When Blair was elected in 1997, RAF had 8 (IX, 12, 617, 31, 13, 14, 17, II) Tornado sqns, with GR4 upgrade underway. 3 Jaguar sqns (6, 41, 54), 3 Harrier (1, 3, IV) and 6 Tornado F3 sqns (5, 11, 25, 43, 111, 29). Fleet Air Arm has 800 and 801 Sqns. SDR1998 cut 17 and 29 Sqns.
Sea Harrier was sacrificed soon after; in 2005 Jaguar was cut. When Tory-LibDem won in 2010 there were 7 Tornado GR4 sqns, 2 Typhoon squadrons (3 and 11), one last Tornado F3 sqn (111) and 2 Harrier sqns, 1 & 801/ex Naval Strike Wing. 39 Sqn had formed on Reaper in 2007.
The 2010 cuts terminated what little was left of the Harrier fleet and removed 2 Tornado GR4 sqns. XIII Sqn became a second Reaper sqn in 2012. Come the next election, there will be 7 Typhoon (1, II, 3, 6, IX, 11, 12), 2 F-35B (617 and 809) and 2 Reaper/Protector (31 and XIII).
In 1997 there were more than 20 Nimrod maritime patrol aircraft in 3 sqns (120, 201, 206). 206 was disbanded in 2005 and with well known woes of Nimrod MR2 the whole force was without working airplanes by 31 March 2010, just before the election. 120 and 201 now have P-8 Poseidon.
Labour ordered 7 out of 8 C-17, initially leasing 4 in May 2000, then purchased outright in 2004 followed by one in 2006, one in 2007 and one in 2009. The Tories added the 8th and last in 2012, just before production ended. They all serve in 99 Sqn.
Helicopters, Labour ordered Wildcat in 2006. 70 initially, reduced to 62. They acquired 6 Merlin HC3A from Denmark in 2007 to add to original 22 HC3 ordered by tories in 1995.
They announced, but did not order, 24 Chinook just before election. Tories eventually bought 14 in 2011
Labour era introduced Sentinel R1 (5 aircraft) and the first 5 Shadow R1. The tories have since expanded the Shadow fleet to 8 but given up Sentinel, as we know. Labour ordered the first 6 Reapers (one lost), Tories doubled that to 10 and ordered 16 new Protector as replacement.
The Army's WATCHKEEPER drone was ordered under Labour. Not the most successful programme, but the intent was good; hopefully it'll prove itself. It was under the Tories instead that Rivet Joint was produred to replace Nimrod R1, and E-7 Wedgetail picked to replace the old Sentry.
In 1997 Royal Navy had 12 SSNs (5 Swiftsure class, 7 Trafalgar) but SDR 1998 formally reduced target to 10 and come 2010, when Labour lost the election, there were actually just 7. Splendid gone in 2004, Spartan 2006, Sovereign 2006, Superb 2008, Trafalgar 2009.
Surface warships: when Blair won in May 1997 there were 6 Type 22 Batch 2, 4 Type 22 Batch 3, 12 Type 42s (4 B1, 4 B2, 4 B3) and 11 Type 23 frigates, with 2 more commissioning before 1997 was over and another 3 on the way. 35 commissioned escorts and 3 in buid/delivery.
Between 1997 and 2010, under Labour, all Type 22 B2 were removed (1999 to 2002), 7 Type 42s decommissioned and 3 out of 16 Type 23s were sold (Norfolk, Grafton, Marlborough to Chile 2005). They ordered the 6 Type 45s; of those, only Daring commissioned before the 2010 election.
The Royal Fleet Auxiliary had 4 Leaf class tankers, 3 ROVER class and 2 OL class, plus 2 FORT 1 class and 2 FORT 2 class supply vessels. Of these, Olna and Olwen were gone in 1999 and 2000, Brambleleaf and Oakleaf in 2009, Grey Rover in 2006. Fort Austin was mothballed in 2009.
The only tankers to enter service in the meanwhile were WAVE RULER and WAVE KNIGHT, ordered just before the 1997 election by the Tories and confirmed by Blair's new government. Labour then built the 4 BAY class LSDs to replace 5 Round Table class vessels.
The amphibious vessels that are often described as an SDR 1998 result (Ocean, Albion and Bulwark) were actually already ordered or in build by the time Blair was elected. The LPDs had been ordered by the tories in 1996, HMS Ocean had been launched already in 1995.
When Labour won election in 1997, Challenger 2 was new, AS90 just arrived, HVM and MLRS had been in service a few years, WARRIOR was young and APACHE had just been ordered. CVRT, SAXON and other "wheels" needed replacement but TRACER died, MRAV abandoned in 2003, FRES was a dud.
5 Royal Artillery received MLRS Jan 1992. April 1998 it lost it and became Surveillance and Target Acquisition unit it still is. 32 RA got MLRS in 1993, but by 2003 it was all UAVs. 39 RA was the only one left with MLRS. It wasn't a UK only thing, but it was not, in fact, wise.
