think it should, especislly as the last one was based on the once in a generation occurence. If it does go ahead. It has to be definitive and unequivocal so 55%+ vote in favour.
Needs to be spelt out really clearly to the Scottish electorate. You vote for independence and leaving the union and you will be cast adrift. No more Barnet formularly from the 2nd the vote comes in. Immediate total withdrawal of all ship building. Immediate withdrawal of HM armed forces. Let the Scots defend themselves.
There will be huge cash flows out of the country.
Or remain part of UK and everything will be as is now. So fine and ok really compared to the other option.
That would create a vacuum our rivals in the EU would be only too delighted to fill however. They could sweep in looking like angels saving Scotland from the vengeful English, and all for the low cost of Scotland’s barely week old independence
Both Salmond and Sturgeon said in 2014 it was a once in a lifetime event. That they are both rowing back on that now, indicates poor honesty and integrity on their part.
Never put into writing or part of the Edinburgh agreement. Throwaway election type comment. Boris dead in a ditch yet?
Nowhere in the Edinburgh agreement, which was the legislation for previous referendum, was the phrase once in a generation used. It was a throwaway comment by Alec salmond which has entered into urban myth.
Above 50% is recognised as the winning margin, you can’t just randomly pick numbers to suit yourself.
Withdrawal of HM forces? You mean the ones Scots taxpayers contribute to? Or are they really just English forces?
You can have the nukes and subs, if you can find somewhere to moor them. Huge savings for Scots taxpayers there, I crease in taxation for rest of you though..
If the Scots get independence they will be a foreign country and the RN won’t buy their ships anymore. In theory…however do we have any English/Welsh/NI yards that could actually build a warship?
Those yards are still in the UK. Scotland will also loose other defence manufacturing. For instance would you develop a high tech radar which is critical to national security in foreign country? No, Leonardo will need to move from Edinburgh.
Not to mention the huge amounts of U.K. civil service work, such as HMRC, that has offices in Scotland. Unemployment would rocket overnight as the work was transferred south.
Many private Scottish businesses, such as the banks , put in place plans to relocate south too.
Yep can’t see any reason for rUK to court Scotland they’ll be contracting economy on day 1 of the break up. They’ll need to increase income tax, vat and business rates which will drive businesses more businesses away. They’ll have no control over the economy as they’ll need to pick a currency but will have no control of its direction. The SNP always say the argument for staying are based on negatives if they leave well that’s because there’s so many negatives, whilst the upside is untested fiction.
Well initially they want to continue using GBP but the BoE would be setting interest rates to suit the U.K. economy, not Scotland’s. So they could take a hit there.
Scotland might not be allowed to join the EU, the SNP’s plan, because it’s debt too income ratio is too high, and countries like Spain and France with separatist movements (Catalan and Basque respectively) might well object to the principle of a breakaway Scotland joining.
And if Scotland is allowed into the EU it would have to adopt the Euro, and there would be a hard border with England.
Then it also had to apply to join NATO, which the U.K. may object to.
Etc, etc, etc.
There would be a hard border even without Scotland joining the EU as SNPs immigration policy is vastly different from Londons. There’s no way a back door into rUK will be allowed.
If the divorce is bad tempered then the border could be completely closed – perhaps not quite on North/ South Korea terms – but it’s possible.
ps: please stop using the ridiculous “rUK” term. The U.K. will always be that, regardless.
I agree
Where did that silly term come from (rUK)
The United Kingdom of England and principality of Wales??
That would p@as of Northern Ireland…
United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland, the name’s not changing and Scotland’s not getting independence.
N Ireland will be part of the Republic before too long. Demographics support this. And Scottish independence won’t be decided by you.
Wrong.
Yeah that’s the thing with you National Socialists, you don’t believe in democracy. You think only Scots should determine the future of the U.K., and when they say they want to remain, you decide to ignore the democratic referendum and plan a continuing succession of them until you can rig a win.
Democracy? Denying an increasing majority of Scots the right to regain, yes, regain their independence from a voluntary union. The u.k. only exists because Scotland and England United. Why are the English so afraid of going it alone?
