Back to news

June 27, 2018 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR

Maintaining UK and US military relationship could cost Britain more than $10 billion a year

LONDON — Britain needs to raise defense spending by over £8 billion a year, or U.S. $10.59 billion, to not undermine the military relationship with the U.S. says a report by the parliamentary defence committee.

The report, which looks at the U.K.'s defense relations with the U.S. and NATO, recommends Britain increases the percentage of gross domestic product being allocated to the military first to 2.5 percent and eventually 3 percent if the country is to maintain the military relationship with the U.S. and keep its leading role in NATO.

“The U.K. armed forces and the Treasury benefit from our close relationship with the U.S. However, that will continue to be true only while the U.K. military retains both the capacity and capability to maintain interoperability with the U.S. military and to relieve U.S. burdens. For this to be the case the U.K. armed forces must be funded appropriately,” said the report released June 26.

The lawmakers urged a significant rise in a defense budget which currently just manages to squeeze above the 2 percent of gross domestic product demanded by NATO for defense spending.

“We calculate that raising defence spending to 2.5% of GDP would result in a forecast spend of £50 billion per annum and raising it to 3% of GDP would take this to £60 billion per annum,” said the lawmakers.

The defense budget this year is set at £37 billion with small real term increases expected annually up to 2022.

A rise to 3 percent would see defence spending return to a level — in GDP percentage terms —that has not been seen since 1995.

The release of the document comes at a bad time for anyone advocating increases in defense spending here.

Last week Chancellor Philip Hammond, an ex-defense secretary, revealed plans to spend an additional £20 billion a year on health care and made it clear that there was little or nothing left to bolster the finances of other departments, including defense.

Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson has been battling for months to secure additional funding to fill a black hole that the National Audit Office, the government's financial watchdog, has previously estimated could be anything between £4.8 billion and £20 billion in equipment spending alone over the next decade.

The exact amount depends to some degree on how much the military can save in efficiency improvements and reprioritizing and cutting capabilities and programs.

The headline outcomes of a Minstry of Defence review into the future size and shape of British forces, officially called the Modernising Defence Programme, could come at the NATO summit scheduled for Brussels starting July 11.

Media reports Sunday on the defense funding battle highlighted the seemingly growing rift between Williamson and senior government figures over the issue.

The reports followed strong denials from Prime Minister Theresa May last week that the government here was considering a watering down of Britain's ‘tier-one' status as a military power after the Financial Times reported that May asked Williamson to justify continuance of that position.

The U.S, Britain, China, Russia and France are the only nations with a tier one status — which basically means they are able to fight nuclear, conventional and other conflicts around the world.

The committee said military-to-military engagement between the U.K. and the U.S. was one of the linchpins of the bilateral relationship between the two nations.

The report said the U.K. benefits greatly from the width and depth of the U.K.-U.S. defense and security relationship, but such a relationship requires a degree of interoperability that can be sustained only through investment in U.K. armed forces.

The importance of the military relationship between the U.S. and Europe's leading military power also extends into NATO.

Lawmakers said the relationship is vital to the functioning of NATO while the U.K.'s leading contribution to the alliance helps to sustain the relationship between London and Washington.

Julian Lewis, the Defence Committee chairman, said in a statement:

“Defence spending is an area where a strong message needs to be sent to our allies and adversaries alike. The Government has consistently talked about increasing the U.K.'s commitment to NATO after our departure from the European Union. An increased commitment, in the face of new and intensified threats, means that further investment is essential,” said Lewis.

The warning in the report over the risks to the military relationship between London and Washington follows a similar warning in February by U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis that Britain had to retain a credible military if the relationship between the two nations was to endure and strengthen.

Williamson said that in financial terms alone the U.K. benefits to the tune of £3 billion a year from the U.K.-U.S. defense relationship.

John Spellar MP, the Defence Committee's senior Labour Party member and former armed forces minister said the inquiry has “underlined the importance of the U.K.-U.S. relationship in the area of defense and security and emphasizes the benefit which the U.K. receives as a result.”

