Project Information Request: Fill & Download for Free

Is the British Army good?I will take this to mean British Armed Forces overall and just the army when answering, first let us have a look at the capability of the armed forces.After all it is already the case that - Europe’s security depends on British and American generositythe UK has effectively subsidised European security to the tune of $23 billion over the past five years.Europe's security depends on British and American generosity - CapXEuropean military spending has unrelentingly shrunk. The reductions in European defence expenditure have become so legendary that they have become a bad joke. Recall that most mainland EU countries are also Nato members. In 2006, they agreed to spend 2 per cent of their Gross Domestic Product on defence. Remember also, that, with threats growing in their eastern and southern neighbourhoods, they recommitted to this target at the Nato Summit in Newport in 2014.However, using calculations based on official Nato statistics, it is clear that mainland Europeans, with few exceptions, have not remained united and have failed to meet their commitments. Based on the 2 per cent of GDP guideline, they have underfunded Nato by a massive $451 billion over the past five years (2012-2016). So on the issue of defence spending, not only do the would-be European peace creators stand naked, they stand with their skin stripped fully to the bone.Oddly, the largest EU and Nato countries are the leading miscreants. France, ostensibly the alliance’s third-strongest military power, has short-changed Nato by approximately $24 billion over the past five years, meaning it has missed the alliance’s spending target by 9 per cent. Over the same timeframe, Germany, with all its vast trade surplus, has short-changed Nato by a whopping $142 billion. This means it has fallen short of its Nato spending target by 39 per cent. Italy, despite its economic difficulties, still a large and wealthy country of 60 million people, has short-changed Nato by $90 billion, or 43 per cent. Spain has short-changed Nato by $75 billion, which means it has failed to meet the organisation’s target by a colossal 54 per cent. And the Netherlands, smaller but still very affluent, has short-changed Nato by $64 billion, or 42 per cent.Indeed, insofar as it has exceeded Nato’s guideline, the UK has effectively subsidised European security to the tune of $23 billion over the past five years. So, far from being a vandal, Britain has continued to behave as a leading custodian of the European peace.The wealthier Europeans, of course, want no attention drawn to their inability to protect their integrationist dream. They will respond by claiming that the EU is distinct from Nato, or even that the EU bears greater responsibility for European peace. Yet such assertions are as mythical as they are false. European integration is a product of peace and security on the mainland, not its cause. So while the EU has undoubtedly helped to dampen distrust between ancient opponents, the real reason order finally emerged in Europe, and indeed, across most of the Euro-Atlantic region, is because of the commitment of the UK and US. They have been willing to cough up the cash to provide sophisticated armed forces and nuclear systems to deter countries – both within and without Nato, and by extension the EU – from disrupting the status quo.And I believe that the UK is “a top military power” but of course not “the top military power”, meaning it is amongst the top military powers of the world.One reason for this is the ability to project power globally helped by having a Blue Water navy.Blue-water navy - WikipediaA blue-water navy is a maritime force capable of operating globally, essentially across the deep waters of open oceans. While definitions of what actually constitutes such a force vary, there is a requirement for the ability to exercise sea control at wide ranges.The term "blue-water navy" is a maritime geographical-term in contrast with "brown-water navy" and "green-water navy".Note that the UK is considered to be a “Rank 2” Blue Water Navy meaning “Limited global-reach power projection meaning At least one major power projection operation globally”, a rank shared with France.The US Navy is of course Rank 1 - “Global-reach power projection - Multiple and sustained power projection missions globally”.For comparison Russia is considered to be Rank 3 - “Multi-regional power projection - Power projection to regions adjacent its own”and China as Rank 4 “Regional power projection - Limited range power projection beyond exclusive economic zone (EEZ)”Experience, the UK military has had centuries of experience, but has also had relevant modern experience.Falklands War - WikipediaMilitarily, the Falklands conflict remains the largest air-naval combat operation between modern forces since the end of the Second World War. As such, it has been the subject of intense study by military analysts and historians. The most significant "lessons learned" include: the vulnerability of surface ships to anti-ship missiles and submarines, the challenges of co-ordinating logistical support for a long-distance projection of power, and reconfirmation of the role of tactical air power, including the use of helicopters.Conqueror is the only nuclear-powered submarine to have engaged an enemy ship with torpedoes, sinking the cruiser General Belgrano during the 1982 Falklands WarandDuring the 1982 Falklands War, Operations Black Buck 1 to Black Buck 7 were a series of seven extremely long-range ground attack missions by Royal Air Force(RAF) Vulcan bombers of the RAF Waddington Wing, comprising aircraft from Nos 44, 50 and 101 Squadrons against Argentine positions in the Falkland Islands, of which five missions completed attacks. The objectives of all missions were to attack Port Stanley Airport and its associated defences. The raids, at almost 6,600 nautical miles (12,200 km) and 16 hours for the return journey, were the longest-ranged bombing raids in history at that time.Our Special Forces capability is so good that it has been influential on many other’s special forces.Special Air Service - WikipediaFollowing the post-war reconstitution of the Special Air Service, other countries in the Commonwealth recognised their need for similar units. The Canadian Special Air Service Company was formed in 1947, being disbanded in 1949. The New Zealand Special Air Service squadron was formed in June 1955 to serve with the British SAS in Malaya, which became a full regiment in 2011. Australia formed the 1st SAS Company in July 1957, which became a full regiment of the Special Air Service Regiment (SASR) in 1964.On its return from Malaya, the C (Rhodesian) Squadron formed the basis for creation of the Rhodesian Special Air Service in 1961. It retained the name "C Squadron (Rhodesian) Special Air Service" within the Rhodesian Security Forcesuntil 1978, when it became 1 (Rhodesian) Special Air Service Regiment.Non-Commonwealth countries have also formed units based on the SAS. The Belgian Army's Special Forces Group, which wears the same capbadge as the British SAS, traces its ancestry partly from the 5th Special Air Service