The difference between British and US Forces (light banter only)

[Flyboy]

For an Air Force, the weather is essential.

Having up to date 'Met' is an important part of any air operation.

The USAF has a specialist team called the Special Operations Weather Technicians specifically for this job. Highly trained SOF personnel, these men are the elite of the USAF.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_For...her_Technician

The RAF has exactly the same requirement. In order to fulfill this need, it has the Mobile Met Unit - a Met Office sponsored reserve unit of the RAF which can call on around 70 men and women. Each has undergone military as well as meteorological training, providing them with the breadth of knowledge and experience required to understand the challenges faced on the frontline.

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/defence/mmu


Draw whatever conclusions you like from that!

Either the US are practicing overkill, or the British are severely under budget!

[LT. COL. John Sheppard]

RAAF ADF RAN are all better

[Flyboy]

Oh noes! A kangaroo! Run awayz!

[The Mighty 6 platoon]

http://www.airventure.de/aia2001pics/RAAF%20logo.jpg


Oh noes! A kangaroo! Run awayz!

Well if it's a flying kangaroo coming at me at 700mph I might be a little worried.

[Flyboy]

Well if it's a flying kangaroo coming at me at 700mph I might be a little worried.

Meh, that's what MANPADS are for!

[Dazzle foot]

US forces don't think before they do things, and are to trigger happy, but they make up for lack or brain power with there vast numbers.
Australian forces are to payed back, they just wait until the wars over before they do anything.
UK forces are professional, but don't have the money to do anything, so we have to beg, steal or borrow other country's equipment.

[The Mighty 6 platoon]

Meh, that's what MANPADS are for!

Hmm, kanga chunks.

[4thDoctor]

4thDoctorthumb.gif

[The Mighty 6 platoon]

US forces don't think before they do things, and are to trigger happy, but they make up for lack or brain power with there vast numbers.
Australian forces are to payed back, they just wait until the wars over before they do anything.
UK forces are professional, but don't have the money to do anything, so we have to beg, steal or borrow other country's equipment.

Err no, all of those are myths.

The U.S are not particularly trigger happy, no more than any other country. They tend to be involved in more friendly fire incidents simply because they will provide most of the forces required for any operation. More forces involved means there's simply a greater chance for blue on blue incidents, but every country suffers them.

The Aussies meanwhile have provided troops to every recent fight, and the Australian Defence Force has been involved in many operations, and they are still involved in Afghanistan. The 32 killed and 218 wounded they have suffered in Afghanistan is a testament to that.

British Forces do have the money to do stuff, we have the 3rd or 4th largest defence budget in the world (depending on whose figures you use) and spend more money than countries such as Russia or India. While we have been suffering defence cuts recently we still retain the ability to unilaterally project power overseas. Further we don't beg, steal or borrow other country's equipment, maybe if we did we'd have lower bills. We develop our own kit, we build our own nuclear powered attack subs for example, are building our own super carriers, built the Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank ourselves, and co finance other military projects, such as the F35 and the Euro fighter Typhoon. We could buy off the shelf export versions of various bit of kit from the Americans or French, like many countries do, but that stuff simply isn't as advanced or as capable as the stuff we develop ourselves. But it also happens to be very expensive unfortunately.

[P-90_177]

Err no, all of those are myths.

The U.S are not particularly trigger happy, no more than any other country. They tend to be involved in more friendly fire incidents simply because they will provide most of the forces required for any operation. More forces involved means there's simply a greater chance for blue on blue incidents, but every country suffers them.

The Aussies meanwhile have provided troops to every recent fight, and the Australian Defence Force has been involved in many operations, and they are still involved in Afghanistan. The 32 killed and 218 wounded they have suffered in Afghanistan is a testament to that.

British Forces do have the money to do stuff, we have the 3rd or 4th largest defence budget in the world (depending on whose figures you use) and spend more money than countries such as Russia or India. While we have been suffering defence cuts recently we still retain the ability to unilaterally project power overseas. Further we don't beg, steal or borrow other country's equipment, maybe if we did we'd have lower bills. We develop our own kit, we build our own nuclear powered attack subs for example, are building our own super carriers, built the Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank ourselves, and co finance other military projects, such as the F35 and the Euro fighter Typhoon. We could buy off the shelf export versions of various bit of kit from the Americans or French, like many countries do, but that stuff simply isn't as advanced or as capable as the stuff we develop ourselves. But it also happens to be very expensive unfortunately.

Careful. That banter isn't light enough for this thread.