No, it’s only a minority of Scots who want independence, like the National Socialists in Germany you don’t seem to be able to differentiate between party and nation.
The rest of Britain isn’t afraid of Scotland going independent, we just don’t fancy the inevitable rescue bailout we’ll have to cough up, yet again, when you go bankrupt, yet again 🤷🏻♂️
Hmrc and DWP are closing offices in Scotland right now. However. A new independent country would need its own civil service network. Jobs bonanza!
Not surprisingly DWP office are closing countrywide, we have higher employment than any time ever.
Wouldn’t be a jobs bonanza, a disproportionately large part of U.K. civil service is up in Scotland. That’s for a country of over 60 million, whereas an independent Scotland doesn’t even have the population of North London. Of course with all the rocketing unemployment that would result from independence they would need lots of dole officers… they just wouldn’t have any money to pay them.
24,000 civil servants employed by UK gov departments in Scotland, including, for example, 7,800 in customs and excise, which will be directly replaced by a Scottish government,another couple thousand in mod, again directly replaced with Scottish alternative. I’m sure there will be other examples. We will need an equivalent DVLA for example, so won’t exactly be rocketing unemployment.
More delusional maths from the SNP 🤣
How so? Which part of my reply is delusional?
Every part of every reply you’ve made is delusional, no doubt because of your delusional political beliefs 🤷🏻♂️
Well, we’ll see in October next year where the majority is. And whose delusional.
Remind us all why that foreign (Italian) firm would need to leave Edinburgh?
Because approx 90% of their UK business will be in England.
No, the argument was it was because no foreign companies are allowed on UK ships. Obviously nonsense.
So who’s there key client. Do you seriously think UK government has zero say in where it puts radar development funds? Italy will have no bones about moving if it keeps the funding secure.
And it’s not just Leonardo. Other defence companies are there to support MoD. That’s all going to shrink overnight. SNP will find themselves paying rUK based defence companies to support equipment transferred during the split.
There’s no reason to remain when you’re customer is in another country, add higher Scottish taxes which are inevitable,, income tax is already highrr than rUK.so their no evidence to support the SNP are a low tax party. It would defy logic for defence companies to stay put. May be the SNP has a credible plan to replace all these well paid jobs, I’m sure they’ll say they have or companies leaving in scaremongering lol.
One income tax band is higher. There is also one lower income tax band. Did you know that?
Why are higher taxes inevitable?
Explain why they’re not inevitable what policies do the SNP have to lower tax below uk rates.
Independence is normal. Complete control over all taxation and spending using the full range of fiscal levers that all independent countries have to tailor the economy to their own benefit.
Ruk tax rates in this scenario are irrelevant.
That’s not the case.read up on Ireland they attracted business by having a low corporate tax. You also need to understand how businesses transfer profits to lower tax countries. If VAT was set higher in Scotland people would go south to do large purchases, of course you could add trade tariffswith the uk but they would be reciprocal making goods exported to the uk more expensive so better for Scottish business’s to relocate. Lastly people do migrate to lower income tax economies.so rUK tax is 100% relevant to Scotland. If Scotland doesn’t have a competitive taxation system it will suffer. So it’s not fiscally independent. It will need to follow rUK and other competitive economies quite closely
Yes. Tailoring the economy to their own benefit, that could include lowering corporate tax. They could also lower vat. People are relocating all over the world right now, why would it be a problem?
Yes Scotland could lower taxes. But can the SNP its already running a deficit? It will need to borrow more if it lowers tax. That may also become an EU stumbling block.as could low corporation tax. Neither the UK or Scotland will be going into the break up on a strong economic footing. The yes vote will devalue the pound and stiffle investment . Its likely both economies will suffer for at least a decade probably more. There’s not some utopia here where the day after breakup Scotland becomes a booming economy. More borrowing and tax rises are far most likely.scenario.
I don’t know where this deficit allegation came from. All UK taxes, including Scottish, go to HM treasury, where it is divvied up across the UK.including back to Scotland. The Scottish government , by law, must balance the books, they also cannot borrow money from international sources like the UK gov. So if they can’t borrow and are balancing the books…where’s the defecit coming from?
