The key question is whether or not the GCAP should or will eventually merge with the FCAS program. It seems logical to pool resources amongst allies facing common threats, why this wasn't done originally is beyond me, maybe part of the then government's 'Brexit-drive' to separate from pan-European defence, but that surely is a secondary consideration now given the need to create economies of scale and expedite this capability in sufficient numbers to be meaningful on the battlefield.
This article, whilst “worthy” repeats much that is nonsense. The oft repeated line that the U.K. defence budget is too small does not bear rigorous analysis (the second biggest defence budget in NATO), neither does the comments about GCAP. We have an equipment budget of circa £30bn and much of the equipment renewal programme; T-26, T-31, Boxer etc will be paid for by 2030. We need less emotive repetition and more dispassionate holistic analysis in our military commentary.
The key question is whether or not the GCAP should or will eventually merge with the FCAS program. It seems logical to pool resources amongst allies facing common threats, why this wasn't done originally is beyond me, maybe part of the then government's 'Brexit-drive' to separate from pan-European defence, but that surely is a secondary consideration now given the need to create economies of scale and expedite this capability in sufficient numbers to be meaningful on the battlefield.
This article, whilst “worthy” repeats much that is nonsense. The oft repeated line that the U.K. defence budget is too small does not bear rigorous analysis (the second biggest defence budget in NATO), neither does the comments about GCAP. We have an equipment budget of circa £30bn and much of the equipment renewal programme; T-26, T-31, Boxer etc will be paid for by 2030. We need less emotive repetition and more dispassionate holistic analysis in our military commentary.