 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| . |  |
. |
U.K. defense policy debate heats up
London (UPI) Jul 30, 2009 Public debate over future U.K. defense policy and procurement has climbed to the top of the political agenda and is likely to remain there. For taxpayers and defense equipment suppliers alike, billions of dollars are at stake. The likely need for massive government spending cuts over a period of years to rebalance recession-shredded budgets has prompted commentators to demand a fundamental U.K. re-think about future military priorities. Several factors have come together to focus national attention on the military and how it is supplied by government. Defense has become another stick for the media and the political opposition to beat a 12-year old Labor administration already trailing badly in all public opinion polls. A general election is due next year, troop deaths in Afghanistan have risen sharply, there is popular anger over government legal appeals against compensation awards to soldiers injured in service, and the government has been forced to backtrack in a party political slanging match over the numbers of helicopters available to support the Afghanistan campaign. Normally confined to specialist strategic publications, debate on the shape, size and strategic thrust of Britain's armed forces has gone public. Big-ticket items -- from nuclear submarines to naval aircraft carriers and military transport planes -- are being debated as rarely before. Meanwhile, Jane's has reported that a revised version of the 2005 Defense Industrial Strategy -- a government white paper that sought to provide greater transparency regarding the United Kingdom's future defense requirements -- now looks unlikely for the foreseeable future. A replacement for Britain's four Trident nuclear submarines from 2022 is the trickiest decision facing the government, says respected defense analyst and writer Robert Fox. Doubts about replacing Trident extend far beyond the anti-nuclear "peace lobby." The Ministry of Defense puts the cost at some $33 billion, while other estimates range to more than $100 billion over the program's projected 50-year life. Other major items include joint strike fighter aircraft for the navy and air force at an estimated cost of more than $6 billion for the hulls plus $30 billion for warfighting systems, and the Typhoon Fighter Bomber, of which 232 are on order at a cost of $36 billion. Surveillance, tanker and transport planes -- the Nimrod MRA4, the FSTA A330 and the A400M -- are costed at some $40 billion to $50 billion or more, says Fox, who also cites plans to lease 14 Airbus A330 tankers for 28 years on a private finance initiative costing $21 billion. Meanwhile, BVT Surface Fleet, the maritime joint venture between BAE Systems and VT Group, has signed a binding 15-year Terms of Business Agreement with the Defense Ministry to reduce the cost of warship building and support for the Royal Navy. The agreement gives BVT a minimum 15-year exclusivity deal on the design, build, integration and aspects of support on specified ministry shipbuilding programs. In May BAE announced the closure of three U.K. factories with 500 job losses on delays to the Future Rapid Effects System utility vehicle program. The FRES scheme is intended to deliver more than 3,000 armored vehicles to the army. Share This Article With Planet Earth
Related Links The Military Industrial Complex at SpaceWar.com Learn about the Superpowers of the 21st Century at SpaceWar.com
Eurofighter deal to be inked: sourcesMilan, Italy (AFP) July 30, 2009 The four partner countries in the Eurofighter consortium were on Friday due to sign a contract on production of the first part of the third tranche of the aircraft, sources said Thursday. "The contract will be signed tomorrow (Friday) in Germany," said an Italian defence ministry source. "It will be signed at the Eurofighter consortium headquarters at Hallbergmoos, near Munich," an ... read more |
|
|
| The content herein, unless otherwise known to be public domain, are Copyright 1995-2009 - SpaceDaily. AFP and UPI Wire Stories are copyright Agence France-Presse and United Press International. ESA Portal Reports are copyright European Space Agency. All NASA sourced material is public domain. Additional copyrights may apply in whole or part to other bona fide parties. Advertising does not imply endorsement,agreement or approval of any opinions, statements or information provided by SpaceDaily on any Web page published or hosted by SpaceDaily. Privacy Statement |
del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
YahooMyWeb
Google
Facebook