“We have heard that there are perceptions in the U.S. that the U.K.'s defense capabilities have slipped and that concerns have been raised about the U.K.'s ability to operate independently. We need to challenge this perception and the Modernising Defence Programme is an excellent opportunity to do so,” said Spellar.

https://www.defensenews.com/smr/nato-priorities/2018/06/26/maintaining-uk-and-us-military-relationship-could-cost-britain-more-than-10-billion-a-year/

On the same subject

  • Software revamp aims to align US Army with industry best practices

    March 10, 2024 | International, C4ISR

    Software revamp aims to align US Army with industry best practices

    “More than ever before, software is actually a national-security imperative,” said Margaret Boatner, an Army strategy and acquisition executive.

  • Who is Secretly Building the USAF’s New Fighter?

    September 17, 2020 | International, Aerospace

    Who is Secretly Building the USAF’s New Fighter?

    MARCUS WEISGERBER Officials are mum, so here's a roundup of clues. Among the big questions surrounding the secret U.S. Air Force fighter-jet demonstrator revealed this week is: who built it? Will Roper, the head of Air Force acquisition, declined to say much about the new plane, other than it has actually flown, that some of the plane's systems have been flight-tested, and that it was designed and built using digital engineering. So let's look at some clues, starting with a likely predecessor to the Next Generation Air Dominance project that produced the new demonstrator. In January 2015, Frank Kendall, then defense undersecretary for acquisition, technology and logistics, told the House Armed Services Committee about a DARPA-led project that was developing new planes and engine technology for the Air Force and Navy. “The intent is to develop prototypes for the next generation of air-dominance platforms — X-plane programs, if you will," Kendall said. Dubbed the Aerospace Innovation Initiative, the project aimed to “develop the technologies and address the risks associated with the air dominance platforms that will follow the F-35, as well as other advanced aeronautical challenges.” Roper wouldn't say whether the NGAD and AII projects are linked, but they sound quite similar. He instead said that he disclosed the plane's existence, in part, to encourage companies to invest more in digital engineering. "The obvious candidates for the NGAD prototype are Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, though General Atomics might be a possible designer—but that's a long-shot," Byron Callan, an analyst with Capital Alpha Partners, wrote in a Tuesday note to clients. "Textron's Scorpion program had recently proven that in one year's time, it could take a new clean sheet design to flight, but we doubt it's been able to elevate this skill to combat aircraft." The plane's engine, Callan wrote, was built by either GE or Raytheon Technologies' Pratt & Whitney. Here's the case for why each of the following companies could have built the new NGAD fighter. Boeing The Chicago-based aerospace giant already knows a lot about digital engineering, having partnered with Sweden's Saab to design and build their T-7A training jet in less than a year, near-lightspeed by U.S. military standards. Air Force officials have gushed about the T-7A, which beat out two other planes, the Lockheed Martin T-50 and Leonardo T-100, that were already being used by foreign air forces. The Boeing plane has a mission computer that can run third-party software and apps, allowing for easy updates. It is also designed for quick assembly: it takes just 15 minutes to assemble the forward and aft fuselages, compared with some 24 hours to assemble a F/A-18 Super Hornet fuselage, according to Leanne Caret, the CEO of Boeing Defense. Northrop Grumman It often gets overlooked that Northrop owns Scaled Composites — the Burt Rutan-founded, XPrize-winning design shop behind SpaceShipOne, the first aircraft to carry private citizens into space. Like Boeing, Northrop's Scaled built a plane from scratch for the Air Force's pilot training jet contest, but in the end didn't submit a bid. Northrop has seen an uptick in classified Pentagon work in recent years. It's been presumed that a sizable portion of that cash has gone to build B-21 stealth bombers, whose existence has been disclosed but are being built in secret. It's conceivable that some of the classified cash flowing into the company's Aeronautical Systems business is for the NGAD test aircraft. Northrop is also building the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent, the new intercontinental ballistic missiles that will replace the Cold War Minuteman III, using the same digital design technology often touted by Roper. Lockheed Martin The company's Advanced Development Programs division — far better known as the Skunk Works — has long developed super-advanced, super-secret planes for the U.S. military, including the famed U-2 and SR-71 spy planes and the F-117 ground-attack jet. They also built the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. “ADP seems pretty busy across a number of fronts, but also...looking at the Digital Century Series and also looking at where the services are going to go in terms of sixth-gen and next-gen aircraft,” said Michele Evans, who leads Lockheed Martin Aeronautics and its Skunk Works operation, last week. Evans also touted Stardrive, a Lockheed effort to incorporate more commercial technology and practices into its manufacturing. “Think of model-based systems engineering, think about factory of the future, software development in terms of containerization technologies like Kubernetes, and agile [software] and then even into sustainment in terms of how we use data analytics and AI,” she said. “I think the technologies are just going to provide tremendous opportunities to speed up the development in the delivery of platforms going forward.” Someone else The most intriguing possibility is that the new jet may not be the product of one of the defense giants at all. There is evidence that the digital-design tools that Roper touted are allowing smaller upstarts to enter markets once reserved for only a few established contractors. In July, for example, an Air Force solicitation for proposals for drones to accompany manned jets drew 18 entries. “It shows there's a lot of interest from very large [companies], which you would expect, to very small,” Gen. Arnold Bunch, the head of Air Force Materiel Command, said in a Wednesday videoconference call with reporters. “I actually believe as we do the digital campaign and we look at doing digital engineering, it will actually open the door to more people to be able to participate that may not have before.” https://www.defenseone.com/business/2020/09/who-secretly-building-usafs-new-fighter/168541/

