Yes, the story was sourced from a reputable British newspaper.
Yes, the story was confirmed by a noted aviation expert/writer.
Yes, it seemed like something to make critics of the F-35 jump for joy.
And yes, it seemed like something from a think tank.
All of the above made the story suspect and this latest piece of information confirms it.
France and Britain announced Friday they are talking about sharing the cost of military aircraft programmes, but rejected reports that they plan to merge their aircraft carrier fleets."In terms of actually being able to share an aircraft carrier, I would have thought that that was utterly unrealistic," Defence Minister Liam Fox told reporters after talks with his French counterpart Herve Morin.Read the whole thing here and get in a corner F-35 haters. I'm tired of the whining.
"But when it comes to pooling assets in other areas such as strategic or tactical lift I would have thought that that was a different case altogether," he added, referring to military transport planes and helicopters.
What you mean Eric Palmer, RSF, Sweetman etc were wrong?
ReplyDeleteNo! Who would have thought? I mean they had a "reputable" British tabloid newspaper article to base their opinions on didn't they? How much more credible can you get?
Oh, btw you should go and check out Eric's latest on "supersonic" anti-ship missiles. It's a cracker. Cavemen figured out that having a third person involved in a fight (on your side) provided an immeasurable improvement in your ability to brain a contrary fellow before he could brain you.
Unfortunately, Eric doesn't seem to have "cottoned on" to such advanced thinking just yet and assumes that "radar horizon" means even AEGIS vessels are vulnerable to these high speed missiles...
The Telegraph is a reputable newspaper but some of its defence reporting is dire.
ReplyDeleteRemember, every story that pops out of the woodwork in the febrile pre SDSR environment that is UK Defence at the moment has a purpose.
The concept of sharing carriers is self evidently complete and utter nonsense but given the commonality between the QE class and the proposed French PA2 carrier then it would make sense to have common maintenance arrangements around some of the machinery. People then take this and extrapolate
If anyone seriously entertained the idea then they really should go and have a lie down, and take a few history books with them so they can read up on the raison d'etre for the RN for the past several centuries!!
I can also see some pooling of training and maintenance for the A400 and FSTA (tanker/transports)
It's not ideal but makes some perverse sense in a financially constrained era
Aussie Digger...
ReplyDeleteyou're foreshadowing a piece i'm trying to put together. certain reformers seem to think that the enemy defense systems are somehow superior in every aspect to what we have in our inventory. how they arrived at that point of view is beyond me but its become annoying.
Think Defence...
thanks for the nod the other day and i don't quite get it when it comes to the UK's papers. alot of times they're ahead of the curve (especially when it comes to reporting on the war in Afghanistan) but other times it seems like they're just rumor mills. its a strange mix.
but back to the issue at hand. i don't think the savings will come in maintenance but more in procurement. not in the types of systems that are being bought but in ammunition, and other consumables.
Sol,
ReplyDeleteI doubt they'll be able to cut down on procurement of things like ammunition and consumables. As a general rule in the current climate, if the idiots we call journalists see something like ammo being cut they'll instantly assume we are leaving our boys in Afghanistan to throw rocks and the like.
No the procurement that gets cut will be the things that aren't as much obvious use in these limited COIN ops but things that we will regret losing in the next few years.
We could make some worthwhile savings from pooling non combat assets with the French though (A400M, FSTA, possibly joint procurement of MARS) which wouldn't cause too much of an issue either politically or practically.
Hi Think Defence,
ReplyDeleteI wasn't being critical of the paper itself, so much as the people who will take a piece of information written in a broadsheet media and run with it no matter how lacking in credibility it might be.
Broadsheet media reporting leaves a lot to be desired in most fields actually, but I agree most defence reporting is atrocious.