The government is cutting spending on a number of areas of defence. What do people expect to happen?
BAE confirms it is slashing 2,000 jobs
BAE Systems has confirmed it is to slash 2,000 jobs across its military, maritime and intelligence services operations. Some 750 roles will be cut in Warton & Samlesbury in Lancashire, England, where the firm builds its Eurofighter Typhoon. Another 400 will go in East Yorkshire; 245 are to be cut in RAF Marham & RAF Leeming; …
COMMENTS
-
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 10:00 GMT Prst. V.Jeltz
I dont know why an aeroplane company is running a cyber security business, but they say they sell to gov and commercial alike.
Also I thought we were in the business of selling high tech death machines to dubious human rights abusing regimes abroad such as
Saudi Arabia,Oman,Kuwait, as well as ,Germany and Spain ,Italy,Austria
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 10:16 GMT John Smith 19
"I dont know why an aeroplane company is running a cyber security business, "
Well it could be they want in house capability due to their very super secret defense work.
No, I'm fu**ing with you.
What you've got to know about BAe is they are a government con-tractor.
IOW their core skills are
a)Talking BS to Ministers. b)Talking BS to civil servants c) Concoting plausible (but probably unworkable) defense concepts that will cost billions to develop d) Having staff who can fabricate (after all they are meant to be a mfg company :-) )the necessary paperwork to prove all work has been done and how much it costs, so they can get paid.
BAe bought "Smith Associates" who were (and probably still are) hand-in-blouse with GCHQ for the boxes to install in ISP's for
on demand snoopingserious national security investigations.BAe are famous for walking away from the Blairs National Identity
RegisterCard scheme. In hindsight because it had other bidders. Why compete when you can be a sole source and can fabricate unauditable invoices for stuff (National Security). -
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 11:59 GMT AndyS
My heart goes out to anyone losing their job.
But rejoices that, in this case, it appears to be because the world is buying fewer machines for killing people. Long may that trend continue, and the best of luck to those affected in finding new, more morally productive, work.
I wonder what the ratio is of people killed by each Typhoon to those employed building it?
-
Wednesday 11th October 2017 11:23 GMT Jeremy Puddleduck
So you are okay with the Russians flying into our airspace on a weekly basis, unchallenged. Interesting approach to national security you have. I quite like the idea of make sure we go an investigate and shoo people who shouldn't be above us away. But of course, the Typhoons only kill people right? And the UK doesn't need defending?
-
-
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 13:50 GMT Hans Neeson-Bumpsadese
RE: "aeroplane company"
"I dont know why an aeroplane company is running a cyber security business, "
BAE aren't an aeroplane company - they are a many-tentacled defence contractor, e.g. they also do a nice line in nuclear submarines. Given the odds of the next world war being fought in cyberspace to a greater or lesser degree, then having a cyber security sector of the business makes sense.
-
Wednesday 11th October 2017 15:43 GMT Lotaresco
Dunno
"I dont know why an aeroplane company is running a cyber security business"
I don't know why you don't know that. It was very well publicised at the time.
Companies buy and sell other businesses all the time. When your market is shrinking it makes some sense to diversify.
-
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 14:45 GMT Commswonk
@ Caustic Soda The government is cutting spending on a number of areas of defence. What do people expect to happen?
I expect that something will happen (sooner rather than later) to which UK Armed Service personnel will be committed, and that there will not be enough of them to do the job properly and those that are there will be ill / under equipped to do the job required of them. To be fair the scaling back of the Eurofighter programme is only a small part of that, but it is indicative of how "defence" is treated these days.
The most recent example is the suggested sale of HMS Ocean; if next year's hurrican season in the Caribbean is a repeat of this year then there won't be an HMS Ocean to go in support of beleaguered islanders. Thinking about it if the rumours are true there wouldn't be enough Royal Marines to go and help either.
To a politician defence spending can be reduced without any formal reduction in defence commitments, but it simply cannot work that way. Historically Conservative governments could be relied upon to maintain "the military" but ever since the cuts of 2010 (e.g."Harrier") that is clearly no longer the case.
I'm not suggesting that BAE Systens should be presented with facilities for direct debits from taxpayers' pockets but IMHO potential commitments (in both men and materiel) are too far ahead of capabilities; the "Capability Gap".