So UK runs a deficit full stop. Scotland gets a greater share of public funds per person than the UK therefore has a larger deficit than the UK. Quite simple really. So unless the SNP have austerity planned post separation, tax or borrowing or both will need to rise. Your obviously passionate about independence but at least brush up on the economics of it from sources other than the SNP. At least it will help you and others prepare better. It’s not going to be easy for Scotland and the UK and will likely disrupt the global economy impacting other countries to.
Because it’s not the ownership that’s the issue (well, it’s fine as Italy are a strong ally), it’s where military technologies for the UK armed forces are researched, developed, and manufactured. Much of that simply can’t be outside the UK.
So they can be basednin Edinburgh now because… Scotland is part of the UK.
It’s really quite simple. Then again, you SNP lot can’t even say what currency you’d use in the case of independence. Nor how you’e fund your very generous wellfare state.
It’s a foreign company! Move it to England from Scotland it’s still a foreign company! Your argument is nonsense.
Bae is foreign company in the US. BAe in the states dies have a say in where it does RND or produces military equipment. The same would apply to any Defence company that is servicing UK from Scotland. MoD would demand it moves just as the US DoD does. Its best Scotland doesn’t focus on defence post independence there plenty more industries it could develop. At best it may be able nail a couple of niche areas in defence.
Interesting article about ships supply chains today though. Seems the majority of supply chain is in Scotland, irrespective of where in world ships are built. And around 70% of the cost is in the supply chain.
Because they bought a UK designed ship a design paid for by the UK government which draws on UK suppliers and one an independent Scotland could not afford. Please tell.me you understand defence procurement. There also the matter of export controls, currently the UK government grants these. I don’t see how or why the UK government would allow a 3rd party to export sensitive equipment.
I’d happily pay a sub for some of the content on here, access to an open forum etc. I learn a lot from the articles and the commenters, it’s a Great site.
Suppose to be in reply to George’s comment.
Off topic but….
what do people think of Rheinmetall’s new KF51 Panther MBT with a 130mm gun, and only requiring a 3 man crew?
Time to replace the Challenger 2 completely?
Throwing another ball into the air right now is the last thing the army needs.
Comparing the results of Ajax and Boxer programmes, I think the clear message is the Army needs to buy more off-the-shelf vehicles (ie Boxer) rather than trying to specify something bespoke/custom (ie Ajax, Warrier Upgrade, Chally 3)…
In which case appears as a contender.
The Challenger contract was handed out over a year ago. You are proposing cancelling the project, yet again, throwing hundreds of millions down the drain, and starting all over again with a product that’s far from off the shelf. Nobody uses it yet and as lead user we might as well call it bespoke. It’s a brand new design with all the teething troubles that implies, and it would still need to be tweaked for UK needs.
The Challenger 3 contract is with Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land (RBSL), and the KF51 Panther is from… Rheinmetall. So I suspect they’ll be happy to do a good deal to land the U.K. as lead customer for this. Hundreds of millions will not have been thrown down the drain.
The Challenger 3 deal is a stop-gap measure, upgrading tanks which were the pinnacle in their day. But we won’t see any more than the number of Chally 2s we currently have, certainly less, as not all will be upgraded, and a diminishing number over time. It also gives us a 120mm gun, just as the trend is to move to a larger calibre again.
We can wait to see what the USA buys to replace Abrams, but we know it will probably be too expensive for us, on both a CAPEX and OPEX basis. You can also bet there would be no U.K. production line for it.
Does look good but not sure what its armour protection is like? 64 tons vs 70+ for Chally 2. New 130mm gun is impressive in trials delivering +50% improvement in penetration. 25% improvement in range but comes at the price of less rounds carried.
I think if Challenger 2 is converted from rifled to a new smooth bore barrel there’ll be a reduction in rounds that can be carried too. Interesting that they tested the 130mm gun for this in a Challenger chassis.
