In addition, there are 8 billions of money as yet unallocated, which will be available to respond to emerging equipment requirements.
This includes the promised 1% equipment budget uplift from 2015.
Given this financial horizon and certainty, the MOD is guaranteeing the delivery of a number of projects which will be funded and given the go ahead:
- The 14 new Chinooks (2 are replacement for Afghanistan losses)
- 4.5 billion pounds in new armoured vehicles (FRES SV, Foxhound, probably expenditure on vehicles brought from UOR to core and, hopefully, the kick-start, around 2016, of the process for a new FRES UV effort) [Note: this is not a novelty, and the armour budget situation has been clear since late 2011. See my earlier article "5.5 billions, 10 years and many programs" for an accurate breakdown of the situation]
- 1 billion pounds for the Warrior upgrade programme (in-service date by 2020 with IOC in 2018)
- Complete building of both CVF aircraft carriers in STOVL arrangement
- Complete the Type 45 acquisition program
- Complete the 7- boats Astute program
- The Type 26 program will go ahead
- Go ahead with the Successor Submarine program for replacing the Vanguard SSBNs from 2028
- Apache life-extension (probably to include Block III upgrades)
- Puma upgrade confirmed (22 helicopters to enter service)
- Wildcat helicopters (the order should be adjusted to procure 28 Naval Wildcats, 8 Special Forces "Light Assault Helicopter" Wildcats and 30 Army reconnaissance Wildcats)
- Merlin HC3 mid-life upgrade and assesment phase for its navalization (only the assesment phase...? This might be specific to Planning Round 12, unless i'm missing something: the Merlin HC3 should replace the Sea King HC4 by 2016, so there is not that much time to lose. This year the assesment phase should be launched, and then rather swiftly advanced in order to meet the 2016 date)
- A400M Atlas (22 to be procured)
- Voyager confirmed as well (9 in service as core fleet + 5 on call)
- Rivet Joint purchase confirmed (3 airplanes, under AIRSEEKER program, as Nimrod R1 replacement)
- The 8th C17 already announced
- An ungodly 7 billions for the Complex Weapons initiative (7 billions...??? I wish we had some more details, this seems way too high a budget for the initiatives launched and/or planned this far)
In addition, 4 billion pounds are to be committed into ISTAR, communications and intelligence projects: the MOD announcement includes SOLOMON (ground ISTAR data dissemination and fusion), Cipher crypto security management infrastructure program, the Falcon joint tactical communications trunk equipment which is entering service in its latest variant with the Army and RAF, DCNS (Defence Core Network Services) and, very importantly, CROWSNEST is also specifically mentioned, meaning that, finally, funding for the AEW platform and solution for the Navy should be made available. The target is to replace the Sea King MK7, hopefully without a "capability holiday" in the middle (the MK7 is now expected to go in 2016, CROWSNEST might not deliver before 2020 or even 2022 unless things are now adjusted), especially considering that the only great thing of an helicopter-based AEW solution is that it does not need a big carrier to operate, but just a rather standard flight deck.
The Navy has already lost fixed wing capability until 2020, losing AEW as well would be terrible. And it would be a spit in the face of experience paid with the blood of who died in the Falklands, in no small part due to the lack of airborne early warning.
A surprise is the announcement that the MOD will purchase the three River class patrol vessels of the Fishery protection squadron (HMS Tyne, HMS Severn and HMS Mersey). These ships have so far operated under a leasing renewed every 5 years, with VT responsible of logistics and mainteinance during each charter period, with the aim of providing a minimum of 275 days at sea per ship.
The arrangement, as far as i know, always worked well, but evidently spreadsheet Phil has determined that purchasing the vessels once and for all should cost less. However, there's no news of change for HMS Clyde, the Falklands patrol vessel which is a ship derived from the basic River design and is also leased, but from BAE.
So the whole idea leaves some real doubts in me. Can i say, honestly, that the purchase of an additional OPV, or indeed a long term solution to the problem of the Antarctic patrol vessel (repair Endurance, or scrap her? Purchase Protector at the end of the current lease? What to do?) would have been a better use of the money?
Unfortunately, no one in the House had enough knowledge of the subject to think about asking explanations on this particular announcement. "Buying ships" always sounds like a good thing, after all: however, in this particular case we should carefully consider if it really is necessary and cost-effective to do so.
The MOD is wasting no words with their announcement, as the following point proves: capability enhancements for the Typhoon are confirmed.