of the Second World War. The French 1st Marine Infantry Parachute Regiment (1er RPIMa) can trace its origins to the Second World War 3rd and 4th SAS, adopting its "who dares wins" motto.The American unit, 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta, was formed by Colonel Charles Alvin Beckwith, who served with 22 SAS as an exchange officer, and recognised the need for a similar type of unit in the United States Army. The Israeli Sayeret Matkal has also been modelled after the SAS, sharing its motto. Ireland's Army Ranger Wing (ARW) has also modelled its training on that of the SAS. The Philippine National Police's Special Action Force was formed along the lines of the SAS.With the Iran Embassy Siege meaning that the expertise of our special forces became in greater demand from foreign governments. Iranian Embassy siege - WikipediaNonetheless, the operation brought the SAS to the public eye for the first time and bolstered the reputation of Thatcher. The SAS was quickly overwhelmed by the number of applications it received from people inspired by the operation and experienced greater demand for its expertise from foreign governments.The UK military has unfortunately been underfunded by all governments for a number of years now, though despite that, it is still a top military power but it does need to be properly funded to maintain that level of capability.Our Navy is still a capable one.The Type 26 Frigate could be the most capable Royal Navy warship in decades if funded properlyThe Type 26 Frigate, or ‘City class’, represents one of the most capable warships the Royal Navy has owned in decades, albeit one of the most costly.It’s no secret that the Type 26 is designed with modularity and flexibility in mind to enhance versatility across a wide range of operations ranging from counter piracy and disaster relief operations to high intensity combat. The final BAE design had a large amidships mission bay instead of the stern well deck featured in previous designs. BAE have commented regarding the mission bay:“A key feature is the flexible mission space, which can accommodate up to four 12 metre sea boats, a range of manned and unmanned air, surface or underwater vehicles or up to 11 20ft containers or ‘capability modules’, and the most advanced sensors available to the fleet.”Once integrated with the Type 26, the MK 41 VLS will offer the Royal Navy “unparalleled flexibility and capability” say BAE, but only if money is made available to fill it.“Lockheed Martin has a long and successful partnership with the Royal Navy, and we look forward to working with BAE Systems to integrate the MK 41 VLS with the Type 26,” said Paul Livingston, Group Managing Director of Lockheed Martin UK Rotary and Mission Systems.“The MK 41 VLS will provide the Royal Navy’s Type 26 Global Combat Ships with a proven and cost-effective vertical launching solution.”Each Type 26 will be equipped with three 8-cell MK 41 VLS modules. BAE Systems initial order includes nine MK 41 VLS modules, enough for the first three ships of the class.A capable air force (again requires proper funding)What's so good about the F-35 anyway?It’s no secret that the F-35 has had severe cost and schedule issues but as the programme matures, it’s shaping up to be a very capable platform.Where the strength of these aircraft really exists is in a key element of 21st century air power, enabling coalition operations. The F-35 provides a (currently) unique integrated air combat capability whereby coalitions of joint or allied F-35s can be supported in common, with information being shared prolifically. The F-35 was designed from the outset to bring information sharing capabilities to any force with which they’re deployed.Two networks are core to this: the Link-16 and the new Multi-Function Advanced Datalink (MADL). These systems allow the F-35 to communicate with nearly all current and future NATO assets.The jet is a quantum leap in capability, able to give the pilot as much information as only theatre commanders have previously had. While the primary value of the jet is in its sensor and networking capabilities, it is also valuable in that it’s able to perform many tasks designed to increase the lethality of not only itself but other assets, such tasks include the ability to co-ordinate small fleets of unmanned combat aircraft, guide weapons launched from other platforms (even warships as detailed above), launch a wide-range of its own weapons and use it’s own radar to conduct electronic attacks.What is the purpose of Tempest?Tempest’s purpose is to explore the technologies and systems that could form a future combat air system. It is not yet at the stage of building a demonstrator aircraft, it may never end up being in any way similar to the mock-up.According to a Commons Library briefing paper which provides a brief overview of the Strategy, the process is still at very early stages and is focused more on exploring and developing potential technologies. It states that:“Tempest was a fighter aircraft in World War Two, although the Strategy only uses this term in the context of ‘Team Tempest’ – it does not confirm this will be the name of whatever aircraft or system emerges.”The companies involved have given some indications of the technologies and techniques they are looking at. The Strategy itself discusses ‘Pyramid’: the project to develop open mission systems architecture. This should make upgrades simpler and more cost effective and allow partners/export customers to easily integrate their own mission systems.Rolls Royce has talked of developing a future power system that drives not just the aircraft but provides a “step-change levels of electrical power (for the future systems on board)”.BAE say that a future combat air system must be able to survive the most challenging combat environments meaning that payload-range, speed and manoeuvrability will be key.“We expect that the system will be equipped with a range of sensors including radio frequency, active and passive electro-optical sensors and advanced electronic support measures to detect and intercept threats.”The aircraft, say the defence giant, is likely to operate with kinetic and non-kinetic weapons.A capable army, although again proper funding is required.The Government must stop twisting the numbers – it’s time to properly fund the British Armed ForcesThrough almost four hundred years of service, the British Armed Forces have proven their outstanding merit time and time again. Whether intervening against genocide in the Balkans, breaking the seemingly invincible powers of Napoleon or Hitler, or defending British sovereignty in the Falklands.Our armed services have always gone above and beyond the call of duty in their defence of this nation and its interests. Yet in recent years there has been a worrying decline in the Government’s willingness to invest in our armed forces.Despite the Royal Navy requesting thirteen of the new Type 26 Global Combat Ship, only eight are to be ordered, with the Ministry of Defence (MoD) now filling the gap with 5 smaller, less capable Type 31e frigates. More worryingly the size of the army has been greatly reduced with fewer soldiers available now