tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post1163469157381185953..comments2024-01-12T18:59:05.080+00:00Comments on Defence With A "C": Scotland the BraveUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-63244246692674164982013-12-14T00:07:20.398+00:002013-12-14T00:07:20.398+00:00Hi Chris,
Yes, no idea why I didn't think of ...Hi Chris,<br /><br />Yes, no idea why I didn't think of her before, probably because I was thinking more defence than attack. But if I have this right she can be a flagship whereas a T23 can't, not with current configurations.<br /><br />Near 40 year Indy supporter my one concern was a feeling the SNP were too pacifist but a survey I found showed more than half their members supported NATO and not just PfP, and after the Gruniad had a thread I took a very active part in and other comments the leadership came out for NATO - and I found Angus had been doing homework for months. Got a bit hacked off with papers coming out all about army and adding a few Hawks and lip-service to navy, or buying loads of Gripens or Absaloms with non-existent money. Also with the idea Scotland would have £billions to spend! We get a share of the assets and make do as best we can till the gaps are filled. Which brought me to obvious co-operation then transition until the rUK filled gaps in forces which are lean but bristol fashion. And then I did the QRA and it became obvious that it all starts from there, moves on to maritime, and negotiations and co-operation follow.<br /><br />I like the idea of no subs for Scotland, us taking more than our 1/12th share of QRA - i.e. mostly half - and therefore less of other duties to protect Scotland + rUK. Simple as that, and it uses soon to be retiring UK assets. Cheap and cheerful solution for Scotland and the rUK. As far as I can see Typhon per hour is quoted as £70,000 an hour but as well as all costs that includes capital and amortisation which is already included in national debt share. So perhaps cost per hour all in is £35,000 maybe even a good bit less. I think the fule cost is about £6,000. A major annual cost for Scotland, but proportionately less short-term in others such as maritime surface forces.<br /><br />And the white paper, as well as giving an arguable adequate defence force, shows the SNP willingness for transition and even long-term co-operation (except Trident!). It also happens to be, in my opinion, an opening gambit in pre-negotiation which the UK for obvious reasons refuses to do ...<br /><br />Interesting 9 months to go, I'll drop in occasionally :-)<br /><br />aka Peter PiperAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-3689679904962069392013-12-13T19:53:34.767+00:002013-12-13T19:53:34.767+00:00Evening Peter,
I think Albion is a good fit. It&#...Evening Peter,<br /><br />I think Albion is a good fit. It's running costs are not beyond the scope of Scotland by any means, it's a ship that would add a lot of interesting capabilities to a Scottish Navy, and it's the kind of ship the UK would be willing to trade to hold on to assets elsewhere.<br /><br />Cheers for stopping by.Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18182426936194426623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-60493038775604193492013-12-12T05:38:05.227+00:002013-12-12T05:38:05.227+00:00Excellent article, one with respect which I just f...Excellent article, one with respect which I just found. I've a feeling Trident is becoming standardised at about 10 years from the point of view of both sides. I think there'll be 53 Tranche 1 Typhoons available, some for spares maybe. The key to negotiations is co-operate - or don't co-operate. After our Independence Scotland doing full QRA North could save the rUK money, and perhaps similar mutual deals can be made. QRA from Boulmer, but perhaps us building a failover / autonomous selective version at Leuchars (set up as slave but the politicians can call it X and Y). The SNP they say yes to co-operation, the rUK say nothing much yet. Co-operation though is cheap as sodden chips for both sides, and takes the urgency out of the whole thing.<br /><br />I like the Skjold - we'll buy a couple of them some time. Also like Albion, I never thought of her.<br /><br />aka Peter PiperAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-69308563782598224832013-11-27T19:02:38.656+00:002013-11-27T19:02:38.656+00:00There is a point however at which point the Govern...There is a point however at which point the Government would come off as being petty. A balance to be struck in all likelyhood. It certainly could make some interesting months of viewing.Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18182426936194426623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-27334464195042390362013-11-26T21:43:54.550+00:002013-11-26T21:43:54.550+00:00Because we would (largely) prefer to maintain the ...Because we would (largely) prefer to maintain the UK, the Government are being extremely forbearing in the face of considerable provocation at present. If the People of Scotland insist on pissing on our chips...the gloves will be off in any negotiations that follow because there will be no votes to be won in England by being helpful to the SNP. <br /><br />aka GNB<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-89785059851948810482013-11-25T22:01:51.600+00:002013-11-25T22:01:51.600+00:00For us or them?For us or them?Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18182426936194426623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-50063816127133699822013-11-25T19:39:22.538+00:002013-11-25T19:39:22.538+00:00With the national debt and the welfare state, ther...With the national debt and the welfare state, there will be vast amounts of wooden dollars flying around anyway. I see no reason defence dollars can not or would not be added to those<br />TrThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07316335177828136131noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-56440887202664870822013-11-20T22:39:35.823+00:002013-11-20T22:39:35.823+00:00Evening.