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 15:07 GMT BebopWeBop
Historically Conservative governments could be relied upon to maintain "the military" but ever since the cuts of 2010 (e.g."Harrier") that is clearly no longer the case.
Not partisan, but the Conservatives have a better (?) record than Labour in cutting defence spending over the last 40 years. Now some might say that they are getting better value for money (haha) but the numbers are clear. I always thought that this was a result of not wishing to be blamed for defence cuts, but still.
The fact is that (possibly mislead by senior officers with their toys and competing service mentalities) or civil servants (budget = prestige) most British politicians have dons a shit job at understanding and/or maintaining the armed servics
-
-
-
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 10:07 GMT Anonymous Coward
Merry Christmas
For many years I worked for a large multi-disciplined company, not BAE, but not a million miles removed. Every October the bean-counters looked at the forecasts for the following year and decided how many heads they wanted to cut. Almost every year early October saw 90 day consultancy notices issued. And it was usually mid-Decmeber before the notices were withdrawn and/or you were notifed that your job was safe.
Senior Manglement could never understand why moral was so low, or why productivity dropped in Q4.
-
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 11:12 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: ""The redundancies will take effect from 1 January 2018.""
"Live by the defense contract, die by the defense contract."
Get most of your money from a customer who earns money mostly in pounds and spends large chunks in dollars and euros, and watch as their spending decreases when the value of the pound falls. This effect is *not* limited to defense.
-
-
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 09:52 GMT Prst. V.Jeltz
"The proposed restructuring of our Applied Intelligence cyber security business will drive continued growth from a more targeted portfolio of products and services focussed on providing leading cyber security, intelligence and financial crime prevention capabilities to government and commercial customers in priority geographic markets," it said in a statement
Well thats a relief
Let me have a stab at translating
"Restructuring our AV business will make more profit from a smaller product that does AV stuff for gov and commercial outfits in ... a certain place?"
I cant quite figure out what a "priority geographic market" is.
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 09:57 GMT SkippyBing
Forward Planning
I'm continually impressed by the ability of UK companies to look more than one financial year ahead. I mean it's not as if the slow down in Typhoon orders wasn't predictable or foreseen, which would have allowed them to develop another product* to use the spare capacity.
*Maybe, shock horror, something that doesn't rely on the defence budget, I hear green energy is a growth market requiring skills in the use of composites and advanced manufacturing techniques.
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 10:11 GMT Simon Harris
Re: Forward Planning
Apparently they make electric and hybrid drive units for buses, ships and railways (I never knew that before!)
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 14:01 GMT David Pearce
Re: Forward Planning
The Typhoon has been the wrong aircraft since it first flew. A short range air superiority fighter intended to fight over East Germany. Now bodged to do ground attack.
Reality is that the RAF and similar need a simpler air defence aircraft to tackle Russian heavy bombers and something simple, cheaper and robust for ground strike -preferably with a decent range
-
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 16:52 GMT SkippyBing
Re: Forward Planning
'It sounds like you're describing the Tornado'
Far too complex, the Buccaneer would be better...
Oddly I believe the Typhoon was originally intended to fulfil the Air Staff Target for a Jaguar replacement, but that had been retired by the time it entered service, and then the Tornado F3 needed replacing. Basically it was the only programme left to replace whatever the RAF were getting rid of.
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 19:49 GMT YARR
Re: Forward Planning
Reality is that the RAF and similar need a simpler air defence aircraft to tackle Russian heavy bombers and something simple, cheaper and robust for ground strike -preferably with a decent range
Both sound like ideal scenarios for drones.
Perhaps some newly redundant workers should found a UK drone design bureau to compete with BAe, using UK gov funding for startups. Might save the taxpayer a fortune in the long run.
-
-
-
-
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
-
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 10:04 GMT Terry 6
The government is cutting spending on a number of areas. What do people expect to happen?
FTFY- the only difference here is that defence spending puts cash directly into big businesses rather than, say, school budgets, or libraries,or parks. How many teaching assistant jobs have been lost through "austerity"? How many libraries closed or left to be run by volunteers? How many parks have become run down or even sold off completely? But that doesn't make headlines.
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 10:15 GMT Ben1892
It's a game of blackmail they play with the MOD/Govt of the day - if you don't buy product X we'll be forced to lay off all these people in this priority geographic area that you'd quite like some votes from come next election. I bet they tried to flog their AV to the UK Govt and they told them, "erm nope, I'd go back to building planes if I were you."