than at any time in the past century. Yet, despite continuous cuts since 2010 it was only last December that Phillip Hammond suggested that the British Army ‘only needs 50,000 troops’. If this were to happen it would make the army smaller than it has even been. Stern opposition from Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson and the threat of a major rebellion in the Commons caused the Government to abandon any plans for further cuts. But nevertheless, for the party that is supposedly the “most patriotic”, it is hard to defend the willingness to slash defensive spending to save money.Vikings in Norway as Royal Marines train Americans on their vehiclesThe Royal Marine commandos of Viking Squadron are teaching their American counterparts how to operate their all-terrain vehicle.According to a Royal Navy press release:“Viking is similar to the long-serving BV tracked vehicle – except it’s armed and armoured, providing both firepower and protection for the ten Royal Marines transported in the rear cab. It also keeps them warm and spares them exhausting marches, especially in the Arctic.For the past few weeks, the Viking Squadron have been teaching the US Marine Corps how to operate their armour under Project Odin, as the ‘Semper Fi guys’ look for a vehicle suited to such extremes as they expand their cold weather warfare capability.”Part of that expansion has involved the commandos teaching the Americans the art of Arctic survival and combat a part of Exercise Cold Enabler according to a release. For 2nd Battalion 2nd Marines, that’s also included driver training on the Viking say the Royal Navy.BAE unveils 'Black Night' - the first fully-upgraded Challenger 2 tankBAE systems say that Black Night comprises cutting-edge technologies and capabilities, which are being offered to the Ministry of Defence as part of the Challenger 2 Life Extension Programme.Simon Jackson, Campaign leader for Team Challenger 2 at BAE Systems said:“The UK is home to some of the world’s finest engineering companies, who have pushed the boundaries of combat vehicle design with Black Night.We are providing the bulk of this upgrade from home soil, however, we have chosen the best defence companies from around the world to collaborate with also, including names from Canada, France and Germany who bring unique skills and proven technology.The British Army has our commitment that we will deliver the most capable upgrade possible, and the best value for money.”And is the home country to BAE systems - BAE Systems - WikipediaBAE Systems plc is a British multinational defence, security, and aerospace company. Its headquarters are in London in the United Kingdom with operations worldwide. It is the largest defence contractor in Europe and among the world's largest defence companies; it was ranked as the third-largest based on applicable 2017 revenues.BAE Systems wins US Marine Corps Amphibious Combat Vehicle competitionThe US Marine Corps has awarded BAE Systems a $198 million contract to deliver an initial 30 Amphibious Combat Vehicles (ACV), with options for a total of 204 vehicles which could be worth up to $1.2 billion.BAE Systems, along with teammate Iveco Defence Vehicles, prevailed in the Marine Corps’ robust competition for the next generation of vehicles to get the Marines from ship to shore to engage in land combat operations.“We are well positioned and ready to build the future of amphibious fighting vehicles for the Marine Corps, having already produced 16 prototypes,” said Dean Medland, vice president and general manager of Combat Vehicles Amphibious and International at BAE Systems.“Through this award, we are proud to continue our partnership with the Marine Corps by providing a best-in-class vehicle to support its mission through mobility, survivability and lethality.”As for perhaps the moral aspect, we have already seen that along with the USA, the British Armed Forces (as part of NATO) have effectively been subsiding our fellow European members to the tune of Billions in helping ensure peace on the continent.Otherwise the British Armed Forces help the UK stand up for freedom, justice and upholding the United Nations Charter. Which seems pretty ‘good’ to me.Press Conference at the UNWe stand for freedom, justice and upholding the United Nations Charter. The people for example in the Falklands had freedom and justice and self-determination. They now have it once again. We stand for upholding international law, that means that you must honour the borders of other people's countries, otherwise there is no international law, there is only international anarchy. We stand for self-determination. There was a border poll in Northern Ireland and of course it was won overwhelmingly by those who wished to stay with the United Kingdom. The fact is that the vast majority of the people in Northern Ireland wish to stay a part of the United Kingdom—that is their right to self-determination. It is a right under the United Nations Charter, it is a right which we enjoy in my country, it is a right which is enjoyed in all democratic countries. And I might just point out, we were one of those countries which went to war in 1939 to 1945 to uphold all of those principles and to stop a tyrant holding sway over Europe and even further. And for a time we stood alone. So it is not a question I expect to find asked of me. But in having been asked, it is not a question I find difficult to answer in any way.

Ah another anti-UK troll question.What would make you think that the UK is not a great military power?Ranking is rather arbitrary for overall military power but in terms of Naval power it is in the top 3.One reason for this is the ability to project power globally helped by having a Blue Water navy.Blue-water navy - WikipediaA blue-water navy is a maritime force capable of operating globally, essentially across the deep waters of open oceans. While definitions of what actually constitutes such a force vary, there is a requirement for the ability to exercise sea control at wide ranges.The term "blue-water navy" is a maritime geographical-term in contrast with "brown-water navy" and "green-water navy".Note that the UK is considered to be a “Rank 2” Blue Water Navy meaning “Limited global-reach power projection meaning At least one major power projection operation globally”, a rank shared with France.The US Navy is of course Rank 1 - “Global-reach power projection - Multiple and sustained power projection missions globally”.For comparison Russia is considered to be Rank 3 - “Multi-regional power projection - Power projection to regions adjacent its own”and China as Rank 4 “Regional power projection - Limited range power projection beyond exclusive economic zone (EEZ)”Europe’s security depends on British and American generositythe UK has effectively subsidised European security to the tune of $23 billion over the past five years.Europe's security depends on British and American generosity - CapXEuropean military spending has unrelentingly shrunk. The reductions in European defence expenditure have become so legendary that they have become a bad joke. Recall that most mainland EU countries are also Nato members. In 2006, they agreed to