The calculations granted are not just &q...Evening.<br /><br />The calculations granted are not just "8% of all ships etc", but nor is the UK government going to allow the SNP to start calculating whatever it feels like. The UK still has the legal right to reject a Scottish vote for independence if it so choses, so the cards are firmly in HM hands. Scotland is very much in the weaker bargaining position and will have to accept a compromise that satisfies the UK. I imagine the UK would be adult about it and give Scotland a decent share of stuff based on a sensible analysis of Scotlands needs, but it will be largely dictated by the UK's terms, not the Scots.<br /><br />I also doubt the SNP will get much say in the time scale for Faslane and moving Trident. The UK will not allow Scotland to dictate the timescale and Scotland will have almost zero legal recourse to counter with. If the UK does decide to roll over and play nicely then there is always the option of temporary basing/operating in the US, albeit at the UK's expense. This also relates back to why Scotland would be wise to keep quiet about trying any fancy book keeping with the value of assets, lest the UK turn around and deduct the cost of a "New Faslane" from any paper assets owed to Scotland.<br /><br />As for the overall finances, although Scottish income will be gone, so will Scottish expense. A small reduction in the UK forces will alleviate the budget pressures as well. If Trident is deemed that important by the government then it will be paid for whatever the cost. The loss of Scottish oil revenues (potentially replaced by English natural gas revenues) will not result in disarmament.Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18182426936194426623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-7820576171233338682013-11-20T22:17:40.196+00:002013-11-20T22:17:40.196+00:00I think perhaps the number of willing transferee&#...I think perhaps the number of willing transferee's is higher than is often made out in the papers. The chances for promotion and the chances to do fun things will still exist in a Scottish military. We're currently winding down from Afghanistan, with the government very nervous about putting boots on the ground anywhere.<br /><br />Thus an argument exists that British forces might not see much more action than Scots. The lack of action may even attract some in. I can't see them meeting all their recruiting demands from day one, but I suspect that given a few years they'll have no worries. I really suspect it wont be that big of a deal.Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18182426936194426623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-47882422284856781712013-11-20T22:14:51.591+00:002013-11-20T22:14:51.591+00:00Dear Chris
Again, another well thought out piece r...Dear Chris<br />Again, another well thought out piece raising some of the arguments out there for post independent Scottish defence. If I could add my thoughts to your piece from the view point of quite a rarity, an Englishman who to date has gone back to 1700's in his family tree with all the relatives living in England and fighting in the Suffolk’s or 12th of foot over the years. <br />Firstly I wish Scotland good luck in their endeavour. Because a strong Scotland strategically benefits England as a trading partner, it secures our northern border and means we will not have outside influences gaining ground in a location with a land border. Plus any sane Scotsman has the same thoughts about England however much it hurts. Ultimately the act of Union was a drive to secure our northern borders from French influence and geography doesn't change even if the eneny does. <br />Money<br />Firstly you have to realise that 8% of assets is not simply a case of 8% of 25 escorts equals 2 frigates or destroyers or 8% of 100 Typhoons means 8 planes. The Scots quite rightly will demand a full valuation of the MOD's assets including land (quite some valuable real estate in London alone ) whilst that is offset against assets in Scotland. Remember although the MOD owns thousands of hectors in Scotland it's not worth as much probably as the Chelsea Barracks of certain Regiments. Thus I really do not think “money” is going to be the issue for Scotland, the bun fight will be the valuation (what is the worth of 2 brand new Aircraft Carriers ? £6.5bn build cost or as per a new car worth ½ that once they hit the water ?) and the UK as a whole lacks spare cash to fund in money terms the Gap. I will post if you don't mind Chris my thoughts on Army, Navy and Air force of Scotland shortly.