-
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 12:23 GMT codejunky
Re: Calling Mr Kim!
@ J J Carter
I am not sure that would work. It isnt going to take a great deal to defeat wooden rockets and troops with sub-par kit. The primary problem with hitting the place is the population may not appreciate anyone approaching with authority or force (they live under it daily), S.Korea is friendly and they will likely take damage as the north looks for someone they can actually hit with most of their kit, and of course China who used N.Korea as a pawn but now fears the flood of refugees as people take the opportunity to run.
But if it does kick off with N.Korea we will likely barely be involved (air strikes maybe, probably logistics) while the US and possibly China pound the ill equipped army. The after affects likely being worse than the war as civi's turn out to be terrorists and N.K tries to find its place in the world. A world that has left it so far behind.
-
-
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 15:27 GMT codejunky
Re: Calling Mr Kim!
@ Miss Lincolnshire
"And after Brexit we can get back to building"
Ha, first a chunk of the population will have to pop their heads back out after predicting the brexocalypse where either the country or the world will fall apart because the UK left the EU. Look at Yet Another Anonymous coward thinking a civil war would be less damaging than brexit. At first I assumed these people were spouting hyperbole but it does seem that some of these people dont realise the world extends beyond the cartel! These people will need time to readjust as they dont have the desire to move to their claimed utopia EU but demand the country be changed around them.
And it will be a shock to the people who nothing more than protesting and dictatorship. They will have to work and figure out how democracy works. I wonder if they will be shouting in defence of N.Korea if it all kicks off or if they dont think about it as its out of the EU.
"Britain is back......................................to the 40s"
There is hope though! With brexit at least we will get to move forward instead of being dragged down and back by the EU. An organisation designed on such an old world and, as demonstrated by their handling of the financial crash, are happy to repeat history.
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 16:33 GMT colinb
Re: Calling Mr Kim!
"dragged down and back by the EU"
Again and again the poor player blaming the team.
This is mostly BAE self inflicted. A single client throws a wobble and 2000 familes are looking at a shitty Christmas.
They could have continued nicely in commercial aviation but like eager children sold out of EADS (Airbus, you know, that European project) in 2006.
Luckily for the 5,900 souls that work in ex BAE Broughton and Filton the muppets are no longer involved.
Then in 2012 they looked to merge back with EADS (Airbus, you know, that European project), that was kiboshed by politics to be fair but once you sell you influence don't be surprised if you can't get back to where you were .
I work in Aircraft leasing and Airbus are on a roll, the A321LR is outselling the Boeing MAX-9 5-1, forcing them to bring out a MAX-10 variant. Airbus simply can't make them quick enough.
Are they massively subsidised, of course its a political desire not to have all US planes, but that's what global competition looks like, it takes scale, large investment and the ability to step on the competitors neck (US) if they step on yours.
UK is cashing out its ticket on the EU cartel, it will now simply have to buy back in for every advantage it thinks it needs, as any fool knows buying separately will be more expensive than buying a basket.
-
-
-
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 15:35 GMT Commswonk
Re: Calling Mr Kim!
@ codejunky: I am not sure that would work. It isnt going to take a great deal to defeat wooden rockets and troops with sub-par kit.
You mean like last time there was fighting in Korea? Or for a more recent example think"Vietnam". If it came down to fighting (I hesitate to say "limited war", because it probably wouldn't be in any sense "limited") then there would be no certainty that China and/or Russia wouldn't support the NK cause for their own reasons, but even if both countries were prepared to sit on the sidelines it is hard to see how SK could escape near total destruction.
As has been shown time and time again just hurling big munitions on to a piece of territory is not enough to defeat it; it needs boots on the ground and it doesn't need a fertile imagination to see where that could lead. Like I said earlier... think Vietnam. Simply decapitating the NK regime in the expectation that that would be enough to ensure instant victory is fantasy.
-
Wednesday 11th October 2017 09:55 GMT codejunky
Re: Calling Mr Kim!
@ Commswonk
"You mean like last time there was fighting in Korea? Or for a more recent example think"Vietnam""
I can understand that point but the difference is they had support. Vietnam had the fantastic machinery that was the AK what could be buried, dug up and worked vs US soldiers who's weapons jammed easy. And it being the same kind of warfare as the middle east where everyone is a civilian until one pulls a gun. But the UK and US are unlikely to occupy as China wont have it. As proven in the middle east the UK and US can perform a pretty good steamroller into the country and knock out the actual military.