Nice. But which enhancements? We are waiting to have news regarding the integration of Brimstone, Storm Shadow and perhaps Paveway III, and we know the RAF wants AESA radar and Conformal Fuel Tanks in the future, at least on the Tranche 3 Typhoons, but the announcement tells positively nothing of what is incoming, nor about when it will arrive.
I'll keep my eyes open to catch any hint of what is to come, and i'll update this article and list as soon as i find out something meaningful.
More money is to go in simulators, logistics and basing upgrades connected to the new airplanes being put in service, from Voyager to F35, but this is frankly little news: it is an inevitable component of any major acquisition programme that gives you a new piece of kit to support.
Regarding Maritime Patrol Aircraft, any decision is delayed at least until SDSR 2015, but at least Hammond says that the re-generation of MPA capability will be on the list of options for the use of the 8 billion "headroom" in the budget.
Hopefully one billion or so can be allocated to the regeneration of this capability, which remains essential.
Hammond said:
"There will be additional commitments in the future from the 8 billion pounds, releases from unused contingency, the reserve in the core budget and from savings made by delegated budget holders."
Budget holders, as part of the defence reform, should be the heads of the three services and, for C4I and ISTAR and other joint kit, the new Joint Forces Commander. This should give the services better control on their priorities and on the use of money. As part of the reform, budget planning should now be done in annual cycles, and not in planning rounds.
Defence research funding to stay at 1.2%. Wouldn't have been bad to grow that figure a little, but at least there's no further reductions in sight.
Work on accommodations for the forces, which has been delayed to 2014, will not be brought forwards. 2014 is and will be.
There is no turning back on the 82.000 stong army, or on the manpower reductions to Navy and RAF, but at least there's the promise of no more cuts in addition to these reductions.
At least until the SDSR 2015, eventually carried out by a different government which might well decide to throw everything to hell anyway, obviously. But this is another story.
Some battalions from the large regiments will vanish, this is definite. Regiments of infantry are all expected to stay, though. In Hammond's words:
“Some of the multi-battalion regiments will have to lose a battalion in order that we can take this number of troops out of the army.”
The Royal Regiment of Scotland, the Rifles, Yorkshire and Mercian regiments are those most likely to "contribute" to the manpower cutting, as they are the formations with the most battalions. The Guards have also been considered for cuts, but i continue to believe it is unlikely that this government will ever dare announcing the disbandment of the oldest regiment of the Army, the Coldstream Guards, and even less would they target the Scots Guards.
Cuts to RLC, Signals, Engineers, RAC and Royal Artillery will also be part of the sad story, with some of the cuts already announced and implemented.
We still don't have the details, however, so it is prudent, and respectful, not to speculate too much on who might get the chop. These are times of uncertainty for people as passionate as me, but we can all imagine how much worse it must be for service personnel living in the uncertainty and with the worry of being made redundant.
Hammond, however, unsurprisingly rubbished recent press claims that announced he was about to order the British Army to abandon all regimental names by 2013 (it had been suggested, namely, that such a move would turn 3 Scots - The Black Watch into 3 Scots only, cutting the last vestiges of history out of the already mutilated army). I had read the reports on the press about this move, but never accepted it as possible. If you think about it, cancelling the historic names does not save a penny, while it buys hate in tons. Anyone suggesting such a move can be only one of the following things: a reporter short of actual stories, or a wannabe (political) suicide.
Hammond's words in facts go:
“I know people feel very strongly about this issue and I understand why. The key thing is protecting the regimental structure.
“In some cases, cap badges of old traditional regiments that have long since gone have been attached to battalion names and I understand that there will be concerns about protecting those cap badge names if we have to take out battalions.
“We will look to do everything we can to protect them.”
Apparently, there is a current that pushes these words to rather ridiculous heights, suggesting that 3 Scots could become "Black Watch and Argyl and Sutherlands Highlanders" to preserve the identity of the 5 Scots battalion if it effectively goes.
We'll see what happens.
The 10 Years budget is now being analysed by the National Audit Office, and once the NAO validates it, it will be published in Summary form. It won't, for obvious reasons, go too in deep with details, but hopefully it'll say enough to enable us to have a far clearer picture of the situation in our minds.
As for information, I have made it clear that once the National Audit Office has completed its review, we will publish its report and a summary-level equipment plan, with the same level of detail in it as has routinely been published about the defence budget. That may not be the level of detail that the hon. Gentleman would like, but it just is not possible, for security reasons and for commercial reasons, to publish a 10-year programme in minute detail without making the situation that the MOD faces impossible.
Hammond has however also said in Parliament that an updated announcement on basing, mainly for the Army, isn't likely to arrive before around year's end. The wait will still be long for some of the information we seek.