<br />England.<br />But in this post I am most concerned about the effect on the rest of the UK or lets be honest England's ability to re-jig it's forces once Scotland by agreement has taken some assets. The problem I see is the Trident question. We all know that Trident is about to take up between 30% & 40% of the MOD's equipment budget. So if we say the total budget is £1bn a year that’s about £400m. Now take 9% of the MOD's budget we get to £910m. Now Tridents got no cheaper so it's still £400m, but it's now 43/44% of your budget. Instead of having £600m left you've got £510m or a 15% reduction. I know the figures above are wrong but the maths don't lie it's still 15% of something either bigger or smaller. As the UK budget struggled to take a 10% reduction over 5yrs after SDR 2010, how on earth as we are already cut to the bone, do we get another 15% saving. This also doesn't take in to account the cost of building a “New Faslane” somewhere in the UK, Devonport I presume ? But can we see the locals putting up with having Nuclear Missiles on their doorstep along with a new repair and storage facility. <br />The biggest question that the rUK or England has to answer is can we afford the cost of Trident, let alone talking about what assets we keep or loose. As a supporter in principle of a nuclear deterrent I really can't see this pig flying, so what's the alternatives ? Ultimately I hope somewhere deep in the bowls of the MOD a set of people are trying to start working this out, because even with political pressure from the US and Nato the SNP are going to need those boats gone by the next election or 5yrs after independence, otherwise they just kissed good bye to their biggest promise. I hope we are not taking the Tony Blair approach to invading Iraq of telling the Army not to equip, train or buy supplies to do it, just because we can't give indications that we might be. A head in the sand Ostrich style is not acceptable.<br />So could we get the US to agree by Treaty to Support the UK remaining a permanent member of the UN Security Council but a non-nuclear one ? Then use the extra 44% free budget to properly equip the armed forces ? <br />The Ginge. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-91365171601932627352013-11-20T21:28:53.002+00:002013-11-20T21:28:53.002+00:00Chris - I'm sure some Commissioned Officers in...Chris - I'm sure some Commissioned Officers in HM Forces do support the SNP, but I'd guess not many; getting the Queen's Commission seems to me to be no mean feat...and clearly involves a great deal of thinking on the part of those who seek one about the implications of providing leadership to a force which is one of the cornerstones of a first strike nuclear alliance, and which is likely to be deployed world-wide whenever NATO does anything discretionary, with or without unqualified UN backing - and which can and does smite the Queen's Enemies without anybody's permission if it suits us.<br /><br />By contrast until their last Conference the SNP was opposed to NATO Membership - and it is still only willing to countenance overseas engagements with unqualified UN support and determined to see the back of our CASD - indeed some members of it explicitly seek to use their leverage on this point in the hope that it will force us to disarm unilaterally, and to try to persuade the French to do the same.<br /><br />Try as I might, I am struggling to see how these two very different positions could be squared by potential Transferees...<br /><br />On the question of more cash and faster promotion, I am sure you are right again - but there seems to be real risk that you end up with at least some Officers keen on a good salary, smart uniform, shiny toys, and a certain prestige (even glamour) - but not too much serious work, and even less real danger...the sort of Officer Corps most probably to be found in various Latin American Regimes in fact...<br /><br />Not universal, certainly...but worth considering.<br /><br />aka Gloomy Northern Boy Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-25455995847547823982013-11-20T16:42:34.794+00:002013-11-20T16:42:34.794+00:00Good question,
