• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

British Military Current Events

The Guards Division... no surprise there ;)


The British Army has a class problem​

Why does it care more about race and gender?​


Indeed, the British Armed Forces have long failed to reflect the society they are tasked to defend. The full-time military is still 90.4% white and 88.7% male. Female representation is roughly equal between the services, but ethnic minorities make up 14% of the army (in which 40% of ethnic minority personnel originate from abroad), compared to 4.9% of the Royal Navy and Royal Marines, and only 3.5% of the air force.

Meanwhile, there is an elephant in the room when it comes to military diversity: social class. Just as Louise Pragnell’s painting displayed ethnic diversity but class homogeneity, all three services are still split into distinct commissioned and non-commissioned universes — between officers and soldiers, in army language. Each track features its own entry requirements and career trajectories. And this split is traditionally based on class: historically, officers were posh; the soldiers were not.

There is some movement between these worlds. For instance, the army sends some promising young soldiers to train at the officer academy at Sandhurst, alongside direct-entry, predominantly graduate cadets. At the other end of the spectrum, there is also now no section of the army where it is impossible to live on your pay as an officer — in the past high mess bills and the prohibitive costs of tailored uniforms could mean a private income was required. Nonetheless, the officer-soldier divide is still the defining fault line in the military’s organisation, and it is most acute in the army. In 2019, 49% of Sandhurst direct-entrant cadets had attended fee-paying schools — whereas the equivalent figure for the Royal Naval College at Dartmouth was 36%. (The RAF does not gather information on educational background.)

 
Any duct tape? ;)


Royal Navy orders investigation into nuclear submarine ‘repaired with glue’​

Claims made that broken bolts on HMS Vanguard’s reactor chamber were stuck on instead of replaced

The Royal Navy has ordered an urgent investigation amid claims that workers on a Trident nuclear armed submarine fixed broken bolts in the vessel’s reactor chamber using glue.

The faulty repairs on the cooling pipes aboard HMS Vanguard were found after one of the bolts fell off during an inspection, the Sun reported.

The bolt heads originally came off due to over-tightening. But, rather than replacing the damaged shafts, staff at the defence contractor Babcock implemented a quick fix and glued them back on.

Engineers at the contractor reported it as a procedural glitch after the problem was found, but did not mention the botched nature of the repair.

 
Any duct tape? ;)


Royal Navy orders investigation into nuclear submarine ‘repaired with glue’​

Claims made that broken bolts on HMS Vanguard’s reactor chamber were stuck on instead of replaced

The Royal Navy has ordered an urgent investigation amid claims that workers on a Trident nuclear armed submarine fixed broken bolts in the vessel’s reactor chamber using glue.

The faulty repairs on the cooling pipes aboard HMS Vanguard were found after one of the bolts fell off during an inspection, the Sun reported.

The bolt heads originally came off due to over-tightening. But, rather than replacing the damaged shafts, staff at the defence contractor Babcock implemented a quick fix and glued them back on.

Engineers at the contractor reported it as a procedural glitch after the problem was found, but did not mention the botched nature of the repair.

Um are there no torque wrenches in the RN or whoever is responsible for nuclear reactor building? Facepalm...
 
30 minute podcast

3 or 4 radio articles and interviews

"How to rebuild the British Army"

Discussions of heavying up. The Future Soldier Light and Unconventional Forces will likely stand pat. Boxer will stay but there is concern about the loss of the Warrior's cannons. Ben Wallace is talking about increasing the number of Challenger 3s to more than 200, possibly to support 4x Type 44 Regiments. Also there is talk of interim buys of SPHs (M109A7, K9, PzHb2000). No mention of Ajax. (I think a lot of people would support a CV90 buy).

Money could be found. Advancing existing programmes. Reprofiling budgets for faster delivery. Repurposing existing funds. Dipping into a cash reserve the Army apparently has available for rainy days.

But new money for newly identified shortfalls will have to be found as well.

"Rebuilding NATO"

SACEUR is asking for Hard Power and "Tanks". And he wants his 2% and his 7 fold increase in boots on the ground. 40,000 now is to become 300,000.

A battle group (-) is to become a brigade group (+). PDQ.



