Aggression by Russia/uk?

[Evanivitch]

Red 4 said:

It was an example of the complete lack of/ substandard kit our forces are/ were equipped with. I'm not sure things have progressed much. Glad you agree.

Moving on it was an example of a tragic turn of events. Not so glad you found the tale amusing and asked for more.

What's the latest procurement/ development disaster for the MOD ?
AJAX ?

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/ajax-armoured-vehi...

Certainly the latest to hit the news.

But that's only because MRV-P part I (JLTV), MRV-P part 2 (unknown delays), CR3 (contracted but no working prototype), MIV (Boxer, procured from a European industry body, sub contracted to the Boxer team, sub contracted to 2 separate German manufacturers), Puma replacement (Yeovil work?) or Future Fires (AS90/Light Gun replacement) haven't hit the news yet.

And that's after WCSP was unceremoniously binned, leaving us without a IFV capability.

[Red 4]

Byker28i said:

Red 4 said:

Evanivitch said:

nikaiyo2 said:

In all fairness he might have made a valid point about MOD procurement.

I used to work in MoD procurement for ATSA back in the day then producing QMGI & CDPIs… I have literally no fking clue what I actually did other than move paper

Everyone knows MOD procurement is a crock of ****. Talking about your buddy's experience 18 years ago in a LR and ECBA is hardly contemporary discussion.

It was an example of the complete lack of/ substandard kit our forces are/ were equipped with. I'm not sure things have progressed much. Glad you agree.

Moving on it was an example of a tragic turn of events. Not so glad you found the tale amusing and asked for more.

What's the latest procurement/ development disaster for the MOD ?
AJAX ?

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/ajax-armoured-vehi...

and yet despite all that we have one of the best equipped forces and almost always have had... There will always be exception to being deployed somewhere not planned for...

edit: and yet talking about others experience is all he has, second or third hand... deriding all other opinions as worthless because they don't match his assumptions. Ignoring others who have actual experience of the kit he's dismissing.

Edited by Byker28i on Thursday 1st July 08:47

I think the report said something along the lines of our armour being "outdated, outclassed and outgunned". I'm not sure that fits with your assessment of our forces being amongst the best equipped in the world.

Yes, for the umpteenth time I did not serve in the military but I have friends and family who do/ did. I'm not sure why that means I'm not allowed an opinion.
Your profile says you're an IT bod, Dave.
Perhaps you forgot to add that you are also 22 Regiment SAS (Territorial obviously).
Or maybe you'd like to tell us what your experience actually is, seeing as you are keen to dismiss others from a nonmilitary background.

[Red 4]

Evanivitch said:

Red 4 said:

It was an example of the complete lack of/ substandard kit our forces are/ were equipped with. I'm not sure things have progressed much. Glad you agree.

Moving on it was an example of a tragic turn of events. Not so glad you found the tale amusing and asked for more.

What's the latest procurement/ development disaster for the MOD ?
AJAX ?

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/ajax-armoured-vehi...

Certainly the latest to hit the news.

But that's only because MRV-P part I (JLTV), MRV-P part 2 (unknown delays), CR3 (contracted but no working prototype), MIV (Boxer, procured from a European industry body, sub contracted to the Boxer team, sub contracted to 2 separate German manufacturers), Puma replacement (Yeovil work?) or Future Fires (AS90/Light Gun replacement) haven't hit the news yet.

And that's after WCSP was unceremoniously binned, leaving us without a IFV capability.

Yes, I only mentioned Ajax because it was in the news a couple of weeks ago.
I have no idea what some of the other acronyms you mentioned are but I shall use the magic of the internet.
Cheers. It seems not everything is as rosy as some would like to believe.

[Evanivitch]

Red 4 said:

Perhaps you forgot to add that you are also 22 Regiment SAS (Territorial obviously).

That would be 21 or 23 then...

[Olivera]

Red 4 said:

Cheers. It seems not everything is as rosy as some would like to believe.

'Not as rosy'? You've convinced me that our armed forces are incompetant, ill-prepared, under-equipped, out-gunned, and just not fit for purpose, so can't we just disband them?

[Cold]

There's a whole long running thread dedicated to the kit our armed forces use and its suitability in today's conflicts.

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

[Red 4]

Olivera said:

Red 4 said:

Cheers. It seems not everything is as rosy as some would like to believe.