Chally can carry a larger number of rounds/shells due to the easier packaging of the 3 part round. The one piece round is harder to find storage for, that is then able to be quickly used. The bustle is the obvious place for ready rounds. But both the Leopard and Abrams still store round sin the hull, that are used to replenish the bustle. The 1300mm long, 30kg, one piece rounds of the 130mm gun will make matters worse for storage.
BAe should take controlling stake in Rhienmetall 🙂
Well Rheinmetall already holding a controlling stake in BAE Land Systems which is building the UKs Boxers. So if HMG expressed interest in the Panther MBT it’s not inconceivable that the first and main production line for it could be set up here.
I was half serious about the controlling share. Defence budgets are increasing and Rheinmetall products will be on the shopping list for many countries.
Market wise, it I think it would be a good move for BAE to launch a bid for Rheinmetall and combine it with its existing land-weapon acquisitions. However I suspect that Germany/ EU would try to block such a move on either competition or national security grounds.
That would be good- I think longer term the Panther is the type of tank the army needs- in that it is a new design, has active, passive protection built in and designed in, I like its drone launcher concept- which could easily morph into a VLS for submunitions and point defence/ close range attack missiles.
It needs the autoloader. The cartridge assembly is around 1300mm long compared to the 120’s 930mm. Each cartridge weighs in at 30kg, whereas the 120’s is 21kg. For a loader it would be next to impossible to manoeuvre a cartridge from the floor and up in to the breech. It will need a direct feed from the rear bustle. At 30kg the loader will soon get tired, pulling out the ready rounds and feeding them into the breech, an autoloader is needed.
The rear bustle magazine only holds 20 rounds/shells, as part of the bustle space is used for a pop up launcher, that can fire either loitering UAVs or missiles.
The have ditched the standard 7.62mm coaxial machine gun for a 50 cal. In some respects this makes a lot of sense, as a 50 cal using SLAP rounds can deal with most non or very lightly armoured vehicles. Against infantry it could be seen as over kill. They have said it can be fitted with a remote weapon station, that can mount a 7.62mm or 50 cal machine gun.
They have managed to loose some 5 to 9 tons of mass. So dropping the weight from the Leopard 2A7’s near 70t to 65 or 61t, depending on whose article you read. Yet they have stated they have improved the armours performance of the 2A7. The spaced armour at the front of the turret definitely protrudes further forward over the hull. Yet the hull doesn’t look any bigger than a 2A7’s, so it may just be a material change for the hull’s outer armour. They have kept the standard 2A7 1500hp engine, but used in a lighter tank, mobility and endurance will increase.
They have also said it will have a plethora of active and passive defensive aids that can “counter” current and future ATGMs. Which is a bit of a bold statement. However, Bundeswehr Leopard 2A7s have been fitted with the Trophy APS, plus they have been getting a lot of information on MBTs performances in Ukraine. So perhaps they have a developed system of Trophy being designed.
Situational awareness in a tank has always been a problem. It usually necessitates the commander sticking his head out of the hatch, to get a better view of what is happening. Making them very vulnerable to a sniper or artillery splinters. Recently we have seen digital cameras fitted around tanks. Along with F35 style crew helmets that allow the crew to see through the tank. These will get better in time giving both improved day and night time awareness. But to enable a tank to see around a bend, into a tree line or over a hill. It needs an attached reconnaissance asset, i.e. Ajax, or better yet, its own organic UAV. The KF51’s pop-up launcher can carry four small UAVs or ATGMs. These UAVs are likely only a one shot only affair, so can’t be reused. A quad copter style UAV in a box, would be the better solution. As you can recover it and reuse it.
Rheinmetall’s release of this prototype is a real shot across the bows, of the joint Franco-German main ground combat system (MGCS). Looking at and following the conflict in Ukraine, a number of countries have delivered a large number of their Army’s T72s. These are being replaced with an urgent delivery of Abrams for Poland and stored Bundeswehr Leopard 2A4/5s to the Czechs. There are also a large number of countries that operate older Leopard 2s that haven’t been updated, along with some NATO countries that still use derivatives of the T72. These countries will likely be looking at an upgrade in the near future. Why wait for MGCS when Rheinmetall can deliver the KF51 within a year or two a vehicle that can do 90% of what MGCS can do, which won’t be ready until after 2030?
