Anybody working in defence weapons sytems?

I have an opportunity to join a designer / manufacturer of the above.

Now I wouldn’t say I’m a pacifist but a tiny inner voice enquired if I’d be entirely comfortable with working towards the end product and what the end product does during “final commissioning.”

How do you square this internally?

TiA

You go and look at pictures of Gaza and take a shake to yourself.

What do you mean by “defence weapons”?

Weapons? Eg bombs, guns etc that can be used for defence but might be sent to [insert controversial war zone here]?

Or specifically defence related, eg Patriot, Iron Dome, Phalanx etc?

It would make a difference to me, as would the ethics and history of the company itself.

I turned two jobs down in that field, the money wasn’t all that and it’d have had to be *very* good to make me go.

One job as a senior designer for Missile systems at GKN and the other was Design lead on an aircraft payload and launch systems team for BAE Systems (Typhoon and Taranis IIRC).

Got 40% more money to go and destroy the environment, rather than killing people directly.

If they are, they wouldn’t be allowed to say on an internet forum 😉

If they are, they wouldn’t be allowed to say on an internet forum 😉

Or they’d have to kill us.

If you have an tiny inner voice already its possibly not the role for you. I guess you can rationalise it by telling yourself the weapons will only be used on ‘bad people’. They will only be used for defence and not attack etc. If your tiny voice believes any of that rubbish is up to you.

Horrible things but as we’ve found out, entirely necessary.

@ossify – specifically missile systems and military grade laser systems.

Doubtful many would be able to say publicly. You may get a DM.

The ethics are rightly a concern as are the environmental concerns and the often overlooked part; screwing the taxpayer out large sums of money via the ineptitude of MOD procurement. 😂

I briefly worked for a defence contractor when I left the Army but the organisational culture was toxic, decided a clean break was much healthier for the soul.

But to your specific point; if there’s any doubt, there’s no doubt.

If you have an inner voice then it might not be for you.

I used to work in medical R&D some of the tech was also suitable for military use and ended up in Tanks and Helicopters.

Same when I worked for a computer firm started out building PC’s we ended up building plotters for submarines.

So just because it for defence today it could be repurposed in the future.

Derek_Starship – specifically missile systems and military grade laser systems.

Username checks out

You are Captain James T Kirk and I claim my £5

Username checks out

You are Captain James T Kirk and I claim my £5

I had an interview where the CEO was very clear in considering yourself part of the ‘kill-chain’. It made me think, I reflected and declined their offer and their increased offer. I now work in medical devices – so actively trying to help not end people. It is/was important to me.

I always wondered where your username came from 😄

What do you mean by “defence weapons”?

It makes little difference – guidance, control, target identification, separation mechanisms, dynamics are equally applied to all.  You may not be working on an interceptor, but you can bet your ass that the same technology used in that missile will be being used elsewhere.

It always makes me more than a little uncomfortable listening to Americans talking about the cost-exchange ratio, more colloquially known as the cost/kill ratio.

When I was interviewed for my job in Pharma Research a standard question was “How do you feel about animal research?”. Obviously one has to have thought about it prior to deciding to apply, but this was a standard filter question. Times have moved on but the principle is still there. I would imagine the same for working in Defence. “How do you feel about the product of your work being used for it’s ultimate purpose?”. If you do not have an answer, or you are not convinced yourself, it’s probably not for you. As an aside, I would expect most novel technologies to have some military application at some point – Pharmacology aside as we’ve rightly banned chemical weapons (but I have previously seen molecules that would be terrifying).

You go and look at pictures of Gaza and take a shake to yourself

Is one side of it. Ukraine being the other, unfortunately they need the technology now, we hopefully won’t need it in the future but having it makes it much less likely to be required. It would be nice of we didn’t need it but that’s the world we live in

Not a chance.
As a family, we had some pretty hard times in the 90s after my electrical engineer dad was made redundant. He was offered multiple jobs in defence/military but turned them down for ideological reasons. I’d have no qualms doing the same, and my family are all of the same view.

Or they’d have to kill us.

Language, Timothy!

Or they’d have to *defend* us

They do ask you if you have any of these qualms when they interview you, or put you through for the undoubted security clearance you’d have to have. So if you have them, it’s best to find a different job. Like in a shop that sells organic candles or something.

My brother-in-law works for BAE on the munitions side. He can’t talk about it though!

Although if he did he’d bore you to death – never met a duller person.

Or specifically defence related, eg Patriot, Iron Dome, Phalanx etc?

I guess you can rationalise it by telling yourself the weapons will only be used on ‘bad people’. They will only be used for defence and not attack etc. If your tiny voice believes any of that rubbish is up to you.

As has been said above, there’s no defensive system that’s not involved in killing people. Patriot, Iron Dome and Phalanx are principally there to protect and allow deployment of offensive systems. Even issuing our own troops with body armour isn’t a purely defensive decision, it allows them to remain combat effective, which includes them remaining capable of killing people. So Kevlar then, is working on something so widely used acceptable, given a small amount of it (relatively) is used militarily?

It’s down to individual conscience of course but it’s no mean feat to stay completely pure!