spend 2 per cent of their Gross Domestic Product on defence. Remember also, that, with threats growing in their eastern and southern neighbourhoods, they recommitted to this target at the Nato Summit in Newport in 2014.However, using calculations based on official Nato statistics, it is clear that mainland Europeans, with few exceptions, have not remained united and have failed to meet their commitments. Based on the 2 per cent of GDP guideline, they have underfunded Nato by a massive $451 billion over the past five years (2012-2016). So on the issue of defence spending, not only do the would-be European peace creators stand naked, they stand with their skin stripped fully to the bone.Oddly, the largest EU and Nato countries are the leading miscreants. France, ostensibly the alliance’s third-strongest military power, has short-changed Nato by approximately $24 billion over the past five years, meaning it has missed the alliance’s spending target by 9 per cent. Over the same timeframe, Germany, with all its vast trade surplus, has short-changed Nato by a whopping $142 billion. This means it has fallen short of its Nato spending target by 39 per cent. Italy, despite its economic difficulties, still a large and wealthy country of 60 million people, has short-changed Nato by $90 billion, or 43 per cent. Spain has short-changed Nato by $75 billion, which means it has failed to meet the organisation’s target by a colossal 54 per cent. And the Netherlands, smaller but still very affluent, has short-changed Nato by $64 billion, or 42 per cent.Indeed, insofar as it has exceeded Nato’s guideline, the UK has effectively subsidised European security to the tune of $23 billion over the past five years. So, far from being a vandal, Britain has continued to behave as a leading custodian of the European peace.The wealthier Europeans, of course, want no attention drawn to their inability to protect their integrationist dream. They will respond by claiming that the EU is distinct from Nato, or even that the EU bears greater responsibility for European peace. Yet such assertions are as mythical as they are false. European integration is a product of peace and security on the mainland, not its cause. So while the EU has undoubtedly helped to dampen distrust between ancient opponents, the real reason order finally emerged in Europe, and indeed, across most of the Euro-Atlantic region, is because of the commitment of the UK and US. They have been willing to cough up the cash to provide sophisticated armed forces and nuclear systems to deter countries – both within and without Nato, and by extension the EU – from disrupting the status quo.Experience, the UK military has had centuries of experience, but has also had relevant modern experience.Falklands War - WikipediaMilitarily, the Falklands conflict remains the largest air-naval combat operation between modern forces since the end of the Second World War. As such, it has been the subject of intense study by military analysts and historians. The most significant "lessons learned" include: the vulnerability of surface ships to anti-ship missiles and submarines, the challenges of co-ordinating logistical support for a long-distance projection of power, and reconfirmation of the role of tactical air power, including the use of helicopters.Conqueror is the only nuclear-powered submarine to have engaged an enemy ship with torpedoes, sinking the cruiser General Belgrano during the 1982 Falklands WarandDuring the 1982 Falklands War, Operations Black Buck 1 to Black Buck 7 were a series of seven extremely long-range ground attack missions by Royal Air Force(RAF) Vulcan bombers of the RAF Waddington Wing, comprising aircraft from Nos 44, 50 and 101 Squadrons against Argentine positions in the Falkland Islands, of which five missions completed attacks. The objectives of all missions were to attack Port Stanley Airport and its associated defences. The raids, at almost 6,600 nautical miles (12,200 km) and 16 hours for the return journey, were the longest-ranged bombing raids in history at that time.Our Special Forces capability is so good that it has been influential on many other’s special forces.Special Air Service - WikipediaFollowing the post-war reconstitution of the Special Air Service, other countries in the Commonwealth recognised their need for similar units. The Canadian Special Air Service Company was formed in 1947, being disbanded in 1949. The New Zealand Special Air Service squadron was formed in June 1955 to serve with the British SAS in Malaya, which became a full regiment in 2011. Australia formed the 1st SAS Company in July 1957, which became a full regiment of the Special Air Service Regiment (SASR) in 1964.On its return from Malaya, the C (Rhodesian) Squadron formed the basis for creation of the Rhodesian Special Air Service in 1961. It retained the name "C Squadron (Rhodesian) Special Air Service" within the Rhodesian Security Forcesuntil 1978, when it became 1 (Rhodesian) Special Air Service Regiment.Non-Commonwealth countries have also formed units based on the SAS. The Belgian Army's Special Forces Group, which wears the same capbadge as the British SAS, traces its ancestry partly from the 5th Special Air Service of the Second World War. The French 1st Marine Infantry Parachute Regiment (1er RPIMa) can trace its origins to the Second World War 3rd and 4th SAS, adopting its "who dares wins" motto.The American unit, 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta, was formed by Colonel Charles Alvin Beckwith, who served with 22 SAS as an exchange officer, and recognised the need for a similar type of unit in the United States Army. The Israeli Sayeret Matkal has also been modelled after the SAS, sharing its motto. Ireland's Army Ranger Wing (ARW) has also modelled its training on that of the SAS. The Philippine National Police's Special Action Force was formed along the lines of the SAS.With the Iran Embassy Siege meaning that the expertise of our special forces became in greater demand from foreign governments. Iranian Embassy siege - WikipediaNonetheless, the operation brought the SAS to the public eye for the first time and bolstered the reputation of Thatcher. The SAS was quickly overwhelmed by the number of applications it received from people inspired by the operation and experienced greater demand for its expertise from foreign governments.The UK military has unfortunately been underfunded by all governments for a number of years now, though despite that, it is still a top military power but it does need to be properly funded to maintain that level of capability.Our Navy is still a capable one.The Type 26 Frigate could be the most capable Royal Navy warship in decades if funded properlyThe Type 26 Frigate, or ‘City class’, represents one of the most capable warships the Royal Navy has owned in decades, albeit one of the most costly.It’s no secret that the Type 26 is designed with modularity and flexibility in mind to enhance versatility across a wide range of operations ranging from counter piracy and disaster relief operations to high intensity combat. The final BAE design had a large amidships mission bay instead of the stern well deck featured in previous designs. BAE have commented regarding the mission bay:“A key feature is the flexible mission space, which can accommodate up to four 12 metre sea boats, a range of manned and unmanned air, surface or underwater vehicles or up to 11 20ft containers or ‘capability modules’, and the most advanced sensors available to the fleet.”Once integrated with the Type 26, the MK 41 VLS will offer the Royal Navy “unparalleled flexibility and capability” say BAE, but only if money is made available to fill it.