On the whole not bad news, I thought, Gabriele. Rather better than I expected in many cases.
ReplyDeleteGood news that, although the acquisition of new MPA aircraft is not announced, Hammond does say that the re-generation of MPA capability will be on the list of options for the use of the 8 billion "headroom" in the budget.
Perhaps a more minor point but no mention was made of the extra £500 billion set aside for further improvements to be made to our counter IED/mine capabilities.
"Perhaps a more minor point but no mention was made of the extra £500 billion set aside for further improvements to be made to our counter IED/mine capabilities."
ReplyDeleteI think those need not to be mentioned, as they are already committed and announced.
Good news overall, apparently (good calls on Merlin and Apache and Crowsnest) but i'd like to know more re: Merlin navalization and Typhoon capabilities upgrade.
Your new found respect and restraint when talking about Regiments is interesting compared to this,
ReplyDeleteHighlanders safe, but Scots Dragoons gone?
A few days ago
That was worth reporting, because it was a sudden change compared to anything heard before. And as i noted, the disbandment of a tank regiment only fits in with a very different MRB structure than expected, which is worth a thought and a mention in my humble opinion. However unpleasant.
DeleteWhatever pointless accusation you are trying to make, you could well spare. You won't find someone else with the same respect i have for the armed forces, no matter how well you search.
Yet again Gabby I have to question what you say
DeleteYou start with a breathy, sensationalist piece (the latest in a long line) without thought, then I write a piece explaining why I don't do stuff like that, the extract is below
########
I am not going to discuss which regiments are under threat because to be honest, I think we should let the MoD make it’s decision and allow those in the Regiments in question deal with it without endless speculation in the media, Twitter or blogs. We are dealing with real people after all and and people proclaiming the end or otherwise of your Regimental family is not likely to be helpful.
########
Then all of a sudden you have been overcome with a new found piety, writing this;
We still don't have the details, however, so it is prudent, and respectful, not to speculate too much on who might get the chop. These are times of uncertainty for people as passionate as me, but we can all imagine how much worse it must be for service personnel living in the uncertainty and with the worry of being made redundant.
####
Do you ever have an original thought?
Just askin like
TD, you have this unhealthy obsession that makes you think that you are the awesome source of all thoughts and knowledge in the world, and that the rest of the world can only express a thought after hearing it from you.
DeleteSeriously, i'm laughing in your face for this. You get more ridiculous with each try you make. Next time you will try to copyright the word "defence" to talk about it alone?
You need medical care. Perhaps they can help you.
Gabriele
ReplyDelete"4.5 billion pounds in new armoured vehicles (FRES SV, Foxhound, probably expenditure on vehicles brought from UOR to core and, hopefully, the kick-start, around 2016, of the process for a new FRES UV effort)"
I wondered whether some of the specific vehicles you have mentioned (e.g. Foxhound, UOR vehicles, etc. is just your speculation, or does the speech (or another document) actually mention those? I can only find references to FRES SV and the Warrior update. That's not to say that you are wrong.
It is not mentioned in this report, but the 5.5 billions in 10 years figure was announced actually long ago, and i reported it in an article on here already back then.
DeleteYou possibly hadn't become a reader on here, though. I suggest you give it a look, i'm sure it'll prove interesting, and Hammond's announcement seem to prove it is still perfectly up to date in its facts.
http://ukarmedforcescommentary.blogspot.it/2011/12/55-billions-10-years-many-programmes.html
Anyway, back then it was said clearly that 5.5 billion was the money the Army had to expend in the 10 years to come for armour. All types of it.
As expected, of 5.5 billions, 1 is for Warrior.
Up to around 1.4 is committed to FRES SV development, testing and long lead items orders for the production to follow, as was explained in a session of the Parliamentary Defence Committee reported in the above-linked article.
That leaves roughly 3.1 billions for:
Production order of FRES SV
Foxhound (the first order for 200 was an UOR, the second order for 100 was announced as coming from Core budget, so it's almost certain that the money comes from this 3 billion figure)
And, around 2015, money for the retention of Afghanistan UOR vehicles will have to come from here.
As for the FRES UV, there's the famous Army proposition of starting to look onto it again in 2016 for a 2022 in service date, so money has to come again from this fund, at least out to 2020 if not to 2022.
There is not a document which sets it all out, no. But putting the data together, i'd say that my interpretation is... very, very likely the correct one.
Latest Foxhound order article
http://ukarmedforcescommentary.blogspot.it/2011/12/100-more-foxhounds-on-way.html
Well, thanks for all that, Gabriele. Will certainly look at the earlier article.
