bobdina
10-01-2009, 09:36 PM
British troops fighting in Afghanistan will not have enough vehicles until the end of next year, Brigadier Kevin Abraham, a senior Army commander, has disclosed.
By Thomas Harding, Defence Correspondent
Published: 7:00AM BST 01 Oct 2009
There is also only half the number of vehicles needed to train troops in Britain before they head to the front line, said Brig Abraham, the head of joint capability at the Ministry of Defence.
The officer told a press conference that there will only be enough new vehicles to combat Taliban bombs in place for the current total of 9,000 by the end of 2010.
Brig Abraham added that "providing a considerable new fleet does take time" and added that while it was sometimes "frustrating", it was "often necessary".
Brig Abraham also admitted that the training system in place at the moment was not as efficient as it could be.
The training fleet in Britain was only “50 to 60 per cent” of the training pool that would be ideal for the force in Afghanistan.
"It's a balance between vehicles for training and vehicles for the operational fleet," he said.
In response, Gordon Brown said where troops wanted new equipment “they have got it”.
But Liam Fox, the shadow defence secretary, accused the Prime Minister of "cowardice and incompetence. "Failing to have enough equipment to allow troops to train on before operations is bad enough. To abandon our Armed Forces in Afghanistan without the equipment they need and deserve for over a year is quite simply staggering.”
The disclosure comes at a time when the Taliban bombing campaign has accounted for 80 per cent of British casualties in the bloodiest summer to date.
Military leaders are trying to get an “uplift” for a total of 10,000 troops in Afghanistan arguing that more soldiers would mean less casualties but putting greater pressure on the Taliban.
But Whitehall is fearful that an increase could create more deaths and negatively impact on public opinion on continuing the British presence in Helmand.
Military planners are close to convincing Downing Street that a force increase will be adequately protected without further scandals of equipment shortages.
Many of the vehicles coming into service are to replace those designed more for Cold War operations or Northern Ireland such as the Warrior and Snatch Land Rover.
Mine-resistant vehicles such as the Mastiff and Ridgback have been brought into service but the majority of the fleet of more than 400 vehicles will take time to come off production lines and it is a lengthy process getting them into Helmand.
There is also some criticism of the amounts being charged by industry in hiking up the prices for vehicles that are urgently needed.
There has been much criticism about the shortages of helicopters that some believe has led to soldiers be forced to take greater risks travelling by road.
Brig Gordon Messenger, a decorated officer who returned from commanding the Royal Marines in Helmand this spring, said helicopters were a “key asset” allow commanders to push troops “beyond the IED (improvised explosive bomb) belts”.
But he added soldiers could not “patrol from helicopters” and they could not provide the same supply tonnage as a 60 vehicle convoy.
By Thomas Harding, Defence Correspondent
Published: 7:00AM BST 01 Oct 2009
There is also only half the number of vehicles needed to train troops in Britain before they head to the front line, said Brig Abraham, the head of joint capability at the Ministry of Defence.
The officer told a press conference that there will only be enough new vehicles to combat Taliban bombs in place for the current total of 9,000 by the end of 2010.
Brig Abraham added that "providing a considerable new fleet does take time" and added that while it was sometimes "frustrating", it was "often necessary".
Brig Abraham also admitted that the training system in place at the moment was not as efficient as it could be.
The training fleet in Britain was only “50 to 60 per cent” of the training pool that would be ideal for the force in Afghanistan.
"It's a balance between vehicles for training and vehicles for the operational fleet," he said.
In response, Gordon Brown said where troops wanted new equipment “they have got it”.
But Liam Fox, the shadow defence secretary, accused the Prime Minister of "cowardice and incompetence. "Failing to have enough equipment to allow troops to train on before operations is bad enough. To abandon our Armed Forces in Afghanistan without the equipment they need and deserve for over a year is quite simply staggering.”
The disclosure comes at a time when the Taliban bombing campaign has accounted for 80 per cent of British casualties in the bloodiest summer to date.
Military leaders are trying to get an “uplift” for a total of 10,000 troops in Afghanistan arguing that more soldiers would mean less casualties but putting greater pressure on the Taliban.
But Whitehall is fearful that an increase could create more deaths and negatively impact on public opinion on continuing the British presence in Helmand.
Military planners are close to convincing Downing Street that a force increase will be adequately protected without further scandals of equipment shortages.
Many of the vehicles coming into service are to replace those designed more for Cold War operations or Northern Ireland such as the Warrior and Snatch Land Rover.
Mine-resistant vehicles such as the Mastiff and Ridgback have been brought into service but the majority of the fleet of more than 400 vehicles will take time to come off production lines and it is a lengthy process getting them into Helmand.
There is also some criticism of the amounts being charged by industry in hiking up the prices for vehicles that are urgently needed.
There has been much criticism about the shortages of helicopters that some believe has led to soldiers be forced to take greater risks travelling by road.
Brig Gordon Messenger, a decorated officer who returned from commanding the Royal Marines in Helmand this spring, said helicopters were a “key asset” allow commanders to push troops “beyond the IED (improvised explosive bomb) belts”.
But he added soldiers could not “patrol from helicopters” and they could not provide the same supply tonnage as a 60 vehicle convoy.