“Lockheed Martin has a long and successful partnership with the Royal Navy, and we look forward to working with BAE Systems to integrate the MK 41 VLS with the Type 26,” said Paul Livingston, Group Managing Director of Lockheed Martin UK Rotary and Mission Systems.“The MK 41 VLS will provide the Royal Navy’s Type 26 Global Combat Ships with a proven and cost-effective vertical launching solution.”Each Type 26 will be equipped with three 8-cell MK 41 VLS modules. BAE Systems initial order includes nine MK 41 VLS modules, enough for the first three ships of the class.A capable air force (again requires proper funding)What's so good about the F-35 anyway?It’s no secret that the F-35 has had severe cost and schedule issues but as the programme matures, it’s shaping up to be a very capable platform.Where the strength of these aircraft really exists is in a key element of 21st century air power, enabling coalition operations. The F-35 provides a (currently) unique integrated air combat capability whereby coalitions of joint or allied F-35s can be supported in common, with information being shared prolifically. The F-35 was designed from the outset to bring information sharing capabilities to any force with which they’re deployed.Two networks are core to this: the Link-16 and the new Multi-Function Advanced Datalink (MADL). These systems allow the F-35 to communicate with nearly all current and future NATO assets.The jet is a quantum leap in capability, able to give the pilot as much information as only theatre commanders have previously had. While the primary value of the jet is in its sensor and networking capabilities, it is also valuable in that it’s able to perform many tasks designed to increase the lethality of not only itself but other assets, such tasks include the ability to co-ordinate small fleets of unmanned combat aircraft, guide weapons launched from other platforms (even warships as detailed above), launch a wide-range of its own weapons and use it’s own radar to conduct electronic attacks.What is the purpose of Tempest?Tempest’s purpose is to explore the technologies and systems that could form a future combat air system. It is not yet at the stage of building a demonstrator aircraft, it may never end up being in any way similar to the mock-up.According to a Commons Library briefing paper which provides a brief overview of the Strategy, the process is still at very early stages and is focused more on exploring and developing potential technologies. It states that:“Tempest was a fighter aircraft in World War Two, although the Strategy only uses this term in the context of ‘Team Tempest’ – it does not confirm this will be the name of whatever aircraft or system emerges.”The companies involved have given some indications of the technologies and techniques they are looking at. The Strategy itself discusses ‘Pyramid’: the project to develop open mission systems architecture. This should make upgrades simpler and more cost effective and allow partners/export customers to easily integrate their own mission systems.Rolls Royce has talked of developing a future power system that drives not just the aircraft but provides a “step-change levels of electrical power (for the future systems on board)”.BAE say that a future combat air system must be able to survive the most challenging combat environments meaning that payload-range, speed and manoeuvrability will be key.“We expect that the system will be equipped with a range of sensors including radio frequency, active and passive electro-optical sensors and advanced electronic support measures to detect and intercept threats.”The aircraft, say the defence giant, is likely to operate with kinetic and non-kinetic weapons.A capable army, although again proper funding is required.The Government must stop twisting the numbers – it’s time to properly fund the British Armed ForcesThrough almost four hundred years of service, the British Armed Forces have proven their outstanding merit time and time again. Whether intervening against genocide in the Balkans, breaking the seemingly invincible powers of Napoleon or Hitler, or defending British sovereignty in the Falklands.Our armed services have always gone above and beyond the call of duty in their defence of this nation and its interests. Yet in recent years there has been a worrying decline in the Government’s willingness to invest in our armed forces.Despite the Royal Navy requesting thirteen of the new Type 26 Global Combat Ship, only eight are to be ordered, with the Ministry of Defence (MoD) now filling the gap with 5 smaller, less capable Type 31e frigates. More worryingly the size of the army has been greatly reduced with fewer soldiers available now than at any time in the past century. Yet, despite continuous cuts since 2010 it was only last December that Phillip Hammond suggested that the British Army ‘only needs 50,000 troops’. If this were to happen it would make the army smaller than it has even been. Stern opposition from Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson and the threat of a major rebellion in the Commons caused the Government to abandon any plans for further cuts. But nevertheless, for the party that is supposedly the “most patriotic”, it is hard to defend the willingness to slash defensive spending to save money.Vikings in Norway as Royal Marines train Americans on their vehiclesThe Royal Marine commandos of Viking Squadron are teaching their American counterparts how to operate their all-terrain vehicle.According to a Royal Navy press release:“Viking is similar to the long-serving BV tracked vehicle – except it’s armed and armoured, providing both firepower and protection for the ten Royal Marines transported in the rear cab. It also keeps them warm and spares them exhausting marches, especially in the Arctic.For the past few weeks, the Viking Squadron have been teaching the US Marine Corps how to operate their armour under Project Odin, as the ‘Semper Fi guys’ look for a vehicle suited to such extremes as they expand their cold weather warfare capability.”Part of that expansion has involved the commandos teaching the Americans the art of Arctic survival and combat a part of Exercise Cold Enabler according to a release. For 2nd Battalion 2nd Marines, that’s also included driver training on the Viking say the Royal Navy.BAE unveils 'Black Night' - the first fully-upgraded Challenger 2 tankBAE systems say that Black Night comprises cutting-edge technologies and capabilities, which are being offered to the Ministry of Defence as part of the Challenger 2 Life Extension Programme.Simon Jackson, Campaign leader for Team Challenger 2 at BAE Systems said:“The UK is home to