1997 to 2010 Labour ordered, UORs aside, 33 Titan bridgelayers, 33 Trojan AVRE, 66 Terrier and 400 PANTHER. Had they kept the course at least on MRAV (Boxer) instead of quitting it, Army wouldn't be facing mass obsolescence in all areas at once. And industry would be healthier.
In 1989, when the Wall of Berlin fell, British Army had some 12-13 tank regiments between new CHALLENGER 1 and CHIEFTAIN. End of Cold War resulted soon in reductions, with plans to run on CHIEFTAIN being abandoned. The then tory government contracted force to 8 tank regiments.
It was done primarily through merges. That's when through merges the Royal Dragoon Guards, Queen's Royal Hussars, King's Royal Hussars, Light Dragoons and Queen's Royal Lancers were born. 3 and 2 RTR merged leaving 2 RTR, 4 and 1 RTR merged leaving 1 RTR.
Soon it was an all CHALLENGER force and CR2 was launched. When Blair was elected, plan was to re-equip with CR2 all 8 regiments, as Type 38 formations. Royal Scots Dragoon Guards, Queen's Own Lancers, KRH, QRH, Royal Dragoon Guards, Queen's Royal Lancers, 1 RTR, 2 RTR.
SDR1998 initially promised to re-grow army by a few thousand and restructured it on 3 armd and 3 mech brigades, each with 1 tank regt. Instead of 8 Type 38 Challenger 2 formations, 6 Type 58. Whole Fleet Management was introduced, which meant no regt actually owned 58 tanks.
British Army was only Service in SDR1998 that was planned to grow in manpower. Navy and RAF both shrank, albeit initially not by much. SDR1998 was very short lived anyway, and was dramatically revised downwards a few years later, eventually going lower still in practice.
Armoured brigades were 4, 20 and 7, under 1st Division. Mechanized were 1 and 19, already existing, and 12, formed by transformation of 5 brigade. 16 Air Assault brigade was born from "merge" of 24 airmobile and 5 airborne. Armd and Mech alike had 1x CR2 regt and 1x AS90 regt.
In 2003-4, infamous "let's quit MRAV, welcome FRES!" moment came. Idea was to equip with FRES the 3 mechanized brigades, and replace their AS90 with LIMAWS (Gun) and (Rocket), lightweight to match the mystic airportability and deployability of FRES. Nothing made it into service.
Obviously, even though FRES and LIMAWS were nowhere to be seen, the july 2004 Labour paper "Delivering Security in a Changing World" axed 7 Challenger 2 sqns in total and 6 batteries worth of AS90 guns. New target: 2 heavy, 3 medium/FRES, 1 light brigades.
In 2010, in Tory-LibDem review, initial result for the Army, as published, was a 95K force centered on 5 homogeneous Multi-Role Brigades. The influence of Op ENTIRETY and the need to have an army able to sustain a 1-in-5 rotation (Afghanistan still very much raged on) was obvious
Regrettably, the 95K model was deemed unaffordable in the space of 1 year and Army2020 was forged in its place in 2011. Sadly multi-role brigade was gone, replaced by a core of 3 armoured brigades and an adaptable force of (an utterly absurd and never explained) 7 light brigades.
The 7 light brigades were a "lie". From those 7 formations (why disperse resources so?), only 2 workable brigades would be formed rotationally. 3+2 brigades was, again, meant to preserve the 1-in-5 force generation mechanism so enduring brigade-sized operations remained feasible.
Then Afghanistan officially ended and in 2015 Army was free to go wild with creativity, and STRIKE was born, at expense of throwing 1-in-5 mechanism immediately out of window, along with 1 of the 3 heavy brigades. Army 2020 Refine was supremely stupid. And doomed from the start.
In 2017 CABRIT was born, a armour-centric, enduring forward presence committment. Did it give Army pause in dismantling 1st Armoured Brigade to pursue STRIKE? Of course it did not. Who needs a sustainable force generation pool when you can pursue "Catterick to Tallin" road moves!
It took until Summer 2019 to rationalize the 7 absurd "adaptable force" brigades, shaving them off one by one. And in December 2019, just before the incoming Review, the Army, still adamant that BOXER was the number 1 priority, signed the contract for 523 of those.
Going back to tanks specifically, 1 RTR effectively lost Challenger 2 from 1998, going to form Joint CBRN regt. Queen's Royal Lancers converted to CVR(T) in 2004. Further tank reductions under Labour were via "Medium Armour" expedient, with 1 sqn in each regt getting Scimitar.
The SDSR 2010 initial plan for 5 Multi Role Brigades would have kept 5 tank regiments, but as i said earlier, that plan was soon superseded by Army 2020, with 3 regts. So Royal Scots DG became Light Cavalry in 2013; RDG got CVRT in 2012, 2 RTR vanished via merging into 1 RTR.