[Dazzle foot]

British Forces do have the money to do stuff, we have the 3rd or 4th largest defence budget in the world

we're abit lower down than 3th/4th spending wise, and most of that money gets pumped into projects that go into service before there ready, like the bowman radios we took out to iraq in 2005, but had to replace with clansman because, they didnt work. The sa80, British made, un reliable for almost 20 years, until the Germans updated.
Yeah, we're building our own 2 super carriers, but we have to sell one of them as soon as its made, because we can't afford to run 2. Also, in 2014 (?) when the illustrious gets de commissions, we're going to have to borrow a France carrier (that's to say land ships, and use it on joint ops) until 2020.

And we do beg, steal borrow quite alot, there was a time, a couple of years back when there wasn't enough osprey going round, so blokes would be borrowing kit off the Americans, or buying what ever form of armour they could online.

[SF_and_Coffee]

Just remember the US forces who were sent to play in the sandbox without proper kit in many cases... *facepalm*

[The Mighty 6 platoon]

we're abit lower down than 3th/4th spending wise, and most of that money gets pumped into projects that go into service before there ready, like the bowman radios we took out to iraq in 2005, but had to replace with clansman because, they didnt work. The sa80, British made, un reliable for almost 20 years, until the Germans updated.
Yeah, we're building our own 2 super carriers, but we have to sell one of them as soon as its made, because we can't afford to run 2. Also, in 2014 (?) when the illustrious gets de commissions, we're going to have to borrow a France carrier (that's to say land ships, and use it on joint ops) until 2020.

And we do beg, steal borrow quite alot, there was a time, a couple of years back when there wasn't enough osprey going round, so blokes would be borrowing kit off the Americans, or buying what ever form of armour they could online.

You can check the various figures, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...y_expenditures
http://www.sipri.org/yearbook/2011/04/04A http://milexdata.sipri.org/result.php4, British military expenditures in 2010 was at $57 billion, or $59 billion, depending on the source, Even accounting for more recent cuts, we happily fit into the top 10 military expenditures.

As for kit, none of what you're saying is specific to the British military. The L85s got updated in 2002, by Heckler and Koch, who were at the time owned by a British Company, BAE systems. Stuff like Bowman gets rushed into service in any military force to meet urgent operational requirements, and stories of troops buying their own body armour and other personnel kit is something you will find in every military, including the U.S. The U.S Marine Corp have an even greater reputation for scrounging stuff than the entire British military. Equipment SNAFU's and never having what you need is a normal part of military life, the world over.

Finally with the Carriers, there has been no decision on what happens to the second carrier, it may be commissioned, placed in extended readiness or sold, but nothing has being confirmed.

Hell some of our kit is far in advance of the Americans. Rations for instance, ours are actually edible.

[The Flyattractor]

You can check the various figures, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...y_expenditures
http://www.sipri.org/yearbook/2011/04/04A http://milexdata.sipri.org/result.php4, British military expenditures in 2010 was at $57 billion, or $59 billion, depending on the source, Even accounting for more recent cuts, we happily fit into the top 10 military expenditures.

As for kit, none of what you're saying is specific to the British military. The L85s got updated in 2002, by Heckler and Koch, who were at the time owned by a British Company, BAE systems. Stuff like Bowman gets rushed into service in any military force to meet urgent operational requirements, and stories of troops buying their own body armour and other personnel kit is something you will find in every military, including the U.S. The U.S Marine Corp have an even greater reputation for scrounging stuff than the entire British military. Equipment SNAFU's and never having what you need is a normal part of military life, the world over.

Finally with the Carriers, there has been no decision on what happens to the second carrier, it may be commissioned, placed in extended readiness or sold, but nothing has being confirmed.

Hell some of our kit is far in advance of the Americans. Rations for instance, ours are actually edible.

*Aims at M6P and gets trigger happy on the Kangaroo Kannon*

[Dazzle foot]

You can check the various figures, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...y_expenditures
http://www.sipri.org/yearbook/2011/04/04A http://milexdata.sipri.org/result.php4, British military expenditures in 2010 was at $57 billion, or $59 billion, depending on the source, Even accounting for more recent cuts, we happily fit into the top 10 military expenditures.

As for kit, none of what you're saying is specific to the British military. The L85s got updated in 2002, by Heckler and Koch, who were at the time owned by a British Company, BAE systems. Stuff like Bowman gets rushed into service in any military force to meet urgent operational requirements, and stories of troops buying their own body armour and other personnel kit is something you will find in every military, including the U.S. The U.S Marine Corp have an even greater reputation for scrounging stuff than the entire British military. Equipment SNAFU's and never having what you need is a normal part of military life, the world over.

Finally with the Carriers, there has been no decision on what happens to the second carrier, it may be commissioned, placed in extended readiness or sold, but nothing has being confirmed.

Hell some of our kit is far in advance of the Americans. Rations for instance, ours are actually edible.

You don't need to try and out do me with statistics. As a serving Army officer for 13 years, I pretty much know first hand the state of the British forces...