British Army cuts announced by defence secretary

The development of strategic nuclear weapons is to safeguard against future potential threats. Nuclear weapons systems take a long time to develop and deploy, and during that time, the strategic situation might have changed.
It certainly seems likely that the world we inhabit will be different in 20 years time, and countries like Iran look set to get nuclear weapons, and who knows what the likes of Egypt, or Saudi Arabia will be like if they fall into the hands of Salafist whackos, which doesn’t seem beyond the realms of possibility in recent months.
Saying that Germany has done well for not having nuclear weapons is a bit like saying that you haven’t suffered for not having a fire extinguisher in your kitchen or had insurance. Just because bad things haven’t happened doesn’t mean the potential for them to happen doesn’t exist, and by the time you realise that you really did need them after all, it is too late.

Also, no one is denying that we can equip ourselves, but is there really any point in buying planes and ships that are more expensive but less capable as long as they are home grown? As you yourself have already pointed out, the economies of scale for producing British goods for a British market simply is not there, and we cannot compete effectively, so why bother?

Front line weapons systems and logistical equipment are day-to-day items which British servicemen’s lives depend on. Inevitably, higher costs mean that we get is less effective and less than we need. I think that the priority should be about equipping our troops in a way that makes them able to carry out their jobs as safely and effectively as possible, not create jobs for people who would mostly be able to find other jobs if defence jobs were not available anyway.

“All that stuff about the Eurofighter may be true (I wouldn’t know, I’m not an aircraft engineer), but I would have thought it was all a moot point, because superior stealth is the most over-riding factor. The F22 will be able to sneak up on just about anything, whereas the Euro fighter will not.”

That’s what they said about the B2 stealth bomber. Then a BAe Rapier system on display at Farnborough air show in 1996 tracked it all the way in and back out again even though it was said to be impossible. Excuses were then made about it being becuase it was raining and the water made the B2 shiny! Google it, there’s plenty about it, just don’t swallow the aircraft manufacturer’s propaganda whole, you’ll choke!

Of course that was with a plain old radar, even now Russia is developing PAK-FA radar specifically to detect F22’s and the like.

“In the US, there is more competition, and thus defence contractors are forced to be more competent than BAe Systems, which I believe is complacent in its belief that they will almost certainly get the major defence contracts regardless of quality, because there are no other British defence contractors with the capability to produce rival products anymore, seeing as BAe Systems systematically gobbled them up over the years.”

If BAe are so incompetent why do the US use them so much? Why are they a 20% partner in the F35? Why do the US buy their Bradley IFV’s, artillery systems, naval guns, missile launchers and precision guided munitions from them? Failures in military procurement have little to do with BAe and everything to do with incompetent governments.

BAe systems are undoubtedly capable of producing good stuff... When they have to. They have many talented engineers and boffins capable of doing great things. The trouble is, what they can get away with in Britain is less likely to fly in the US, so there is a certain element of them having to ‘raise their game’ when they are producing for the US DOD rather than the MOD...

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.