JamesFennell.bsky.social Profile picture
Feb 25 15 tweets 6 min read Read on X
Replacing US forces in Europe, implications for UK - a 🧵

Europe will need to increase defence spending by £225 per annum (to nearly 4% GDP) and add somewhere between 200-300K personnel overall.

UK will have decisions to make. telegraph.co.uk/world-news/202…
1.) Nuclear deterrent. Both UK and France will need to expand their deterrents to provide for the alliance. The US-UK MDA was extended indefinately by Biden after the US elections, but UK may need to develop its own delivery systems in future. 100+ tactical nukes are needed. Image
2.) Building on JEF, UK should lead on defence of North Atlantic / Arctic AOR for the new alliance. This will require Project CABOT accross the GIUK gap and more littoral expiedtionary land and air forces as part of JEF. More surface combatants, MPAs & SSNs required. Image
2.).. JEF will need to provide a littoral division to provide a 'main force' to follow on from the RM commando vanguard in the High North, and elements of the UK light division (1 Div) will needed for this role. UK's CVTFs will have to provide air/sea dominance in N. Atlantic. Image
3.) UK, France, Germany and Italy will need to lead on backfilling logistics and enablers. US provides 75% of these.

100 A400M, 20-30 MRTT tankers, 10-20 AEWC platforms and dozens of specialist EW types, trucking fleets and stockpiles of fuel, ammunition and supplies. Image
3.) cont...

10-15 new surveillance sattelites will be needed urgently, and a fleet of 20+ auxilliary sealift and replenshment vessels.

Kits could be provided to repurpose commercial airliners for AAR, and merchant navy tankers and RO-ROs as naval auxiliaries on mobilistion. Image
4.) Combat air will need to increase by 300-500 fast jets and thousands of drones (and possibly replace 200 F-35s in service or on order). For the UK the priority should be to bolster UK air defence and ability to conduct a punative deep strike against Russian air power. Image
4. cont.. Around 75-100 increase in RAF combat air power (or equivalent if loyal wingman drones are part of package) as well as fully equipping the RN's two carrier air wings. Image
5.) While much of the heavy lifting on the Eastern flank can be picked up by 🇵🇱🇩🇪, the British Army will need to create a credible expeditionary strategic reserve to initially lead the stabilisation force in Ukraine. This is JEF+. Image
5.) continued.. the first priority is the toothless Royal Artillery which has no guns or missiles to speak of for air defence or close support. Beyond that Britain and France will need to the replace the US's ability to rapidly deploy 101 or 82 airborne to hot spots. Image
6.) Europe will need up to 300,000 more personnel. While aging population is a potential hazard, we should look to the Norwegian and Finnish models for creating and mobilising reserves. UK civillian bodies can be tapped as reserves too. UK will need 30-50K increase. Image
All of this will need to be achieved in the next 5-10 years, some faster than others. That means creating new alliance-wide funding mechanisms that ensure equitable burden sharing, deep reform to procurement and recruitment and re-building industrial capacity. Image
Significant streamlining of defence production is needed to focus down on making more of fewer and cheaper types of equipment - this needs a 'Lord Beaverbrook' to rationalise Europe and Canada's industry to produce the equipment and supplies the alliance needs. Image
Its an extremely difficult ask, but the alternatives may be either wishful thinking or surrender to the autocratic world order. And beyond Euope we may need to support Japan, Australia, Singapore, New Zealand and the other bastions of democracy in the Pacific.

Fin. Image
@threadreaderapp unroll

• • •

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

Keep Current with JamesFennell.bsky.social

JamesFennell.bsky.social 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 @FennellJW

Jan 5
Israel AFVs of the '60s🧵

Or how to build an Army on a shoestring...

The IDF grew from miltias formed to protect settlers in the '19th century. During WW1 a Jewish Legion and Jewish Mule Corps fought for the British, and in 1944-5 a Jewish Brigade joined 8th Army in Italy. Image
Many of the 'Haganah' (Defence) organisation also had gained military skills with the British Army, or with Orde Wingate's Night Squads during the Arab Rebellion of 1936-9.

Attached to the 7th Australian Div, Moshe Dyan would lose an eye during the invasion of Syria in 1941. Image
One such man was Asher "Oshraka" Peled.