'Not as rosy'? You've convinced me that our armed forces are incompetant, ill-prepared, under-equipped, out-gunned, and just not fit for purpose, so can't we just disband them?

I'm not sure I would go that far. My criticism has mainly revolved around the F35.
Somebody said yesterday that a good sand-box conflict may help to iron out the flaws.
It turns out that sand (of a specific type, found in the middle east) isn't good for the F35 because it destroys the fan blades in the engine, so perhaps that isn't the best way forward.
Apparently 2 issues with the aircraft were sorted last year and only 871 deficiencies remain.
Finger crossed, eh ?

[Red 4]

Evanivitch said:

Red 4 said:

Perhaps you forgot to add that you are also 22 Regiment SAS (Territorial obviously).

That would be 21 or 23 then...

Or ? Oh, come on. Dave serves in both. Simultaneously.

[citizensm1th]

Evanivitch said:

Can we pull Estonia exercises into this?

3RHA currently deployed in Estonia with support from reserves and ISTAR regiments. Nice picture showing the scale of the nasty alongside the 105. Both in need of urgent capability updates, but at the back of the queue with AFV updates the priority right now.

My neice served with them ,the nearest she came to being wounded was the odd horse bite.

BTW are you to blame for the snach lr?

[Evanivitch]

citizensm1th said:

My neice served with them ,the nearest she came to being wounded was the odd horse bite.

BTW are you to blame for the snach lr?

Before my time!

[768]

Red 4 said:

It turns out that sand (of a specific type, found in the middle east) isn't good for the F35 because it destroys the fan blades in the engine, so perhaps that isn't the best way forward.

Damages the blade coatings and addressed before you ever heard about it.

[Red 4]

768 said:

Damages the blade coatings and addressed before you ever heard about it.

Addressed ? New coating is better but the issue is not solved.
Rumblings in the US about lack of engines and the availability of spare parts.
Further rumblings about in service costs and future upgrades.
I reckon the US will largely sideline the F35, they are already looking for alternatives.
Meanwhile, we will have no alternative - unlike the US.

[andymadmak]

Red 4 said:

Meanwhile, we will have no alternative - unlike the US.

Not strictly true. I believe that both carriers could be retrofitted with EMALS systems if it became necessary. Cost issues aside, (which are not inconsiderable) I understand that the machinery space is available - which would have been a far more challenging problem had it not been.
The hull life of these ships is designed for 50+ years. That means that they will likely undergo several major changes throughout their lives.

[Red 4]

andymadmak said:

Red 4 said:

Meanwhile, we will have no alternative - unlike the US.

Not strictly true. I believe that both carriers could be retrofitted with EMALS systems if it became necessary. Cost issues aside, (which are not inconsiderable) I understand that the machinery space is available - which would have been a far more challenging problem had it not been.
The hull life of these ships is designed for 50+ years. That means that they will likely undergo several major changes throughout their lives.

Yes, the carriers can be retro-fitted with cats. It was designed into them.

My point is that, as things stand, the only option for the carriers is the F35B and we are currently committed to the programme. A naval version of Tempest would be great but that is way over the horizon.
Service life for F35 is decades. Problems with development and in all likelihood reliability and cost remain.

F35 is an addition to the US arsenal. It is not the only plane they can call on and it appears they may very well sideline it.

Edited by Red 4 on Thursday 1st July 12:23

[Northernboy]

Red 4 said:

I think the report said something along the lines of our armour being "outdated, outclassed and outgunned". I'm not sure that fits with your assessment of our forces being amongst the best equipped in the world.

Yes, for the umpteenth time I did not serve in the military but I have friends and family who do/ did. I'm not sure why that means I'm not allowed an opinion.

No-one says that you aren't allowed an opinion, but I think that people are amused by your proclaimed expertise based on what the bloke next door sems to have told you over the garden fence and / or a cousin who fixes vans in the TA has sahred with you. It's just a bit silly, neighbours don't sit each other down and give them detailed inside informatin like this, so you are pretending to be an expert based on some spurious reasons.

I spent a year working for the MOD, at Farnborough, on the design of what back then was the Eurofighter. It gave me a extremely detailed insight into one very specific feature of that plane, and told me literally nothing about anything else at all, which is why I'm not on here claiming expertise.

What you sem to be doing is like if the bloke next door here was arguing about the combat readiness of the Challenger II based on the fact that I've had a chat with him about which barbecue to buy.