"Simply decapitating the NK regime in the expectation that that would be enough to ensure instant victory is fantasy."
I dont think that is really what any country apart from China really thinks about (maybe S.Korea?). It seems more an issue of removing their actual threat before it is. After that they can sort themselves out.
-
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 21:33 GMT Doctor Syntax
Re: Calling Mr Kim!
"China who used N.Korea as a pawn but now fears the flood of refugees as people take the opportunity to run."
I'm surprised they haven't invited him for a state visit during which he'll suffer a sudden and fatal heart attack. That's the way it would have been tackled in the old days.
-
-
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 10:43 GMT Anonymous Coward
Just because they have a cyber side doesnt mean just AV products
It seems short sighted why some seem to refer to just AV as the only product a Cyber arm of a company will do.
Also the comment on the company that got pwned it was the Applied Intelligence side that got brought in to find out who had hacked them.
Some people really need to read an article and reference it correctly at least rather than banging their short sighted drum and bitterness.
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 11:18 GMT Anonymous Coward
Charles Woodburn, chief exec of BAE Systems, said the organisational changes are intended to create a more "streamlined" and "de-layered organisation." He said the actions at some of its UK sites will align its workforce capacity "more closely with near-term demand".
Why do these CEOs and company spokespeople use such awful patronising language all the time? People are losing their jobs and income in very uncertain times and that's 'streamlining'. I expect if a member of Charles Woodburn's close family died, he'd say God had acted pragmatically to 'rightsize the cohesive unit to better take on the challenges of the future'.
Utter twat.
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 11:43 GMT andy 103
Streamlining and de-layering
Streamlining == Streamlining the flow of money into CEO and directors pockets, at the expense of employing enough people to do the jobs which generate said money to the required standard.
De-layering == Getting rid of people who may spot what's going on (see also: streamlining).
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 13:05 GMT ToddRundgrensUtopia
Re: Streamlining and de-layering
No Andy103,
I think de-layering means, removal of middle management, which generally should be a positive. Remember before Woodburn BAE was run along the lines of a government department, so lots of Sir Humphreys. Woodburn came from Schlumberger I think.
sad there are redundancies, but the CEO isn't automatically an arse
-
-
-
Wednesday 11th October 2017 04:02 GMT Zmodem
MoD does'nt pay for everything BAE System's do, BAE System's is a company with investors, the is the secret underground city of salisbury plain, where all the classfied MoD side of BAE System's work which is why the wiltshire is the UFO hotspot of the uk, which work like 2 seperate companies
all the classified materials the MoD pay's for, will only be used on the british military vehicles, like the shielding on challenger 2 tank, and target tracking system, and all other system's with makes the typhoon a typhoon and not a eurofighter
-
-
-
Wednesday 11th October 2017 15:53 GMT Lotaresco
Re: "But cutting jobs from ye olde Detica? "
"I'd forgotten Smith Associates changed it's name after Billions Above Estimate bought them."
You can't have "forgotten" that because it never happened. It's more like you just made that up.
Smith Associates renamed itself "Detica" in 2001
BAe bought Detica in 2008
-
-
Tuesday 10th October 2017 17:31 GMT Charlie Clark
Unfortunately not entirely unexpected
A few years ago BAe made a strategic bet that being part of the US military industrial complex would make them more money than being part of the European military bureaucracy. Surprisingly, the hoped for contracts making for the US never materialised in the expected quantities and that was before the Ginger Kid became president.
There's a lesson in there for others, perhaps.
-
-
Wednesday 11th October 2017 14:32 GMT Zmodem
the basic's of EM Drive and the whole concept that is the black project of skylon 8 the blackholes in the MoD budget has been paying for is all in > https://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/2/2017/07/27/nasa_lights_bloody_big_rocket_that_doesnt_go_anywhere/#c_3245239
or you can just watch the same video's of skylon 8 after many years of scale models over salisbury plain
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGuYYBAT-Xk
https://youtu.be/fN7YCu-Wbh4?t=14s
https://youtu.be/z0Asf_1WDss?t=1m36s
american's have to make their own, not steal everything like the TR-3B propulsion during the lockheed martin merger
-