Born Asher Weinberg to a wealthy family in the Ukraine, he had emmigrated in 1926, and was chief smuggler for the Hanganah, mostly weapons from the diaspora.

Drafted into the IDF in 1948 he became Head of the Ordnance Service. Image
Read 37 tweets
Jan 4
MBT-70 - Challenger 🧵

Chieftain entered service in 1967. The production tank weighed 52 tons, due to three factors:

1⃣ the turret was enlarged to provide for the L11 gun
2⃣ turret armour was improved
3⃣ the engine comparment was enlarged for cooling. Image
The L60 multifuel engine was a disaster. Although chosen due to the compact design and suitability for multifuel applications, Leyland's horizontally opposed six cylinder 2-stroke engine (similar to the Jumo 205 aeroengine) had cooling problems. Image
Power output was also disappointing, only 485bhp initially, from a desired 500bhp, and combined with engine compartment redesign (and added weight) to enable better cooling, the L60 reduced x-country performance.

Two programmes to improve the engine were needed in the '70s. Image
Read 38 tweets
Jan 2
Chieftain versus Leopard 🧵

As Centurion entered service work began to to develop its replacement.

The British Army's wartime experience set three priorities for their tanks:
1⃣ Firepower, first;
2⃣ Then, Protection, and;
3⃣ Finally, Cross-country Mobility. Image
The Army was also worried about very heavy Soviet tanks, the IS series, and the T-10 which entered service in 1953.

The response was to revive the A45 chassis with an American L1 120mm gun. This was the FV214 Conqueror heavy tank, which entered service in 1955. Image
Only 185 of the slow but heavily armed and armoured Conquerors were built, and they replaced wartime Churchill infantry tanks in three Royal Tank Regiment heavy tank battalions in Germany.

Neverthleless they provided a useful counter to the T-10. Image
Read 24 tweets
Jan 2
Centurion variants🧵

100 Mk I tanks were built from '45-47, inc. the 26 prototype and pre-production vehicles.

Mk 1 tanks has a mixed cast and welded turret, a 17lb gun and 21" tracks.

The turret had a rear escape hatch and a Besa 7.92mm coaxial MG, some had a 20mm cannon. Image
The Mk 2 was the first full production version and introduced a new machined cast turret, cupola, gunners periscope, two-plane stabilisation for the 17 pounder main gun and wider 24" tracks. The Besa 7.92mm coax MG was retained.

250 were build for the British Army from '46-'48. Image
The Mk 3 had the new 20 pounder (83mm) high velocity gun. 2,833 were mass produced for the UK, NATO and commonwealth members from 1948-56.

The hull was slightly shorter and weight increased to 49 tons. Most would be upgraded to later marks. Image
Read 15 tweets
Jan 1
Centurion tank - a 🧵

In 1943, Australian engineer Sir Claude Gibb was moved from munitions to be Director-General of AFV manufacturing at the Ministry of Supply.

On the top of his in-tray was a report on the Tiger tank,
examples of which the allies had captured in Tunisia. Image
At that time tanks were a black spot in British armament production, and British armour did not compare well with their German opponents or American and Soviet designs.

Design had been farmed out to manufacturers and lessons from users had not been properly taken into account. Image
Gibb was a hands-on force of nature, and former chief engineer for Parsons Steam Turbines.

He found it difficult to delegate to lesser mortals and, reading the report on the new German behemoth, decided to roll up his sleeves.

He would design the next British tank in-house. Image
Read 33 tweets
Jan 1
NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)🧵

One of the drivers of military aircraft innovation in the '60s were several NBMR issued by SACEUR.

NATO Supreme Command were concerned that the growing size and complexity of aircraft was increasing vulnerability to a first strike. Image
To buck the trend SACEUR financed several competitions to develop aircraft that could be easily dispersed, and were affordable by NATO members.

NBMR-1 was issued in 1953, with an eye on replacing the Republic F-84F Thundersteak light attack aircraft then in use by NATO members. Image
NBMR-1 was inspired by the Folland Gnat lightweight fighter developed as a private venture by British designer, Teddy Petter in 1950.

The Gnat used a small axial flow turbojet, the Bristol Siddeley Orpheus, development of which had been funded by the US Mutual Wespons Programme. Image
Read 18 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!

:(