As with anything new I suspect it ...Good question,<br /><br />As with anything new I suspect it would take time. Eventually the balance would shift as the number of places for Scots in the UK forces would probably be limited, if only to do the Scots a favour. <br /><br />How many Scottish officers are pro-independence? There's bound to be some who will leap at the chance to join a new Scottish force. There's also likely to be some who - even though not independence minded - are savvy enough to spot the chance for accelerated promotion (and all the benefits that provides) by switching over to the Scottish forces. There's going to be lots of top spots that will need filling and there maybe chances for people to jump several ranks in quick succession to fill them.<br /><br />Never under estimate the allure of coin.Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18182426936194426623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-78670507100609549982013-11-20T12:31:02.641+00:002013-11-20T12:31:02.641+00:00It does occur to me that although the current Head...It does occur to me that although the current Head of the RAF is not an fast jet pilot, the majority of those holding the post since WW2 have been, and some of them have gone on to lead the Armed Forces as a whole - that being the case I wonder how many of our current trained pilots would want to sacrifice the possibility of Command at that level in order to fly patrols in the North Sea and North Atlantic for the rest of their careers? Even in current circumstances the UK retains a significant expeditionary capability which is likely to be used...and does still routinely and regularly "play with the big boys" on a world wide basis. The same thing probably applies to the Royal Navy...will Warfare Officers in surface ships give up now on the possibility of commanding a Carrier one day? Will those on submarines have no interest in becoming the "Silent Menace" at some point in their career? Will FAA Pilots abandon all hope of landing a fast jet on a Carrier one day? Will Army subalterns decide against leading an Armoured Brigade, 1st UK Division, or the SAS?<br /><br />Don't doubt some Scots from all Services will decide to sign up with the SDF, but I am wondering how balanced the skills mix is likely to be amongst them - especially in respect of those skills that are the hardest and most costly to acquire..<br /><br />aka GNB. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-65084326625028699102013-11-19T14:17:16.820+00:002013-11-19T14:17:16.820+00:00@ TrT,
A Type 23 or two would be quite handy for t...@ TrT,<br />A Type 23 or two would be quite handy for their location, give them a bit of punch to back up the offshore vessels. And the likelyhood that the UK is going to have over a blank cheque in leiu of assets and just say "there you go boys, have a spending spree" is very low. <br /><br />@Anon,<br />The Scots should be more than capable of operating assets like Type 23 and Typhoon. Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18182426936194426623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-69238993522242164032013-11-19T12:07:08.954+00:002013-11-19T12:07:08.954+00:00The independence movement is driven by romantic id...The independence movement is driven by romantic ideas of national identity.<br /><br />The Scots will undoubtedly seek to acquire prestige items for their military, whether they need them or not, and whether they can practically utilise them or not.<br /><br />Showpiece assets would likely include T23 for their navy, Typhoon for their airforce, and Challenger, Warrior, and AS90 for their army.<br /><br />Some of that could end up rotting away to obsolescence in sheds, but practical considerations are often absent in the military plans of nation states. Button smart toy soldiers marching back and forth, roaring jets overhead, and tanks rumbling across the glens... f'call use for Scottish defence, but will raise the passions of a proud people.<br /><br />If the Scots have their heads screwed on straight, they'd try to get their hands on the British Army's wheeled patrol vehicles. From an English perspective, if the Scots plan to have six battalions of infantry, we should offer them six battalions of Warrior; offload that rubbish and invest in cheaper wheels ourselves - a return to FRES but hopefully having learned from our bungled acquisition. And help yourself to a tank regiment too, Jock.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-65241915594661743602013-11-19T07:11:12.342+00:002013-11-19T07:11:12.342+00:00Scotland would almost certainly be pushing for cas...Scotland would almost certainly be pushing for cash not kit.<br />They dont need T23/6<br />They need SkjoldTrThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07316335177828136131noreply@blogger.com