[Red 4]

Northernboy said:

Red 4 said:

I think the report said something along the lines of our armour being "outdated, outclassed and outgunned". I'm not sure that fits with your assessment of our forces being amongst the best equipped in the world.

Yes, for the umpteenth time I did not serve in the military but I have friends and family who do/ did. I'm not sure why that means I'm not allowed an opinion.

No-one says that you aren't allowed an opinion, but I think that people are amused by your proclaimed expertise based on what the bloke next door sems to have told you over the garden fence and / or a cousin who fixes vans in the TA has sahred with you. It's just a bit silly, neighbours don't sit each other down and give them detailed inside informatin like this, so you are pretending to be an expert based on some spurious reasons.

I spent a year working for the MOD, at Farnborough, on the design of what back then was the Eurofighter. It gave me a extremely detailed insight into one very specific feature of that plane, and told me literally nothing about anything else at all, which is why I'm not on here claiming expertise.

What you sem to be doing is like if the bloke next door here was arguing about the combat readiness of the Challenger II based on the fact that I've had a chat with him about which barbecue to buy.

Nothing much to do with the bloke next door. I've had an interest in aircraft for as long as I can remember. I just happen to chat with my neighbour from time to time and sometimes discuss aircraft. We are on the same page concerning the F35. He does, however, know more about aircraft than I ever will.

I've explained this more than once. The fact that you (and others) keep trotting out the same old nonsense says more about you than me.
You seek to attack the poster, not the opinion. It's a childish tactic but, unfortunstely, it is your usual line of attack.
I will admit to occasionally doing the same but that is only when others have had more than one chance to explain themselves or hint at having insider knowledge and knowing more than anybody else (wink wink, nudge nudge, I could tell you but then I'd have to kill you nonsense).

[Evanivitch]

Red 4 said:

Nothing much to do with the bloke next door. I've had an interest in aircraft for as long as I can remember. I just happen to chat with my neighbour from time to time and sometimes discuss aircraft. We are on the same page concerning the F35. He does, however, know more about aircraft than I ever will.

I've explained this more than once. The fact that you (and others) keep trotting out the same old nonsense says more about you than me.
You seek to attack the poster, not the opinion. It's a childish tactic but, unfortunstely, it is your usual line of attack.
I will admit to occasionally doing the same but that is only when others have had more than one chance to explain themselves or hint at having insider knowledge and knowing more than anybody else (wink wink, nudge nudge, I could tell you but then I'd have to kill you nonsense).

Remind me again how your interim aircraft and neighbour translates into a valid opinion like this?

Red 4 said:

It was an example of the complete lack of/ substandard kit our forces are/ were equipped with. I'm not sure things have progressed much. Glad you agree.

[Red 4]

Evanivitch said:

Red 4 said:

Nothing much to do with the bloke next door. I've had an interest in aircraft for as long as I can remember. I just happen to chat with my neighbour from time to time and sometimes discuss aircraft. We are on the same page concerning the F35. He does, however, know more about aircraft than I ever will.

I've explained this more than once. The fact that you (and others) keep trotting out the same old nonsense says more about you than me.
You seek to attack the poster, not the opinion. It's a childish tactic but, unfortunstely, it is your usual line of attack.
I will admit to occasionally doing the same but that is only when others have had more than one chance to explain themselves or hint at having insider knowledge and knowing more than anybody else (wink wink, nudge nudge, I could tell you but then I'd have to kill you nonsense).

Remind me again how your interim aircraft and neighbour translates into a valid opinion like this?

Red 4 said:

5
It was an example of the complete lack of/ substandard kit our forces are/ were equipped with. I'm not sure things have progressed much. Glad you agree.

Substandard or no kit and being sent into a warzone ? No link to the F35 just an example of what our forces sometimes have to deal with.

[Oilchange]

I think whatever shortfalls the F35 has at the moment are irrelevant largely because

a. It will be developed over its lifetime to mitigate or even delete them. No aircraft has ever fulfilled its potential out of the box.

b. Any gap in capability will likely be filled with other, less stealthy aircraft. Gulf war 1 wasn't won using only F117 and B2 aircraft.

c. We will make adapt and out think our opponents as we have always done. Less ideal obviously but the arms race is a fluid one I think.

It's far too early to write off the F35 frankly.

[Biggy Stardust]

Red 4 said:

He does, however, know more about aircraft than I ever will.

This statement is easy to believe.