Finally, 2015's STRIKE fantasy trip introduced plan to convert KRH, one of 3 remaining tank regiments (Royal Tank Regiment, Queen's Royal Hussars and King's Royal Hussars) from Challenger 2 to AJAX. Note: well before Boris Johnson became PM, so don't blame him for the tanks.
Obviously, due also to AJAX's woes, the King's Royal Hussars have not converted yet and are very much active with Challenger 2. The announced "review" of the numbers of Challenger 3s is effectively a way to say the conversion of KRH to AJAX will hopefully be cancelled.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
5 Royal Artillery received MLRS Jan 1992. April 1998 it lost it and became Surveillance and Target Acquisition unit it still is.
32 RA got MLRS in 1993, but by 2003 it was all UAVs.
39 RA was the only left with MLRS. It wasn't a UK only thing, but it was not, in fact, wise.
HVM Starstreak was also a system with a regrettably short active life. It entered service in the early 90s and in great quantities that ensured every manoeuvre unit had good SHORAD, but a great number of launchers was axed soon after in the Labour reviews in the early 2000s.
When Labour won election in May 1997, Challenger 2 was new, AS90 just arrived, HVM and MLRS had been in service a few years, WARRIOR was young and APACHE had just been ordered. CVRT replacement and SAXON and other "wheels" needed replacement but TRACER died and MRAV abandoned.
Casual mention of carriers as source of Army woes is ever present. Nevermind fact that carriers are paid for and haven't even qualified to be in Major Projects spreadsheet for 3 years now.
Army has 2 "carrier-sized" projects ongoing: AJAX and MIV (BOXER) dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1…
AJAX, in the last Major Project spreadsheet, had its overall cost exempted for commercial reasons, an ominous sign. Last time it was given, it was 6353 million. MIV is 6575 million. That the return on both of these projects is so sub-optimal is largely the Army's own fault.
"Poor" British Army also has 1371 million on Challenger 3, 1787 million earmarked for Ground Based Air Defence, 1521 million for land ISTAR and especially a 13,140 million LeTacCIS mega-programme which is notoriously not doing well, particularly its MORPHEUS sub-component.
What is going on with L118 Light Gun...? 1 February: the MOD has made BAE the Design Organisation for the L118 Light Gun, tasking them with producing updated design documents and a Manufacturing Data Pack (MDP) to allow new spares to be produced. (1)
Weird part is: "BAES can complete this work due to their unique knowledge and know-how which has been obtained by their maintenance of the TDP for the L119 variant of LG". So, knowledge of the L118 appears to have been lost, and have to draw from the american variant! (2)
8 February, BAE gets contract to produce L119 “Abbot kits”, aka ordnance that allows L119 to be turned into L118.
L119 uses a slightly shorter ordnance meant for US 105mm one-piece, while L118 uses 2-piece “Field 105” derived from those once used by Abbot self-propel howitzer.
THREAD: The UK in the Indo-Pacific.
What does the UK do in the Indo-Pacific "tilt"? No other single topic in modern british defence matters is as misunderstood and misused as this one, so let's see make a summary:
SINGAPORE - Did you know that, back in the days, withdrawal of the UK from region was very much NOT wanted by locals? To lessen impact of hasty, largely unilateral decision to leave, 5 Power Defence Arrangements were signed in 1971 with Australia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore
Ever since, there has been a residual UK permanent presence in Singapore, tiny but precious: Naval Party 1022 – Sembawang Wharves. Berthing, storage and fueling facility. HMS Illustrious here picking up stores on the way to Philippines for disaster relief in 2013:
If you can and want to imagine big war with Russia, before asking for more British Army divisions you'd better ask for ground based air and missile defence, because cruise missiles are the 1 threat sure to rain thick on UK, and there is next to nothing in place to deal with that.
As the UK is a critical base for fighting the movements of russian submarines, ships and long range aviation threatening the North Atlantic routes and entry point for troops arriving from CONUS, US would have to deploy lots of PATRIOT batteries to the UK just to keep it viable.
What else could the UK offer in such a big war against Russia before? Lossiemouth's P-8 Poseidons would be super busy. E-7? As well. Looking back, Lossiemouth used to have dedicate anti-ship attack jet squadrons to deal with russian surface movements, and that is no longer there.
@JohnHealey_MP 's speech today to RUSI was horribly hollow. Apart from "Tories bad" and a cringe mention of 1998 Review that was nice to read but never realized, Labour manages to once again say AUKUS and Tempest tie up with Japan are good, but "tilt to Indo-Pacific is bad".
Healey says that it makes no sense "for UK forces to devote an increasing share of their scarce resources to the Indo-Pacific". Can @johnhealey, and all who share this vision, finally tell us what this actually amounts to, and especially what it is they want to cut?
What is it that they want to walk back from? Keeping 2 OPVs there? Oh, yeah, that is going to fund a larger army, for sure! Withdraw KIPION? No periodic carrier deployments...? What IS IT that you oppose? What is it that you intend to cut, and what will that save in practice?