PS The new turret for the Challenger 3, has been designed to take the larger 130mm gun as a future upgrade.
I believe it has the auto loader, hence the reduction in crew size. Or are you thinking more along the lines of the South Korean K10 automatic ammunition resupply vehicle that can reload their K9 Thunder Howitzer?…
From the sounds of it, they’ve developed their own in-house active defensive system rather than fitting Trophy to it.
I’d be amazed if the UAVs are one shot affairs. That would be incredibly short-sighted (if you’ll pardon the pun) given the huge boost in situational awareness they would give the crew.
It certainly is a major blow to the Franco-German programme. Probably deliberately so, as the French invariably try to take over and dominate multinational projects.
Given the the current consumption of existing tank stocks across Europe due to the war in Ukraine, and the obvious fact Putin manifestly wants to rebuild the USSR, there’s going to be demand for an off the shelf MBT that can defeat the very best the Russians have. Depending upon how well developed the Panther is, I can see several nations showing interest.
While the new Challenger 3 turret is capable of hosting a 130mm gun – and it’s clear that their testing of the 130mm for the Panther was done using a Challenger – would we ever actually see it happen?
Replacing the gun (again) would surely count as a Challenger 4 project, and see fewer tanks upgraded. At some point the remaining Challys are going to resemble Trigger’s broom 😏
Trigger’s broom, brilliant.
Sean, the KF51 needs the autoloader because it has the larger gun and ammunition, hence why it only has a crew of 3. Though if there was space I would still have a fourth bod if there’s room. Who would still be in charge of making the brews and helping out with the tank’s maintenance. But could also be put in charge of the tank’s UAV.
Regarding APS, Rheinmetall have had a few goes at developing APS, but Trophy was chosen by the Bundeswehr. They have probably got their hands on Trophy and seen how it works and think they can now do better.
The tube launched UAVs, will need one of the crew to step out of the tank, pick up the UAV, repack it with whatever charge was used to get it out of the tube, so that it can then be launched again. Hence why I think they are one use only. The drone in a box is the way forward – see the attached link:
Drones in a Box – Think Defence
The Volarious V-line tethered UAVs, shown in the video can reach 60m, but stay up for 12 hours or more, whilst maintaining position over the tank when its moving at speed.
At the moment the Rheinmetall L55 120mm smoothbore gun will likely defeat any threat it meets on the battlefield and probably for the next 10 to 20 years. However, the gun has yet to be used in tank versus tank combat, so its performance is merely speculative. The Abrams with the shorter L44 gun, using higher pressure DU rounds can achieve the same penetration value as the longer gun firing the tungsten carbide rounds. Therefore, the UK which has no qualms in using the DU round, when fired from the longer L55 gun, will have the potential of better penetration values than the Abrams or Leopard.
The elephant in the room, is whether Russia can actually produce a meaningful number of T14 Armatas. As it could be a game changer against NATO tanks. Hence why both the German and French Defence ministries, insisted on a gun that outperforms the current 120 L55 for the MGCS. The Rheinmetall 130mm has a published 50% greater penetration value, whilst the Giat 140mm is closer to 70%. Using either guns will reduce the number of ready rounds and stored rounds carried. Though they managed to shoehorn the 140 into a Leclerc a few years back. This gun uses two piece ammo and can only carry a total of 31 rounds, if they were one piece rounds it would be even less.
Russia have said they may fit the Armata with a 152mm gun. If they did, not many, if any tanks could withstand such a hit. But they have to compensate for poorer optics and weapons aiming computers. For the Challenger 3, the gun it ends up with, will depend on whether Russia remain a main player after the Ukraine conflict. But also if they do get the resources to build more than just parade T14s.
Tigger’s broom seemed to be an analogy I thought people would appreciate 😉
Yes it needed an autoloader because of the size of the 130mm rounds. But although the crew is 3, it actually has an extra space to accommodate a 4th crew member – eg for whoever is commanding the tank group.