some of the world’s finest engineering companies, who have pushed the boundaries of combat vehicle design with Black Night.We are providing the bulk of this upgrade from home soil, however, we have chosen the best defence companies from around the world to collaborate with also, including names from Canada, France and Germany who bring unique skills and proven technology.The British Army has our commitment that we will deliver the most capable upgrade possible, and the best value for money.”And is the home country to BAE systems - BAE Systems - WikipediaBAE Systems plc is a British multinational defence, security, and aerospacecompany. Its headquarters are in London in the United Kingdom with operations worldwide. It is the largest defence contractor in Europe and among the world's largest defence companies; it was ranked as the third-largest based on applicable 2017 revenues.BAE Systems wins US Marine Corps Amphibious Combat Vehicle competitionThe US Marine Corps has awarded BAE Systems a $198 million contract to deliver an initial 30 Amphibious Combat Vehicles (ACV), with options for a total of 204 vehicles which could be worth up to $1.2 billion.BAE Systems, along with teammate Iveco Defence Vehicles, prevailed in the Marine Corps’ robust competition for the next generation of vehicles to get the Marines from ship to shore to engage in land combat operations.“We are well positioned and ready to build the future of amphibious fighting vehicles for the Marine Corps, having already produced 16 prototypes,” said Dean Medland, vice president and general manager of Combat Vehicles Amphibious and International at BAE Systems.“Through this award, we are proud to continue our partnership with the Marine Corps by providing a best-in-class vehicle to support its mission through mobility, survivability and lethality.”As for perhaps the moral aspect, we have already seen that along with the USA, the British Armed Forces (as part of NATO) have effectively been subsiding our fellow European members to the tune of Billions in helping ensure peace on the continent.Otherwise the British Armed Forces help the UK stand up for freedom, justice and upholding the United Nations Charter. Which seems pretty ‘good’ to me.Press Conference at the UNWe stand for freedom, justice and upholding the United Nations Charter. The people for example in the Falklands had freedom and justice and self-determination. They now have it once again. We stand for upholding international law, that means that you must honour the borders of other people's countries, otherwise there is no international law, there is only international anarchy. We stand for self-determination. There was a border poll in Northern Ireland and of course it was won overwhelmingly by those who wished to stay with the United Kingdom. The fact is that the vast majority of the people in Northern Ireland wish to stay a part of the United Kingdom—that is their right to self-determination. It is a right under the United Nations Charter, it is a right which we enjoy in my country, it is a right which is enjoyed in all democratic countries. And I might just point out, we were one of those countries which went to war in 1939 to 1945 to uphold all of those principles and to stop a tyrant holding sway over Europe and even further. And for a time we stood alone. So it is not a question I expect to find asked of me. But in having been asked, it is not a question I find difficult to answer in any way.

Why would it need to upgrade its military?After all it is already the case that - Europe’s security depends on British and American generositythe UK has effectively subsidised European security to the tune of $23 billion over the past five years.Europe's security depends on British and American generosity - CapXEuropean military spending has unrelentingly shrunk. The reductions in European defence expenditure have become so legendary that they have become a bad joke. Recall that most mainland EU countries are also Nato members. In 2006, they agreed to spend 2 per cent of their Gross Domestic Product on defence. Remember also, that, with threats growing in their eastern and southern neighbourhoods, they recommitted to this target at the Nato Summit in Newport in 2014.However, using calculations based on official Nato statistics, it is clear that mainland Europeans, with few exceptions, have not remained united and have failed to meet their commitments. Based on the 2 per cent of GDP guideline, they have underfunded Nato by a massive $451 billion over the past five years (2012-2016). So on the issue of defence spending, not only do the would-be European peace creators stand naked, they stand with their skin stripped fully to the bone.Oddly, the largest EU and Nato countries are the leading miscreants. France, ostensibly the alliance’s third-strongest military power, has short-changed Nato by approximately $24 billion over the past five years, meaning it has missed the alliance’s spending target by 9 per cent. Over the same timeframe, Germany, with all its vast trade surplus, has short-changed Nato by a whopping $142 billion. This means it has fallen short of its Nato spending target by 39 per cent. Italy, despite its economic difficulties, still a large and wealthy country of 60 million people, has short-changed Nato by $90 billion, or 43 per cent. Spain has short-changed Nato by $75 billion, which means it has failed to meet the organisation’s target by a colossal 54 per cent. And the Netherlands, smaller but still very affluent, has short-changed Nato by $64 billion, or 42 per cent.Indeed, insofar as it has exceeded Nato’s guideline, the UK has effectively subsidised European security to the tune of $23 billion over the past five years. So, far from being a vandal, Britain has continued to behave as a leading custodian of the European peace.The wealthier Europeans, of course, want no attention drawn to their inability to protect their integrationist dream. They will respond by claiming that the EU is distinct from Nato, or even that the EU bears greater responsibility for European peace. Yet such assertions are as mythical as they are false. European integration is a product of peace and security on the mainland, not its cause. So while the EU has undoubtedly helped to dampen distrust between ancient opponents, the real reason order finally emerged in Europe, and indeed, across most of the Euro-Atlantic region, is because of the commitment of the UK and US. They have been willing to cough up the cash to provide sophisticated armed forces and nuclear systems to deter countries – both within and without Nato, and by extension the EU – from disrupting the status quo.And I believe that the UK is “a top military power” but of course not “the top military power”, meaning it is amongst the top military powers of the world.One reason for this is the ability to project power globally helped by having a Blue Water navy.Blue-water navy - WikipediaA blue-water navy is a maritime force capable of operating globally, essentially across the deep waters of open oceans. While definitions of what actually constitutes such a force vary, there is a requirement for the ability to exercise sea control