 
🍻
 


Mothball HMS Prince of Wales? Sounds like an opportunity

Britain’s armed forces would “last about five days” if there was a war, a senior Conservative MP has claimed, as pressure increases on the chancellor to boost defence spending in next month’s Budget. Tobias Ellwood, Tory chair of the Commons defence committee, told the Financial Times that high inflation and the cost of replacing equipment sent to Ukraine had created “a really grim picture” and left military supplies seriously depleted. Jeremy Hunt has vowed to consider the case for more military spending in his Budget in response to an update of the government’s 2021 foreign and defence policy, expected in the coming weeks. The revamping of the so-called “Integrated Review” by John Bew, a historian and member of the Number 10 policy unit, will take account of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The original document was billed as a “tilt to the Indo-Pacific”. In the meantime the lobbying for more military spending is increasing, with defence officials privately discussing a range of eye-catching measures to save money. One person briefed on the discussions told the FT these could include the mothballing of HMS Prince of Wales, one of the Royal Navy’s two aircraft carriers, fewer RAF flights and the possible cutting of special forces operations. Treasury insiders were scornful of such “doomsday scenarios”, often described in One Horse Guards Road as “shroud waving”. The state of the British army has become a domestic political issue. Ben Wallace, the defence secretary, who has lobbied for extra funding over the past year, told parliament last week that the UK had “hollowed out and underfunded” its forces. It was an admission that John Healey, the shadow defence secretary, leapt on as “a frank admission of failure over 13 years of Conservative government”. Ellwood claimed the army was seriously short of surface-to-air and anti-tank missiles, which are among the weaponry supplied to Ukraine. “I’m very concerned that the message coming out of the Treasury is indicating that we must brace ourselves for further real terms cuts because inflation is rising,” he said. The Ministry of Defence said: “These are speculative rumours, which always circulate before a Budget and even more so in the run-up to the integrated review. We don’t comment on speculation.” There is frustration in the Treasury and Number 10 about the campaign for more military spending. Hunt’s team points out that £242bn has been earmarked for a 10-year equipment procurement plan. Rishi Sunak, as chancellor under Boris Johnson’s government, in 2020 promised an extra £16bn for defence across four years, hailed as the biggest boost to defence spending since the cold war. Hunt said in his Autumn Statement last year: “The prime minister and I both recognise the need to increase defence spending. But before we make that commitment, it is necessary to revise and update the Integrated Review, written as it was before the Ukraine invasion.” Recommended News in-depthWar in Ukraine Military briefing: how the UK took a vanguard role on arms for Ukraine During last year’s Tory leadership contests, Sunak refused to match promises by rivals to increase defence spending to 3 per cent of GDP by 2030, up from just over 2 per cent now. But a spokesperson for Sunak said the prime minister’s commitment to defence was clear, given he had increased the military budget and had sent considerable shipments of arms to Ukraine. Britain has provided more than £2.3bn of military aid to Ukraine, and the government has also allocated £560mn to the MoD to replenish depleted UK weapons stockpiles. Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2023. All rights reserved.Reuse this content(opens in new window)CommentsJump to comments section UK defence spending stories you missed News in-depthWar in Ukraine Military briefing: how the UK took a vanguard role on arms for Ukraine UK defence spending Britain set to resume payments for army’s troubled armoured vehicle programme UK defence spending UK defence chiefs seek funding increase to confront rising threats Aerospace & Defence UK, Japan and Italy agree to build joint advanced fighter jet BAE Systems PLC BAE Systems bullish as defence spending rises UK defence spending Sunak quiet on defence budget as he signs off on £4.2bn frigate contract UK defence spending Truss to launch defence review as she calls for Russian reparations
 

Britain's Armed Forces have been too small to measure up against Russia since the 90s.

And even during the Cold War they only had one measly armoured Division, a couple of kind of light brigades (Commando and Airborne) plus a fictitious TA Division.

So not news, really ;)
 
Britain's Armed Forces have been too small to measure up against Russia since the 90s.

And even during the Cold War they only had one measly armoured Division, a couple of kind of light brigades (Commando and Airborne) plus a fictitious TA Division.

So not news, really ;)

And yet


1968 and 2016.
 
Defence Ministers railing at Treasury for more money

Labour saying whatever the Tories are doing it's not good enough and we'll do better - but we can't tell you until we see the books

By the way Labour supports the Armed Forces, NATO, the Joint Expeditionary Force and recognizes we won't be doing anything without the US.....

Gawd - I do luv politicians.

 
Um are there no torque wrenches in the RN or whoever is responsible for nuclear reactor building? Facepalm...
This is likely a case of one bad millwright verses the whole contractors fault. We had something similar happen on a gearbox where I work. A lazy ass had broken off 3 bolts well tightening them down and proceeded to silicone the heads on them to make it look like he didn't because he didn't want to take out the broken bolts and fix it (that can be a lot of effort, every 5 minute job is one broken bolt away from being a 4 hour nightmare). We only caught it because someone went to check to make sure the bolts were all tight before they were sent out. He received a exceptionally strong talking to afterwards.

The point being is it only takes one POS to make that happen unfortunately.
 
More on the conversion of Ukrainian civilians into infanteers by Brits, Norwegians and Swedes.

5 week course to convert

I expect there's more than a little bit of hubris and exaggeration to the statement that straight-off-the-street civilians are "pretty much fully-fledged infantry soldiers" after five weeks of training, but it does make one think about how long a training regime needs to be, doesn't it.

Takes me back to my Junior NCO course and understanding the difference between "Must-knows", "Should-knows", and "Could-knows".

🍻
 
Takes me back to my Junior NCO course and understanding the difference between "Must-knows", "Should-knows", and "Could-knows".
And how many of those must-knows can actually be taught as opposed to experienced.
 
I expect there's more than a little bit of hubris and exaggeration to the statement that straight-off-the-street civilians are "pretty much fully-fledged infantry soldiers" after five weeks of training, but it does make one think about how long a training regime needs to be, doesn't it.

Takes me back to my Junior NCO course and understanding the difference between "Must-knows", "Should-knows", and "Could-knows".

🍻

At Depot PARA in the mid-80s, after 6 weeks of training and testing, we gave our recruits rifles and had them doing perimeter patrols of the base as part of the regular guard force because: IRA threat.

Depending on how you do it and (more importantly) who you have doing it, you can absolutely prepare a civilian for certain aspects of military life in that timeframe.
 
Back
Top