Agreed, if the UAVs are tube launched, rather than simply taking off and landing out of these ‘tubes’ under their own power.
I think the problem with a tethered drone is that effectively it’s a flag to the enemy where a tank is. I think as a replacement for Crowsnest on the carriers they’d be a good solution.
But I think untethered scouting drones would be better for tanks – perhaps flown by that 4th crewman?
Although the Russians have said a future version of Armata might have a 152mm, I think they have decided superior munitions are the way forward rather than ever increasing calibre. Even still, it leaves them with 125mm on their T-90s and T-14s, compared to 120mm on most NATO tanks.
Get Challenger 3 in service, save up some money, see if Panther is adopted by other users, and then commit.
https://defence-blog.com/kmw-unveils-tracked-version-of-its-boxer-fighting-vehicle/?amp
See they have also launched a tracked version of boxer as well. Could tick quite a few boxes.
A brave although somewhat obvious conclusion from Pete Wishart. On the other hand he may unwittingly represent those who vote SNP and are happy for them to govern Scotland without wanting to break away from the UK. Much like some prominent Celtic fans who support the Union while some Rangers supporters are Nats! I think of the late Sean Connery who actually switched sides from Celtic to Rangers!! I could never get my head round that!!
PS Well done George for a detailed and comprehensive document!
Why wouldn’t the Scottish parliament want to know more about the state of a traditional industry that affects us all and consumes billions of pounds of public money? And if it can persuade UK government to give the country an even larger slice of the pie, why not? That’s just doing its job properly.
As a non-Scottish Brit, I wish other UK regions were as well served.
But the irony the current government in Scotland promotes a strategy that will ultimately secure 0% of the pie. My thoughts are is they trying to show that once independent they have the skill to secure third party builds. With BAe and Babcock both exiting to rUK I’m not how they would achieve this.
I see Sturgeon or aka wee jimmy cranky is already outlining her next bid for a referendum. UK governments response should be sling your hook.
Not on your nelly.
If there is a push for a referendum it cant be devisive like the damn half cooked Brexit one courtesy of Cameron and Osbourne. It would have to be +55% in favour. So a clear majority.
The finance of Scottish independence is going to be interesting. Get ready for an IMF bailout and then a newly indrpendent Scotland going cap in hand to the EU and then gess what…losing its independence to join the EU.
Rest of UK ship building will no doubt be delighted to have all RN ship production moved south of the border. Appledore, Birkenhead, Belfast, Portsmouth. Even potential reopen Swan Hunters yard on the Tyne. There are plenty of viable options.
A new entry too the Dictionary should be Neverendingreferendum meaning an endless pointless self gratify exercise that continues Ad infinitum
Until they win then there will never be another. If a referendum is granted it should be on the grounds there’s a referendum every 5 years on rejoining for the next 30 years 🙂
Cheers Expat, and there was Mr Cameron saying that the 2015 referendum would take place and it would be a once in a generation its only 7 yrs since the last Wee Mrs Crankie is really ignoring that Clause which enabled them too have a Referendum in the first place
This is all Mel Gibson’s Fault
I’ll bet members of the SNP policy think tank are already throwing ideas out for an Indy Ref 3 campaign…
The SNP are a one trick pony, scream Scotland the brave and howling indignation at Westminster are all they actually have…
Look at the state of Scottish public services, the drug and drink issues, the total lack of anyway to actually run and finance an independent Scotland that the Scottish people would actually accept.
The reality would be brutal slashing of spending on already poorly performing public services and sky high borrowing, a sort of austerity that wouldn’t be out of place in post war Britain….
Still ” Scotland the brave” and good luck to you…..
The White Flag is flying over Stanley, Hoorah June 14th 1982
Hi folks hope all is well.
As ever I appreciate the advice from you experts on this site.
One thing that I have trouble with is what happens with the policy of UK complex warships not being built in a foreign country?
An independent Scotland will be technically a foreign country.
Advice please.
