The whole program quite frankly is a shambles. BAE systems are largely the one at most faults for this and many of our other procurement programs.

Firstly, both carriers are guaranteed, but they will be very late, so much so that once again when Britain finally builds something new thereby seemingly closing the capability gap in terms of size with our American cousins, they will have already put their new Gerald R ford class carriers to sea thus leaving us one step behind again.

Secondly while both carriers have got the go ahead it seems likely that only one will be in service, the other is to either be put on extended readiness/mothballed or scrapped/sold off all together. Even if the two are kept in commission it is likely if this is to be the case (which is unlikely in itself) that only the one ship will have the provision for a naval air wing. Like I said the program is a shambles, it has been done in the wrong manner. The ships are being built far too slow and will be second rate upon their launch. Build carriers worth £4 billion and then scrap one after less than 5 years of service, comic isn?t it?

This is once again the demonstration of how pathetic our arms procurement is.  we keep equipment  in  service for far too long, and then take ages in designing then eventually (and rather begrudgingly it may be added) paid for, then it has to be built etc. all of this is done at such a slow pace that we have designs created 10-15 years ago that are only being fielded now.

Eurofighter is an example, good plane but Britain goes ahead  and develops and buys a 4.5 gen  fighter at the time when most nations who want  to  make  the presence felt on the world stage are developing 5th gen planes. by the time we go 5th gen the US will be well advanced in the development of their 6th gen fighters, and this is all because  we are so slow to procure anything we are usually left with second rate equipment by the time the design is actually fielded. The UOR program is an exception to this and is pretty much the only thing the MoD has done well recently.

Now I say BAE systems are the bane of British defence and here is my reason. They have a monopoly on British defence. they are pretty much our only major defence contractor, as such they have bought up all the competition thereby meaning that there  is  not drive to fuel them into creating better deal etc. they know that their position as  the dominant  supplier of  arms to the MoD is secure as the government insists on buying British (which almost always  means  it will come from, or be linked to BAE systems in some way) even when  there may  be  foreign alternatives that are not necessarily better quality but they may be cheaper and be able to be produced faster and still offer the same capability at  a time when you need it not 6 years later when you have moved on. This insistence on buying British means that they will usually secure all potential deals. They then usually take long about doing it and run over budget because there is no competition to fuel them to earn the deals rather than be handed them on a silver platter. partially the British government is to blame as they are lax  with them., they do not take a hard-line  on the  timing and budgets of BAE because  they do not want to  upset  the sole defence contractor

You are quite right in what you say. It is very true that the MoD claims to have these world beating ambitions but yet whenever it is offered the chance to see these ambitions realised it bottles it so to speak. for example the rumoured UVX UAV/UCAV carrier program, it is being headed by BAE systems  and is based around the Type 45 hull, so it would be a safe bet to say that it will be offered to, or at least shown to the MoD so that they will be aware of it. The UVX program would give the Royal Navy a leading edge in future naval air power based around UAV systems; it would make it the world leader in this field, but would the MoD go near it? No. they would comment in what a great system it is, even acknowledge its undeniable benefits, but they would then defy all belief and state that such capability was not needed, or just turn a blind eye to it altogether thereby passing up another great opportunity. or as with the carriers, when they finally (and rarely I may add too) do actually give the go ahead for one of these world class projects that will seemingly potentially give the Royal Navy (or any other service branch in a similar situation) world beating capability they will often downgrade and undercut the original design, or specification all in the name of saving money. if they don?t cut the programs capability thereby reducing its winning edge (because i will be honest here  the US gets the credit for creating lots  of world class kit, which in my mind they well deserve but what goes unnoticed is the Britain often comes up with many revolutionary or world beating ideas  for military kit but because of the attitude of the British government and the MoD such ideas never usually make it off the drawing board. if such ideas were realised without having capability cut or downgraded or numbers  slashed during the process  the British forces would be equipped with some of the finest and most capable kit in the world today) or cut the original specified numbers outlined in the procurement plans (a good example to refer to here is the Type 45, there was an original specification for 12 such ships, this has now been cut to a mere 6, all the while knowing full well that 12 were specified for a very good reason, and 6 simply will not do the job. this can also be used to support my previous point about the capability  downgrades of British programs, as before the  Type 45 were originally designed in mind with having the latest lit installed to ensure that it was the most advanced ship in its class, with the original specification it had a definite capability advantage so much so that i would freely feel confident  in labelling it the best ship currently in service, but like i said as with many British procurement programs this capability was gradually downgraded, the ambitious de