at wide ranges.The term "blue-water navy" is a maritime geographical-term in contrast with "brown-water navy" and "green-water navy".Note that the UK is considered to be a “Rank 2” Blue Water Navy meaning “Limited global-reach power projection meaning At least one major power projection operation globally”, a rank shared with France.The US Navy is of course Rank 1 - “Global-reach power projection - Multiple and sustained power projection missions globally”.For comparison Russia is considered to be Rank 3 - “Multi-regional power projection - Power projection to regions adjacent its own”and China as Rank 4 “Regional power projection - Limited range power projection beyond exclusive economic zone (EEZ)”Experience, the UK military has had centuries of experience, but has also had relevant modern experience.Falklands War - WikipediaMilitarily, the Falklands conflict remains the largest air-naval combat operation between modern forces since the end of the Second World War. As such, it has been the subject of intense study by military analysts and historians. The most significant "lessons learned" include: the vulnerability of surface ships to anti-ship missiles and submarines, the challenges of co-ordinating logistical support for a long-distance projection of power, and reconfirmation of the role of tactical air power, including the use of helicopters.Conqueror is the only nuclear-powered submarine to have engaged an enemy ship with torpedoes, sinking the cruiser General Belgrano during the 1982 Falklands WarandDuring the 1982 Falklands War, Operations Black Buck 1 to Black Buck 7 were a series of seven extremely long-range ground attack missions by Royal Air Force(RAF) Vulcan bombers of the RAF Waddington Wing, comprising aircraft from Nos 44, 50 and 101 Squadrons against Argentine positions in the Falkland Islands, of which five missions completed attacks. The objectives of all missions were to attack Port Stanley Airport and its associated defences. The raids, at almost 6,600 nautical miles (12,200 km) and 16 hours for the return journey, were the longest-ranged bombing raids in history at that time.Our Special Forces capability is so good that it has been influential on many other’s special forces.Special Air Service - WikipediaFollowing the post-war reconstitution of the Special Air Service, other countries in the Commonwealth recognised their need for similar units. The Canadian Special Air Service Company was formed in 1947, being disbanded in 1949. The New Zealand Special Air Service squadron was formed in June 1955 to serve with the British SAS in Malaya, which became a full regiment in 2011. Australia formed the 1st SAS Company in July 1957, which became a full regiment of the Special Air Service Regiment (SASR) in 1964.On its return from Malaya, the C (Rhodesian) Squadron formed the basis for creation of the Rhodesian Special Air Service in 1961. It retained the name "C Squadron (Rhodesian) Special Air Service" within the Rhodesian Security Forcesuntil 1978, when it became 1 (Rhodesian) Special Air Service Regiment.Non-Commonwealth countries have also formed units based on the SAS. The Belgian Army's Special Forces Group, which wears the same capbadge as the British SAS, traces its ancestry partly from the 5th Special Air Service of the Second World War. The French 1st Marine Infantry Parachute Regiment (1er RPIMa) can trace its origins to the Second World War 3rd and 4th SAS, adopting its "who dares wins" motto.The American unit, 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta, was formed by Colonel Charles Alvin Beckwith, who served with 22 SAS as an exchange officer, and recognised the need for a similar type of unit in the United States Army. The Israeli Sayeret Matkal has also been modelled after the SAS, sharing its motto. Ireland's Army Ranger Wing (ARW) has also modelled its training on that of the SAS. The Philippine National Police's Special Action Force was formed along the lines of the SAS.With the Iran Embassy Siege meaning that the expertise of our special forces became in greater demand from foreign governments. Iranian Embassy siege - WikipediaNonetheless, the operation brought the SAS to the public eye for the first time and bolstered the reputation of Thatcher. The SAS was quickly overwhelmed by the number of applications it received from people inspired by the operation and experienced greater demand for its expertise from foreign governments.The UK military has unfortunately been underfunded by all governments for a number of years now, though despite that, it is still a top military power but it does need to be properly funded to maintain that level of capability.Our Navy is still a capable one.The Type 26 Frigate could be the most capable Royal Navy warship in decades if funded properlyThe Type 26 Frigate, or ‘City class’, represents one of the most capable warships the Royal Navy has owned in decades, albeit one of the most costly.It’s no secret that the Type 26 is designed with modularity and flexibility in mind to enhance versatility across a wide range of operations ranging from counter piracy and disaster relief operations to high intensity combat. The final BAE design had a large amidships mission bay instead of the stern well deck featured in previous designs. BAE have commented regarding the mission bay:“A key feature is the flexible mission space, which can accommodate up to four 12 metre sea boats, a range of manned and unmanned air, surface or underwater vehicles or up to 11 20ft containers or ‘capability modules’, and the most advanced sensors available to the fleet.”Once integrated with the Type 26, the MK 41 VLS will offer the Royal Navy “unparalleled flexibility and capability” say BAE, but only if money is made available to fill it.“Lockheed Martin has a long and successful partnership with the Royal Navy, and we look forward to working with BAE Systems to integrate the MK 41 VLS with the Type 26,” said Paul Livingston, Group Managing Director of Lockheed Martin UK Rotary and Mission Systems.“The MK 41 VLS will provide the Royal Navy’s Type 26 Global Combat Ships with a proven and cost-effective vertical launching solution.”Each Type 26 will be equipped with three 8-cell MK 41 VLS modules. BAE Systems initial order includes nine MK 41 VLS modules, enough for the first three ships of the class.A capable air force (again requires proper funding)What's so good about the F-35 anyway?It’s no secret that the F-35 has had severe cost and schedule issues but as the programme matures, it’s shaping up to be a very capable platform.Where the strength of these aircraft really exists is in a key element of 21st century air power, enabling coalition operations. The F-35 provides a (currently) unique integrated air combat capability whereby coalitions of joint or allied F-35s can be supported in common, with information being shared prolifically. The F-35 was designed from the outset to bring information sharing capabilities to any force with which they’re deployed.Two networks are core to this: the Link-16 and the new Multi-Function Advanced Datalink (MADL). These systems allow the F-35 to communicate with nearly all current and future NATO assets.The jet