I’ve worked on military systems. As Ukraine shows, you either stay up to date with the latest weapon tech, or someone else who has may well just invade you…

And yes they will get used for evil by someone somewhere, but that applies to any pretty much anything.

they will get used for evil by someone somewhere, but that applies to any pretty much anything

Just spat my tea out at this.

My job mainly involves trying to help people get into more healthy habits.

Is that as likely to be used for evil as weapons systems are?

How about the factory down the road from me that makes flooring? Or the bakery up the other way?

So much untapped potential for evil.

Weapons are fun, is the lasers more directed energy weapons, or targeting, ah, doesn’t matter, either will be cool, who wouldn’t enjoy working with lasers or explosives!

I’m not in a weapons system type role but personally I wouldn’t have a problem with it, having sophisticated weapons can be a deterrent in itself. I’ve got nothing against pacifism but it’s not a luxury we can all afford in the real world. It’s the same with AI – the West can talk about ethics and safeguards all day long but unless every country agrees to the same limitations then you’re just going to end up in a weaker position along with the consequences that brings.

The design and manufacturing side of things is so far removed from the politics and the actual killing that I personally wouldn’t have a problem working in defence.

There’s loads of industries and jobs that someone somewhere will considered ‘evil’ but most people are just trying to get by and I wouldn’t judge anyone for simply working in defence in order to earn a living.

There’s loads of industries and jobs that someone somewhere will considered ‘evil’ but most people are just trying to get by and I wouldn’t judge anyone for simply working in defence in order to earn a living.

Depends on the position. If you are genuinely just getting by then fair enough. Just like I have sympathy for people that have to work in shitty conditions for Amazon or Sports Direct, I certainly don’t blame them for propping up the evil empire.

If you do have the luxury of choosing jobs, which it sounds like the OP has, then it can be a moral decision and if you can choose the better option then good for you. I work with a number of charities and there are often talented people there who have taken a substantial pay cut to do job that they feel makes a positive difference.

is the lasers more directed energy weapons, or targeting, ah, doesn’t matter, either will be cool, who wouldn’t enjoy working with lasers or explosives!

the vast majority are rangefinders – not so exciting

who wouldn’t enjoy working with lasers or explosives!

Having worked extensively with things that can go bang in my previous career as a lab chemist, I can assure you that the paperwork and H&S surrounding such things is very tedious and indeed making anything go bang was very much frowned upon. In fact, you have to go through many safety protocols to ensure that they don’t go bang.

If you want an exciting career with things that go bang, go and be a pyrotechnical engineer in the film industry.

I can assure you that the paperwork and H&S surrounding such things is very tedious

Untold amounts of hours spent planning, mitigating and then writing documents to do something that is over in a heartbeat and to make sure everybody still has all the bits they should and there are no extra holes.

Absolute ball ache when you’re the accountable adult and you don’t even get to make things blow up, it’s all paperwork so someone else gets to do the fun bit.

Do not miss that in the slightest.

Just spat my tea out at this.

My job mainly involves trying to help people get into more healthy habits.

Is that as likely to be used for evil as weapons systems are?

How about the factory down the road from me that makes flooring? Or the bakery up the other way?

So much untapped potential for evil.

Didn’t see any fatties in the SS. You’re creating potential effective fascists and you don’t even know it. 😉

Just jokes. I hope he meant tech.

If you want an exciting career with things that go bang, go and be a pyrotechnical engineer in the film industry.

Boring, might as well just sell fireworks.

My job mainly involves trying to help people get into more healthy habits.

A lot of the weapons companies offer good healthcare and have onsite gyms, so could be best of both worlds for the OP.

If you’re asking the question OP then I think you already know the answer. I like it when it gets called defence. Can’t they just be honest and call it killing equipment or something. It reminds me of when some company made guns with smaller triggers for “women” not for child soldiers, no siree! If you’re going to be a **** the least you can do is be honest about it.

or someone else who has may well just invade you…

For the UK, France, Germany, China, The Americans,Australia   none of that applies because they’re not going to be invaded.

So what is it for 😕

To be sold to countries where oppression of the people, either at home, or in neighbouring countries, or to prop up tin-pot dictators working for one of the above.

I’m not judging anyone who doesn’t share the same outlook as me, but if you have to justify a potential role with a weapons manufacturer with

good healthcare and …onsite gyms

then I’m not sure that deep down you’d ever feel at peace with it.

Or they’d have to kill us.

And could probably do so

For the UK, France, Germany, China, The Americans,Australia   none of that applies because they’re not going to be invaded.

So what is it for 😕

Why are those countries more secure than others?  Is it due to ad-hoc buying of defence technologies or that they’re a significant part of those country’s capability to defend themselves?

Sure, many of those technologies can and will be sold onto others, but not all are dic(tator)s.  If you have a problem with that part, that’s a problem which can be solved via legislation without killing the underlying capability to develop it…you (we) might just have to pay more for that security.

I’m starting to think nobody would invade us because we’re a bit shit. Surely the only deterrent needed is nuclear. Where do you go after that? Mutually assured destruction is pretty much a stalemate and why none of the big powers have gone to war with each other for a while.