Cheers,
George
Simple. Building stops, incomplete hulls transported out of Scotland for completion elsewhere. Happened before when Swan Hunter in the Tyne went way over budget on a Bay class.
Obviously it would hugely delay the naval programme re-establishing naval ship building south of the border, or in NI, but shipyards would jump at the chance. It’s the most obvious hit to the Scottish economy and employment.
Agree Sean- we might have to go to South Korea or Japan or USA to get some heavily armed warships as an interim measure whilst UK shipbuilding is reset. I like the South Korean KX2 series heavy destroyer- would love the RN to have some of those monsters.
Then you might as well build them in Scotland. ohhhhh but no UK warship can be built in a foreign land
Its not just ship building there will be massive pressure on all defence manufacturers, Leonardo will be under massive pressure to move from Edinburgh along with a list on around 10+ other defence companies. rUK will want rUK defence budget spent in rUK. Scotland will take on some UK kit and rUK will then export parts and services to Scotland, this will not last and the SNP of course will have an anyone but rUK attitude to defence procurement once independent.
I read the title and assumed that next year’s April Fools had been accidently posted early.
Just bring the work to England who will appreciate it. Same with every other military base or contract.
Let Scotland leave, cut them off entirely like they are another opposite side of the globe nobody, and let them sink.
No border rights, no use of the pound, no work rights, they take their share of the debt they’ve helped accumulate and good riddance.
‘Scotland’ is a very broad term to describe the country and its people-there is no uniformity of opinion among Scots about anything-in fact no two humans, let alone Scots think in exactly the same way. So in summary, your comment is ugly and insulting and diminishes the quality of debate on this forum
Regards
OK Nicola. Whatever.
Marked-the point I am trying to make is that the majority of Scots are Unionists and rants such as yours above are manna from heaven to those who want to destroy the UK.
Regards
I suppose the counter to that Geoff, is the SNP constantly scream ” them and us” .
They would have you believe they represent all downtrodden oppressed Scottish people everywhere…
That’s all the BBC report anyway…
Really the place for BBC bashing when the SNP’s favourite whipping boy is the BBC?
Morning Tams, interesting … I never hear anything from the Unionist side on the BBC.
Their reporting would have the casual observer believing virtually all Scots are SNP supporters.
Nicola Sturgeon is the only Scottish voice we hear on the radio and TV, she is “the voice of Scotland”, as far as the press are concerned.
It’s a thorny one, while I see the logic of a clear majority, i.e 55%, if the result was 53% to leave and it didn’t get past the post, can you imagine the uproar and the screams for Indyref3!
Morning John. I am no fan of the SNP but find unnuanced generalisations unhelpful in any debate. Scottish Nationalism, like it or not, is a valid viewpoint held by many good Scots with whom I strongly disagree but I would rather try to persuade those on the fence to my side than lambast them with insults such as those from Marked above which are guaranteed to damage our cause.
Kind Regards
Geoff
Morning Geoff, the issue appears to be, who is the Unionist voice of remain??
From an English perspective, I wouldn’t have a clue. The SNP have their case nailed down, simply saying, “it’s all their fault” while pointing at Westminster. This paper thin case seems to actually work, because they know what buttons to press…
The Unionist side had better get organised and a lot more press savvy.
The SNP’s record in charge is quite poor, there really is a lot of ammunition to use, but no one appears to be seriously fighting the remain cause?
Truth Hurts, if England Voted to split from Scotland, what would the attitude be.
Oh hang on that’s not fair we don’t want the English deciding the Unions split.
when you tell a spoilt little child they cannot have something, they want it more
Odds on Nicola has Putin on speed dial, same intelligence and have a villa in Portugal within the same complex.
The letter to the Minister is really well written: straightforward and with no jargon or cliches. Well done.
Pretty much stating the obvious.
More to the point this SNP MP should perhaps devote some time to giving Sturgeon a lesson in economics as she clearly does not have clue.
What bothers me, is Sturgeon has just announced she is going full steam ahead with indyref2.
So now that the Scottish shipbuilders’ order books are full. She knows all too well that moving this work to English yards will cause more headaches than it’s worth.