is a quantum leap in capability, able to give the pilot as much information as only theatre commanders have previously had. While the primary value of the jet is in its sensor and networking capabilities, it is also valuable in that it’s able to perform many tasks designed to increase the lethality of not only itself but other assets, such tasks include the ability to co-ordinate small fleets of unmanned combat aircraft, guide weapons launched from other platforms (even warships as detailed above), launch a wide-range of its own weapons and use it’s own radar to conduct electronic attacks.What is the purpose of Tempest?Tempest’s purpose is to explore the technologies and systems that could form a future combat air system. It is not yet at the stage of building a demonstrator aircraft, it may never end up being in any way similar to the mock-up.According to a Commons Library briefing paper which provides a brief overview of the Strategy, the process is still at very early stages and is focused more on exploring and developing potential technologies. It states that:“Tempest was a fighter aircraft in World War Two, although the Strategy only uses this term in the context of ‘Team Tempest’ – it does not confirm this will be the name of whatever aircraft or system emerges.”The companies involved have given some indications of the technologies and techniques they are looking at. The Strategy itself discusses ‘Pyramid’: the project to develop open mission systems architecture. This should make upgrades simpler and more cost effective and allow partners/export customers to easily integrate their own mission systems.Rolls Royce has talked of developing a future power system that drives not just the aircraft but provides a “step-change levels of electrical power (for the future systems on board)”.BAE say that a future combat air system must be able to survive the most challenging combat environments meaning that payload-range, speed and manoeuvrability will be key.“We expect that the system will be equipped with a range of sensors including radio frequency, active and passive electro-optical sensors and advanced electronic support measures to detect and intercept threats.”The aircraft, say the defence giant, is likely to operate with kinetic and non-kinetic weapons.A capable army, although again proper funding is required.The Government must stop twisting the numbers – it’s time to properly fund the British Armed ForcesThrough almost four hundred years of service, the British Armed Forces have proven their outstanding merit time and time again. Whether intervening against genocide in the Balkans, breaking the seemingly invincible powers of Napoleon or Hitler, or defending British sovereignty in the Falklands.Our armed services have always gone above and beyond the call of duty in their defence of this nation and its interests. Yet in recent years there has been a worrying decline in the Government’s willingness to invest in our armed forces.Despite the Royal Navy requesting thirteen of the new Type 26 Global Combat Ship, only eight are to be ordered, with the Ministry of Defence (MoD) now filling the gap with 5 smaller, less capable Type 31e frigates. More worryingly the size of the army has been greatly reduced with fewer soldiers available now than at any time in the past century. Yet, despite continuous cuts since 2010 it was only last December that Phillip Hammond suggested that the British Army ‘only needs 50,000 troops’. If this were to happen it would make the army smaller than it has even been. Stern opposition from Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson and the threat of a major rebellion in the Commons caused the Government to abandon any plans for further cuts. But nevertheless, for the party that is supposedly the “most patriotic”, it is hard to defend the willingness to slash defensive spending to save money.Vikings in Norway as Royal Marines train Americans on their vehiclesThe Royal Marine commandos of Viking Squadron are teaching their American counterparts how to operate their all-terrain vehicle.According to a Royal Navy press release:“Viking is similar to the long-serving BV tracked vehicle – except it’s armed and armoured, providing both firepower and protection for the ten Royal Marines transported in the rear cab. It also keeps them warm and spares them exhausting marches, especially in the Arctic.For the past few weeks, the Viking Squadron have been teaching the US Marine Corps how to operate their armour under Project Odin, as the ‘Semper Fi guys’ look for a vehicle suited to such extremes as they expand their cold weather warfare capability.”Part of that expansion has involved the commandos teaching the Americans the art of Arctic survival and combat a part of Exercise Cold Enabler according to a release. For 2nd Battalion 2nd Marines, that’s also included driver training on the Viking say the Royal Navy.BAE unveils 'Black Night' - the first fully-upgraded Challenger 2 tankBAE systems say that Black Night comprises cutting-edge technologies and capabilities, which are being offered to the Ministry of Defence as part of the Challenger 2 Life Extension Programme.Simon Jackson, Campaign leader for Team Challenger 2 at BAE Systems said:“The UK is home to some of the world’s finest engineering companies, who have pushed the boundaries of combat vehicle design with Black Night.We are providing the bulk of this upgrade from home soil, however, we have chosen the best defence companies from around the world to collaborate with also, including names from Canada, France and Germany who bring unique skills and proven technology.The British Army has our commitment that we will deliver the most capable upgrade possible, and the best value for money.”And is the home country to BAE systems - BAE Systems - WikipediaBAE Systems plc is a British multinational defence, security, and aerospace company. Its headquarters are in London in the United Kingdom with operations worldwide. It is the largest defence contractor in Europe and among the world's largest defence companies; it was ranked as the third-largest based on applicable 2017 revenues.BAE Systems wins US Marine Corps Amphibious Combat Vehicle competitionThe US Marine Corps has awarded BAE Systems a $198 million contract to deliver an initial 30 Amphibious Combat Vehicles (ACV), with options for a total of 204 vehicles which could be worth up to $1.2 billion.BAE Systems, along with teammate Iveco Defence Vehicles, prevailed in the Marine Corps’ robust competition for the next generation of vehicles to get the Marines from ship to shore to engage in land combat operations.“We are well positioned and ready to build the future of amphibious fighting vehicles for the Marine Corps, having already produced 16 prototypes,” said Dean Medland, vice president and general manager of Combat Vehicles Amphibious and International at BAE Systems.“Through this award, we are proud to continue our partnership with the Marine Corps by providing a best-in-class vehicle to support its mission through mobility, survivability and lethality.”So hopefully, for the moment at least, it is not difficult to see why the UK is considered a top military power.