  • Will this hybrid drone give Russia a high-altitude advantage?

    August 14, 2019 | International, Aerospace

    Will this hybrid drone give Russia a high-altitude advantage?

    By: Kelsey D. Atherton Is it still a tiltrotor aircraft if the whole body tilts? The new “Fixar” drone, set to be presented at Russia's MAKS-2019 airshow in late August, is a hybrid of sorts, a quadcopter with fixed wings. With limited moving parts and a flexible design, it's the kind of dual-use technology worth watching and, perhaps, even imitating. “Many companies and UAV manufacturers will present their aircraft, concepts and models” at the MAKS-2019 airshow, said Samuel Bendett, an adviser at the Center for Naval Analyses. “This Fixar UAV is a ‘self-initiated' project by the manufacturer, with the hope of getting attention from potential civilian and military customers at the air show.” Unlike the more eponymous tiltrotor craft, which switch distinctly from rotor-powered takeoff and landing to propeller-driven level flight, the Fixar instead has its four rotors in a permanently fixed position. The engines remain in position while the whole frame of the aircraft can lean backwards for more traditional vertical flights or stay level to operate as a fixed-wing machine. While the Fixar's marketing photos show it working in fields of crops, manufacturer IKS also bills it as designed specifically to operate in windy conditions and in mountains, suggesting that the whole machine might have a role in ISR and cargo transport. “What caught my attention in particular was that the drone can operate in ‘mountainous conditions' due to its unique design,” said Bendett. “In fact, Russian military has been practicing the operation of different UAVs at high altitudes and in high wind — so this Fixar UAV can prove useful right away.” Like all duel-use platforms, a drone is only as useful as the payloads put on it. Cameras and supply storage are likely options, though nothing yet suggests any new demand on the airframe. An ability to fly fast and from small patches of land without a runway is valuable, but it needs to have a certain range and speed to be a better choice than the baseline low cost and simplicity of civilian quadcopters. A large internal security market might support that and could easily lead to the Fixar in police roles, as well. “At present, there is no UAV in the Russian military that has characteristics similar to the Fixar, but given a steady rate of UAS acquisition by the MOD — at 300 UAVs per year for the next several years — it's safe to assume that the Russian military is looking to diversify its UAV fleet beyond the workhorses like Eleton or Orlan," said Bendett. https://www.c4isrnet.com/unmanned/2019/08/13/will-this-hybrid-drone-give-russia-a-high-altitude-advantage/

All news