Royal Navy and RAF will bear brunt of multi-billion pound defence cuts

Date: 24th July 2010
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

The Royal Navy and the RAF will bear the brunt of the multi-billion pound cuts set to be inflicted upon Britain's armed forces.


Defence strategists believe that in the next 50-years future conflicts will be similar to those of Iraq and Afghanistan involving a mixture of low and high tech capability but where large troop numbers will be essential.
As well as the cutting of major defence projects, the cuts will see wholesale changes to the Ministry of Defence's inept procurement process, which Liam Fox, the defence secretary, has already said is "not fit for purpose".

Talks on the strategic defence review are taking place this weekend during which the armed forces chiefs will discuss how £6.5bn can be stripped out of the current defence budget without neutering Britain's offensive capability. Even larger savings will have to be extracted from future defence projects.

Sources have told The Sunday Telegraph that all options are being considered from the "sublime to the ridiculous". "There are no sacred cows," said one source. "Everything, absolutely everything, is on the table".

The defence secretary is hopeful that the military chiefs will reach a consensus on cuts without the bitter internecine bloodletting that has accompanied defence reviews of the past.

Chief among the list of victims is the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which comes with a price tag of £70m per plane. The MoD had planned to buy around 150 for service in both the RAF and the Navy but that number could be cut by half. The final 48 of the RAF's multi-role Typhoon ground attack aircraft, which has a unit price tag of around £35m, could also be axed, although the penalties of withdrawing from the four-nation collaborative project could make buying and mothballing the plane the cheaper option.

The Royal Navy's aircraft carrier programme is also vulnerable and could be reduced from two vessels to one. The highly advanced but hugely costly Type 45 Destroyers, where the cost for just six ships has soared to £6bn, is also vulnerable. Other projects which could be cancelled include the A400M transport aircraft, and elements of the RAF in-flight refuelling tanker fleet.

But the Army will also face cuts with artillery and tank regiments likely to be mothballed and the Future Rapid Effects System (FRES) – a multi-billion pound project designed to replace Britain's ageing fleets of armoured vehicles – either shelved entirely or hugely reduced.

It is understood that the military's eight deployable brigades, which are vital for the war effort in Helmand, and Britain's involvement in future conflicts, will survive for the time being. Speculation has surfaced suggesting that 16 Air Assault Brigade, which is largely composed of Paras, and 3 Commando Brigade, within which the Royal Marines serve, could be amalgamated. But this is likely to meet with stiff opposition from all three chiefs who fear that such a merger would make little sense and would significantly weaken Britain's ability to project "hard power".

One source told The Sunday Telegraph: "This is not the back of a fag packet planning – the strategic defence review needs to be an intellectual construct which will define Britain's fighting capability for the next 50-years. What we decided now will have enormous implications for the future. We cannot afford to get it wrong. Once the cuts have been made there will be no going back. The choice for us is whether our armed forces have some sort of offensive capability so that we can continue to undertake operations like Afghanistan or whether we reduced our capability to that of Belgium."
But other sources have also been critical of the defence secretary for creating a "maelstrom of doubt and confusion" at a time when over 10,000 British troops are fighting in Afghanistan.

A senior officer said: "All we have had from the new defence secretary are hints and sideswipes at the military. We have troops fighting and dying on operations and unless some direction and leadership, rather than the constant regurgitation of how bad things are within the military, some troops will legitimately ask 'what's the point' when their future is in doubt."

Is there actually any more "meat" to cut from these bones? If you cut too far then the "patient" will wither and die. We've heard all the talk of A400M possibly getting canned yonks bank, and we've heard that they may be putting the AAR to possibly "private" tender.
I think the SAR may be safe for a while now though....HRH is making it his job. Which may I say is a fantastic job!
The tasks that are coming up and will come up in the future wont get done or they WILL expect you/us to do a hell of a lot more with outdated/obselete equipment and overworked personnel. A recipe for a joyful existence.

In conclusion I fear for the future for the RN and RAF and it would seem that the army (granted are taking the majority of losses at this time, WE WILL REMEMBER THEM) are trying to force the other two armed forces to accept that they are the real junior partners.

Times-online have stated today that ther RAF will lose the Tornado fleet and save 7.5 Billion rather than bin the Harrier which would only save 1.5 Billion. Wish they would make their mind up, or could it be both fleets that go?!? To be frank I am sick of all the gossip mongering, they should say nothing until it all has been finalised!