A large number of Conservative MPs are pressuring Boris Johnson to substantially increase UK Defence spending. This is a welcome move. But if extra investment comes, I would expect it to go towards the Royal Navy and RAF before the Army. So what would be the priorities?
1/12
The first priority is to get everything we have already working properly. This would include expediting the Type 45 Destroyer propulsion improvement programme. Sorting out Ajax. Upgrading the Typhoon fleet. And Ensuring we have sufficient spares for key equipment types.
2/12
The 2nd priority is to reconsider cuts imposed by the IR and DCP. In particular, the time may have come to increase headcount across the services. The RN and RAF would benefit from 3K-5K extra personnel each, while the Army could field two divisions instead of one with 90K.
3/12
The RN needs to boost its ASW credentials, so a couple of extra Type 26 frigates would be helpful. Accelerating the AUKUS attack submarine programme in partnership with the USA and Australia would also be a good move. Extra ships would require additional RFA sustainment.
4/12
For the RAF, additional F-35Bs are already planned, but increasing numbers closer to the original total of 138 would be great. For the E7 Wedgetail AEW&C aircraft, 5 instead of 3 would be more credible, while 12 P8 Poseidon MPAs instead of 9 is desirable.
5/12
Persistent rumours suggest the RAF wants the F-35A. With Tempest still a long way off this could make sense, because it's all about what can be delivered now, not in 10 years time. There's talk of buying further A400Ms. A fleet of 30 would compensate for the loss of C-130J.
6/12
Of course, it may be simpler to retain the C-130J. The US Air Force may decide to restart C-17 production. If it does, I'd prioritise an extra 4 of these over another 8 A400Ms. When it comes to RAF airfield defence, SkySabre GBAD is needed to protect them.
7/12
Finally, we come to the Army. Before buying any new kit or generating new combat units, we should prioritise logistics and support elements so that more of our existing brigades become deployable. Our principal investment should be in additional deep fires and air defence.
8/12
Assuming extra headcount, we should then restore infantry mass through 33 regular battalions with 650-700 soldiers in each. We should make the Regular Army deployable without relying on the Army Reserve, reinstating the latter as a Home Defence and reinforcement force.
9/12
C4I and ISTAR projects are ongoing, but we need to turbocharge these ensuring that an evolved digital backbone, which will establish fully networked combat formations, comes online via an accelerated roll-out.
10/12
We should invest in additional armoured vehicles, including more Boxers, a new medium tracked platform to replace Warrior and FV432, and upgrade a larger number of Challenger MBTs. We should accelerate MRVP and FATV. If there's money left, start looking at automation tech.
10/12
Investment in the above capabilities would easily absorb an additional 1% of GDP, build on what is already a robust foundation and send a clear signal not only to Putin, but also to China. Ultimately, spending to deter is always less expensive than spending to counter.
12/12

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Nicholas Drummond

Nicholas Drummond Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @nicholadrummond

Mar 4
Anyone who follows me knows I'm enthusiastic about 8x8 platforms. So naturally I was curious to see how recent events in Ukraine would impact the @BritishArmy decision to purchase Boxer. Everything I've seen convinces me that this is the right vehicle, at the right time.
Like Saxon and FV432, Boxer is not intended to enter the direct fire zone. It's a battlefield taxi, but it can deposit the troops it carries much closer to the action. It has great mobility and provides the troops riding in it with very high levels of protection.
I worry that UK Boxers need to be better able to protect themselves, which is why a turreted version with at least a 30x173 mm cannon would be a worthy addition to the fleet. I'm a great fan of @kongsbergasa RT60 turret, which is 50 mm-ready with twin ATGM in a 3-tonne package.
Read 6 tweets
Feb 25
Some commentators are saying that what began as a war of choice has now become a war of survival for Putin. I agree. If his assault grinds to halt, how long before his position in Moscow becomes untenable? And how far will he go as his desperation grows?
1
A fierce insurgency is a more likely scenario, but either way, a costly stalemate and tougher sanctions biting ordinary Russians hard, there's a chance that Putin's inner circle will remove him from power. It's a question of time with Ukraine inflicting as much pain as it can.
2
The danger of a coup in Russia is Putin being replaced by someone who is even worse. The problem is his inner circle were all hand-picked by him. So they're like to be strict adherents to the cause. But finding someone may be a risk worth taking and a catalyst for change.
3
Read 8 tweets
Feb 22
Given a deteriorating relationship with Russia and Putin’s desire to enlarge his empire, we are inevitably returning to a Cold War posture where NATO forces in Europe will need to pre-positioned to prevent future land grabs.
1
ft.com/content/f3aaf2…
Hard power is necessary to establish a clear red line, which if crossed, marks the difference between peace and conflict. This is an antiquated concept, but it kept the peace in Europe for 50+ years or until Putin came to power.
2 Image
This means that the UK’s 2021 Integrated Review, Defence Command Paper and Future Soldier Guide are already out-of-date. This gives us an opportunity to correct the compromised structure imposed upon the Army by further cost savings.
3 Image
Read 20 tweets
Jan 27
CAN AN 8X8 BE AN IFV? (Thread)
Interesting conversation with a US Army 2-star at #IAV2022 about the role of the turreted Stryker Dragoon. I asked whether it's an IFV and, if so, can be used to enable infantry to dismount on the objective?
(1 of 7) Stryker Dragoon (Image: US Army)
The answer depends on the threat. If you know your enemy is equipped with weapons designed to defeat armour, infantry will dismount early and conduct the final assault on foot, while their Strykers move to the best possible position from which to provide fire support.
(2 of 7)
However, if an enemy only has light weapons, and assuming the terrain allows it, you might manoeuvre right onto an objective, The Stryker's speed and agility is a form of protection in itself and can enable an extremely rapid assault, especially in urban situations.
(3 of 7)
Read 7 tweets
Jan 13
ARMY 2025 (Thread)
The Army’s Future Soldier Guide has been described as the most far reaching transformation of the Army in a generation. After more than 12 years of austerity, It's a much needed step in the right direction.
1/25
By way of introduction, there are 4 implicit beliefs that underpin not only the Army’s future structure, but UK defence as a whole. First, as an island nation, Britain is dependent on its Navy and Air Force, and therefore needs to prioritise them above its peacetime Army.
2/25
Second, as a nuclear power, Britain’s ballistic missile submarine fleet is the ultimate guarantor of UK security, but if we don’t maintain our conventional forces at a reasonable level, there is a risk of needing to resort to nuclear weapons far sooner than we might want.
3/25
Read 26 tweets
Sep 19, 2021
Five points to make about AUKUS submarine deal:
1️⃣ If something isn’t working (@navalgroup) you don’t terminate an agreement until you’ve secured a new one. Otherwise you weaken your negotiating position. This isn’t duplicitous and it’s nothing personal. It’s just business.
2️⃣ AUKUS may signify the beginning of a new global alliance beyond NATO. Given strong bonds and mutual interests, the USA, Australia & UK were a strong foundation for this. But it doesn’t exclude other nations from joining subsequently or mean that NATO is now defunct
3️⃣ France may now choose to leave NATO or propose a new European defence alliance in its place. This could cause NATO to fracture, but could backfire spectacularly if Germany & other EU states prefer the status quo, France could find itself isolated & outside Article 5 protection
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(