ReplyDeleteCertainly hope that the FRES UV programme is re-started. I can't see how else the Mechanised Infantry and other formations will cope.
@Gabriele
ReplyDeleteI'v just been having a closer look at the list of projects and another little think.
It would seem to me that although the list is quite pleasing, in that no project mentioned in recent times has been cancelled, on the other hand, nothing really new has been included.
I'll take my illustration from the Army. There is a lot of quality new kit that the Army would like to get its hands on but which has no mention here. For instance, there is the M777 gun (a deal has recently been arranged with India for the sale of appprox. 150 of these excellent weapons). The Light Gun needs replacement or supplementing and yet there is no mention of such a project. Another example is the urgent need to upgrade the Challengers (120mm smoothbore gun, etc.)
Do you think such projects might still materialize or is the Hammond list all that there will be for ten years and that is it, full stop?
The Light Gun replacement has long been pushed to the right. The 2022 date has become a 2030 notional date, so it's no surprise on that front.
DeleteThe Challenger II CSP is instead a necessity, and it is expected around the middle of the decade, perhaps in 2016.
However, with the Army structures not even announced yet, i'm not entirely surprised that there is no mention of such programs.
The list presented in parliament is, i think, by no means complete. The MOD works with hundreds of contracts each year, while that summary is about the biggest-ticket items.
I do not think at all that the list announced yesterday is all what happens, and stop.
It's a first list with the biggest items they are able to confirm at the moment.
Hopefully, once the Summary validated by NAO is published, we'll be able to build a more complete picture.
Oh well, that sounds a bit more hopeful. Thanks for those thoughts. I didn't know the Challenger update was considered that important.
ReplyDeleteJust one or two more questions, if you don't mind.
I saw no mention of Watckeeper in the list. Would that be because it has already been completely funded? I ask because it is a programme that has had more than its fair share of troubles and I wondered whether there was any thought of cancellation.
Second, I wondered whether you thought there was any possibility of the £8 billion "contingency" money might be used to buy items that are not strictly emergency buys.
Lastly, I think I remember you including some detail on which programmes were included in the Complex Weapons Initiative. I think it included CAMM but can'remember the others. Could you direct me to it?
Oh well, that sounds a bit more hopeful. Thanks for those thoughts. I didn't know the Challenger update was considered that important.
ReplyDeleteJust one or two more questions, if you don't mind.
I saw no mention of Watckeeper in the list. Would that be because it has already been completely funded? I ask because it is a programme that has had more than its fair share of troubles and I wondered whether there was any thought of cancellation.
Second, I wondered whether you thought there was any possibility of the £8 billion "contingency" money might be used to buy items that are not strictly emergency buys.
Lastly, I think I remember you including some detail on which programmes were included in the Complex Weapons Initiative. I think it included CAMM but can'remember the others. Could you direct me to it?
Watchkeeper is about to enter service, it's high priority, and by now probably mostly paid for (save for the running costs, obviously), so i am not worried.
ReplyDeleteAs to that 8 billions, for what i understand, it will be most definitely mainly used for regular procurement. It is, however, currently uncommitted to any specific plan. If i get the point right, those 8 billions, unless they are needed to cover cost overruns on other projects, are intended to be available for funding procurement of whatever the Service Chiefs will accord priority to.
It might be an MPA platform. It might be Challenger CSP, it might be the Fast Landing Craft and/or the Future Force Protection Craft, depending on what gets the priority.
It will likely be the source of some MHPC funding, unless the 2018 date is abandoned and the minesweepers only replaced later than that.
That funding is not, ideally, an UOR allocation: it is the money the MOD can commit during the next ten years to other voices of expenditure currently not contracted for.
About Complex Weapons, yes, CAMM is part of it. For the MOD, Complex Weapons team by now covers all main weaponry programs, from SPEAR to Storm Shadow passing by Sea Viper, LMM, Starstreak, CAMM and Meteor.
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/MicroSite/DES/OurTeams/WeaponsTeams/TeamComplexWeapons.htm
The MOD Complex Weapons team includes the Complex Weapon agreement with MBDA for the development of CAMM, Fire Shadow and SPEAR.
To access the two articles i think you are seeking, you can click on the tag "SPEAR" in the Topics list to the right of the page.
When i've got some time i'll write an article bringing all info together regarding the Complex Weapon initiative, so it'll work as reference. As always, if you have questions, do make them without hesitation.
Gabriele
ReplyDeleteThanks very much for all that info.
Most re-asssuring to know that the 8 billions will be mainly used for regular procurement.
I'll click on the SPEAR tag. Thanks